The Conduit

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



ESB -1138
I haven't seen a thread for the FPS Wii game. This game looks amazing. The game is said to come out sometime around March 2009 and it has pretty much everything you could want in a game. The graphics look great, online play and talk thanks to the WiiSpeak, and from what I've heard the Wii controls are better than Metroid Prime 3 and with that new motion sensor + the controls will be better.

I'm looking forward to this game very, very much.

Smasandian
Meh, I cant really say the graphics are great looking.

ESB -1138
Originally posted by Smasandian
Meh, I cant really say the graphics are great looking.

What they've been showing off thus far won't be the finished product but it does show some highlights to the game engine.

Smasandian
I dont know.

Seeing the screenshots, Im not impressed at all. Some decent lighting effects but the characters look really bad.

ESB -1138
Go to gametrailers or IGN and watch the trailers or something.

Menetnashté
Watched a video and checked out screens doesn't look good Graphics-wise severe lack of detail on guns from what I could see. Looks like another B-rated shooter game. Might have a decent plotline reminded me a bit of Area 51

Smasandian
Originally posted by ESB -1138
Go to gametrailers or IGN and watch the trailers or something.

You think I didnt do that already?

I just dont think it looks good graphic wise.

NonSensi-Klown
It's the Wii.

Just sayin'.

Kazenji
Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
It's the Wii.

Just sayin'.

And i think thats the whole point Nintendo wanted to go with Gameplay over Graphics with the Wii.

NonSensi-Klown
I agree.

Smasandian
Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
It's the Wii.

Just sayin'.

I know but Metriod Prime 3 still looks pretty good.

There is more than just technical wizardry.

Ushgarak
MP3 looked very good in fact. Smas is right, sometimes decent artistic talent counts for more than hardware- my comparison was always that Twilight Princess, with its gorgeous smooth movement and beautiful lighting effects, looked much prettier than Oblivion's stiff, unconvincing movement and ridiculous hi-tech lightwork.

Dunno about this game. A lot of critical vibe talkimng it up but that might only be because of the paucity of effort in this area so far on Wii. Plot seems a bit generic too, a shame.

There's no confirmation on the motionplus yet, btw. Hard to see what it could achieve in this game anyway.

MadMel
finally!
voicechat erm

Ushgarak
Oh, yes, all that said, the amunt of features they are putting in with control customisation, HUD customisation, and looking at available Wii tech, all that is very welcome.

MadMel
indeed, but im just glad that Australia FINALLY has an online shooter game for wii that looks half decent

Kero_Co
I think the game looks good graphically, so, yeah......
The main character looks like a nerd.

Smasandian
Originally posted by Ushgarak
MP3 looked very good in fact. Smas is right, sometimes decent artistic talent counts for more than hardware- my comparison was always that Twilight Princess, with its gorgeous smooth movement and beautiful lighting effects, looked much prettier than Oblivion's stiff, unconvincing movement and ridiculous hi-tech lightwork.

Dunno about this game. A lot of critical vibe talkimng it up but that might only be because of the paucity of effort in this area so far on Wii. Plot seems a bit generic too, a shame.

There's no confirmation on the motionplus yet, btw. Hard to see what it could achieve in this game anyway.

I would love to see Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime 3 in HD though.

But in the end, the graphics are pretty good in both games. Village areas in TP are excellent. The open vistas, ummmmm, not so much.

Quincy
Alright there is a thread!

I'm pretty excited about this game!

Ridley_Prime
Me too, but anyone who thinks this will be a Halo-killer (let alone a comparable experience visually to games on the PS3 and 360) is out of their mind.

And yeah, you had best not use wikipedia at all when it comes to things that have yet to be released. It's pretty much okay otherwise, kinda.
Actually, no. That's an overstatement.

Regardless, I'm still looking forward to the Conduit as well (in fact, it's the only Wii game on my "to get" list now). So far, it hasn't disappointed. That's a good sign.

MadMel
it was proven that Wikipedia is only as inaccurate as the average encyclopedia..since a lot of encyclopedias can be biased this doesn't say a lot, but still erm
cant wait for this big grin

Ushgarak
No encyclopedia is a good source- encyclopedias are not sources, they are references. Find the source. Wikipedia just happens to be less reliable than most, esoecially in areas like gaming. We just had that with the complete false claim in the wiki article that the graphics were to be comparable with the 360, which is nonsense. The term the devlopers used was that they wanted to make it 'competitive'. VERY different. Super Mario Galaxy was competitive, looks wise. No-one would call it comparable to the best 360/PS3 games- but that didn't matter.


I still worry this game is mostly hype. The interface options etc. are good but... it is just the underlying game seems so bland.

lord xyz
http://uk.gamespot.com/wii/action/theconduit/video/6206890/gdc-2009-the-conduit-interview?hd=0

This game looks really awesome. A lot like MP3, but so much better, and without the obvious Metroid features.

This is pretty much the Nintendo game we've all been waiting for. Great controls, great gameplay, and for a mature audience.

Best of all, only for Wii.

I can pretty much predict the future. This game is going to spring off a succession of successful mature games with similar awesomeness in terms of gameplay, story, controls etc. will have sequels, and the PS3/360 market will be dead.

Apparently Nintendo is doubting it will be a success for it being more mature than traditional games...**** 'em.

Ushgarak
... again I honestly don't get why a vid like this causes so much excitement. My earlier assessment remains- it just looks so bland. There are so many FPS games out there. Other than the Wii remote, what actually does this game have? What makes it better than, say, a Half-Life game, let alone any of the more recent FPS trump cards? For that matter, MP3 had a lot of stuff in it a that I don't see much here comparing to.

Again, yes, the customisation options are great. ALL Wii games should be this flexible and user friendly, and that is to be massively applauded. But other than that... have we seriously lost so much perspective that simply because it is an FPS ON the Wii people automatically call this great?


Oh, xyz- don't be surprised if it tanks.

occultdestroyer
^
I agree. I watched a couple of trailers and it looks bland.
Nothing new to bring to the table, other than the use of the Wii-mote.

Ridley_Prime
Yeah. If this game were on any of the other current-generation consoles, it wouldn't be getting any attention. stick out tongue

Smasandian
I agree with most.

Looks like the developers got the controls correct, but the actual gameplay looks kinda of boring.

That preview that was shown had some pretty generic stuff from other games.

Ushgarak
IGN- big backers of the game- have also made a perceptive comment that the vision is ahead of the art- as in, despite the decent tech involved, their art design team hasn't done all they could do with it (in contrats as to what the SMG team did, for example).

Despite all of this and what I have mentioned... I've pre-ordered the game. I suppose it's worth a look and I have no reason to think that I won't play through it. I'm just not as pumped as a lot of people seem to be.

If it surprises me I'll let you know.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by lord xyz
http://uk.gamespot.com/wii/action/theconduit/video/6206890/gdc-2009-the-conduit-interview?hd=0

This game looks really awesome. A lot like MP3, but so much better, and without the obvious Metroid features.

This is pretty much the Nintendo game we've all been waiting for. Great controls, great gameplay, and for a mature audience.

Best of all, only for Wii.

I can pretty much predict the future. This game is going to spring off a succession of successful mature games with similar awesomeness in terms of gameplay, story, controls etc. will have sequels, and the PS3/360 market will be dead.

Apparently Nintendo is doubting it will be a success for it being more mature than traditional games...**** 'em.

lol. really?

SaTsuJiN
well the thing that spices up most FPSes is giving each gun multiple functions..

perfect dark was a hit because of how much crap you could do with each weapon... felt like takin that sniper rifle?.. switch to disarm and give that dude a pimp slap.. feel like mowin people down n you aint in the room?.. toss a laptop gun on the cielin'.. goes on and on for quite a large amount of possibilities

Gears of War 'almost' does this.. though I think alot of their guns, when in active reload status, dont have creative enough effects...
an AR on the magnum will let you fire it much faster.. AR on the flamethrower will make it go farther.. but these are kindof typical to me..

Though do not be mistaken.. I hate team fortress 2 so goddamn much.. it ought to be turn-based for how broken it is

Smasandian
Perfect Dark was also a hit because it came from the makers of Goldeneye, the most beloved N64 games out there.

And why is TF2 broken?

SaTsuJiN
I have quite a bit of complaints with each class... but its mostly that you can brainlessly win with a handful of characters.. and on the other side of the coin.. you can bust your hump trying with the rest of the cast, just to fall victim to the former.. and then they throw in goofy rpg weapons like "crits 100% from behind" to classes that dont need to crit..

Fire doesnt need to crit.. fire DOESNT crit when its in a stream.. I can see if you get hit with a chunk of rock thats on fire.. but how the hell does a stream of poofed fire crit?.. retarded.. I cant see why people like it so much

Also, "the makers of goldeneye" have produced such "gems" as perfect dark : zero.. and probably some other fail 360 game that I cant place atm

Smasandian
Yes, those guys. Those guys who made Goldeneye went on to make Perfect Dark. Everybody was excited because it was the from the makers of Goldeneye. You see my drift?
At the time, people wanted Perfect Dark because it was the sequel to Goldeneye, but without the Bond franchise.

TF2 is meant to be fun. It's not broken at all. Your just putting realism into. Every class gets crits. One soldier can take out 3-4 people with a crit rocket, while demo can take out the same amount or more with a crit pill. Crit bodyshoots from a sniper can take out most of the classes. Pyro rarely gets crits outside of the Backburner, and Spy has instant crits with backstab.

What's your problem with it? It's meant to be fun and if you want to play a serious game, play non crit TF2. Each class is balanced pretty well also.

SaTsuJiN
Originally posted by Smasandian
Yes, those guys. Those guys who made Goldeneye went on to make Perfect Dark. Everybody was excited because it was the from the makers of Goldeneye. You see my drift?
At the time, people wanted Perfect Dark because it was the sequel to Goldeneye, but without the Bond franchise.

TF2 is meant to be fun. It's not broken at all. Your just putting realism into. Every class gets crits. One soldier can take out 3-4 people with a crit rocket, while demo can take out the same amount or more with a crit pill. Crit bodyshoots from a sniper can take out most of the classes. Pyro rarely gets crits outside of the Backburner, and Spy has instant crits with backstab.

What's your problem with it? It's meant to be fun and if you want to play a serious game, play non crit TF2. Each class is balanced pretty well also. Yes, but after the first fail (Perfect Dark : Zero), I have no excitement when I hear Rare anymore.. also its more of a successor than a sequel.. the bond license held them back, creatively speaking.. Rare is just really lazy now

Its not even just the crits.. pyro doesnt even need to crit.. you get poofed with 1 mouse click and you die.. he goes on to take out the rest of the room with 3 more clicks.. then imagine the nonsense I went through when the entire opposing team were all pyros.. its really annoying, and I cant see how skill is involved at this point of my experience with it


So what does "the conduit" boast.. besides having a Met Prime 3 control scheme?... any kind of char customization, or interesting weapons?..

Ushgarak
Calling it a MP3 control scheme is not really doing the effort they have made there justice.

In fact the various interface options it brings (in controls, customisation and even the UI/HUD) is frankly just about all it is bringing.

Smasandian
Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
Yes, but after the first fail (Perfect Dark : Zero), I have no excitement when I hear Rare anymore.. also its more of a successor than a sequel.. the bond license held them back, creatively speaking.. Rare is just really lazy now

Its not even just the crits.. pyro doesnt even need to crit.. you get poofed with 1 mouse click and you die.. he goes on to take out the rest of the room with 3 more clicks.. then imagine the nonsense I went through when the entire opposing team were all pyros.. its really annoying, and I cant see how skill is involved at this point of my experience with it


So what does "the conduit" boast.. besides having a Met Prime 3 control scheme?... any kind of char customization, or interesting weapons?..

But that's not really my point. At the time of Perfect Dark release, Rare name was huge thus why Perfect Dark sold alot.

As for TF2, I've got about 130-140 hours in it and I play on a server that has some really good people on it and a bad pyro is a bad pyro. They rarely take over a game and primarily used for ambushes and spy checking.

As for the Conduit, I'll have to see the reviews before I even touch this game. I'm not that exicted. I would be if there was a demo, but well, its Nintendo so no demo.

SaTsuJiN
I'm definitely gonna check some vids of it.. few of my friends arent that good at FPS's so I'm sure aiming with the wiimote will feel more natural

but if it winds up being too generic, I can most certainly afford to pass

Especially with KOFXII and Blaz Blue coming very soon

I'm pretty sure rares name alone didnt sell perfect dark.. you could have easily gone to a friends house and seen how awesome the game was.. hell I knew goldeneye was a must-buy because I rented the game like 5 times consecutively

Smasandian
Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
I'm definitely gonna check some vids of it.. few of my friends arent that good at FPS's so I'm sure aiming with the wiimote will feel more natural

but if it winds up being too generic, I can most certainly afford to pass

Especially with KOFXII and Blaz Blue coming very soon

I'm pretty sure rares name alone didnt sell perfect dark.. you could have easily gone to a friends house and seen how awesome the game was.. hell I knew goldeneye was a must-buy because I rented the game like 5 times consecutively

Well I wouldn't say the name but when people figure out that it was the same guys who developed Goldeneye, it was a big selling point. I do remember they promoted it as the guys who did Goldeneye.

Ushgarak
Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
I'm definitely gonna check some vids of it.. few of my friends arent that good at FPS's so I'm sure aiming with the wiimote will feel more natural

but if it winds up being too generic, I can most certainly afford to pass


Well, it is certainly the vids of it that give me the 'generic' worry.

lord xyz
Well it's almost out, and most people have probably forgot about it.

I admit, I was really excited, it's flexibilty and use of Wiimote and Wiispeak seemed really cool, but no one's talking about it anymore. It's only real appeal is it was the game we all expected in 2006. A sort of Sci-Fi Red Steel done right.

We'll have to see later this month.

WO Polaski
it wont be.

occultdestroyer
IMO it's a waste of money.

I'll just wait for God of War 3, ty.

Ushgarak
Reviews are coming in, and despite what good things some have to say about it, it really does look agonisingly standard. I've cancelled my order.

Mandrag Ganon
I am enjoying it. I'm playing it on it's hardest diffuculty and dieing every few minutes, but it's still fun. Can't say much about the story though, because I am only about 30 minutes into it, but the gameplay is fun (Would be nice to use the Zapper though.)

All in all, though. I think it is worth buying just to have another decent Wii game.

Smasandian
I don't like the reasoning behind the majority of the reviews.

A good game is a good game but a bad game does not turn into a good game just because there isn't a game like that on that system.

Some of the reviews are stating that if this was released on the 360, PC, or PS3 that it wouldn't be any good but becaause its on the Wii, its a good game.

Ushgarak
Agreed absolutely. Nor is a good control scheme- laudable though that might be- ever going to make a generic shooter a classic, or even a worthwhile buy.

Ganon- I don't need to buy games just because they are 'decent' on the Wii, as if my collection needs life support. I am only interested in buying worthwhile games full stop, regardless of the platform (so long as I own the system, of course). Nothing I have ehard about the Conduit makes me want to buy.

Single player is apparently pretty short. It is entirely linear run-and-gun stuff (which makes the comparisons to Perfect Dark rather odd- PD was far from run and gun, with non-linear levels, variable scenarios, lots of fun training modes, hidden levels, co-op modes etc... whole different ballgame. If Conduit had all THAT I'd be interested). And as for online... I am not a deathmatch fan, and if I was I'd do it on the PC.

So let's say Conduit's gameplay is reasonably enjoyable. Do I want to blow full price on eight hours' worth of shallow fighting against, apparently, the same enemies over and over? Pretty much nope. Just not worth my purchase.

SaTsuJiN
kind of a sad turn of events.. I kinda had some hopes for this game

Ushgarak
The actual shame is that the guys who made it are very talented- the game is extremely well made, apparently, and the tech use is impressive, and as said, the controls and UI customisation are better than any Wii game out there, and particularly the customisation is possibly better than any FPS on any platform out there too.

But they are painfully lacking in areas like storyline, originality, art design etc. They need to be twinned with people to cover that area. Someone that can take that raw technical talent and use it to contribute to a better-realised experience.

I DO help it sells well, though, because talented people need encouragement to work on Wii. Look at poor old Zack and Wiki- awesome game, great technical acheivement on Wii, one of the best uses of the Wii controller seen yet, funny, intelligent, lots of good touches... didn't sell. Geez. But if this DOES sell, maybe they can make a sequel with more to it.*

If you really like FPS games I am sure Conduit will be fun... just my worry is if you really like FPS games you probably have so many on the 360, PS3 and PC that this one isn't really worth the look. It needs to have something to make it stand out! "It's on the Wii" doesn't cut it. MP3 was on the Wii, but that would have been a good game on ANY platform, and that is easily discernable. I've not heard or seen anything about The Conduit that makes it seem like that.

All in all... ahh, I dunno. This should have appeared a couple of years back, I think.

Ridley_Prime
Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
kind of a sad turn of events.. I kinda had some hopes for this game
Me too, but alas.. They kinda died not too long before launch.

Smasandian
Originally posted by Ushgarak
The actual shame is that the guys who made it are very talented- the game is extremely well made, apparently, and the tech use is impressive, and as said, the controls and UI customisation are better than any Wii game out there, and particularly the customisation is possibly better than any FPS on any platform out there too.

But they are painfully lacking in areas like storyline, originality, art design etc. They need to be twinned with people to cover that area. Someone that can take that raw technical talent and use it to contribute to a better-realised experience.

I DO help it sells well, though, because talented people need encouragement to work on Wii. Look at poor old Zack and Wiki- awesome game, great technical acheivement on Wii, one of the best uses of the Wii controller seen yet, funny, intelligent, lots of good touches... didn't sell. Geez. But if this DOES sell, maybe they can make a sequel with more to it.*

If you really like FPS games I am sure Conduit will be fun... just my worry is if you really like FPS games you probably have so many on the 360, PS3 and PC that this one isn't really worth the look. It needs to have something to make it stand out! "It's on the Wii" doesn't cut it. MP3 was on the Wii, but that would have been a good game on ANY platform, and that is easily discernable. I've not heard or seen anything about The Conduit that makes it seem like that.

All in all... ahh, I dunno. This should have appeared a couple of years back, I think.




One reviewer has stated that it took about 5 1/2 hours to beat the SP. That's bloody short, even for the FPS standards. I don't need a 20 hour game but atleast make it 10 hours.

Anyways, it's a rental for me. 6 bucks is much easier to digest than 50 something.

Mandrag Ganon
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Agreed absolutely. Nor is a good control scheme- laudable though that might be- ever going to make a generic shooter a classic, or even a worthwhile buy.

Ganon- I don't need to buy games just because they are 'decent' on the Wii, as if my collection needs life support. I am only interested in buying worthwhile games full stop, regardless of the platform (so long as I own the system, of course). Nothing I have ehard about the Conduit makes me want to buy.

Good point.

It's still fun, and will be nice for someone like me with not a lot of time to play for the next couple of months (2 hrs of running per day, papers, assigned books, Work, Zelda RP on this very site, and the 12-book series I am reading all take up my gaming time.). May be short, but my gaming time consists of 30 minute - 1 hour incriments. Couple that with playing it on the highest difficulty, which is actually pretty difficult, and it will be fun to play. Will definately hold me over untill Batman comes out. smile

Ushgarak
I really do think single-digit hour games are not worth full price, though this is me ruling out the deathmatch side of thigns which I suspect others will enjoy more.

Like I say, their next game- which seems to offer much more- has got my interest.

Smasandian
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I really do think single-digit hour games are not worth full price, though this is me ruling out the deathmatch side of thigns which I suspect others will enjoy more.

Like I say, their next game- which seems to offer much more- has got my interest.

It depends on the game for me.

If the game is known for its online MP than a shorter campaign is alright, but this game does not look like that type.

Mandrag Ganon
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I really do think single-digit hour games are not worth full price, though this is me ruling out the deathmatch side of thigns which I suspect others will enjoy more.

And, how long are the Halo games? Because they are not much longer than single-digit hour games. Infact, I seem to remember beating Halo 3 on Heroic in a total game play time of less than 9 hours. And Halo and Halo 2 didn't take me long at all either, but they are both immensely popular games.

And Ghostbusters, a game that I consiter to have been worth the price paid, took me about 13 hours to beat, and that has about 1 or 2 hours of accumulated sitting on the pause screen, while I had to take care of other things, several stupid mistakes, and about another hour of trying to figure out certian puzzles, trying to find cursed artifacts, and taking extra time to gather achievements.

and that was also all on the hardest difficulty.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by Mandrag Ganon
And, how long are the Halo games? Because they are not much longer than single-digit hour games. Infact, I seem to remember beating Halo 3 on Heroic in a total game play time of less than 9 hours. And Halo and Halo 2 didn't take me long at all either, but they are both immensely popular games.

halo is an MP oriented game. i have over three months of total gameplay on halo 3's multiplayer personally. thats roughly 2160 hours if i did my math right(24 hours in a day * 30 days which is a standard month times 3 months).

Ushgarak
Originally posted by Mandrag Ganon
And, how long are the Halo games? Because they are not much longer than single-digit hour games. Infact, I seem to remember beating Halo 3 on Heroic in a total game play time of less than 9 hours. And Halo and Halo 2 didn't take me long at all either, but they are both immensely popular games.

And Ghostbusters, a game that I consiter to have been worth the price paid, took me about 13 hours to beat, and that has about 1 or 2 hours of accumulated sitting on the pause screen, while I had to take care of other things, several stupid mistakes, and about another hour of trying to figure out certian puzzles, trying to find cursed artifacts, and taking extra time to gather achievements.

and that was also all on the hardest difficulty.

First of all, Halo had a LOT of other stuff going for it that made it distinct from a bog standard FPS, like the use of vehicles, an engaging storyline, presentation and... well, just read the reviews from the time, there was reason it scored well, and that's before we get into the multiplayer. The Conduit has nothing of the sort to distinguish it other than its control scheme and customisability... and that is not enough. Let's face it, no-one is going to give it the gameplay kudos Halo got. If it DID have that, then I would be tempted to buy despite the length.

Secondly, I would still consider that short length a significant criticism of Halo's single player.

Thirdly, if you are fine shelling out full price for 13 hours (which is, let's face it, considerably longer than the times we are talking here) then fine. But that's not a logic I can agree with.

In short, you are trying to defend the indefensible. The Conduit will be (and already is) justly criticised for its short play time.

Smasandian
Even though I'm not a big fan of Halo single-player, it's multi-player was alot of fun and it did bring two big things to the FPS genre.

One was the ability to recharge your shield aka your health and giving the player only a few slots for weapons making the them choose which ones to carry.

Maybe one FPS before did those things but Halo did them extremely well and made them a staple in the FPS genre. Similiar to what Half Life did.

If Bungie learn how to create a map, it would of been one of the best ever.

Mandrag Ganon
Originally posted by WO Polaski
halo is an MP oriented game.

Yea, see, that's not true. People just think it's true because it has good Multiplayer.

Dark Exile
Originally posted by Ushgarak
First of all, Halo had a LOT of other stuff going for it that made it distinct from a bog standard FPS, like the use of vehicles, an engaging storyline, presentation and... well, just read the reviews from the time, there was reason it scored well, and that's before we get into the multiplayer.

Would you go as far to say that it was "revolutionary?"

Smasandian
In a few aspects it was.

For an console FPS, it did alot of good things for the control and mechanices of an console FPS. It had it share of problems though.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by Mandrag Ganon
Yea, see, that's not true. People just think it's true because it has good Multiplayer.

people say that because if you try to gauge the game as a single player oriented game its only average and cliche. theres a reason why halo 3 has millions of hours of online gameplay but in the end there are tons of MLG players who havent even beaten the campaign after playing it for years.

SaTsuJiN
I think it depends though.. a game like perfect dark was 'new' for its time.. a FPS (not RPG/FPS, just flat out FPS) to have a pretty good story, and awesome content to unlock to boot.. great stuff..

I've been looking at vids of this game.. and the multiplayer doesnt even look that great / special... if the single player is as lame as everyone says, but the multiplayer made up for it 10-fold.. I could see being forgiving.. but it looks very copy/paste

Zack Fair
Aww. Was kindda looking forward to this game...but having played and owned the most FPSers on 360 n PS3 this makes the game less appealing. Perfect dark for xbl damn it yeah!

Mandrag Ganon
Originally posted by WO Polaski
people say that because if you try to gauge the game as a single player oriented game its only average and cliche. theres a reason why halo 3 has millions of hours of online gameplay but in the end there are tons of MLG players who havent even beaten the campaign after playing it for years.

Yes, but MLG is completely focused on multiplayer, because that is essentiallly their job. And a series having 6 books based completely on the story shows that it is not as average and cliche` as people say.

And in mamy ways, Halo is known to have set the bar for shooters.

Smasandian
Console shooters that is.

SaTsuJiN
lol yeah.. for PC, quite a few shooters have paved the way for what we play today

though strangely as of late Ive been preferring console shooters.. something more inviting about them

Mandrag Ganon
Originally posted by Smasandian
Console shooters that is.

Well... yea...

Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
lol yeah.. for PC, quite a few shooters have paved the way for what we play today

though strangely as of late Ive been preferring console shooters.. something more inviting about them

I, personally, have never really liked PC shooters. Really, the only genre I like on the PC beter than consoles is RTS.

Smasandian
Shooters are key on PC's.

Much better control scheme.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Smasandian
Shooters are key on PC's.

Much better control scheme.


I disagree. I've logged plenty of hours on both and I like a controller better for FPSs....

I prefer the gamecube controller over ALL other controllers. Simply the best controller ever designed.

Ushgarak
Regardless of opinion, mouse and keyboard provide faster and more accurate controls allowing for better play. From any objective point of view, therefore, they are superior.

Smasandian
Yep.

I'm playing Resistance 2 and I just wish they had a CRTL button on it so I can crouch while having SHIFT to sprint. It's annoying to have one button control two different motions. I want to sprint but cant because I crouched instead.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Regardless of opinion, mouse and keyboard provide faster and more accurate controls allowing for better play. From any objective point of view, therefore, they are superior.

that doesnt make it superior objectively...

SaTsuJiN
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Regardless of opinion, mouse and keyboard provide faster and more accurate controls allowing for better play. From any objective point of view, therefore, they are superior. I've seen people PWN hard @ Q3 with 'only' a keyboard.. no mouse.. and I've also seen people that are insane with an optical trackball

Smasandian
Originally posted by WO Polaski
that doesnt make it superior objectively...

It is superior.

There is a reason consoles shooters have auto-aim.

WO Polaski
ive played console shooters without auto-aim (I.E.Turok. that game sucks) and ive never had any problems... so again i dont really see what the problem is. i always thought they put the auto-aim feature into console games because people are bitches.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Regardless of opinion, mouse and keyboard provide faster and more accurate controls allowing for better play. From any objective point of view, therefore, they are superior.


Wrong.


The Wii-Mote does with motion +



laughing

I would rather play a very resonsive FPS with motion+ than any other form in gaming. Using the nunchuk with the remote is da bomb.

Still, I want a little more out of it, like strafing.


And, no, I still am better with a controller when playing an FPS, than when I use a computer. Fer realz.



Playing an RTS, keyboard and mouse, by FAR!

An action RPG, controller...definite.

MMO, a keyboard and mouse.


KOTR republic and RPGs like it, I'm mixed. KOTR itself, I liked the controller. This one can't be done objectively.





To be literal, I've probably logged more PC gaming hours than console gaming hours. I am using a PC for most of the day, everyday, even on my days off.

Smasandian
Originally posted by WO Polaski
ive played console shooters without auto-aim (I.E.Turok. that game sucks) and ive never had any problems... so again i dont really see what the problem is. i always thought they put the auto-aim feature into console games because people are bitches.

No, they put in auto-aim because the controller is less precise than the mouse. Trying to aim for a head is alot easier on a mouse while aiming for a head on the controller without auto-aim is frustrating.

There might be a few people, and of course one of them is you that can do it well enough to be equal to a mouse but the majority of the time, its much easier with a mouse. And natural.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.