fvgazi wrote:PC was the way to go for FPS and for the most part it still is. During that time period, the PC market was full of people who could afford to put the money into the hardware to run a FPS. Consoles were "inferior" at that point.
fvgazi wrote:
recently the mass market has shifted to consoles, as you can get rivaled gameplay that of a PC and appeal to the casual gamer
Current consoles still are inferioir. The technology is beginning to be very outdated, you can tell the difference in graphics. Like it's been said before, consoles can never match PC in this regard unless they become PC-like. Mouse for aiming, competetive scene, unlimited server hosting capabilities and ability to make all kinds of unofficial servers, being able to mod the game to your liking, make own maps, scenarios etc.
Yeah, I never argued that consoles were better. I prefer FPS on PC myself.
I was just making the point that the average Console gamer has the same quality game as the average PC player now. Think Medal of Honor PS2 Vs Allied Assault on PC back in the day, which one would you rather player? MW2 on PC vs 360 has very little difference besides graphics and the ability to mod. I'm not talking about people with $600 dual GPU video cards where the games look incredible on a setup that cost 2x a PS3/360. There certainly is a VERY LARGE competitive scene in the console market for FPS, Fighting, and Shmup games. There are national competitions for many of these games. Lets not turn this into a PC/Console thread. It's already known both are awesome.
I noticed no one mentioned Turok as an influential FPS.. I've played very little of it, but I was under the impression that it was a heavy hitter in its day ..?
I noticed no one mentioned Turok as an influential FPS.. I've played very little of it, but I was under the impression that it was a heavy hitter in its day ..?
I've never thought of it as influential. In fact, I don't even consider it a good game.
prfsnl_gmr wrote:There is nothing feigned about it. What I wrote is a display of actual moral superiority.
I noticed no one mentioned Turok as an influential FPS.. I've played very little of it, but I was under the impression that it was a heavy hitter in its day ..?
I've never thought of it as influential. In fact, I don't even consider it a good game.
Interesting premis. Interesting weapons. However, the heavy fog and crappy level design ruin it.
It was only ever given note because it was on the N64. Far from an influential game.
Wow, it's nice to see retrogamers around here around my age (I'll be 14 in August). As someone who has a burning hate for MW, but loves (and sucks at) most FPS's, is getting the first CoD on PSN worth it?
3DSStrider wrote:Wow, it's nice to see retrogamers around here around my age (I'll be 14 in August). As someone who has a burning hate for MW, but loves (and sucks at) most FPS's, is getting the first CoD on PSN worth it?
Go for the PC version (also on Mac (PPC only) I believe). It'll run on basically anything at this point.
But yes, the first CoD is totally worth it. It's a great game, and feels notably different from modern entries, and it probably has the best single player campaign in the series.
3DSStrider wrote:Wow, it's nice to see retrogamers around here around my age (I'll be 14 in August). As someone who has a burning hate for MW, but loves (and sucks at) most FPS's, is getting the first CoD on PSN worth it?
Go for the PC version (also on Mac (PPC only) I believe). It'll run on basically anything at this point.
But yes, the first CoD is totally worth it. It's a great game, and feels notably different from modern entries, and it probably has the best single player campaign in the series.
If you enjoy COD 1, check out the expansion pack as well. You might also like COD 2, which plays more like COD 1 than COD 4.
prfsnl_gmr wrote:There is nothing feigned about it. What I wrote is a display of actual moral superiority.
I noticed no one mentioned Turok as an influential FPS.. I've played very little of it, but I was under the impression that it was a heavy hitter in its day ..?
I've never thought of it as influential. In fact, I don't even consider it a good game.
Interesting premis. Interesting weapons. However, the heavy fog and crappy level design ruin it.
It was only ever given note because it was on the N64. Far from an influential game.
Fair enough. Like I said, I never played much of it. It's why we ask these things
AppleQueso wrote:Turok influential?
What did it influence?
nothing, evidently
i was unaware of its infamy
...from this point on I don't have to keep looking at the series as games I think I should have played, and to that I say, right on
