Reply With QuoteIt's a shame all FPS don't control and run as well as these games after all these years.
I think what makes Modern Warfare so fun is the pacing. Also the lack of a learning curve - you pretty much know everything you need to get going in the first 10 minutes. Everything after that is just putting it all to practice under different conditions designed to test your ability.
Someone I know once said it was a retarded FPS because it wasn't a thinking man's game. It was a shooting gallery. But I remember Doom being that way (although far more complex in map design), and some of my favorite games as a kid were Duck Hunt and Hogan's Alley. So shooting gallery? I'm ok with that!
The thing I'm not okay with? The kind of community that CoD fosters. Then again, a lot of games I like (fighters, racing, anything multiplayer really) have a swatch of foul-mouthed kids playing to prove their e-peen. Not really MW's "fault" for that.
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Bastard
It's a shame all FPS don't control and run as well as these games after all these years.
Cuckoo Daddy Long-legs
Yeah, Quake 3 came out in '99 so you'd figure they'd get things like netcode and controlls down at some point
I'm cautious;y looking forward to this game. I'd rather this be a Treyarch joint, since IW has a way of shipping the most broken, unbalanced shit.
After Black Ops; I've lost all faith in Treyarch.
I loved MW2. I can't wait for MW3, just sucks I have no money right now to buy it or I would.
I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me.
Electronic cigarette.
Your memory is wrong.
About Doom's pacing or the map designs? Or is that I forgot to mention that Doom let you have far more weapons at a time, non-regenerating health, key collecting, etc.? If that's the case, I can safely say we're off that boat - regen health, all the next-gen casualization of FPSes is here to stay.
But I do remember Doom being a fast paced game...
Actuarian
What I'm guessing MechDeus means is that the enemies in Doom were anything but a shooting gallery -- the AI may be very simple, but all of the enemies would not just sit there and shoot at you partially behind cover.
If he's really claiming that the map layouts are less complicated in Doom or that the game is slower, he's on crack. We are probably never going to see a FPS as fast as Doom again -- it doesn't work on consoles, it would wreck havoc on networking code, and it's something that would give the current playerbase of FPS games massive fits (or worse).
Hostages? **** em'
A more accurate statement than calling it a shooting gallery (whatever that means) is that given how little control you have over the game, it might as well be an on-rails shooter, which we all love.
Electronic cigarette.
About Doom being a shooting gallery. COD has magical spawning doors that enemies will pour out of in a copy-paste fashion, while the player sits behind a wall and pecks away at their leisure. Each enemy will come out in the same fashion, running the same way, following the same path, allowing the player to literally aim in one location and get 20 headshots in a row while the soldiers obliviously walk on their pre-scripted path through a pile of bodies.
Doom, on the other hand, always requires movement for combat. There's almost no shooting gallery sections where you can prop yourself in one spot and then peck away at leisure. They do occasionally happen (the secret exit in episode 1 has a room like that) but it's not a constant part of the main game like it is in COD. The ability to do so is also pretty much removed on nightmare difficulty since they'll come back to life too fast and you have to keep moving even more than normal.
I have to give Activision's marketing credit for this one:
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks