Deus Ex Alpha

LOL WHAT THE FUCK WERE THEY THINKING


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tedlWs1XY[/youtube]

It's a shame Treyarch don't have an original thought in their head

They weren't thinking. I think that's the point.

I know, but HORSES?

In the FUTURE?

What the fuck

I don't even care.

Wow.

Thought i was watching the new Halo trailer for a minute

Mmmmm, tasty plagiarism.

At the beginning it reminded me of DXHR for some reason.

Well the music might as well be a pirate of Michael McCann.

Protocol wrote:I know, but HORSES?

In the FUTURE?

What the fuck

They where in the desert.

I think I'm the only person who likes the look of it

Yeah dude I love the look of Battlefield 2142 pfffpfffpfffpfffpfffff

A change of direction is a good idea because COD started to stagnate a long time ago, i dunno about this direction though

Is this REALLY a change in direction? It's going to be exactly the same game we've seen for the last 5 years on the same engine we've seen used for the series in 8. Except for the unique new style like that HORRIBLE RTS mechanic - it's no different from what we've seen already in COD in the form of killstreaks.

Don't be fooled. I mean it.

The futuristic thing wouldn't be so bad if they had a new/upgraded-to-shit engine, and implemented actual unique ideas.


This is just a clusterfuck of..... cluster.

I'm sure it'll be awful. GotY inc though, people like bad games.

Bad 'HD' ports and mediocre shooters are right up Danny's alley!

If you seen my video game collection you'd find i have very few shooters

I think they should just leave the Cod series there.
Its like new year=new Cod
And of course all the cod fanboys are bursting with joy >_>
*sigh* when will it end

It's part of Activision's annual roll out. You've seen it with Tony Hawk's and Guitar Hero.

ynnaD wrote:If you seen my video game collection you'd find i have very few shooters

And they're mediocre!

James wrote:Don't be fooled. I mean it.

Enlarged for major emphasis.

People want this shit and I'm still no closer to understanding why. I think there is some scientific merit in finding out the real reason as to why people get sucked into this shit.

Vote with your wallet, these magical games will go away if you don't buy them.

James wrote:Vote with your wallet, these magical games will go away if you don't buy them.

I don't buy them. I even returned my copy of Mass Effect 3 after finding out the ending was horrid but whilst it only takes one man to start a revolution it takes a sight more to reach the revolutions goals.

There are more people willing to pay for shoddy games like Call of Duty then there are those prepared to go the lengths to boycott them. Not that I believe in boycotts, frankly. The L4D2 one worked well, didn't it? Oh wait.

When your members end up buying the game you're trying to boycott several months later, why waste your time? I won't buy the games, but I'm not going to sit around convincing others to do so. I find leading by example to be better than wasting my voice trying to convince those who are already adamantly buying the games regardless.

Magnir wrote:I think there is some scientific merit in finding out the real reason as to why people get sucked into this shit.

I could break it down into retrospect, but to provide a simple answer, multiple variants of 'mob mentality.'

The unfortunate thing, is that a few of these variants cloud the opportunity for these people to play something else; that could be far more unique, and fun.

COD is popular because it is easy, and has a treadmill system firmly rooted in the game. That's it.

I'd like to point out I was joking with the "scientific merit" part.

Protocol wrote:COD is popular because it is easy, and has a treadmill system firmly rooted in the game. That's it.

I guess I do understand why people play Call of Duty, then.

My opinion on Call of Duty is the same for most action-RPGs (hell, most shooters in general, too): Most shooters and action-RPGs have horrid storylines, repetitive gameplay and are, in general, pretty easy (especially anything cover-based). So why do I play them? Because all I want out of them is cheap thrills. I play them when I want to blow or hack somethings brains out, and that's usually it. If it has any amount of decency in anything other than this then I consider it to have exceeded my very low expectations.

In saying this, many of my games I use for these cheap thrills I wouldn't pay more than $30 for, and haven't paid more than that. My go-to game for action-RPG goodness is usually Titan Quest and for shooters it was, before I lost it, Battlefield 1942 and Star Wars Battlefront II.

I never saw a need to "upgrade". Better graphics? Meh, so what? I can still snipe someone to hell in BF1942 and it has better single-player support than the newer models do (I know they're all multiplayer-oriented, but like I said, I play 'em for cheap thrills).

Aidan wrote:

Magnir wrote:I think there is some scientific merit in finding out the real reason as to why people get sucked into this shit.

I could break it down into retrospect, but to provide a simple answer, multiple variants of 'mob mentality.'

The unfortunate thing, is that a few of these variants cloud the opportunity for these people to play something else; that could be far more unique, and fun.

It's a game where you can shoot people and you get rewarded for being bad or doing little things which allow you to do more stuff with little effort. See deathstreaks and killstreaks.

He does have a point, though.

I'm not a fan of the "instant gratification" reward systems found in most modern-day video games, even though I've fallen prey to them on occasion. I don't like them because ultimately, they detract from the entire purpose of a reward. When you can get one easily and instantly then it's not nearly as gratifying as when you had to work for it.

It's simple really though isn't it?

Activision makes identical games every year (like FIFA), people buy it, they make millions.

The sad thing is, as long as this keeps happening, Activison will continue to do so, people nowadays don't want good Single Player experiences , gamers of today normally wonder what a game's MP is like before asking about the SP , most gamers don't even realise some of the games they have actually has an SP.

Aside from MMOs, I actually hate the advent of multiplayer games. But then, even MMOs suck.

Multiplayer games in general are just poor excuses for video games, in my opinion. They're nothing more than a cheap means to make money without offering the value worthy of my money. I don't buy games from local stores simply because I refuse to pay $96 USD (59 GBP) for something I can get half-price elsewhere and still less than what even Americans pay.

The price for video games is ever increasing the quality is ever decreasing, so why should I pay for the filth? Yes I boycott and yes, I've had pirated games in the past simply because I refuse to pay the extreme amounts for what I could crap out after having a bad lunch.

Like Fifa? Sure it is like Fifa that its an annual series but technically (and applies to Battlefield, Sims and other EA titles) lot goes into Fifa unfixed so they can sell it. At least with Activision's titles you're given a proper assurance of quality.

Also if I am not mistaken, single-player is extremely popular according to statistics for CoD, after release spike a lot of people soon drop the titles after beating the SP.