QUOTE(jaskerzada006 @ Mar 8 2006, 10:57 AM)
Are you actually trying to justify shitty renders by saying there are many shitty renders?
By your logic, GeoWars is graphically superior.
Come on, the physics are basic at best. Nothing new.
And if gameplay is a factor for you at all, you will have to agree this is a shitty game not worthy of a "Next-Gen" label. Worst than Full Auto.
How much does M$ pay you?
Your just another brainwashed monkey willing to accept whatever they throw at you?
QUOTE(jaskerzada006 @ Mar 8 2006, 01:59 PM)
Looks like shodanjr_gr will be the only one picking this up.
Good luck on the multiplayer!!!
But hey, if you can't find anyone to play with, I guess you could get your moneys worth "looking at the characters up close."
not to take sides here because i wont be buying the game either, but your personal opinion and dislike for MS effect the debate. the game doesnt look great but you can tell that the developers didnt work for the highest level of realism. it is a fact that you seem to dismiss to easily that with all of the action going on, no current gen console would be able to run the game without some serious cut-backs. also what does MS have anything to do with the game when they didnt develop, publish, or have any involvement with the game?? it seems like anyone who disagrees with you is being paid by MS (regardless of topic) and automatically brainwashed when you are the one who refuses to think outside the box.
and for the record i dont think anyone will have problems finding people to play with when buying the game as there are plenty of people that have said they will buy and play the game. it seems to be get good responses by those still playing the demo who like simple fun destruction. im sure if the graphics were up to GoW calibur there would be far less naysayers because it looks "next gen". point being is that its rather immiture and un-needed to single those out who dont agree with you.
Edited by KAGE360, 08 March 2006 - 08:10 PM.