StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Dont buy this game.

The graphics, sound and voice acting are top notch. But the gameplay is some of the most pathetic I have ever played. First of all your fellow robot companinons are useless. No I don't mean in normal stupid team mate AI sense. Your team mates don't exist as real objects. Their weapons don't do any damage at all and they themselves dont get damaged. So don't get excited by fighting side by side with megatron because its actually a hologram of megatron. I once let him attack a puny cannonfodder autobot and even after five minutes damn thing was without a scratch. A single shot from my neutron rifle and he exploded. Yet he took countless blasts from megatrons hueg arm cannons.

The enemy are in general stupid and worthless. They die in a few shots and their AI is non existent. It is nearly impossible to get killed by them. The biggest challenge in this game is navigating. This is a railroad shooter game and you will have to sometimes do some crazy power jumps.

All I can say is fuck the mentality that video games are art. Fire the people responsible for making those concept arts and movies for those games. Get some real game developers working on remaking making it and pay THEM the sackloads of money. War for Cybertron had some astounding potentials. You can jump off a huge ledge and fire thrusters to slow down your descent then hit the ground with a Earthshaking boom you expect from your 40 foot high robot warrior. The transformation into vehicle mode is fantastically implemented, you can even do it in the middle of a leap like the movies. The ability to pull off movie like stunts in general is amazing. But all that is wasted because the game is so easy and broken.

By the way I played the PC version. There is no lan play. So if you want to play against friends or fight alongside them in coop prepare for laggy internet experience.

Buy this game.

The graphics, sound and voice acting are top notch. The gameplay is exactly what you should expect from a console shooter - enemies explode when you shoot them and you don't have to worry about the AI taking the glory.

There is some great level design, with plenty of opportunities for crazy power jumps.

You can jump off a huge ledge and fire thrusters to slow down your descent then hit the ground with a Earthshaking boom you expect from your 40 foot high robot warrior. The transformation into vehicle mode is fantastically implemented, you can even do it in the middle of a leap like the movies. The ability to pull off movie like stunts in general is amazing.

(( BTW I am pretty sure the AI companions do damage because I've had boss fights end when I'm in vehicle mode ))

I bought the game due to positive buzz, haven't played it yet (yeah, I broke my gaming backlog rule. Again).

But after nearly 120 hours of play, I finally finished Empire Total War, so now its time for some PS3 play. War for Cybertron, I choose you!

It's pretty funny when people are this wrong; killing Trypticon on hard my whole plan was 'draw all the fire and let the NPCs kill him.'

But then I'm not dumb enough to write off a multi-focused twitch shooter because of some really inaccurate claims from maybe 10m of one mode.

PS game designed for console PC gaming dead etc.

I played on medium. Do the NPC allies actually do damage on hard ? Do they actually also take damage on that difficulty as opposed to being holograms with intangible weapons ?

Why would the game get easier on hard? Maybe you're just full of shit. I played the game on normal the spoitled hard and I have no idea what you're complaining about. The 'defend Omega' section would be basically impossible if the teammates did no damage.

You gotta be shitting me or lieing or maybe you are a liar who is full of shit.

I havent got to omega section yet. But I did do the chapter 1 of both autobot and decepticon campaign. I have carefully observed my team mates in action. To test my theory today I let them fight the battles while I stood by. They do absolutely no damage at all to mook enemies. They are also immune to damage themselves from both my weapons and the enemies. Well on autobot campaign I think I did saw optimus kill one, maybe two enemies. But that was after a two minute exchange of gunfire. When I am playing as optimus just a few shots cause enemies to go poof.

AI teammates' weapons do damage enemies. How you could have played through the entire game and come to the conclusion that their attacks did not do anything is staggering.

He HASN'T. He's posted his ill-informed 'review' after playing TWO CHAPTERS. The AI guys can't shoot for shit and pick targets poorly (ie often waste their fire on cover etc) but they certainly do damage. In some boss fights it's easiest to leave the damage-dealing to the team and just dodge everywhere.

In any case it's a multi-based twitch shooter so even if they DIDN'T do damage who would even care?

Whatever damage they do is miniscule and ineffectual. Why would weapons operate at 1/1000th the power when not used by me ? Take the zoom pistol for example. Two shots maximum to kill any mook. Yet this morning I witnessed Bumblebee send shot after shot into same mook without effect.

This reminds me of the gamespot review. Y'know wherein the said reviewer makes multiple mistakes, gets caught upon it, and then resolves to blame others.

Oh right, for the game. I'd say buy it. The main game is fun if not a bit short, though the whole harkening to G1 makes it fun to play as the leaders. So far I do enjoy a few online matches, but suspecting that can vary wildly on whether or not your opponents aren't retards and grasp how to transform.

The multiplayer can be hit-or-miss, dependent on two factors, those being whether your teammates are idiots (which is something you can only remedy by playing with friends, and isn't limited to this game alone), and if the sub-par netcode decides to be so laggy that the match becomes unplayable except for the host (which is something you can rightfully hold against the game).

I've sunk a fair amount of time into multiplayer and have warmed up to all the classes. I just wish more people played some of the objective gametypes.

The team balancing is awful. You'll often see the top 5 scorers from last round put against the worst 5, or the level 20s put against a team of noobs.

Sarevok wrote:You gotta be shitting me or lieing or maybe you are a liar who is full of shit.

Maybe he's just less rubbish at the game than you?

(I dunno, I played it all co-op, so there were two of us running around murdering robot dudes).

Game's alright, I should probably try and go back to it online before Reach comes out and it's even deader than it is now, because it is fun, my mate's managed to get himself into the top 50 for TDM, but I got distracted by stabbing terrorists in the face in Alpha Protocol.

I like the multi; it manages to steal some good ideas. It's pretty cheesed and I doubt it'll be balanced before it totally dies, but it works and its fun. I don't have any lag issues either (unless the game is overall laggy for everyone).

Stark wrote:The team balancing is awful. You'll often see the top 5 scorers from last round put against the worst 5, or the level 20s put against a team of noobs.

That's another thing to file under "Subpar Matchmaking Programming". If you get a group of 5 v 5 and then right before the match starts, 4 guys on one side drop out... you end up playing 5 v 1. And if a player joins the game, there is no guarantee he'll be put on the side with only one player.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:That's another thing to file under "Subpar Matchmaking Programming". If you get a group of 5 v 5 and then right before the match starts, 4 guys on one side drop out... you end up playing 5 v 1. And if a player joins the game, there is no guarantee he'll be put on the side with only one player.

I played matches where starting out, it's a 5 vs 2, and no one had dropped. The Automatchmaker just decided to do it for shits and giggles.

Also, I have no idea what Sarevok is smoking. The game was fun to play, which is all I expect from a game. And the AI sidekicks were very helpful. Hell, in the fight against Zeta Prime, I would never have beaten the fight without them thanks to fucking clones he makes. I just let AI deal with the horde of clones while I drove around avoiding them all.

For the XBox version of this game, I need to know - does it allow for split-screen co-op, or only that bullshit separate-systems co-op play?

Molyneux wrote:For the XBox version of this game, I need to know - does it allow for split-screen co-op, or only that bullshit separate-systems co-op play?

It's online only co-op.

Split screen co-op is pretty rare these days. Companies would much rather you go out to buy two versions of their game so you can play with a friend rather than only one you can both play.

And it's only going to get worse.

Temjin wrote:

Molyneux wrote:For the XBox version of this game, I need to know - does it allow for split-screen co-op, or only that bullshit separate-systems co-op play?

It's online only co-op.

Split screen co-op is pretty rare these days. Companies would much rather you go out to buy two versions of their game so you can play with a friend rather than only one you can both play.

And it's only going to get worse.

Fucking hell. I despise any company that pulls that shit...half the fun of playing multiplayer is having people to talk to while I'm playing. There's no damn way I would have ever played Gears of War or Halo 2/3 without same-room co-op available.
I'm less likely to buy this game now.

Molyneux wrote: Fucking hell. I despise any company that pulls that shit...half the fun of playing multiplayer is having people to talk to while I'm playing. There's no damn way I would have ever played Gears of War or Halo 2/3 without same-room co-op available.
I'm less likely to buy this game now.

You know you can get headsets, right, and they let you talk to people. Hell, I play co-op all the time, and online co-op is far more convenient than managing to get together for maybe one night a month when no-one has any other commitments keeping them at home. Same box co-op is a relic, fun for some arcade games but mostly not cutting it for long term games.

Vendetta wrote:

Molyneux wrote: Fucking hell. I despise any company that pulls that shit...half the fun of playing multiplayer is having people to talk to while I'm playing. There's no damn way I would have ever played Gears of War or Halo 2/3 without same-room co-op available.
I'm less likely to buy this game now.

You know you can get headsets, right, and they let you talk to people. Hell, I play co-op all the time, and online co-op is far more convenient than managing to get together for maybe one night a month when no-one has any other commitments keeping them at home. Same box co-op is a relic, fun for some arcade games but mostly not cutting it for long term games.

Because talking to someone on a headset is comparable to them being in the same room, right?
I quite enjoy getting together with friends to play games. I just finished running through Halo 2 in co-op, and before that we did Gears of War; next up we're going to try for Gears of War 2. Online co-op would be silly given that we live maybe ten minutes away from each other, and is not nearly as fun in any case.

Same-box co-op may not be a necessity for you, but it is for me. I would have had a lot of fun playing, say, Ghostbusters with my friends; instead we wound up with one person playing and three others sitting around, watching. Still fun, but not nearly in the same league.

I can't count the number of nights I've spent shooting shit with my mates while playing gears.

You use phones, right? Lol. Like has been said split-screen is going to become even less common in future.

Buy Borderlands.

Stark wrote:I can't count the number of nights I've spent shooting shit with my mates while playing gears.

You use phones, right? Lol. Like has been said split-screen is going to become even less common in future.

Buy Borderlands.

Phone? As little as possible. Some people still enjoy face-to-face interaction. Get this through your head: maybe you don't mind having to use a microphone to talk with the people you're playing with. That's fine. I do mind, and lack of splitscreen is every bit as legitimate a reason for me to be annoyed with a game as, say, leaving out save-file support would be. For me, it's an integral part of multiplayer console gaming, especially in shooters.

If I wanted to play remotely, I'd buy it for the fucking PC.

Stark wrote:Ok, you've got a social disability. That's cool.

I'm not sure how PC is going to change anything though; indeed most PC implementations of voice chat etc are fucking awful. Voice chat/parties/multi is probably the biggest draw to consoles for many people, because its seamless and 'just works'.

Oh wait, you ignorantly threatened to take your bat and ball and go back to PC because... you're disabled? Oh sorry it's an integral part of multiplayer ON CONSOLE... somehow... even though it limits you to 2/4 players. OH NOEZ.

Buy Perfect Dark.

Wanting to play with my friends in the same room is somehow a 'social disability'? Go fuck yourself.