Aja on 27/3/2009 at 02:02
I didn't like the demo of World At War; all of the horrific cutscenes they can pack in don't change the fact that you're still supposed to be having fun killing hordes of Japanese. Somehow COD4 avoided this problem; maybe because it had you fighting very specific terrorist groups rather than an entire country.
Actually I think my distaste also has something to do with the fact that Treyarch just isn't quite as good at making these games as is Infinity Ward. World At War feels like COD3 with a fancier engine.
Angel Dust on 27/3/2009 at 02:29
Quote Posted by mothra
i love you (all/how predictable you are). always aim for the head and never talk about the post, only the poster
I actually thought Sulphur addressed your post perfectly, that is all this indignant, mouth-frothing rage regarding war games is very hard to take from someone who plays pretty much every AAA bang-bang game that comes out.
I mean really how do you expect people to respond to a post as ridiculously hyperbolic as yours? You might actually have a valid point worth discussing if you went about discussing it in a more level headed way.
PigLick on 27/3/2009 at 03:48
Yeh COD4 was much better, it didnt make me cringe like COD5 did, I found a lot of it distasteful. They should have just made the whole of COD5 a nazi zombie game, cos there aint nothing wrong with mowing down waves of zombies, who are also Nazis to boot.
Speaking of which, eagerly awaiting the new zombie map.
Koki on 27/3/2009 at 05:59
Quote Posted by Aja
I didn't like the demo of World At War; all of the horrific cutscenes they can pack in don't change the fact that you're still supposed to be having fun killing hordes of Japanese.
Jesus christ man, how can you not have fun killing japanese?
Oh, and CoD5 > CoD4. But I said that already.
june gloom on 27/3/2009 at 06:16
There isn't enough salt in the world to take your opinion with, Kokes.
Aja on 27/3/2009 at 06:46
Quote Posted by Koki
Jesus christ man, how can you not have fun killing japanese?
Cute, but the overt strain of your cynicism or whatever it is you're trying to convey ruins any potential reaction to it -- be it shock or amusement or anything else -- it ends up reading lamely.
Koki on 27/3/2009 at 07:56
@Aja: Well, you made it sound as if killing hordes of japanese was somehow bad. And it intrigued me because you apparently had a blast doing the same to generic muslims in CoD4.
Nice try, but he completely misses the fact that there are no civilians at all in Far Cry 2. Actually you'd be hard pressed to find civilians in any FPS at all.
Aja on 27/3/2009 at 08:04
But in COD4 I wasn't fighting Islam; I was fighting terrorism. I killed Russians and Iraqis and dogs with equal disregard for their nationalities.
Sinister Handed on 27/3/2009 at 08:52
Quote Posted by Koki
Nice try, but he completely misses the fact that there are no civilians at all in Far Cry 2. Actually you'd be hard pressed to find civilians in any FPS at all.
Actually the article is complaining about the lack of civilians in Far Cry 2.
Quote:
In Africa, the mercenary's freedom from responsibility for killing non-combatants is a redundancy, since at no point is he able to do it. It's not that civilians should exist to get casually slaughtered, but the gameplay could use a little variety: the only non-violent character interaction in the game is when someone orders the player to go and kill someone else. All the characters are either fellow mercenaries -- with whom the player's alliances are extremely shaky -- and the infinitely-numbered faction warriors, who inexplicably open fire at first sight.
