Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasereth
To me there just wasn't enough different to keep me hooked. Great game, but the earth shattering graphics of the first one didn't happen again the 2nd time around (first one had graphics years ahead of its time), and it seems like other games do the same thing as Gears of War except add way more (GTA4 anyone?).
|
GTA 4 sucked. Yes, they built an amazing world, and the story was compelling. Brucie is my all time favourite NPC, but when it came to playability, the individual aspects of the game failed. It had many "mini-games", but none of them were actually entertaining enough to merit repayability. The cars' handling sucked, plus there was never any feeling of speed, except when you wanted to brake. Since you're driving 80% of the time, it was a really unrewarding. The AI was stupid. The "cover and shoot" system poorly executed, and worst of all: no collision detection when you're running.
On GOW2: I felt like the graphics advanced form the first one: not in terms of texture quality, but the application of the engine. Where GOW had tons of atmosphere - who didn't have sweaty palms the first time facing the berseker - GOW 2 played like a fast-paced movie - from confined spaces, to wide open landscapes etc, and they really used the unreal engine well to take you along on this surreal ride. And its not just cover and shoot, cover and shoot - they created excellent terrain and spaces to fight it out in - GOW2 is a better tactical shooter than GOW.
I agree that Horde is by far the most compelling thing about the game, but it doesnt need anything else. The only objective-based multiplayer game I play these days is Halo3, so i get those kicks there.