Quote:
|
Originally Posted by elstatec
you can argue against it but perfect dark, halo 2, killzone, far cry instincts, timesplitters future perfect, , halo 1 and black to name a few are not bad at all and do deliver on a "substantial amount of substance."
|
I'll give you Perfect Dark and Halo 1&2, Timesplitters was marginal, and if it weren't for auto-aim it'd be impossible to hit anything (gamecube version).
I happen to have thought Killzone was a god awful game, it didn't bring anything new and it wasn't a horribly exciting game at best. As for Far Cry to say that it's just a port from PC wouldn't be too far from the truth, sure it's got the whole new character and the mutant thing going for it but the basic premise was invented on the PC.
[quote:5bac6]Why is it that so many console gamers still cling to a Nintendo 64 game from the 90's to prove that a console system can get it right?
[/quote:5bac6]
why so many? maybe because it has a good claim to the throne of best fps, hence alot of people claiming it even if it is an old game. Ive played pc fps alot, console fps alot, but never have i found i game i loved more than goldeneye. Doesnt have to prove that consoles get it right but there are good console fps's out there even if you try to ignore it.
[/quote]
I'm not ignoring the fact that their are good console FPS games, but to put down PC FPS games in favor of one Nintendo 64 game is unreasonable. You mentioned the other games however, and that makes your claim a bit more credible.
[quote:5bac6][quote:5bac6]That in itself is an argument
agaisnt console games.
[/quote:5bac6]
is what?[/quote:5bac6]
Using Goldeneye to defend all consoles, when really all it is was an extreme exception for it's time.