- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: DICE may have saved me $60
Posted on 6/20/11 at 12:15 am to Antiheroaz
Posted on 6/20/11 at 12:15 am to Antiheroaz
Everybody does. It's the same shite
0
Posted on 6/20/11 at 12:41 am to TigerBandTuba
quote:
I still don't want to play CoD
Me neither, This one shouldn't be called MW3, it should be called MW1.5.3
Posted on 6/20/11 at 12:55 am to Antiheroaz
this is disappointing and I'm not sure how the lower standard of fps and resolution can be a good thing....but again I'll hold out judgement graphics wise until I see some actual console gameplay on the live dashboard.
still curious about all the COD players in here readily opening the back of their throats for BF3.
still curious about all the COD players in here readily opening the back of their throats for BF3.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 12:59 am to Klark Kent
quote:
still curious about all the COD players in here readily opening the back of their throats for BF3.
They read so much BF3 dick sucking posts/articles that they actually start to believe it's gonna be the greatest thing since sliced bread.
It will be the same as BFBC2/Homefront/Crysis 2/any other FPS besides CoD in the sense that people will play it for ~2 weeks then revert back to old faithful. It's inevitable
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:01 am to Antiheroaz
quote:
30fps and 720p confirmed on consoles by DICE exec.
Oh, and for the framerate doesn't mean anything crowd, I don't know what to say. Any PC gamer will tell you 30 fps blows cock.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:05 am to Jcorye1
Dont know why anyone with an Xbox would complain about the 720p, pretty sure thats as good as it gets on Xbox anyway.
I am disappointed with 30fps, but having played Crysis 2 and BFBC2 on 30fps, I dont think its that great of an issue. COD needs 60 to maintain the fast paced gun on gun, BF is more about the entire war experience, big maps and weapons and whatnot, so im not surprised, again, just disappointed
I am disappointed with 30fps, but having played Crysis 2 and BFBC2 on 30fps, I dont think its that great of an issue. COD needs 60 to maintain the fast paced gun on gun, BF is more about the entire war experience, big maps and weapons and whatnot, so im not surprised, again, just disappointed
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:09 am to Jcorye1
quote:
Any PC gamer
We are talking about consoles here so this argument is invalid. Crysis was 30fps and it was fine, as was Halo Reach. The difference in frame rates is much greater on a PC than console
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:11 am to RATeamWannabe
Yeah, the 720p really doesn't matter to me, but the FPS is going to be an issue for me. Halo 3 worked for me before I really got into the faster paced games like COD, but I go back and it just seems so sluggish. I can see how the frame rate might be minimized, but I definitely think it's going to be a massive drawback.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:12 am to Tigerfan7218
quote:
We are talking about consoles here so this argument is invalid. Crysis was 30fps and it was fine, as was Halo Reach. The difference in frame rates is much greater on a PC than console
Eh, Reach has massive issues when you start playing invasion, which is the only comparable thing to BF.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:17 am to Jcorye1
I never had huge issues on invasion, they were there but nothing huge.
This next part isn't directed at you J, just didn't want to post twice... I think it's funny that CoD fanboys tend to use games that weren't specifically designed for multiplayer like CoD was and is (and don't kid yourself that's exactly what infinity ward is doing at this point). Halo: Reach and Crysis were very much intended to be sold as great campaign games with solid multiplayer (Crysis failed in this aspect imo).
CoD:MW3 looks like the same campaign in a different location.
This next part isn't directed at you J, just didn't want to post twice... I think it's funny that CoD fanboys tend to use games that weren't specifically designed for multiplayer like CoD was and is (and don't kid yourself that's exactly what infinity ward is doing at this point). Halo: Reach and Crysis were very much intended to be sold as great campaign games with solid multiplayer (Crysis failed in this aspect imo).
CoD:MW3 looks like the same campaign in a different location.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:21 am to Tigerfan7218
quote:
This next part isn't directed at you J, just didn't want to post twice... I think it's funny that CoD fanboys tend to use games that weren't specifically designed for multiplayer like CoD was and is (and don't kid yourself that's exactly what infinity ward is doing at this point). Halo: Reach and Crysis were very much intended to be sold as great campaign games with solid multiplayer (Crysis failed in this aspect imo).
I can see why more companies are sliding to better multiplayer and crappier campaign though. It might change when I actually graduate college and get a real job, but right now, I'm not going to pick up a game that I won't realistically play 200+ hours for 60 bucks.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:23 am to Jcorye1
I'm the opposite, I love getting games like Fallout and Bioshock because I can put so many hours in them. Even though I don't have a ton of time with school either it just means that a game is going to last me a long time which means I get my money's worth out of it.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:25 am to Tigerfan7218
I'll give you Fallout 3, but New Vegas's glitches finally got to me (I was halfway through with the story, and BAM! all my status's with the gangs suddenly went to even.)
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:27 am to Jcorye1
Which is why I said Fallout and didn't include a suffix. 3 was awesome, NV would have been good except for the glitches (although I did finish it). I just finished beating AC:Brotherhood and doing/getting everything. It took me almost 3 weeks to do, but only because I had more time to play without any classes right now.
Oh and Revelations is gonna be awesome
Oh and Revelations is gonna be awesome
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:38 am to Tigerfan7218
quote:
I think it's funny that CoD fanboys tend to use games that weren't specifically designed for multiplayer like CoD was and is (and don't kid yourself that's exactly what infinity ward is doing at this point).
lolwut
quote:
Oh and Revelations is gonna be awesome
But I agree with this.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:42 am to Sir Saint
If you honestly can't see that CoD is strictly a multiplayer game at this point then there is no hope for you. I'm not bashing the business strategy or anything (because obviously it works or they wouldn't be in business). It's just that CoD campaigns after MW1 just aren't that good. BLOPS was a poor execution of a good idea, MW2 was pretty much 1 all over again to me, MW3 looks like the same thing.
But glad we can at least agree that Revelations is gonna be sweet
But glad we can at least agree that Revelations is gonna be sweet
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:48 am to Tigerfan7218
No I agree that CoD is purely for multi, and I also agree that all of the MW installments are shells of the former edition. (ie MW2.5 coming in November)
I just didn't grasp the point you were trying to make in the sentence I quoted.
I just didn't grasp the point you were trying to make in the sentence I quoted.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 1:50 am to Sir Saint
People like to bring up FPS's that go for a great campaign are somehow inferior to CoD (See the examples I posted). I'm sorry if it was confusing, after I went back and read it a few more times, I see exactly what you are saying, I didn't really finish the point
Posted on 6/20/11 at 6:28 am to Antiheroaz
Well, think of it like this. Bc2 probably ran at 30 and I thought the game flowed well, not withstanding its DICElike feel of gunplay.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 6:45 am to Ham Tonks
quote:
30 FPS = cinematic look
Come on man...I'm really looking forward to BF3, but 30 FPS just looks less fluid. BF3 would be 60 fps on console if Dice could do it, the consoles just don't have enough power.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News