A brief rant

[Captain Vlad]

No one will listen to this opinion of mine. I don't care, cuz I'm sick of hearing all the nonsense that infects every game-centered forum in the 'net, and I simply have to declare that: Just because a game isn't designed to suit every one of your personal whims doesn't make it a bad piece of software.

No game will ever be complete realistic. Furthermore, what's 'realistic' to you might be tedious and boring to others, or *gasp* less authentic than the game you say 'lacks realism'.

Entertainment is the objective of any game. If it doesn't entertain, if it's not capable of entertaining, it doesn't matter how realistic or pretty it is.

Not doing things the same way another game in the same category did doesn't make a new game 'not an RPG' or 'not an FPS', or not an anything.

You don't know jack about a game you haven't played.

Just cuz it was made for a console doesn't make it bad. Just cuz it was made for a PC doesn't make it bad.

You not personally liking it doesn't even make it bad, it just means you didn't like it. I've loved games that objectively, were pretty weak. I've been bored to death by games that, looking at them with a clear eye, were very well done. Learn to see things objectively...or shut the hell up.

I could continue to vent here, but...if I fuss too much, it makes me tired, and I've expressed my opinion clearly enough, I think.

[Dowly]

Just because a game isn't designed to suit every one of your personal whims doesn't make it a bad piece of software.

Yes it does. :D

[tater]

This a reaction to my "RTS games are neither RT, nor Strategy" post?

You can certainly say that a game is not a FPS game definitively. If the player sees his avatar from a god's-eye view, it's NOT an FPS, period. "First person" means you see what a person sees. Any additional tools that do not simulate the information that person has, also changes the FP part of the equation. Doesn't mean it's bad, but it is categorically not "FP."

Same thing with "Real Time." I can look at the second had of the clock here, and real time means real time. 2X time is not real time. If some game has a facility being built while a "real time" battle takes place, and it goes from nothing to a gun emplacement in time to participate in a 10 minute long battle, not real time, sorry (unless real gun emplacements are built and ready to fire inside 10 minutes). Again, doesn't meant he game sucks, it's just not "real time."

I don't require games I like to be either, BTW, I just find the labels of them funny since they are in many cases flat out wrong.

[GlobalExplorer]

As fas ar I am concerned, everyone is free to rant.

However, it seem you have not understood how annoying it is these days to constantly see bought 5 star reviews and raving comments by people who by the hype. About new games that cater more and more for, - in order to avoid more insulting terms - the "casual gamer".

In other words: No one attacks you if you rave about a game, so let people with a more negative outlook have their word too. Why is it that everytime you post something negative in a thread about a new game people tend to single you out as a naysayer, while stupid mindless raving goes?

[GlobalExplorer]

You don't know jack about a game you haven't played.

First of all this an insult to our intelligence.

Secondly if it were true, everyone should stfu until a game has been released. This includes not only negative opinions but OMG LOOK AT TEH GRAFX THIS GAEM WILL BE AWESUM as well.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Or just not get worked up about other people's opinions. This is after all the internet, why not worry about the things you can control.

Lets keep this civil and above bar folks.


RDP

[GlobalExplorer]

LOL. Now it will be Captain Vlad who gets attacked for being negative. Complaining about people complaining makes you also complain in the eyes of people, and people who complain are always easy targets.

[ReallyDedPoet]

and people who complain are always easy targets.
People who speak up in general are targets ( good and the not so much ), comes with
the territory.

I am just asking it remain above bar.


RDP

[nikimcbee]

You must be refering to this thread:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=931294#post931294

[GlobalExplorer]

That was different, someone was really butthurt there, then got a deserved riposte.

[GlobalExplorer]

But in general I agree, I also find it often unbearable when other peoples opionion differ from mine ;)

[Captain Vlad]

Wasn't reacting to anyone particular, actually. Just the general 'If it's not exactly the way I want it to be, it'll suck, and I know this before I've even played the game' attitude I've seen over and over and over again over the past couple of months...well, it's gotten to me a little.

Just a little sick of hearing 'well that's going to be a crap game' when no one's even got to play the game yet, and tired of hearing lamentations of 'it'll suck because they didn't do it my way' when your way might not make a very good game.


First of all this an insult to our intelligence.
If you choose to percieve it that way. I see it more as a condemnation of a jaded attitude in regard to anything that doesn't fit expectations or preconceptions.

[GlobalExplorer]

First of all this an insult to our intelligence.
If you choose to percieve it that way. I see it more as a condemnation of a jaded attitude in regard to anything that doesn't fit expectations or preconceptions.

But that's subjective. The problem here is not so much concrete expectations but rather annoyance about dumbing down of each and every aspect until games literally play themselves.

[AJ!]

Look what you've done now Vlad :rotfl:

[SUBMAN1]

...Just cuz it was made for a console doesn't make it bad. ....Not an absolute guarantee, you are correct, but an almost guarantee for sure it is.

-S

[stabiz]

Yeah 99% makes it close to a guarantee.

[Captain Vlad]

The problem here is not so much concrete expectations but rather annoyance about dumbing down of each and every aspect until games literally play themselves.
Again, perception. There's been plenty of games released over the past couple of years that equal or exceed some you've held up as ideals.

Yeah 99% makes it close to a guarantee.

I think your percentages are a little off.

[SUBMAN1]

Yeah 99% makes it close to a guarantee.
I think your percentages are a little off.Once again you are right. It is only 98%.

-S

[Ilpalazzo]

Gaming is so widespread nowadays. It's turning into the movie industry. A whole lot of garbage to feed the 'casuals'. I feel like anybody who has been burned by a bad port or an unfaithful sequel can complain all they want about a game. Even if they haven't played it.

Lemme just remind everybody that the HALO series is unbelievably popular. Despite it being just an average shooter.

ps. Not exactly clear on what this rant is about. I guess he's just pissed about people that complain about games.

[danlisa]

I'm not too sure where Vlad is coming from but I'm guessing it's people vehemently arguing/defending their POV on a game, whether this be based on personal game play or reviews. If so, bollox, people disagree, always will....

LMFAO @ Stabiz & Subman1

PC Fanboys much?:rotfl:LOL

I game on both PC & Console and BOTH offer things the other doesn't. However saying that Console dev'd games are inherently bad is ignorant & rather short sighted. However, I suspect you are both winding Vlad up a little:lol:. You both know that there are more failed PC games than console, so your statement is a little off. What I will concede is that PC games which get ported to a console do suck 99% of the time but that is not because the game is bad but rather the porting was sloppy, EA for example, however, when developed specifically for each hardware device they tend to outshine their counterparts. The area that I suspect your console gripe comes from is the 'closed' format in which it's presented. There are few openly moddable games on consoles however there are some, it's down to the gametype & studios to allow this, this IMHO is the only area where the PC games excel.

On a personal note, I prefer to see games of this current gen caliber coming through on the consoles because it in turn drives the technology forward on the PC's. For example MGS4 looks as good as it does on my PS3 while running on a system with only 512mb RAM (256 GPU and 256 SKU) (and a kickass Cell processor), while maintaining 60FPS throughout. The same is true of Gran Turismo, Uncharted etc....If PC developers could code this well then we would all be very happy.

Now, while it may not be your interest, I advise you to search out information on a console only game called BigLittlePlanet. IMHO this game is revolutionary in both PC & Console builds. The imaginative scope, design, user creations & changeability that this title brings to a console owner is unfathomable. It is the first time (that I can remember) that a dev studio has said "Here's the tools, build it yourself", with this kind of user interactivity the possible outcomes are endless.

Start you off - http://www.gametrailers.com/player/39082.html?type= & http://www.gametrailers.com/player/39080.html?type=

Bottom line it's about 50/50 if you are honest.:p

[stabiz]

Nah, I`m not winding anybody up, I`m just saying that in my opinion there are no good reasons to buy a console (yet). Close to none of the games I enjoy exist on a console, since I mainly play simulators.

And to base quality on sales figures ... uhm ... I guess that makes The Sims something close to the pyramids. And Spice Girls will be compared to Mozart in 200 years?

And why are people fanboys when they like something over something else? I dont wear anti-console tshirts, I just hate the sit-down-in-your-couch-and-master-this-in-two-minutes-before-supper-is-ready mentality of casual gaming.

[danlisa]

Nah, I`m not winding anybody up, I`m just saying that in my opinion there are no good reasons to buy a console (yet). Close to none of the games I enjoy exist on a console, since I mainly play simulators.

And to base quality on sales figures ... uhm ... I guess that makes The Sims something close to the pyramids. And Spice Girls will be compared to Mozart in 200 years?

And why are people fanboys when they like something over something else? I dont wear anti-console tshirts, I just hate the sit-down-in-your-couch-and-master-this-in-two-minutes-before-supper-is-ready mentality of casual gaming.

LOL, fair enough mate.

I agree simulators are very scarce on consoles, much to my disappointment but I enjoy GT & Drift (< not really a sim ;)) and I'm looking forward to the IL2 Birds of Prey coming soon.

However, generalizing console games as 99/98% bad due to the lack of simulations is akin to saying that PC games are 90% bad for the same reason (probably more).

Regards sales. Yes, I have to agree with you, sales do not determine whether a game is 'good' or 'bad' is only signifies it's popularity, however, sales do provide an indication of how good a game is, following it's immediate release, in that strong sales later in the game's life indicate the quality of that title.

I never use the 'Fanboy' name in a derogatory way, Hell, I'm both:D. I even made a huge argument (on another forum) that the word should be auto censored due to too many people believing it to be an insult. So no offense ment.:up:

[stabiz]

Hehe! When I talk about why pc is better than console, I`m talking about personal preference, of course. Its not science.

Thus pc is best, and all who disagree must make love to a troll. Okay?

[danlisa]

Thus pc is best, and all who disagree must make love to a troll. Okay?

:rotfl:<Raises hand>

[SUBMAN1]

I'm speaking from a professional perspective! PC rule!

An example - PC's offer more in the way of hardware for a designer to work with. Consoles are automatically limited by memory right out of the box, so designing games on it, you are already level limited on size right out of the gate. There are a ton of factors on top of this, but I don't have the energy to delve into it at the moment.

So you know if a game is being designed for both the PC and Console at the same time, you already know right away that it has its legs chopped off at the knees.

-S

[GlobalExplorer]

Again, perception. There's been plenty of games released over the past couple of years that equal or exceed some you've held up as ideals.

One hand is enough :yep:.

[Captain Vlad]

One hand is enough :yep:.

You must have a whole lot of fingers.:D

[GlobalExplorer]

I'm speaking from a professional perspective! PC rule!

An example - PC's offer more in the way of hardware for a designer to work with. Consoles are automatically limited by memory right out of the box, so designing games on it, you are already level limited on size right out of the gate. There are a ton of factors on top of this, but I don't have the energy to delve into it at the moment.

So you know if a game is being designed for both the PC and Console at the same time, you already know right away that it has its legs chopped off at the knees.

-S

This is the reason why I hate consoles: Without them, and the dreadful porting over, on the PC we would have slick interfaces, which make use of high resolutions and powerful input devices. Instead we get this:

http://www.madshrimps.be/upload/B|owie/SW:kotor/Equip%20menu.JPG

Now how can consoles be more advanced than PCs, as some people were trying to convince of me during the "NexGen" hype?

A huge majority of games are bastardizing our computers. A good example is how the Morrowind interface was so much better than Oblivion, owing to NexGen and the 360.

[FIREWALL]

I HATE ALL COMPUTER GAMES. :arrgh!:

That's why I upgrade rig and harass my local Ganestop with "WHERE;S MY G#& D%$#@ GAME AT!!!

It's a sickness I don't want a cure for. :p

[Captain Vlad]

Don't get me started on those occasional...upgrade frenzies....

[danlisa]

This is the reason why I hate consoles: Without them, and the dreadful porting over, on the PC we would have slick interfaces, which make use of high resolutions and powerful input devices.

A huge majority of games are bastardizing our computers. A good example is how the Morrowind interface was so much better than Oblivion, owing to NexGen and the 360.

It's not consoles ruining your PC experience, it's lazy developers looking for a quick dollar on multi-platform titles.

Learn the difference.

[SUBMAN1]

It's not consoles ruining your PC experience, it's lazy developers looking for a quick dollar on multi-platform titles.

Learn the difference.I agree. Games should be optimized for a given platform. I'm hating the dumbed down one size fits all as of late. This is the very reason that PC Gamers just aren't buying software anymore. Besides, why would I want one of these protection schemes that screws up my computer when I can buy the same game in looks and feel for my damn console?

I could go on ranting all day long, but one thing the developers have forgotten - the PC Gamer is a much more 'sophisticated' gamer and can spot crap titles a mile away. This is the real reason PC Gaming is on a decline.

-S

[AJ!]

"Now how can consoles be more advanced than PCs, as some people were trying to convince of me during the "NexGen" hype?"

Dont worry. All the new consoles and handhelds are in development at the moment. the PS4, wii 2 and xbox 7 somit that their on about will bring even more headaches to the pc v console debate :shifty:

Not long till the next "NextGen" hype :doh:

[Frederf]

The quality of a piece of software is not entirely subjective. There are logical reasons why some things are desirable although usually our rubrics differ somewhat. I think "realistic" is such a bastardized word in the sim/hardcore game crowd. The word is basically inserted without critical thought because that's what people want to see.

On the other hand the word "fun" gets used too much as the antithesis of "hard" or "complex." "Fun" and "brain dead easy" are almost synonyms. "Accessible" is the corporate version. Not always is a minimap with all enemies marked on it, infinite ammo, constant hollywood explosions, teh c00l shiz, etc making the game more fun. It's hard to have a conversation about games with someone that doesn't realize that more stuff, less thinking, and greater ease in a game can detract from the satisfaction. Entertainment is a very broad definition and people need to learn that.

Consoles make money, are well optimized for the hardware, are "accessible", etc but I stand by my stance that consoles ruin otherwise very satisfying games. Rainbow Six (#1) vs Lockdown anyone? Sure the graphics are better and the animations more fluid but they have secretly drained away all the thinking, the challenge, the tension.

There are of course many games that belong on a console. Katamari Demacy, Guitar Hero, JRPGs are all lovely on a console. I have never ever ever ever loaded up a "sim" on a console and been pleasantly surprised by its depth. Forza/GranTurismo are excelent driving games but utter crap racing games.

While most people don't want the kind of depth that I do, the developers are partly to blame for underestimating people's intelligence. How long do you think the average console game "learn time" is by design? That is how long from sitting down and turning it on to being good enough to play it. 5 minutes? 10 minutes? And they wonder why we seem to have such short attention spans. It's too short! If I'm as good as I'm ever going to be in 10 minutes, the game is too simple. Welcome to the land of instant gratification and ADD.

[stabiz]

Hear, hear!

[Ilpalazzo]

Word.

Personally, I also find myself irritated by short, unreplayable games. Doesn't matter if it is easy or hard. Something about beating a game in one day just really irks me. It's cool if it has replayability you know? Like an addictive game, like having a different experience each time. That's why online play, open ended games, and skirmish modes are so fun. They're never really over until you feel like you had enough.

When a game is heavily scripted and linear, that's it. You beat it once and it's done. Like a movie. Just put it back on your shelf and remember if fondly. Don't get me wrong, some of these games can be very good. Recently I played Condemned and Call of Cthulhu. Absolutely no replayability and they were beat in a pretty short amount of time, but they were good. The Call of Duty SP campaigns can be very enjoyable, but I can't imagine anybody playing them much more than once.

In the end I guess it's about value. Why pay $40-$50 for a game I beat in 1-2 days and never play again. When I can pay $40-$50 for another game that will be played for months or even years?

If only we could rent pc games.

But I guess that's all just me:doh:


ps. I can't actually beat Call of Cthulhu. There seems to be some annoying bug at the very end that prevents me from finishing the game.

[SUBMAN1]

ps. I can't actually beat Call of Cthulhu. There seems to be some annoying bug at the very end that prevents me from finishing the game.I beat Call of Cthulhu. Get a walkthrough if its that much trouble.. I can remember feeling like I couldn't beat Fallout 2 since I needed some thing (something about the ship nav system) that I forgot was in my inventory and I didn't relate the two because it looked like a tankers helmet or something. Make sure this isn't happening to you as well. You can sometimes fix these poblems by taking a breather. I came back after taking a couple days off and smacked myself up side the head because I had the thing I was looking for all that time already! I just left it in the trunk of the car!

-S

[Frederf]

Ilpalazzo, guess what I'm playing now? Falcon 4.0, a game out of 1996 or 1998 or something. Why? Because they used generated content. It allows awesome coop scenarios, lends itself to hours and hours of learning, has the full range of tension, and is not afraid to be a little hard.

This is why I like Silent Hunter, because I get a feeling of connection with something larger than a video game. I'm experiencing a piece of history, doing what they are doing. It's not a ride on rails but a chess board in front of me and it's my move. Jet-powered U-boats and scripted missions where you nuke-torpedo a time-traveled US modern air craft carrier... I would stop playing. The second the game disconnects itself from what makes it meaningful, that's the second that the prettiest graphics, biggest explosions, most scripted "coincidences" of cool things become meaningless.

Anyone can make a big explosion or impossible fighting moves in software, that doesn't impress me. Bigger or faster is not praiseworthy. Using the tools at your disposal to tell a meaningful story is what makes a good game good. By story I mean the whole message and feeling.

[Ilpalazzo]

edited and added some ranting

OOOOOOh Falcon. My friend tried to get me into a game called Falcon Allied Force. Is that the same game? I was so caught up in IL2 at the time that I didn't feel like learning another sim. It did look good though. Played very smoothly.

Yes! Generated content! Akella's PT Boats game is gonna suck because they went with scripted missions. Yeah, I said it's going to suck, I haven't played it. So what.

I like how you mentioned (and bolded) coop. Where are all the coop games anyway? Sometimes I just want to play with a few friends and not have to find a full public server to have fun you know? Last game I remember playing coop with a couple dudes and having fun was some sort of Vietnam game. I forget the name. I want coop Thief 4. Sheez I want just about any game with a singleplayer campaign to have coop. My father even wanted to play coop Silent Hunter with me. We tried mp, but it was too contained feeling. We would love to patrol together. Maybe coop the same sub or something, I dunno. Just seems like there's coop fun to be had in most any game and nobody cares enough for it. Majority rule I guess.


hope this next part isn't a big spoiler to anybody


About Cthulhu, I tried this same part about 11 times. It's what I believe to be very close to the end of the game. It is when you have to make it through the place while it is collapsing because of the submarine attack. I received a tip to try it without strafing and lowering the resolution. Anyway, at the exact same part every time, no matter how fast I went through, I get game over. Do you know what part I'm talking about? WTF am I supposed to do. There is no sprint button. Could I actually be like a millisecond off and get game over? I just don't see how I can get there any faster. I always lose on the same part. I saw video of somebody completing it. He went through exactly as I did. I just don't understand why the game decides to kill me on this same part every time.

I have heard of many others having the same difficulty on that part. I just assumed it was bugged and let off it for a while.

[SUBMAN1]

...Anyone can make a big explosion or impossible fighting moves in software, that doesn't impress me. Bigger or faster is not praiseworthy. Using the tools at your disposal to tell a meaningful story is what makes a good game good. By story I mean the whole message and feeling.Good rant. I agree. I don't mind a little fantasy as long as the game doesn't try to sell itself as realistic. When I get into something that I'm not expecting, and that doesn't involve an awesome story, its game over!

I expect Doom 3 or 4 to be not so realistic. I buy that for the story. I expect a Falcon 4.0 AF to be realistic. I buy that for the learning! :up: If it's not realistic when I expect it to be, it's probably headed for the garbage bin - and I will warn anyone that talks about it what i found - guaranteed!

-S

[SUBMAN1]

OOOOOOh Falcon. My friend tried to get me into a game called Falcon Allied Force. Is that the same game? I was so caught up in IL2 at the time that I didn't feel like learning another sim. It did look good though.


hope this next part isn't a big spoiler to anybody


About Cthulhu, I tried this same part about 11 times. It's what I believe to be very close to the end of the game. It is when you have to make it through the place while it is collapsing because of the submarine attack. I received a tip to try it without strafing and lowering the resolution. Anyway, at the exact same part every time, no matter how fast I went through, I get game over. Do you know what part I'm talking about? WTF am I supposed to do. There is no sprint button. Could I actually be like a millisecond off and get game over? I just don't see how I can get there any faster. I always lose on the same part. I saw video of somebody completing it. He went through exactly as I did. I just don't understand why the game decides to kill me on this same part every time.

I have heard of many others having the same difficulty on that part. I just assumed it was bugged and let off it for a while.I remember the sub attacking. I think you have to get out of there at that point. If you don't make it in time, you die. You probably went down the wrong path.

And yes, he is talking about Falcon 4 AF. I did a couple video's myself on that one:

Ramp Start - http://www.veoh.com/videos/v141964342dXZjwFA

Dodging SAM's - http://www.veoh.com/videos/v1243432BJSkrk7p

Suprised by a contact on my RADAR that I didn't expect - Turned out to be a Juicy bomber. Only had Sidewinders this mission - http://www.veoh.com/videos/v1029789T9qcshHS

[Ilpalazzo]

I didn't go down the wrong path though. I watched a video on youtube where the guy beat it. I did exactly the same. It's just that the game decides to kill me at an exact same spot every time. Right toward the end of the run before you use the charm on the thingy.

[Frederf]

Falcon 4.0 and Falcon AF are realllllly close to the same game but they aren't. Falcon 4.0 is older and isn't the "Falcon 4.5" that AF is but 4.0 has the benefit of having the "Open Falcon" modification community which has basically gone to town on the old bird for some very impressive results. It's waaay updated. IL-2 is really cool except that the campaign is very... eastern european developer'd. Falcon is more like a war sim with a flight sim attached instead of the other way around. You could play a very interesting game without ever getting in the cockpit and thus the generated content is a little better feeling. I like how IL-2 flies and the Falcon 4.0 world.

Find/Buy Falcon 4.0 and get OpenFalcon. You'll like it muuuch better than AF.

Coop. Dear lord that's the most fun part of multiplay. Using AI as the other side lets you have things you can't have against humans, like they don't complain about bad odds, they are actually surprised by a surprise attack, they calmly walk patrols unalerted. You can actually make a plan and execute some tactics. PvP is generally so fast and deadly that it's a straight TDM and any sneaking, teamplay or tactics go out the window.

Coop seems to be very low on a dev's list but it's up near #1 on mine. The magazine reviews always say "The coop was cut at the last minute but there's deathmatch for up to 20 people!" And I think... might as well not release it. Try SWAT4 or H&D2 Sabre Squadron for some good squad coops. There's an OK coop mod for AvP2. Valve's Left 4 Dead is a very 4-person coop type of game which means it'll be enjoyable. I wish they had periods of "slow tension" between all the fast zombie bits. Sadly it's GOGOGO-quake-fast but besides that looks golden.

Doom and RPGs don't have to be realistic to be good, just sensible. I mean the three-days-till-retirement cop doesn't have to die every time ironically, the WWII private doesn't have to catch a sniper bullet mid-conversation, and a lot of other cliches. OMG, just as I got past this bit of corridor a big boss smashed thorugh the wall!! What are the odds of that perfect timing!? *save, reload* Oh...

[Ilpalazzo]

hah! When you can't use the mouse right? I hate that crap:lol:


Find/Buy Falcon 4.0 and get OpenFalcon. You'll like it muuuch better than AF.
Just looked up a little on OpenFalcon. Sounds and looks amazing. Been watching videos on youtube and find myself, once again, mumbling about needing a trackir.


Try SWAT4 or H&D2 Sabre Squadron for some good squad coops. There's an OK coop mod for AvP2. Valve's Left 4 Dead is a very 4-person coop type of game which means it'll be enjoyable. I wish they had periods of "slow tension" between all the fast zombie bits. Sadly it's GOGOGO-quake-fast but besides that looks golden.

AH yes, I forgot about Swat 4. That was a lot of fun. I loved all the shouting and shocking. Had fun popping cuffed perps with that bean bag shotty just for kicks. Sigh, they never did make a 5 did they?

Arma is probably a lot of fun coop, but nobody I know wanted to get into it. I'm having trouble thinking of any recent releases that had a coop feature. Oh god my mind just started wandering and I imagined coop Oblivion. Some extra enemies spawns and increased difficulty would be neat, like when players are increased in Diablo 2. Are there any coop RPGs? I don't mean mmo games. hmm looking at my games the only ones seem to be of the hack n' slash variety.

I have had mixed feelings about Left 4 Dead. First and foremost I was excited by the concept. I love zombies and survival horror. I learned more about it eventually and saw the videos and was a little disappointed with the fast pacing, quick game style of play. I was secretly hoping for some tough coop campaign through a zombie infested city. I dunno, I guess I was imagining some sort of coop Resident Evil or something. Still, doesn't mean that it can't be fun.

Oh yea, I agree. IL2 has a crappy campaign. I did however find myself enjoying some downloaded user made ones.

eastern european developer'd

LoL, many of those games do have a similar way. Like the Cossacks series and all the other games that use that engine. Lackluster campaigns. From now on they shall be described as this.

ps. Been thinking about getting Umbrella Chronicles on the Wii with a couple of blasters. Still wishing Thief 4 will include coop play.

[Captain Vlad]

Swat 4 was probably my favorite tactical shooter-type game since Rogue Spear. Particularly liked the creepy warrant service on the old apartment building the weird cult had taken up residence in...

[SUBMAN1]

Falcon 4.0 and Falcon AF are realllllly close to the same game but they aren't. Falcon 4.0 is older and isn't the "Falcon 4.5" that AF is but 4.0 has the benefit of having the "Open Falcon" modification community which has basically gone to town on the old bird for some very impressive results. It's waaay updated. IL-2 is really cool except that the campaign is very... eastern european developer'd. Falcon is more like a war sim with a flight sim attached instead of the other way around. You could play a very interesting game without ever getting in the cockpit and thus the generated content is a little better feeling. I like how IL-2 flies and the Falcon 4.0 world.

Find/Buy Falcon 4.0 and get OpenFalcon. You'll like it muuuch better than AF.
I have the original Falcon 4.0 - In the big spiral bound manual to go with! I'll have to see if Open Falcon gives me anything over AF. I haven't seen anything out of the community that would suggest as much. I see some better looking explosions, and slightly better clouds. Not much else to trade for the downgrade. What would I be missing?

I used to play with the BMS 2.0 mods way back when, but AF is a better product, not to mention is supports dual core.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Studying the graphics in Open Falcon, the puffy cloud missile and explosions look worse, not better!

A bunch of vids can be found here - http://www.fencecheck.com/forums/index.php?topic=10810.0

-S

[Ilpalazzo]

Hope you guys don't mind if I continue the Falcon talk. It really sucks when a complex game has a crappy tutorial. IL2 and Civ 4 come to my mind right now. A game can be learned so much more quickly and easily with a comprehensive, hands on, tutorial.

I'm wondering if Falcon has a good tutorial mode. It sucks having to learn by reading/screwing around when a game could just make a tutorial. IL2 for example. That game had the worst tutorial I had ever seen. Espcially disconcerting because it was a sim. It had those lame watch and pay attention recordings, but no actual hands on tutorial. It didn't help that I'm colorblind and had immense difficulty reading the red fonts used in the training recordings. It took me too long to get decent at that game because of those reasons. I'm surprised I didn't give up.

So yeah, would be much easier to get into a game like Falcon if it has a good tutorial mode.

[NeonSamurai]

If i remember correctly all the versions of falcon 4 have extensive training missions, the only problem is they are the manual in hand kind (which is fine for the original f4 manual, but bad if your working off a pdf unless you have a second monitor or a laptop)

F4 AF has 30 training missions (all hands on) and a couple hundred pages to go with the missions in the manual. You can also make your own "training" missions too. There are also a pile of other external tutorials (the flash "ramp start" program is very handy to learn the sequence).

Also the worst is sims with no training missions at all in either format, i can think of several that are like that.

[Ilpalazzo]

Are there still copies of Falcon with this giant manual? Where might I find one? It would kinda suck to get stuck with a gigantic PDF. Not too bad though as I do use a second monitor.

Heh,

/Seinfeld
And what's the deal with game manuals these days?

I have the original Falcon 4.0 - In the big spiral bound manual to go with! I'll have to see if Open Falcon gives me anything over AF. I haven't seen anything out of the community that would suggest as much. I see some better looking explosions, and slightly better clouds. Not much else to trade for the downgrade. What would I be missing?

Hmm, would be cool to hear what the actual differences are. I have heard that OF is supposed to be more realistic and better looking. I haven't heard exactly why though.

[SUBMAN1]

With AF, you don't ever get a manual and you need more than the old F4 Manual.

PDF is it. Best to print out the relevant training missions and have them in hand. Second monitor trick won't work - You will not be able to turn pages on it, and many times a change in resolution will send the page off the second screen half way. I should know, I run multi monitors in this office at once and the manual scrolls half way off screen due to a different res being used.

-S