Printable View
I havent played an online PC FPS lately (lately as in, the past 2 or 3 years) that is as fun as Halo 2 Live. UT2004 definitely isnt. Id rather play a really fun game with a small number of maps than a mildly fun game with a near-infinite number of maps. Im sure your meager brain can process this logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Changeling
Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
It's obvious you don't play many FPS, if you feel this way. I don't care how good a game is, if you are stuck on the same handful of maps, you will get bored ... quickly.
..and when I say play, I mean 2-3 hours a night, everyday.
Sounds like you're just playing the maps that shipped with the game, silly boy. There is so much more to it. Go download some real maps and mods and come back with a more informed opinion next time. Besides, how can Halo be so fun if you have to use a controller instead of mouse/keyboard set-up. Very very JV. Perhaps you should stick to playing Halo with the kids, Diff.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I agree with you to a point. The most important part to having fun with a fps is good competition. Organized competition. Not playing with 12 yr olds with the latest hacks. Playing the same maps with random people = boring hell. Playing same maps with clans = great fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by toxic
I downloaded that stupid Red Orchestra and that Alien Swarm as well as basically any map that was in modes I played that I didnt have on my comp (log on to an Onslaught server, dont have the map, it downloads). The game's just not that good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Changeling
As for the control setup, who cares? Man, it takes a real chump to not play a game because you use a controller (like youve never played a game with a controller before?). Its all about fun.
The best online FPS I played was that free Castle Wolfenstein download, but even then I think Halo 2 is better.
I played TFC and CounterStrike for hundreds of hours, each. At least 50% of games being played online were on 2fort and de_dust, respectively. By the time I was over the game, I was over the whole thing, not just those maps. If the game is good, and the map is well-designed, it doesnt get old. People have been playing football on the same field with the same rules every week, for a hundred years, and it doesnt get old.Quote:
It's obvious you don't play many FPS, if you feel this way. I don't care how good a game is, if you are stuck on the same handful of maps, you will get bored ... quickly.
I meant Unreal Championship 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Changeling
I like UT2K4 a lot, too, but I think Halo 2 is better.
As far as paying, 2 of the maps are free now and the other 2 cost like $6 until June 28th, when they'll be free too. I wasn't going to buy them but Chux wouldn't stfu.
I have to disagree with Diffx.
ALL Console FPS's are on the short end of the stick in control and latency, and it's for that reason that the best ones will always be on PC (for now). Halo 2 makes the two thumbstick thing feel very natural, which most console FPS fail to do, the last patch really made the game better too.
No console FPS game (this generation at least), as great as it may be, will ever impress me like BF1942 did. Or Day of Defeat, or the Quake 3, or HL2.
I really feel like the next generation of online console(s) will have a much better plan for supporting 20+ people with voice, without it being a slideshow. I've heard PD0 is supposed to be massive in scale.
Its not that I dont think PC FPS games *can* be better than console FPS games, because they clearly can just from the control advantages. But they just *havent* been. At least on the multiplayer side. Its weird because a lot of people were predicting the end of single player FPS when UT and Quake3 came out, but some of the best single-player games ever made (NOLF, Half-Life 2) have come out while the multiplayer has floundered.
I'm not being a "chump". I enjoy games more whenever they control perfect. A controller doesn't give me perfect control like the mouse/keyboard combo does. Therefore it isn't as fun and the experience is ruined. How many fighting game tournaments do you see being played with a controller? hardly any. I don't like to play a game that holds my hand and assists my shots. Most console FPS's do that. Fuck that noise.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Thats the funniest thing I've heard all week. Wolf:ET was HORRIBLE. Play better games!Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Yeah I know, he got me to buy them too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
Castle Wolfenstein's free demo was TONS of fun! Bringing the flamethrower up the beach and annihilating folks was awesome. I must have played that multi demo alone for about 40 hours.
Halo 2 is really really fun, and the ease of connecting (except for the rare network problem) only enhances the experience, as does the fact that almost every player has voice on by default. However the control issues do get to me eventually. Whenever I'm in close I can't really turn fast enough to follow my opponent, and those close-in battles often last seconds longer than they need to as we find each other.
Of course I could put the sensitivty way up but then fine-aiming is close to impossible. I'd prefer a mouse and keyboard, but none of the recent PC FPSes have a multiplayer mode that is this fun. It really did need new maps though. I had started to groan every time I played a rumble pit match that wasn't Ascension or Beaver Creek...or Lockout.
The only PC FPS that had a multiplayer that has really grabbed me recently has been Battlefield 1942, but the way it played/lag eventually turned me off to it.
Planetside was also a lot of fun, but I did not want to continue paying for it.