Topics
We Recommend By ZergNet
View as:
-
Newest first
Oldest first
-
-
-
-
YesConsiderably - October 1, 2012 3:29 p.m.
The list is missing 007 Legends, which i expect will be the best FPS of the year... and possibly all time. You might be able to tell from my avatar (a photoshopped version of the cover art from the 2008 edition Diamonds are Forever) that i'm a little bit of a James Bond fanboy, however. I'm also more excited for Black Ops II than Halo 4. Treyarch are doing enough differently that the annual excitement is justified for once, while the same cannot be said of the Halo franchise. -
GoldenEagle1476 - October 1, 2012 4:34 p.m.
The same cannot be said about the Halo franchise? Really? This is the first Halo game not being made by Bungie (not counting Halo Wars or CE: Anniversary) so that alone should make people exicted for the game. However, there's also an entirely new enemy, new story, new characters, new weapons, and a new setting. I'm not trying to say that you should feel more exicted for Halo 4. I'm just trying to make it clear that there's definitely going to be some differences between this game and the rest in the series. -
YesConsiderably - October 1, 2012 4:58 p.m.
I don't think so, no. At least not to nearly the same extent. Black Ops II is to feature a branching narrative in which your decisions and actions/inactions affect not only the way the events of the game play out, but also retroactively alter the antagonist's motives. Really, the new futuristic setting is one of the least impressive changes Treyarch are making with the game. Halo 4 has a new location and some new enemies... my response is: so? It should be doing that anyway. Nothing has been added that will drastically alter the experience. -
GoldenEagle1476 - October 1, 2012 5:07 p.m.
From all the videos and trailers I've seen of Black Ops II, it still looks like a frantic shooting rampage. Even if it does include a branching narrative, it will in no way alter that experience. -
ObliqueZombie - October 1, 2012 5:19 p.m.
I, too, am excited for the litany of things I believe Treyarch will get right, but it's not "changing" anything much like Call of Duty isn't. It's still the same game play, the same physics engine, the same "ADS" shooting, the same twitch-skill, the same ebb and flow of the battles, the same... you get it. Much like Halo 4, it's going to improve on its base level and add some much-needed tweaks to the already solid multiplayer (disregarding Reach and MW3). -
YesConsiderably - October 1, 2012 5:33 p.m.
Well no, i disagree. I appreciate that i am one of a minute fraction of CoD fans that buy and play the games purely for the single-player campaign, but i believe the branching narrative will have a huge impact on my experience. It's also worth pointing out that intersped throughout the campaign are sections in which you control a whole team of soldiers from an overhead perspective, issuing orders, with the ability to jump into any role. This is something that will affect the gameplay. Halo 4 very much is just another dose of the same old thing. The same really can't be said for Black Ops II. -
-
YesConsiderably - October 2, 2012 5:43 a.m.
Nah. If you play on the easiest difficulty and rush, then every single Halo game can be finished in around 5-6 hours too. If you're rushing through a CoD game in such a time, you're not taking the time to enjoy the set pieces and sights, and are likely playing on a difficulty level way inside your comfort zone. The games generally take me between ten and eleven hours to finish on Veteran difficulty, which is quite reasonable. -
ObliqueZombie - October 2, 2012 11:03 a.m.
If it takes you that long to complete the campaign, you're literally standing in one spot. The game MAKES you go as a break-neck speed, and the only thing that'll really increase the time spent on the short campaign is the time it takes for you to not die through a veteran level. -
YesConsiderably - October 2, 2012 1:44 p.m.
No, this isn't accurate at all. At least not since World at War implemented the current enemy spawn system. The enemies in any one spot will respawn in waves, but after four or five, simply stop, leaving you to push up to the next spot in peace. Are there any other facets of the game i can correct your malformed view upon? -
ObliqueZombie - October 2, 2012 7:44 p.m.
I'm sorry I don't delve into the nitpicky facets of the game's coding, quite simply because I see no fun in standing in one spot fighting wave after wave of enemies until they stop. Not when it's supposed to happen every time I trigger a spawn wave. (You also don't have to be a dick). -
ObliqueZombie - October 2, 2012 9:27 a.m.
But it's the first campaign in Halo history to add entirely new species of enemies, and it follows the continuing epic of Master Chief, something we haven't seen since 2007. It's also worth noting a planet to discover, which we've never done before. -
YesConsiderably - October 2, 2012 10:48 a.m.
A planet to discover? You mean the game is set on a new planet, and you'll traverse it in the usual linear, level-based fashion. I'm unimpressed. It's a new setting, but a game should be doing that anyway. It's just a new Halo game, that will play like the rest of the Halo games. There is nothing wrong with that, but Black Ops II is doing a lot more on the changes front. -
ObliqueZombie - October 2, 2012 11 a.m.
But it's not. It's taking mechanics from Battlefield 2 and shoe-horning them into a more linear campaign than most games on the market. Like I said, I'm excited for Black Ops II just as much as the next guy, but they're simply not changing a whole lot of things that's made Call of Duty, well, Call of Duty. They're simply adding things, which is a strategy Halo is doing. I'm not comparing either in terms of quality or greatness, but they're essentially the same thing: taking a base formula for a successful game and adding some much-needed changes to get current fans and veterans excited. Black Ops will play just the same as any other Call of Duty games, but with different weapons and gizmos to toy around with. The "choices" in the story will equate to pressing RT or not during a slow-mo segment. -
YesConsiderably - October 2, 2012 1:52 p.m.
But it is. New enemies and a new locale will not do much to alter the way Halo 4 plays. Maybe some of the new enemy types will posses new abilities and require a slight variation in tactics... but it's just not that substantial. The branching narrative featured in Black Ops II is a far bigger deal. The method with which we make the choices isn't all that relevant either; does it matter that in Mass Effect you make your choices by using the analogue stick to choose a speech option? No, not really. If you were to remove the element of choice from Mass Effect, it would be almost an entirely different game. It hass always amused me that Halo has been somehow immune to the criticisms heaped upon Call of Duty year after year. It's especially funny this time, as Treyarch actually are making big changes while the competition just isn't. -
ObliqueZombie - October 2, 2012 7:54 p.m.
I've have never shied away from criticizing Halo. In fact, I'm saying HOW excited I am for Black Ops because of its fine-tuned tweaks, a fact you seem hellbent on ignoring. You strike me as a blatant, blind fanboy. Yes, they're making changes. Yes, to long-term players like ourselves they're fairly substantial. But boil it down to the roots (which you're doing in excess for Halo, yet not for Blops II), and it's the exact. Same. Freaking. Formula. They're not doing entire system revamps like the jump from Mass Effect 1 to 2, or Dawn of War 1 to 2, or even Resident Evil 2 to what is now 6. The choices, while we both can't argue how substantial they'll be because PR campaign are always over-hyped on purpose, won't alter the game so drastically that it could be compared to Dragon Age or, once again, Mass Effect. To say otherwise is ignorantly hopeful. I don't claim Halo is changing more than Call of Duty--because neither is truly CHANGING that much, it's still part of an ongoing franchise--, but I'm TRYING to say they're both changing, which you refuse to believe. I'm done with this "discussion." -
christian-shaffer - October 2, 2012 5:12 p.m.
Comparing Halo and COD anything is like comparing vanilla and chocolate. You don't do it because it's a waste of time and in the end, it makes you look like a person that just likes to nitpick. As for changes in COD. They changed to a 10 point system and are keeping in point streaks and adding some new stuff to the zombie mode. Let's not sit here and pretend they have made a whole new game that just completely diverges from the COD series. In the end, it's going to be the same game with some new adjustments. Same goes for Halo and just about any other franchise anymore. In the end, who really cares. You're probably gonna go out and by it anyway. -
ThatGamerDude - October 1, 2012 4:23 p.m.
Out of this list, the only games I plan on buying is NfS: Most Wanted, Halo 4 and Far Cry 3. However, I've already pre-ordered Pokemon Black Version 2 and may even buy Forza Horizon, LBP Karting, Black Ops II as well as a few others if I can. I'm seriously going to go broke buy the end of this year!
Moondoggie1157 - October 1, 2012 2:33 p.m.