Just want to make some general conversation about The latest serious sam, anyone thought this game was overdone with the blood? I liked it though, there cant be too much blood in a game. Anyway, who thought there was a massive difference between serious sam 2 and serious sam 3 in the graphics?
Saw the game, thought it looked pretty cool, might get it. But GOOD GOD MAN... learn what makes a game good! Graphics and blood have little-to-no sway in the quality of a game! (VVVVVV vs Homefront = Pristine example)
i loved the game. back to the old school shooter where cover is for amateurs. ^^ lots of blood? it must have been there but i didn''t realy see it cause i was dodging enemys and rockets. so i guess it isn't to much blood. (for some people maybe a bit to much enemy's =P) to bad there is not much going on online. but it was great fun while it lasted. as for the the grapihics... nice that they improve them like all other games so they don''t fall behind on the avarage game. but it's the gameplay, story and fun that counts more.
Well, I just say that blood makes a game a whole lot better for me. I do also enjoy alot of other games. You might have been dodging them, but if you get up close using melee grabs and sledgehammers, the screen gets covered in it. True that the story and gameplay is more valuable, but serious sam was mostly about taking on wave after wave of enemies at once.
well i thought the grabs are kinda lame and take a bit to long sometimes. so i didn''t use it. the sladgehammer sure if fun but i didn''t use it much cause i like the guns more. aswell as the gameplay of dodging them.
as for serious sam being fight waves after waves.... yes thats the serie. it's part of why the gameplay is good. it's kinda like saying that dynasty warriors is bad because the only thing you do is killing 1000's of man. or katamari is bad because you only roll up stuff.
