OK, time for a reality break...
Some comments that are getting too frequent:
"It was good but too short"
"It was good but repetative"
"It only took me 5 hours to beat"
Alright ladies and gentlemen, how long can a developer make a game? When they make them complex ala' Morrowind, the game is boring. When they make Hunter, it's too easy and short. Isn't our beloved Halo the same...shoot aliens, blow up aliens, run over aliens, you get my point. Yet for the most part we all love it.
What gives you a charge...Playing a game and having fun or rushing to beat it and proclaim your supperiority to the developers that there isn't a game worthy of your talent and skill.
Are we gamers just so good now that we can't see a game for what it is...Morrowind is a RPG there isn't supposed to be alot of combat, and if there is your supposed to train to get good at it, thats why it's a ROLE PLAYING GAME.
Hunter is a hack and slash game, your objective, to kill zombies and free the people. So it has a few hidden treasures and you need to find, sometimes cleverly hidden, innocents. It's too short you say...well wouldn't making it longer fuel the repetative argument?
And of course Multi-player does save a games longevity, but on it's own do you really think your gonna play a game 6 months from now, no matter how great it is??
It's funny, a while ago all i read was "There are no good games" now it's shifted to this.
So wich is it, are we just too damn good at this, or are developers slakin' off.
OR...Wait a sec, do you think developers invision an individual sitting down with there game for 15 hours straight right out of the box???? NAAAAAAAAAAAAA. LOL.
Bookmarks