Most over-rated games

[-Jk-]

the_Danarchist said:

UT is at least better than Quake 3. And if it werent for the cool game modes in UT, I'd say even playing Quake 2 with an Eraser bot would be more fun.

Heh, Q2 with Eraser bot is really great (if you have nothing else to do).

[Sharessa]

-Jk- said:

Heh, Q2 with Eraser bot is really great (if you have nothing else to do).

Yeah. I love playing with Warhammer 40k models and having team deathmatch, say Crimson Fists vs. Chaos vs. Eldar. It's pretty fun that way. :P

[Melfice]

No actually I like Quake 3 better, I'd have to disagree.

[sargebaldy]

I disagree, I think both are complete crap. I think UT has shitty weapon balance and godawful textures and Quake III is just a prettier version of any other deathmatch, and pretty is exactly what I don't care about in a deathmatch.

[AndrewB]

The gameplay in both "games" are especially silly, with Q3 taking the gameplay-absenteeism-award.

[Ralphis]

Melfice said:

Soul Calibur 2 (It was alright the first 30 minutes, but then when you realize there's really nothing to learn, it bores you).
[

Perhaps you're crappy at the game and wern't willing to learn what else to learn

[Melfice]

Ralphis said:

Perhaps you're crappy at the game and wern't willing to learn what else to learn

No, it was just plain boring. Any of my friends would say the same if they posted here, after I wasted the money renting it out for 5 days under the impression that it would be a great game.

[Sharessa]

For some reason, I didn't like it as much as Soul Calibur 1.

[DOOM Anomaly]

When I played it I always wacked people with the guy's giant pole or staff, it was fun. :D My leathal 3-hit combo. :D

[toxicfluff]

AndrewB said:

The gameplay in both "games" are especially silly, with Q3 taking the gameplay-absenteeism-award.

You are a miserable cretin, AndrewB. I honestly can't remember the last time you said anything positive, nice or even vaguely optimistic. Considering you are always right, this isn't a good sign.

Anyway, what was the most recent "game" you played and really enjoyed?

[AndrewB]

ToXiCFLUFF said:

You are a miserable cretin, AndrewB. I honestly can't remember the last time you said anything positive, nice or even vaguely optimistic. Considering you are always right, this isn't a good sign.

What does this mean?

Anyway, what was the most recent "game" you played and really enjoyed?

Hmm... Morrowind. Although its replayability value is minimal, since everything is in exploration, and there are no random quests. I guess a game with 100+ hours of fresh play can get away with little replay value.

[Melfice]

ToXiCFLUFF said:

You are a miserable cretin, AndrewB. I honestly can't remember the last time you said anything positive, nice or even vaguely optimistic. Considering you are always right, this isn't a good sign.

Anyway, what was the most recent "game" you played and really enjoyed?

Very nice attack, well executed. FINISH HIM.

[Cyb]

heh, hate to tell you guys, but Q3 has almost the exact same DM gameplay as Doom does; simple and really fast paced. And despite what you may think, quite a lot of testing and tweaking went into it to make it, imo anyway, one of the most fun pure DM games (pure DM meaning no team objectives, no teamplay, no goals to accomplish etc, just killing everyone else) I've ever played. UT is fun too, but I can't play it any more without turning the game speed up to 115% because it's to goddamn slow. but that's just me, I don't expect to convince anyone else :P

[Sharessa]

Cyb said:

heh, hate to tell you guys, but Q3 has almost the exact same DM gameplay as Doom does; simple and really fast paced.

I realised that too. But for some reason, I like playing Doom DM 100x more. Could be the weapon balance or the maps, or most likely because I know half of everyone that plays it. :P

[999cop]

Cyb said:

heh, hate to tell you guys, but Q3 has almost the exact same DM gameplay as Doom does; simple and really fast paced. And despite what you may think, quite a lot of testing and tweaking went into it to make it, imo anyway, one of the most fun pure DM games (pure DM meaning no team objectives, no teamplay, no goals to accomplish etc, just killing everyone else) I've ever played. UT is fun too, but I can't play it any more without turning the game speed up to 115% because it's to goddamn slow. but that's just me, I don't expect to convince anyone else :P

I'd have to agree with you on this that that is one of a few things the games themselves I choose Quake 3 over UT. I can't stand taking hours to finish one CTF game against bots in UT, namely Lava Giant.

[sargebaldy]

Cyb said:

heh, hate to tell you guys, but Q3 has almost the exact same DM gameplay as Doom does; simple and really fast paced.

which is EXACTLY why quake3 sucks. it's just taking a really old dm game, not changing it barely at all (except by adding lame things like personal teleports), beefing the graphics engine (which frankly doesn't matter in dm anyway), and then uncapping it so people with 1337er systems have an advantage. and the mode that most people prefer, single player, isn't even there. what's the frigging point?

[Fredrik]

sargebaldy said:

what's the frigging point?

Letting people have some fun?

[sargebaldy]

Fredrik said:

Letting people have some fun?

no i mean what's the point in remaking the deathmatch mode from a very old game without changing very much at all.

[Fredrik]

sargebaldy said:

no i mean what's the point in remaking the deathmatch mode from a very old game without changing very much at all.

There is a number of reasons why people wouldn't want to play Doom deathmatch, and many of them are valid.

[999cop]

sargebaldy said:

no i mean what's the point in remaking the deathmatch mode from a very old game without changing very much at all.

"Shoot and run" is the term which id considers fun. One thing that makes Q3 so unique is its physics and jumpy features.

[sargebaldy]

Fredrik said:

There is a number of reasons why people wouldn't want to play Doom deathmatch, and many of them are valid.

please feel free to list them here. it helps to give your opinion some weight.

[999cop]

Fredrik said:

There is a number of reasons why people wouldn't want to play Doom deathmatch, and many of them are valid.

sargebaldy said:

please feel free to list them here. it helps to give your opinion some weight.

"Old" is the most common excuse I've heard from random people.

[sargebaldy]

999cop said:

"Old" is the most common excuse I've heard from random people.

yes, but "old" alone is hardly a valid excuse. that just means an unwillingness to accept things as fun due solely to when it was made.

[999cop]

sargebaldy said:

yes, but "old" alone is hardly a valid excuse. that just means an unwillingness to accept things as fun due solely to when it was made.

In fact, there are also other similar excuses as that despite the fact that Doom is an old game.

"Its gameplay is old without jump or mouselook, either way, it doesn't matter because it just doesn't fit into the game"
"Its weapons are old, overused, uninteresting, too simple..."
People prefer teamplays than playing solely...CS, Call of Duty...etc

[Arioch]

sargebaldy said:

yes, but "old" alone is hardly a valid excuse. that just means an unwillingness to accept things as fun due solely to when it was made.

Not when it's "old" enough to require DOS mode to run and IPX/SPX networking for multiplayer, then that can be a hindrance to enjoyment.

And as for single player games... for the vast majority of people they play through a game once or maybe sometimes not at all before jumping straight into multiplay. Quake 3 was an attempt to cut straight to the chase with those people.

As for "graphics" and "1337 computars", all you gotta do is turn down all the detail to minimum and force all the models to a single one ... then you're competitive even with a slow-ass computer and a crappy 3d accelerator. Just ask aurikan.

I don't necessarily love Quake 3, but I still like it for being a marvel of excellence in my opinion.

[Fredrik]

sargebaldy said:

please feel free to list them here. it helps to give your opinion some weight.

1. Doom doesn't run on their computers
2. They don't want huge pixels in their face
3. They want more than 35 fps
4. They don't want to aim at 8-angle, 4-frame sprites
5. They want a decent interface to game configuration
6. They want network code written after 1993
7. They want to play more than 4 people at once
8. They want three-dimensional arenas

I'm sure there's more.

[sargebaldy]

Fredrik said:

1. Doom doesn't run on their computers
2. They don't want huge pixels in their face
3. They want more than 35 fps
4. They don't want to aim at 8-angle, 4-frame sprites
5. They want a decent interface to game configuration
6. They want network code written after 1993
7. They want to play more than 4 people at once
8. They want three-dimensional arenas

1-3 and 5-7 are covered by source ports, and 8 is possible to some degree, especially using ports like Legacy. And if you look at the actual Quake III maps, many are not very 3d at all. 4 just seems to me to indicate a tendency towards violence, where killing virtual people is only fun if they look realistic.

[Fredrik]

sargebaldy said:

1-3 and 4-7 are covered by source ports, and 8 is possible to some degree, especially using ports like Legacy.

Seeing as Quake 3 was released in 1999 and therefore predates almost every Doom source port (especially those implementing said features), your point is pretty much completely fucking invalid.

[sargebaldy]

Fredrik said:

Seeing as Quake 3 was released in 1999 and therefore predates almost every Doom source port (especially those implementing said features), your point is pretty much completely fucking invalid.

haha, already bringing out the f-word. and who said anything about 1999? did i say it was worthless in 1999? please quote me if i did, because i really honestly forgot saying that. i just meant that, in general, quake III is a worthless update of doom dm. furthermore, quake III came out in december 1999, by which time zdoom was readily available. the daedalus demo came out the next month, after all.

[Fredrik]

haha, already bringing out the f-word

Remember I'm the authorized troll, heheh.

and who said anything about 1999? did i say it was worthless in 1999? please quote me if i did, because i really honestly forgot saying that. i just meant that, in general, quake III is a worthless update of doom dm.

It sounds to me like you're trying to say that Quake 3 sucks because it is merely an update of Doom's deathmatch, whereas Doom sourceports don't suck because they update Doom's deathmatch. That doesn't make any sense to me at all. And if Quake 3 wasn't worthless in 1999, then why would it be worthless now?