I purchased BF3 and MW3 about the same time. I was never interested in modern day shooter games (Big scifi fan) until I was over at a buddies house who was playing BF2. It was pretty fun, especially watching my buddy suicide bomb his own teammates. So, I decided to go out and purchase an X-Box 360 and BF3. While at the store I also picked up a copy of MW3 which I didn't expect to play much.
I never play campaigns, so I cannot express my opinion on that aspect of the game, but I can for the multiplayer. To me, this was one of the most dreadful online experiences I have ever had. First, finding a match was cumbersome and confusing. I wanted a deathmatch. Sweet, fast paced action that all shooters are known for. What I found was a game where I ran around for five minutes before I was either shot in the head or the game ended. I didn't give up! This game looked awesome in the videos I watched (even though the game did not look anywhere near that good even with the HD textures installed). I stuck with it. Surely something in this game would redeem itself. Maybe with more experience I would find it more fun, but as a noob I should be captivated from the start!
Instead I found the game to be slow and boring. I was doing great in close quarters, an art I had perfected over countless shooters from the days of Doom, Quake, Unreal, Halo and onwards. But the huge distances I had to cover just to find an enemy even on the smallest of maps was excruciating.
The worst part about this was that I convinced my brother to purchase BF3 so that we could experience this glorious game together. We finally gave up after two days. The game was just to boring.
We ended up playing MW3 and getting hooked. I'm not saying MW3 is a better game, it just fits our play style better. We prefer games that throw you into carnage and never lets up. For me, and my brother, this was not the game for acti
PZ is a fun, relatively open-ended zombie/psychological sandbox survival-horror... thing.
It brings something that should be in a zombie game - survival. And here's another thing: it's actually -scary-. Not scary as in, wow, this thing represents the complete economical destruction of our society kind of scary, or even HOLY CRAP WHAT WAS THAT HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE-scary. It's just a simulation of trying to live your life, alone, during a zombie acopolypse. And, it does what it came to do best: survival. Having to scavenge around a deserted supermarket, desperate for food, with death clawing at the glass doors, is one I've only experienced from this game.
Yeah, a few gameplay issues, but they become so trivial under all the game's pure brilliance that they're not worth complaining about.
So, I'll complain about this, instead: Y GAEM DEVILIMUNT NOE B FASTR?!!!?!!111!?!/1////1!?!?!!!!?111/1//1/ *Epilectic fit*
The gaming community has never had a shortage of First Person Shooter games. Almost like clockwork, every year a new FPS comes out that breaks sales records and dominates the market and receives critical acclaim. Doom, Quake, Halflife, Halo, Medal of Honor and on and on, the FPS marches forward to dominate sales and past glories set. So what was it about Modern Warfare that, despite being a basic clone of games before it, has continued to grow?
The renewable fanbase is something that I think few critics of the series have not considered. For fans that have been around since the 2007 release, the game has either not lived up to expectations or grown stale due to its repeat game model.
The critics fail to realize that every year new players who have never played a MW game are experiencing the game for the first time. To them, and me, MW is a brand new experience. I've played Battlefield 3, and the game is not for me. Where BF3 is a huge game that you can walk around for five or ten minutes without seeing anyone, in MW3 you can't run around five or ten seconds without running into someone.
Many critics have cited that not only is the game ”more of the same” but that the maps are also bland and uninspired. When I first started the game, I recognized the MP maps as following two models- maze and linear. Maze maps are basically hallways, clutter and obstacles that litter a map and force players into close combat. This model is usually tough to learn and benefits players with fast reaction times that favor close quarters weapons such as shotguns and sub-machine guns. The linear maps are typically wide open maps with little to no Z-axis play and a central focus. These maps are prone to snipers and medium range weapons such as assault rifles. An experienced FPS player will quickly identify these maps and adapt their game-play for each map rather than forcing the same style of play for every map.
For me, this is a fresh experience which I give an 8.
Well, this is scary as hell :) I loved the random sounds, created a really spooky atmosphere.
One thing I didn't like is lack of detail, all the hallways look the same, some dust/blood/whatever could help :)
And there were some overlapping/unaligned models. But that can be forgiven for the experience you created. Keep it up.
I don't know what I wrote, but it sure isn't my opinion. I feel sober now, so it would be better to write a review now.
The game has good music, voice acting, monster design, environments (Desert in act 2 is really awesome), nice character abilites, and good quests. The cinematics are just brilliant.
The only downside for me is that it kinda feels like I am useless in early game, as the equipment available is never any good at all. I wonder how people can play in hell, where monsters have 10k hp?
Other then that, Diablo 3 is a good game.