Wow. Highfire made me confused.
It's a hobby ^^
He is on a serious role here with large posts :P.
I'm serious now - it's a hobby ^^
And I do highly agree with Highfire on most of his agreeable posts.
Wait... now I'm confused, my agreeable posts are the ones you agree with? So... which ones do you agree with or which ones do I not agree with on so you don't agree?
... Let me reiterate:
Please say what you meant again, but in different words.
He is very observant, I love reading your posts Highfire. They prove alot!
Thanks man
I've been on Armor Games a while now (over 2 years) and I've learnt to grow and adapt to the way the WEPR ("World Events, Politics & Religion"
forums did things. It helps a lot
Example 1: Good Game, Not the best Graphics: Ever heard of Lost Planet? Yeah maybe the graphics are "decent" but I wouldn't call them the best. Lost Planet is a good game. Infact I love it.
This game?I've certainly seen better, and they're not at the minimum standard. I think the animations are quite detailed as well, which in an RPG is something difficult to achieve when gameplay aspects like taking cover directly behind... cover gives a rigid feel.
Mass Effect II is an example. It's not too bad but still provides a very mechanical feel which stops cohesive playstyles and immersion.
The game Lost Planet certainly looks interesting, I think I saw one of its cinematic trailers when looking for a gameplay video and ... wow.
My final opinion is of course being withheld until I've got a feel of the game and enough information - if that happens at all.
Example 2: Horrible Game, Great Graphics: Raven Squad is a horrible game I own on Xbox360. Its storyline is the worst. Hardly makes any sense. Its graphics are great. Doesn't mean anything just because it has good graphics that does not mean it is better than other games. Infact I only like it because of how much gamer points you can get out of one achievment. And how easy it is to earn a achievment.
Wait...
this?How old is this game? This video is in 2009 and if this video is from merely two years ago from that point I'd need to disagree as to its graphics.
Why two years?
Crysis 1 was released in 2007.
Needless to say not all parts of this trailer bares traits ingame, but the video serves double purpose in this case:
Show the excellent and vastly superior graphics (which isn't even shown to full extent being as you see little invisibility, water effects or distortion effects).
The second reason is the showing of gameplay - it works, very nicely in fact. It's somewhat rigid but upgraded in Crysis 2 and has a non-persevering multiplayer (which could be argued as an excellent trait in the face of professional play) but I found it very nicely done in the aspect of Multiplayer, whereas Singleplayer was undoubtedly superb and moreso in Crysis 2.
Crysis 2 did vert to the Class System present in Call of Duty but I'm alright with that, because it has a spark of balance, a distinction in capabilities and a unique selling point about it (being a super soldier).
Here is the
Crysis 2 Multiplayer Demo for the sake of seeing it.
Large post? Let's hope I live up to expectations ^^
- H