What Game Are You Playing Right Now?

Alfred · 12-03-2009, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

More refined graphics dosen't always mean better graphics though.

In this case it sure as hell does. It's way more colorful, detailed, and overall attractive looking than its predecessor.

boo boo · 12-03-2009, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alfred

In this case it sure as hell does. It's way more colorful, detailed, and overall attractive looking than its predecessor.

Ok, in that case.

But, I think many modern games compromise things graphically, there's more texture and detail, but there's also less color and imagination.

I still think many of the best looking games ever made were from the 16 bit era.

But really, I hate the modern trend of games that confuses "realistic graphics" with "looking through a coffee filter".

Just look at how dull and brown GTA4 looks when compared to the very vibrant and colorful Vice City. Yes it's New York and I realise it's supposed to look like that, but blah.

LoathsomePete · 12-03-2009, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

Ok, in that case.

But, I think many modern games compromise things graphically, there's more texture and detail, but there's also less color and imagination.

I still think many of the best looking games ever made were from the 16 bit era.

But really, I hate the modern trend of games that confuses "realistic graphics" with "looking through a coffee filter".

Just look at how dull and brown GTA4 looks when compared to the very vibrant and colorful Vice City. Yes it's New York and I realise it's supposed to look like that, but blah.

Didn't you get the memo? Brown is the new real.

Alfred · 12-03-2009, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

But really, I hate the modern trend of games that confuses "realistic graphics" with "looking through a coffee filter".

COD4 is one of the ugliest games I've ever seen for this very reason.

boo boo · 12-04-2009, 08:40 AM

You know, speaking of which. Why didn't they just call Modern Warfare 2 Call of Duty 5? It was a sequel to the last game which was called Call of Duty 4, so wtf kinda sense does that make? If you're gonna even put "Call of Duty" in the title why not number it?

Oh well, at least it's not as bad as giving some new game in a series the exact same title as the original game, like Ninja Gaiden, Sonic the Hedgehog, Prince of Persia and Bionic Commando.

Anyway, some more fun with Yahtzee, this time it's Assassins Creed 2.

The Escapist : Video Galleries : Zero Punctuation : Assassin's Creed 2

Guybrush · 12-04-2009, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

You know, speaking of which. Why didn't they just call Modern Warfare 2 Call of Duty 5? It was a sequel to the last game which was called Call of Duty 4, so wtf since does that make? If you're gonna even put "Call of Duty" in the title why not number it?

I think it's technically call of duty 6. Call of duty 5 is a WW2 game released not too long ago which was relatively forgettable compared to CoD4 (played through single player). They call it modern warfare 2 because it's a direct sequel to the first modern warfare - or CoD4. It builds on the same story which is not something one should expect from CoD games in general, hence the distinction.

boo boo · 12-04-2009, 08:46 AM

Wait...... what? There's actually a Call of Duty 5? I have never f*cking heard of it.

Do you mean World at War? It's not called COD5. And what I said is still true, if MW2 is a direct sequel to COD4 (unlike World at War), then I don't know why it's not being called COD5.

Zarko · 12-04-2009, 08:52 AM

CoD: World at War?

Alfred · 12-04-2009, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tore

I think it's technically call of duty 6. Call of duty 5 is a WW2 game released not too long ago which was relatively forgettable compared to CoD4 (played through single player). They call it modern warfare 2 because it's a direct sequel to the first modern warfare - or CoD4. It builds on the same story which is not something one should expect from CoD games in general, hence the distinction.

I think I may be the only person alive who thinks that COD4 didn't have a very memorable campaign. Maybe for people who never played Uncharted, Bioshock (or any other game with a compelling narrative) it was something special, but to me, it's just another FPS.

Guybrush · 12-04-2009, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

Wait...... what? There's actually a Call of Duty 5? I have never f*cking heard of it.

Do you mean World at War? It's not called COD5. And what I said is still true, if MW2 is a direct sequel to COD4 (unlike World at War), then I don't know why it's not being called COD5.

Oh yeah, World at War is the fith game, but not called CoD5 as such.

Nevermind me

12-04-2009, 08:52 AM	#1198 (permalink)
Zarko Barely Disheveled Zombie Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Australia Posts: 1,196	CoD: World at War?