Oh no, a creative and innovative game! Hide behind the Call of Duty!

[Nessy]

The fact that you think that quake and unreal are easy games to play really shows how little you know what you are talking about. In the entirety of the crap i've read on the internet, I don't think i've ever heard someone say that about quake lol. They take more skill and more know how that any other fps, and certainly contain a whole lot less luck than any rts, any single player game, and sure as hell any rpg. It takes most players months to just be able to complete the jump challenges in quake live which are incredibly simple.

In quake if cooler played public, he would never lose, yet i've seen the best players in rts lose to randoms.

Seriously, this isn't even an opinion, by saying that you think quake or unreal are simple or easy games to play, it is because you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Ember To Inferno]

Games like Borderlands may also differ from your annual Call of Duty experience. Here's hoping that RAGE does too.

But sadly, I have to agree here. Games are attempting to be more and more like Call of Duty in an attempt to garner sales. I can't say I blame them sadly, because it does work, otherwise Call of Duty wouldn't be the gaming giant it is today. It happened to F.E.A.R 3 too, it felt like I was playing through a Call of Duty game with a friend. Granted Paxton was an awesome break, being a ghost and possessing soldiers and all.

The fact that you think that quake and unreal are easy games to play really shows how little you know what you are talking about. In the entirety of the crap i've read on the internet, I don't think i've ever heard someone say that about quake lol. They take more skill and more know how that any other fps, and certainly contain a whole lot less luck than any rts, any single player game, and sure as hell any rpg. It takes most players months to just be able to complete the jump challenges in quake live which are incredibly simple.

In quake if cooler played public, he would never lose, yet i've seen the best players in rts lose to randoms.

Seriously, this isn't even an opinion, by saying that you think quake or unreal are simple or easy games to play, it is because you have no idea what you are talking about.

Well, he found it easy to pick up and play. However mastering the game (just like a lot of other games) can be quite time consuming. It's not that he's saying it's an easy game, just it was quick to get the basic general feel of the game and go on from there. I don't think he meant to bash Quake or Unreal.

Sorry if I'm misinterpreting anything.

 

[Nessy]

I don't see how anyone could say that there is anything even remotely easy about those games in comparison to others.

I don't care if someone doesn't enjoy them, but nobody can say that playing at that speed while timing 4 different things that you have to calculate on the move in your head is easy.

 

[Ember To Inferno]

I don't see how anyone could say that there is anything even remotely easy about those games in comparison to others.

I don't care if someone doesn't enjoy them, but nobody can say that playing at that speed while timing 4 different things that you have to calculate on the move in your head is easy.

It may very well come natural to some. My friend's little brother who recently got into Gears of War 2 can literally toss me into an eclipse when I have been playing it for a couple of years now -- and he's just 6 years old! He's great at the multiplayer in that game.

I'm not saying Gears of War is on par with Unreal/Quake in terms of skill, I'm just trying to say that some people can just do it.

Or maybe I am just bad at video games? <---- Probably It's this.

 

[Nessy]

Yeah, I think that these are two very different scenarios. Quake is the only game I can think of that was specifically designed for competitive gaming. I have showed a lot of people how to play the game, and nobody gets good at it fast. I am assuming that aka has very little experience in the game and that this assumption is made on nothing other than a guess. Nobody can just hop into quake, start strafe jumping everywhere, while controlling weapons and timing powerups.

On the other hand I have been playing quake for many years, both online and at lan, and my views on it come from experience.

 

[aka958]

The fact that you think that quake and unreal are easy games to play really shows how little you know what you are talking about. In the entirety of the crap i've read on the internet, I don't think i've ever heard someone say that about quake lol. They take more skill and more know how that any other fps, and certainly contain a whole lot less luck than any rts, any single player game, and sure as hell any rpg. It takes most players months to just be able to complete the jump challenges in quake live which are incredibly simple.

In quake if cooler played public, he would never lose, yet i've seen the best players in rts lose to randoms.

Seriously, this isn't even an opinion, by saying that you think quake or unreal are simple or easy games to play, it is because you have no idea what you are talking about.

But sir I do know what I'm talking about since I'm talking about experience. They are easy, easy easy easy. Just sitting and training reflexes and aim while you memorize your routine and knowledge of each map. You've won.

All it costs and all it requires is a hefty sum of time to do so. Wow, you suddenly lost again. .-.

 

[Nessy]

Let us hope that you are just trolling, because there are very few things in this world as stupid as your post.

Routine and knowledge in a game that has more judgement based variables than any other, it's sad that you try to lie your way through a conversation pretending you have knowledge in an area you are clueless about.

Oh and please clue me in on what your experiences are with quake? I myself have only played against players from dignitas and such, and have watched thousands of games between the greatest players, and been part of their community for over half a decade. Also came third at a quake3 competition at the iseries. Of course you aka must of been playing it for many many years, even though nothing that you have said in this thread has even hinted at knowledge of the game. You probably don't even know the set of competitively used weapons, maps or anything else for that matter.

What's worse is that some people on this forum may actually value your opinion, and thus really you are doing everyone a disservice by pretending you have any clue.

A hefty sum of time to get good at something, hmmm, could that be because it takes skill. And ending your post with you lost again, wow, childish and foolish all in one.

Also, what do you define as "skill" or being difficult if knowledge, reflexes strategy and aim are not?

 

[Ember To Inferno]

All I hope for is for you all to not be too lax on the insults. I wouldn't want you all getting in trouble for such a thing. Perhaps there's a way you can solve this debate without such a thing becoming a potential?

 

[Nessy]

I already took it to pms

 

[Ember To Inferno]

Alright, that's good. I hope it all goes well.

 

[Vergil'sBitch]

Speaking of Call of Duty, EA have been b*tching that they think it'll only last another 3-4years.

I've always wanted to play Unreal tournament. I've never really been pulled into buying it though (plus, its fps... *vomits*).

 

[Nessy]

Don't buy the new one

 

[aka958]

Ohh... just a thing... the thread starter, I don't really get it. Alot, and I do mean alot of the games made are mediocre. You should reconsider your words since the game might appeal to you but some points of it just might be very lackluster and turns off most of the crowd.

 

[Nessy]

I would say that in comparison with the amount made, most games are terrible, very few are mediocre, and only a handful are good enough that I can actually enjoy them.

In my opinion

 

[aka958]

I would say that in comparison with the amount made, most games are terrible, very few are mediocre, and only a handful are good enough that I can actually enjoy them.

In my opinion

Totally true.

However I like some of the mediocre ones only for the part where they shine. :3

 

[Meg]

Ohh... just a thing... the thread starter, I don't really get it. Alot, and I do mean alot of the games made are mediocre. You should reconsider your words since the game might appeal to you but some points of it just might be very lackluster and turns off most of the crowd.

I have to agree with this. I don't get the OP either. Some reviewers are better than others, but there aren't all about the "mainstream." Little known games like Okami can still be critical successes even if they aren't popular. Thing is, reviewers (in general) look at how well a game is made and grade it accordingly. A mediocre game can still have fans, but that doesn't make it well made. A certain podcast on GamesRadar covered just that. The editors discussed how they have to remove their own biases when they review a game. They could have LOVED a game, but if it was just an all around average game it wouldn't be fair to give it a high score even if they think it deserves one.