Oh yes. This looks sweet. I enjoyed the hell out of the first game. This looks even better.
Something wrong with the server? I can't access it.
The sad part is that it's still going to sell a whole lot. That is why they're not afraid to try and screw us over and over. And as much as I hate Acti, it's also partly the fault of all those 15+ million people who supported them by buying their crap in the first place.
Not exactly screenshots. Those ae more artwork/CGI promo images rather than actual in-game screns. Although they do look very good. What we really need now is some actual in-game screens.
EA really need to get their act together. Otherwise, they're gonna lose more than just a few of their new players. And it's not gonna do their rep one bit of good.
"....while 360 owners really have nothing that rivals it."
That line was absolutely unnecessary, especially in a professional review. It's not the reference to MAG that triggered my post. Read more carefully next time. Your counter-criticism fails harder. And I'm willing to bet you're either the reviewer or the one who submitted it here. If it's the former, next time do a review that doesn't involve attacking a rival platform. And No, I'm not a 360 fanboy.
"If you’re a fan of online shooters at all, you’ll be buying this game. Bad Company 2 has plenty of variety and strategy rules as king"
"Personally the game didn’t blow me away and at no point did I feel like the game offered me anything I hadn’t already seen."
Don't contradict yourself. You lose credibility.
"...you might be better off with MAG, a game that supports more than 200 players beyond what you can fit in a round ...
Nice shots. I hope this game is not too harsh on my 5750, since I only play on 1280x1024 resolution(monitor restriction :P).
That is actually a nice read. I completely agree with points 4 & 2. Sadly, when it comes to online-gaming, 'equality' doesn't mean better treatment. It actually means getting the same thing as everybody else, including a whole bunch of racist slurs and sexual-orientation insults. While I agree that girl-gamers get lots of negative stereotyping online from guys, it's really not that bad when compared to the colorful insults we constantly get from other guys.
Although I feel a bit sad for IW, they did choose to work with Activision in the first place. Also, let's not forget they were the ones that decided to drop proper development for the PC version of MW2, meaning the no-dedicated server idea plus the crappy port from console versions was theirs. So I'm gonna be frank and say, "You reap what you sow." In other words, "Serves you right."
Ha ha. Yeah. It's no fun if they're not spitting fire at each other. j/k
It's actually nice to see them exchanging pleasantries every once in a while. Takes a little bit of the tension off their shoulders, i guess.
"No no no no. He'll just send some Special-Ops douchebags with p***y-a** heartbeat monitors on their guns."
That line was freakishly hilarious. I couldn't stop laughing for a minute there. It's pure classic.
How many features does the console version have that the PC doesn't? None. Does the PC version have features that the console version doesn't? Yes. This is FACT.
But in the end, it's all still a matter of personal preference. Obviously, some people find it easier playing on the consoles, while others prefer the PC. It's their choice. But in your attempts to justify your preference for the console versions, you try to degerade the PC platfor as a whole. And the only feasible poi...
How exactly does MW2 get a 10 for graphics while BC2 gets 9? And how is "too much action" bad for an ACTION-shooter? And why is he complaining about a 6 hour campaign for BC2 while MW2 has less than 5?
This is IGN. The same guys that gave MW2 PC version a 9.5/10. They have zero credibility.
The funny thing is, the reviewer is complaining about how short the campaign is, at about 6 hours, while MW2 campaign was not even 5 hours long.
Oh, and they gave this game 9.0 for graphics, while MW2 got 9.5. I think someone needs to get fired from the IGN reviewing staff.
Pathetic, Ubisoft. Last gen graphics, intrusive DRM and 6 months delay doesn't warrant a $60 price tag for a PC game. It's clear they're trying to cash in on the success of recent IW/Activision exploits. Not gonna work.
I don't believe it. A multiplat game requiring that much on 'optimum'? None of the screenshots justify the insane specs. If a game was gonna truly need an i7 processor, an unreleased highest-end card and 8GB of RAM, then it damn well better look much more detailed than what they've been showing us.
I mean, I know the character models are quite detailed, but look at the environment - the grass/bushes/cars for example. I see absolutely no particular attention given to those detai...
I believe this is the kind of game that gives you a great experience no matter which platform you choose to play it on. Just pick the platform in which you have the most number of friends on and have fun.
"....I mean, you’re not all complete twerps, just most of you. And if you’re offended by the previous sentence, it’s probably because you’re a twerp....."
That line was not needed and instantly dissolves any form of credibility the article might have. You might wanna lose that attitude a bit before writing a story about how sorry you feel for PC gamers.
Nero definitely deserves to be on that list. 15 minutes into the game, and I was tired of his whiny-a** whimpers already. Thank god for the Dante-levels in the second half of the game. Nero's just a poor man's(read "Emo's") crappy version of Dante and Capcom knows it.
Hey, Capcom, here's a simple way to improve the series - Kill off the drama-queen emo kid and bring back Vergil in DMC5.