Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare (PC, PS4, 360/One)

**YellerDog** · 05 Nov 2015, 01:36 PM

Not having to look at Plants vs Zombies assets yet again may be a factor.

**Hero** · 05 Nov 2015, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Yoshi

I know, and I can't figure out a reason besides the Nintendo logo. My daughter loves it, but it's also the first competitive shooter she's played, so I suspect it's more the concept than the game.

I think it's pacing too.

I really, really enjoyed Garden Warfare but the movement of everything feels real sluggish compared to other MP FPSes, moreso compared to Splatoon.

For you, I'm guessing because Splatoon's hypothetical features bullet-list is sorely lacking to GW's, that makes the latter the de facto better game. But I think Splatoon's speed as well as movement mechanics really set it apart as snappier and more satisfying, especially given how much time commitment is asked of players.

I'd definitely give GW2 a go though! Bad Mass Effect tie ins and all.

**Diff-chan** · 05 Nov 2015, 02:04 PM

I like Garden Warfare, but I don't think it's as good as Splatoon and its closest cousin is Team Fortress 2 which is obviously a much larger and more incomprehensible game. Garden Warfare is surprisingly good for a Popcap's first shooter though.

**Yoshi** · 05 Nov 2015, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by Hero

I think it's pacing too.

I really, really enjoyed Garden Warfare but the movement of everything feels real sluggish compared to other MP FPSes, moreso compared to Splatoon.

Considering neither game is FPS, I'm not sure what the relevance is there. Maybe Splatoon feels less sluggish because the two levels you can play at a time are so tiny by comparison?

For you, I'm guessing because Splatoon's hypothetical features bullet-list is sorely lacking to GW's, that makes the latter the de facto better game. But I think Splatoon's speed as well as movement mechanics really set it apart as snappier and more satisfying, especially given how much time commitment is asked of players.

For me, it's literally everything. I beat the hell out of two Splat Fests in Splatoon and have no desire to turn it on again, whereas I spent over 100 hours and got nearly every achievement in GW and will buy the sequel day one. You're certainly right that Splatoon's features are a joke, but if you took away GW's voice chat (which I rarely used anyway), limited it to eight players, made its levels smaller in number and size, removed classes, limited customizing, and everything else I am forgetting, I still think it's likely the better game.

**Hero** · 05 Nov 2015, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by Yoshi

Considering neither game is FPS, I'm not sure what the relevance is there. Maybe Splatoon feels less sluggish because the two levels you can play at a time are so tiny by comparison?

No, I'm thinking in terms of how you get around the map. In GW1, it feels like clomping around territory (until the cooldown on a class' move/boost/jump is up). In Splatoon, being able to swim under the ink, swim up walls, etc. makes the general movement far more faster, diverse, and interesting for everyone in the match.

Or to put it another way - look at ME3's MP vs. CoD. Mass Effect has really interesting classes and skills, but I'll still play CoD because the baseline mobility for players is much faster.