Moderator: Thanas
So... pretty much exactly the same as the PS2 version, just sans building loads? For a 'load screen free' game, that's hilarious. Let's do a survey: who on 360 doesn't have a HDD?Delta_Squad wrote:With regards to the loading times (on 360) when you start the game you have about 30-40 seconds of loading before it dumps you at your last save location. Once in the game the only time you get load screens is when you start a mission and these only last 5-10 seconds.
I don't know...if the gameplay is as good as it sounds, a revision of my worldview may be in order.Tolya wrote:When does this...creation of go...wait, Im an atheist...fuck...thinkthinkthink...reset
From the video i hope theres a way to turn off the bloody opponent tags, otherwise that 'tense search' is going to be pretty trivial...PeZook wrote:Yes! Yes, thank God!
He does exist! The game came out and it's awesome!
And, damn, I already see that multiplayer...where you hunt for the other player in a crowded city, shootouts with crowds running scared, staking out the other guy with a sniper rifle on the roof...
I want it...I want it so bad!
You know, that might make the whole change of clothes thing worthwhile if you can turn those off. You have only a picture of the face of the man you're hunting, but they could try to disguise themselves or something.Steel wrote:From the video i hope theres a way to turn off the bloody opponent tags, otherwise that 'tense search' is going to be pretty trivial...PeZook wrote:Yes! Yes, thank God!
He does exist! The game came out and it's awesome!
And, damn, I already see that multiplayer...where you hunt for the other player in a crowded city, shootouts with crowds running scared, staking out the other guy with a sniper rifle on the roof...
I want it...I want it so bad!
Bit like the retarded situation in AvP2 deathmatch where cloaked predators were tagged in massive colourful writing
Dude, the POINT of gaming journalism for most people is FREE games and hardware. So sometimes they might be a bit too overzealous.CaptHawkeye wrote:Is it a good example of the state of gaming journalism that every reviewer is giving this game a perfect 10/10 and other numbers they've never handed out and I still don't care what any of them think of the game?
Right. They all do that every week, yes? Even if you're going to be that hideously cynical about a gaming series that has proven itself over the ages, do you really think they all suddenly got given swag bags full of money Rockstar could have blown on advertising instead?CaptHawkeye wrote:Is it a good example of the state of gaming journalism that every reviewer is giving this game a perfect 10/10 and other numbers they've never handed out and I still don't care what any of them think of the game?
Except that I wasn't referring to GTA IV in paticular, or do you expect me to spell this out for you?Admiral Valdemar wrote: Right. They all do that every week, yes? Even if you're going to be that hideously cynical about a gaming series that has proven itself over the ages, do you really think they all suddenly got given swag bags full of money Rockstar could have blown on advertising instead?
Or, you could not strawman me?Or, you could play it yourself and find out..
Hey, great. But I seem to see GTA IV in the thread title. Care to go elsewhere then?CaptHawkeye wrote:
Except that I wasn't referring to GTA IV in paticular, or do you expect me to spell this out for you?
Yeah, it sure beats commenting on "ZOMG!!1 I DUN TRUST DA REVIEWZ!" twice in a single fucking thread.Or, you could not strawman me?
You see GTAIV, but I guess you missed the part after it about GTAIV REVIEWS.Admiral Valdemar wrote: Hey, great. But I seem to see GTA IV in the thread title. Care to go elsewhere then?
Actually, I was referring to your comment on Metacritic giving it a 100/100 which I guess I should have quoted. I like what i've seen in the gameplay vidoes and descriptions and will buy it for that reason. I couldn't give two shits about what tacky number the reviewers feel like stapling on to it even if it is rare for them to give perfect scores. (Nevermind how lame it is for them to claim that it's perfect. It can't be, but we'll just forget about that part I guess.) Because gaming media is shit, and the difference from their usual scoring is almost negligable. I guess it just doesn't matter to me when a reviewer decided to give a game a 100/100 instead of the usual 95/100?
Yeah, it sure beats commenting on "ZOMG!!1 I DUN TRUST DA REVIEWZ!" twice in a single fucking thread.
Yes, and your comment not on GTAIV specifically and being a repeated comment. Anyway, I agree with it.CaptHawkeye wrote:
You see GTAIV, but I guess you missed the part after it about GTAIV REVIEWS.
The 100% or 10 out of 10 reviews are stupid, yes. But on the other hand, a perfect game can be just that subjective anyway, so like you can get a 5 star movie, a 10 star game is possible if it is an absolute classic, which by the looks of it, this will be. I'd actually vouch more for 10/10 than 100/100 which is quite simply too exacting. I mean, HL2 gets 96%, so what differentiates it from something that gets 94 or 98%? Unless someone has one hell of a detailed criteria sheet, it's bullshit.Actually, I was referring to your comment on Metacritic giving it a 100/100 which I guess I should have quoted. I like what i've seen in the gameplay vidoes and descriptions and will buy it for that reason. I couldn't give two shits about what tacky number the reviewers feel like stapling on to it even if it is rare for them to give perfect scores. (Nevermind how lame it is for them to claim that it's perfect. It can't be, but we'll just forget about that part I guess.) Because gaming media is shit, and the difference from their usual scoring is almost negligable. I guess it just doesn't matter to me when a reviewer decided to give a game a 100/100 instead of the usual 95/100?
Yeah, this is something I've felt for a while. Anything more than a ten point scale is useless wankery. Even a twenty point scale with half points is really pushing it when it comes to being able to justify the difference between the points and apply it consistently.Admiral Valdemar wrote: I'd actually vouch more for 10/10 than 100/100 which is quite simply too exacting. I mean, HL2 gets 96%, so what differentiates it from something that gets 94 or 98%? Unless someone has one hell of a detailed criteria sheet, it's bullshit.
You forgot the part about how awesome it wasTolya wrote: We (me and PeZook) once set up a sniper battle on Operation Flashpoint. A big valley was our area of operations and after 60 minutes of looking for each other I got in a Mi8 and started strafing the countryside.
