Games you're looking forward to in 2011

[Blordow]

portal 2
pokemon b/w
mortal kombat 9

that's all i can really think of!

[cipher]

I really hope this finally comes out this year, but who knows. Apparently there's going to be some "big news" on it soon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=975Zw8BJ3Vg

[Hnilmik]

 It looks soooo pretty!

[jjjjjjjjjj]

duke
portal2
dark souls
uhh thats it

[cipher]

It looks soooo pretty!

I have to say that game and Okami have two of my favorite art styles ever

[dilly]

Arkham City, Pokemon b/w, and portal 2

[billy]

no you just have no taste in anything

for example crysis 2 is terrible

>he plays starcraft 2
>starcraft 1 with better graphics
>shitty unbalanced clickfest
>still waiting for the other 2/3 of the game




lol go ahead and enjoy your clicking competition, i'll be enjoying my next generation gameplay experience

[Sinitron]

>he plays starcraft 2
>starcraft 1 with better graphics
>shitty unbalanced clickfest
>still waiting for the other 2/3 of the game

Starcraft 1 was good, yes you have to click and use buttons etc etc to actually interact with the game and control units (this is common, i would assume most people know but i guess you're too used to wiisports), imbalances aren't really a big deal until you reach pro-level, and nobody gives a fuck about the campaign anyway, which was long enough by itself, even though i didn't like it

by comparison, crysis 2 is a console port with inferior graphics compared to the original, where the developers purposely chose a setting that would be easier for consoles with obsolete hardware to render, people have to use gamespy for multiplayer and it's bound to continue the generic and shitty story of crysis 1 with the same shitty characters, but this time around it's not even good for benchmarking high-end systems

of course, the games themselves can't be compared since one is an RTS while the other is a shooter

pretty much everyone who doesn't like starcraft cries about it being a clickfest, too, which doesn't really make any sense unless you like to just sit back and watch shit happen and let the game sort out the combat for you, in which case you would probably prefer supreme commander or command & conquer 3

[Sinitron]

nothing on consoles is next-gen, all the hardware is obsolete already and companies rely more and more on gimmicks (see: guitar hero, dance dance revolution, wiisports and similar) which can be fine by itself but most of it is usually a rehash of something that was done 10 years ago, except back then it was executed well with limited tech, while now it's just horrendous with fancy high-tech laser pointers and motion sensors - which are fine, except a lot of the time stuff is woefully underdeveloped, like epic mickey was

the SC2 expansions being spread out over multiple years is blizzard's way of trying to keep the game relevant over time, except with larger content packs as opposed to overpriced DLC being spammed out the ass for worthless crap like 2-3 maps, some weapons or a car

[BloodyCheery]

Elder Scrolls: Skyrim
Okamiden
Portal 2
American McGee's Alice: Madness Returns
Catherine
The Last Guardian (if it's still coming out this year)
Ico and Shadow of the Colossus PS3 pack
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3DS
Starfox 64 3DS

[BluPhoenix]

im not understanding the whole 'lol this game sux compared to this' yammer

no you just have no taste in anything

for example crysis 2 is terrible

>starcraft 2
>starcraft 1 with better graphics
>shitty unbalanced clickfest

by comparison, crysis 2 is a console port with inferior graphics compared to the original, where the developers purposely chose a setting that would be easier for consoles with obsolete hardware to render, people have to use gamespy for multiplayer and it's bound to continue the generic and shitty story of crysis 1 with the same shitty characters, but this time around it's not even good for benchmarking high-end systems

wrong

wrong

wrong

they're both fine games

[Sinitron]

i played the demo with some other coons

pretty much everyone except some fag who thinks halo is the greatest shit ever thought it was terrible

[billy]

>the same 10 year old game with better graphics and spread out over 3 $60 releases
>keeping the game relevant
>$180 for the same game

it's the [size=]SAME DAMN GAME[/size]

the game is a [size=]clicking competition[/size] devoid of any strategy

company of heroes and dawn of war 2 are much better

[BloodyCheery]

Shit is starting to get real

[Sinitron]

>the same 10 year old game with better graphics and spread out over 3 $60 releases
>keeping the game relevant
>$180 for the same game

it's the SAME DAMN GAME

the game is a clicking competition devoid of any strategy

company of heroes and dawn of war 2 are much better

Anyone who has played both can confirm that they are not even close to being the 'same', in part because SC1 only let you select 12 units at a time, requiring a far higher APM to manage any sizable army, while in SC2 the upper limit is 255. The expansions are also supposed to be around 40$... which is still less than most DLC when you consider the amount of content they will be adding. You're also not FORCED to buy all the expansions either, unless you just want to play the campaign, and if you're really queer about it you can wait 5 years for a discounted battlechest or something.

There's plenty of strategy and tactics, but you obviously wouldn't see that if you play it on a lower level where people don't know how to implement any strategies and just do random shit. I prefer the pacing over CoH and DoW2 is a terrible example if you want to bring up strategy. In fact, DoW2 is just a terrible example. Supreme Commander is a far more strategic game than either CoH or DoW.

[BluPhoenix]

guhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[rtil]

i just don't understand why you'd bash a game you've never played

i mean if you don't like rts/think rts is boring, that's fine

but sc2 is an amazingly well done rts game and has a lot of features other rts games should follow suit with. yes, it's not totally balanced yet and there's still things they are adding to bnet 2.0, but it took years for brood war to get to there after a lot of patches. sc2 has been out for 8 months

i haven't played a lot of brood war but i can definitely say they're not the "same game with better graphics", and i don't think you'd want to go back to playing brood war after experiencing sc2

the expansions are going to be cheaper, there's going to be 2 of them, and they're coming out within years of eachother. when it's all said and done sc2 fans will have paid a measly $140 over the course of 6 years for 3 full campaigns and unlimited access to custom maps, the map editor, the ladder system (the reason most people play starcraft), bnet 2.0 and many many patches and balance changes. only a total cheapskate would try to complain about that, and you're one to talk billy, you spend a fuckload of money on video games

and comparing it to a game like CoH is irrelevant - the strategy and pacing of CoH is entirely different. they're both great rts games in their own right

[billy]

oh ok

this post has been edited by billy

i'm sure the game is fine

dragon age ii comes out tomorrow and i'll bet it's gonna suck

[dilly]

VIDEO GAMES

[jjjjjjjjjj]

DILLY YOUR AVATAR