The Videogames Tab

Oh yes, "you've been hit and your screen is turning red so hide behind cover" is pretty darn realistic.

Play CoD 4 on the computer, and then go back to the console. You'll wanna trash that crap real quick.

__________________
"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza

HEY, if it was good enough for Wolfenstein 3-D back in 1992, it's good enough for now too.

__________________
Linda's Author Website
Linda's Amazon Author page

Well heck, what's the alternative? A health bar? The red flashes beat anything I can think of. No matter how good it is, it still has to be a game, and fun.

I'm just commenting on the realistic comment. There are plenty of FPS games that are much more realistic than CoD 4 where you can either bleed out, or actually get killed from just one or two shots.

If we should take the fact that realistic is fun and good, then why not make it more realistic like other games do? Well, that's because it's really not that fun when you get too realistic. Hence, CoD 4 isn't really that realistic, and not even close to the most realistic. Of course, we already know this to be the case. As Yoda said, it's just a game.

Yoda, I'm not sure I ever considered watching your brother run around that castle with that screen going red (usually because some Nazi jerk was shooting him from behind) "fun."

A bit of a stretch for me, at least. I used to have nightmares about that game back then -- and I wasn't even the one playing it! It was your six-year-old brother!

Of course you'll want to throw the console version away. That is the case with every FPS on the PC vs Console. Using the mouse is just too damn accurate and the controls are right at your finger tips.

I can't stand the melee being on the joystick, every time I run around I accidentally hit it in and when I try to shoot the guy I end up doing a melee in mid air. Then I get killed. I usually make it circle, which is what I did with CoD4 and Resistance 2.

As for realism, CoD4 is near the top, specifically for the photo-realistic environments. Sure, the game play is not as hectic as UT or even Timesplitters, which I think is a highly underrated FPS. But it's just so damn fun because of everything it offers.

Custom weapon sets, upgradeable weapons, perks, new ranks. Killzone 2 basically took what CoD4 had and played off on it.

I have CoD and Cod2 for PC, played both for days straight and will occasionally throw them back in the PC, which I hardly use by the way (MAC all the way).

So, yes I would say CoD4 is one of, if not the best FPS to get today. Game of the year awards up the WAZOO. Halo is simply overrated as hell.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

Halo may be overrated but it's still incredibly fun especially b/c you can play splitscreen and online at the same time. Still CoD4 takes that cake for best online game...although TF2 is pretty darn awesome.

__________________

Ok, so everyone agrees CoD is realistic except Matt, yes?

It's realistic.

__________________

Mob rule means nothing...

Oh yes, it is, indeed, more realistic than most FPS you mentioned. However, comparing it to unrealistic ones and then calling it the most realistic is not an accurate portrayal. Ever played America's Army? Ghost Recon? SWAT 4? Rainbow Six 3? Close Combat: First to Fight (which is, IMO, one of the most realistic FPS I have ever played...alas, it was too buggy/not that good)?

Those are just some fine examples of much more realistic FPS than CoD 4. Now if you're saying it's the best "realistic" FPS than I have no argument, but that doesn't make it the most realistic.

Resident Evil 5 (on 360, the guy in the store said the PS3 version, which I was quite happy to get instead, has framerate issues - quelle surprise)

It's ok, and all that, but when did the world's premier survival horror franchise morph into Uncharted with awful tank-like controls? Probably around RE4, I guess.

Yes it looks great, yes it seems to get quite frantic here and there and yes, it has loads of little cues to the previous titles but it's just an action adventure game. Forget RE2, I'm not even enjoying this one as much as Code: Veronica. I can't find an awful lot wrong with it - daft controls aside, but Capcom and fans will probably say that it's being true to its roots. New cars don't come with starting handles these days, for a reason - but there's not a lot to inspire.

Siren: Blood Curse is still the only decent current gen survival horror game I've played, and even that one's a remake of sorts. The genre seems to have had its day.

__________________
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how the Tatty 100 is done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves." - Brendan Behan

Yeah, I find it ironic that so many people complained that the series' original controls (RE to RE:CV) were clunky and tank-like. Now everyone is screaming that they're so smooth, and I think they're more awkward than ever because (a) they're not nearly as smooth as other 3rd-person shooters out there, and (b) they don't resemble (or even honor) the original control scheme at all. They're just floating in the ether of indecision.

This is my biggest beef with the way these games have trended. Not only have they moved away from zombie-inspired horror, now delving into this bizarre cult angle, but there's little or no investigating and puzzle solving anymore. Personally, I liked when the games unfolded more slowly. I liked the ability to search anything. Now it's just run, shoot, run, shoot.

Oh god, the cinematic camera for the original Resident Evil games were horrible.

Also, playing the demo version of this game, I did not notice any frame rate issues. I played both single and co-op games.

I don't think I've ever heard anyne say the controls for Resi are 'so smooth' and the controls for 4 are the same as previous games, for some reason, it seems different due to the switch to 3rd person view. Odd, I know, but that's the only reason, I can think of. You should go compare them, just to see the controls are the more or less identical. I've only read heard people complain more of Resi 5, because Dead Space, took the Resi 4 controls and really improved them.

I heard that, though it's meant to be a remake, it's nothing like the original. True or fulse?

Never played the PS2 version, to be honest, but yeah, the reviews I've read say that the new version is substantially different.

The RE control scheme - One of my biggest bugbears with RE IV was the controls: Run, stop, shoot. RE V is exactly the same and, to be honest, it's pretty unforgivable when you see what, for example, MGS4 and the last couple of GTA games have done with the 3rd person action game mechanics. It's like a handbrake on the action and I wonder if it's just Capcom being bloody-minded.

Apart from that it's very slick but generic. A bit like Dead Space.

Yep, the puzzles in the old Ressie games were hardly of Mensa standard but there seems a complete lack of them this time round.

And another thing!

It's all very well having wonderfully detailed character models but when they take up 20% of the screen and you're trying to move around in a small space it's just silly...

Yeah, and instead of investigating Umbrella Corp., Chris Redfield must have been hitting the weights pretty hard since he last appeared in Code: Veronica. He looks like he can bench press a sequoia.

No way. It slowed the action down and gave the games a cinematic feel. Exactly what the Resident Evil were always all about. It's a preference thing, though. Some people just couldn't get into the style.

Yeah, I completely agree with this. They transplanted the same basic control scheme into a more action-oriented style of gameplay, and I just don't find that the two work very well, particularly when you've got enemies that can't be killed. Instead of capitalizing on the player's sense of dread, they're trying to create fear through frantic action and the need to run away. Which again, doesn't quite feel right when I've got two large guns and grenades.

Also, is there a quick-reload? I couldn't find one in the demo: it seemed to be the old RE method of combining your bullets with your gun. Which gets really tedious when there are so many enemies; you're doing it every fifteen seconds.

I'll admit, the second resident evil was a great game and the third wasn't too shabby either. Other then that the series hasn't impressed me.

after a lot of drinking games I played Wii sports and especially Tennis man this Wii game is really awesome but also very dangerous to the people around you

__________________
I'm in movie heaven

I seem to remember getting startled a couple of times in RE1 - the first time it had happened to me in a video game since I was a child - and the camera angles, designed as they were to look like something Romero would have tossed off in a lunch break, were a big factor in that. I doubt if the PS1's hardware would have allowed for anything more than static backgrounds either, without a significant, and thus lessening of immersion, quality drop - I can only think of Xenogears (graphically a couple of notches below) and Vagrant Story (criminally underrated) which used 'proper' 3D environments well on the console.

A lot of the camera work in that early game was laughable, although the recent Gamecube remake corrected some and made it feel a bit more polished. Still, some were brilliant: like the hallway where you can only see the shadows of zombies beating on the windows as you pass through, and then when you venture back, the shadows are gone.

Yeah, it wouldn't have. Code: Veronica was the first to use 3-D environments, and it blended them perfectly with the established RE formula. Still, I love RE2 and RE3, even for the little reasons. For some reason, dead bodies strewn across an abandoned diner seem so much more macabre when they're blurry, static environments versus when they're 3-D and detailed.