Page 1 of 1
HL2: Episode 2 coming soon then...?
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:54 pm
by o'dium
Episode 1 isn't even out yet (What a gay name), but Valve are already well underway with Episode 2 it seems.
Episode 1 will only take about 6 hours to complete, so in other words, its gonna have a good hour or so of actual normal person playing time gameplay.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/ ... ?id=134629
Anybody else think this whole "buy buy buy" thing with Sin and now HL2 is just a bit money grabbing? What happened to PROPER games with PROPER times? I dont want a game that takes a few hours to complete, i wanted MORE game time not less
Oh well, thats the future i guess...
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:02 pm
by DiscoDave
Games aren't what they used to be. Go back about 5 years or so and I bet you could go into a game store or whatever and pretty much find a game you'll like. Nowadays I dont go to a game store unless i have a specific intention to buy a particular game. As the shelves are pretty much full of crap now with the Sims 87487237842th expansion.
Or its something with me getting older...
But with steam and now EA Downloaded Its all about the money now, not the experience.
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:26 pm
by seremtan
oh stop moaning
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:42 pm
by Tsakali_
DiscoDave wrote:
Or its something with me getting older...
I think it has alot to do with you getting older, I'm starting to notice my tolerance in what I call an entertaining video game has gotten very short
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:47 pm
by DiscoDave
Well im only 19 and play a lot of games

. I just remember older and simpler games being the best, like sonic, alex the kid etc. Very simple games, but also very addictive
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:49 pm
by Tsakali_
never mind you're too young
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:59 pm
by Freakaloin
is this gonna be a free download or am i gonna have to warez it?>..
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 5:04 pm
by GONNAFISTYA
Episodical games are the wave of the future.
Count on it.
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 5:08 pm
by Tsakali_
well the fact that game development requirements are prolly also following moore's law in a way, I'd say it has alot to do with resourses.
the development of pacman vs the development of anything recent is silly to even compare.
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 10:14 pm
by BlueGene
I like steam in general because it's easy to update and to redownload the game with no hassle.
However I don't like the fact that you always have to pay a little to get a small portion of the gameplay or get extra mods.
For example I think the DoD:S should of been free, this is why so little people actually bought it. Also with that new unreal engine mod coming out on steam.
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 10:26 pm
by I cant spell u
It would be so cool if they released episode 1 for free and charged money for 2 and 3, would be just like the shareware days.....
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:20 am
by PhoeniX
Never even played HL2 its self (well, I have briefly), I didn't like the single player in the first

. (multiplayer in the first was ok though, excluding countershit)
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:05 am
by BlueGene
Why exactly don’t you like counter-strike, the game play is awesome.
The numbers can't be wrong.
http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/
Counter-Strike (1.6)
29126 servers, 41192 players
Counter-Strike: Condition Zero
2795 servers, 6152 players
cstrike (source)
20855 servers, 42545 players
Quake 3: Arena
1980 servers, 3103 players
Quake 4
1152 servers, 523 players
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:07 am
by Tsakali_
where's wold ET in that list?
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:17 am
by BlueGene
#7. Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:18 am
by I cant spell u
I'd play cs source if I had it, I need to buy Half Life 2.
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 8:58 am
by MKJ
BlueGene wrote:Why exactly don’t you like counter-strike, the game play is awesome.
The numbers can't be wrong.
ah yes, that routine again
mcdonalds served over 234987 trillion. that doesnt make it exactly prime rib does it
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 10:57 am
by Grudge
cs is an average game for average people, that's why it's so big
I find it pretty meh, just like McD
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:45 pm
by PhoeniX
BlueGene wrote:Why exactly don’t you like counter-strike, the game play is awesome.
The numbers can't be wrong.
http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/
Counter-Strike (1.6)
29126 servers, 41192 players
Counter-Strike: Condition Zero
2795 servers, 6152 players
cstrike (source)
20855 servers, 42545 players
Quake 3: Arena
1980 servers, 3103 players
Quake 4
1152 servers, 523 players
Because the gameplay is something a long the lines of:
Spawn. Take ages selecting a weapon. Run out the compound. Camp (else you get head shotted). Die. Then wait 10 minutes whilst the rest of the team die to respawn.
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:35 pm
by BlueGene
To each his own I guess, I think the game play is entertaining. I personally enjoy the game more then quake3, quake3 is also good but it’s a completely different game. Quake3 is based on individual skill while CS is also based on team and individual skills, CS has many more elements then Quake3. Weapon selection can easily be bound, I use F keys and it takes me half a second to buy my equipment. The same can be said for BF2 or any other class/weapon selection games, that it takes too much time.
The round is never 10 minutes, it’s usually 3-5 minutes and it rarely reaches that mark. Camping depends on map and depends on the server, one problem is AWP Spawn camping (However I like and it’s part of the game) many servers ban the AWP so the issue of being killed off during a rush with 1 shot is highly decreased. Camping is forbidden on certain servers so it’s also not an issue.
McDonalds has decent food for low prices, yeah it’s not as good as some other foods like Prime Rib. But how much will you pay for a Prime Rib dinner cooked in a high quality restaurant compared to McDonalds? Do people really have the money to get Prime Rib when they want? This is a price issue not a quantity one, therefore the comparison can’t be used.
Games that are generally really good have large amount of players, otherwise people won’t play them? Why play shit when you can play another game? FPS games on the market cost about the same.
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 12:12 am
by SOAPboy
PhoeniX wrote:BlueGene wrote:Why exactly don’t you like counter-strike, the game play is awesome.
The numbers can't be wrong.
http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/
Counter-Strike (1.6)
29126 servers, 41192 players
Counter-Strike: Condition Zero
2795 servers, 6152 players
cstrike (source)
20855 servers, 42545 players
Quake 3: Arena
1980 servers, 3103 players
Quake 4
1152 servers, 523 players
Because the gameplay is something a long the lines of:
Spawn. Take ages selecting a weapon. Run out the compound. Camp (else you get head shotted). Die. Then wait 10 minutes whilst the rest of the team die to respawn.
Blame yourself for sitting there dead.. its not quake, you dont run around DMing everybody..
And if it takes 10 min for them to finish up, and your in spec, guess what, you died because someone was better than you or got a lucky ass shot.. suck it up and QQ