[Advice/feedback please] Buying an EXBAOX

So, no FPS... let's see, will 3rd person shooters do? If yes, check out Gears of War 1/2, I'm not a big fan but a lot of people seem to like the series.

Also, you should still give Darkness a chance since it's not on PC and is a fantastic game.

Lost Planet is a fun 3rd person shooter if you're into fighting huge things.

Fight Night Round 3 is the best boxing game I've played and it's probably the best looking game on 360.

Ace Combat 6 is a really awesome flight sim. Even if you're not into that, you should check it out.

Need for Speed: Most Wanted is the best NFS since NFS 1.

Forza Motorsport 2 is the best "serious" racer on 360.

Lost Odyssey is a good game as far as jrpg's go.

Saints Row is not as good as GTA but what little I played of it was a lot of fun.

GTA 4 is better on 360. Many people are not happy with the PC port and the 360 version will have exclusive DLC.
 
maximaz said:
So, no FPS... let's see, will 3rd person shooters do? If yes, check out Gears of War 1/2, I'm not a big fan but a lot of people seem to like the series.

Also, you should still give Darkness a chance since it's not on PC and is a fantastic game.

Lost Planet is a fun 3rd person shooter if you're into fighting huge things.

Fight Night Round 3 is the best boxing game I've played and it's probably the best looking game on 360.

Ace Combat 6 is a really awesome flight sim. Even if you're not into that, you should check it out.

Need for Speed: Most Wanted is the best NFS since NFS 1.

Forza Motorsport 2 is the best "serious" racer on 360.

Lost Odyssey is a good game as far as jrpg's go.

Saints Row is not as good as GTA but what little I played of it was a lot of fun.

GTA 4 is better on 360. Many people are not happy with the PC port and the 360 version will have exclusive DLC.
Click to expand...

Ahh, plenty of good suggestions there! Thanks again!

Fight night is indeed a great game, I might even go as far to say that it's the best Game EA has churned out in quite a few years.

Considering getting Gears 2, since the story seems to have some good moments, and the graphics are great, as always.

Will check out the other titles you mentioned, not a big racing or sports fan, but some games are so good they crush notions of "not a fan of"
 
Did someone mention Bioshock, the Orange Box, or does that disqualify since it's on PC too?

Alright, I think I'm a Valve Fangirl
 
Spoonfeed said:
I am a complete wuss when it comes down to "horror games" occasionally i still have nightmares about resident evil 2, which was over 5 years ago that i played it...(they don't scare me anymore nowadays, but they are still stuck in my head)
Click to expand...

The new resident evil games are a far cry from RE2. RE4 and 5 are much more akin to a regular third person shooter. The horror themes are still there, but the scary moments are more like, "holy shit zombies are coming in through the windows and the toilets and I'm running low on ammo and when i blow their heads off vines with scythes on the end pop out!!!!" as opposed to the skin crawling creepiness of RE1 and 2.

And yeh Lost Odyssey is decent if you can stomach jrpgs. Although they are a bit heavy handed with the "it's so sad and lonely to be immortal" theme, the writing is pretty good here and there. Found myself blubbering like a little girly man at some of the all-text memory vignettes you unlock at various times throughout the game.

I'll definitely never understand the popularity of console FPS games either. Playing an FPS on a controller is like fucking through a hole in the sheet.
 
Lost oddysee seems like a decent game, only problem is, that ever since I've played chrono trigger, my mind always wanders back to that faithfull summer, where i was enveloped in possibly the bestest JRPG ever.

But I will check it out.. thanks
 
Forget about Need for Speeds and get the latest burnout game. From what I hear it's better than an NFS that's out right now and it's super fun to boot.
 
Burnout is always fun for some crashy-action!

For that reason I might consider purchasing Skate2, to get my favourite "white trash man"(It's how i call the main character in all his bone-breaky glory) on his board, and especially, off it again.

Heard somewhere that the bone-breaky goodness is improved, reason to buy the game I reckon.
 
Try the Kingdom Under Fire games, nice action/RTS hybrid.

Not to mention DMC4, although it's not as good as on PS3 or PC.
 
I say this without exaggeration: Xbox 360 narrowly beats its predecessor for the distinction of being the most worthless, ill-conceived, overpriced, poorly engineered gaming system of the decade, and I find it impossible to find a single redeeming quality for that vile heap of substandard hardware. How the hell it managed to become a best-selling console in the United States is beyond me, but that fact speaks more about the declining intellectual faculties of American youth than 360's quality (which is shockingly subpar even for a Microsoft product).

Now, game consoles are generally judged on three aspects - game library, engineering and pricing. 360, moreso than the original Xbox, not only failed miserably on all three, but managed to have a catastrophic destructive effect on game production in general, by stomping on grounds traditionally occupied by the PC and causing an unprecedented decline in quality of mainstream games. It's simply beyond belief how one console managed to be so detrimental to an industry and culture that took decades to develop and seemed so healthy and prosperous only eight years ago. It may seem like an impossible prospect given the current demented state of the gaming community and media, but I have little doubt that future generations of PC gamers (if there are any left!) will rue the day when that infernal machine cast its blighted shadow upon the world of gaming. I cannot emphasize this enough: if you have any gaming sensibilities at all, you will not waste *a single cent* on that overpriced shitpile.
 
Ratty said:
I say this without exaggeration: Xbox 360 narrowly beats its predecessor for the distinction of being the most worthless, ill-conceived, overpriced, poorly engineered gaming system of the decade, and I find it impossible to find a single redeeming quality for that vile heap of substandard hardware. How the hell it managed to become a best-selling console in the United States is beyond me, but that fact speaks more about the declining intellectual faculties of American youth than 360's quality (which is shockingly subpar even for a Microsoft product).
Click to expand...

How? Halo, GoW, CoD. All there is to it really.

The American console crowd seems to love mediocre shooters that have a "made in USA" label.
 
Well I'd say CoD is better than the other two. Still highly overrated and very much a console title, but not the mediocrefest that Halo or GoW are.
 
Ratty said:
... quote]

I agree that $400 is a bit much for a console but the original launched for over $300 and resulted in 4 billion dollar loss by the end of its life cycle. As far as I know (and I could be wrong about this), Microsoft is already making money on 360 hardware sales and it's already the cheapest console. So, I'd have to disagree that the 360 failed on that front. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that Microsoft handled 360 marketing, including pricing, fantastically. The 360 outsold both the original xbox and the new playstation. It isn't nearly as amazing as what Nintendo marketing people have done but it's far from a failure.

It's hard to argue the engineering part for a lot of reasons. I don't even think I need to get into it.

As far as game library, I think it's pretty decent. There are a lot of games and some of them a pretty good as far as console games go. The problem is that most developers don't want to make PC only games anymore because they don't think they sell as well. That means making changes to games that shouldn't be on consoles, to make them appear on consoles. In my opinion, it's the developers' fault. Their desire to make money is understandable but most allow their products to suffer needlessly. Valve and Blizzard develop games for PC and then do or don't port them, and they seem to be doing very well.


BloodyPuppy,
what makes Halo a mediocrefest?
Click to expand...
 
Ratty said:
Now, game consoles are generally judged on three aspects - game library, engineering and pricing. 360, moreso than the original Xbox, not only failed miserably on all three, but managed to have a catastrophic destructive effect on game production in general, by stomping on grounds traditionally occupied by the PC and causing an unprecedented decline in quality of mainstream games. It's simply beyond belief how one console managed to be so detrimental to an industry and culture that took decades to develop and seemed so healthy and prosperous only eight years ago. It may seem like an impossible prospect given the current demented state of the gaming community and media, but I have little doubt that future generations of PC gamers (if there are any left!) will rue the day when that infernal machine cast its blighted shadow upon the world of gaming. I cannot emphasize this enough: if you have any gaming sensibilities at all, you will not waste *a single cent* on that overpriced shitpile.
Click to expand...

Considering i might get the xbox for free, I won't really have to spend *THAT* much money on it.

Also, castle crashers seems to be worth every penny.
It's also a "decent" media streaming device, which will come in handy for my future home.
 
maximaz said:
I agree that $400 is a bit much for a console but the original launched for over $300 and resulted in 4 billion dollar loss by the end of its life cycle. As far as I know (and I could be wrong about this), Microsoft is already making money on 360 hardware sales and it's already the cheapest console. So, I'd have to disagree that the 360 failed on that front. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that Microsoft handled 360 marketing, including pricing, fantastically. The 360 outsold both the original xbox and the new playstation. It isn't nearly as amazing as what Nintendo marketing people have done but it's far from a failure.
Click to expand...
When I say "failure", I mean from the consumer's perspective, not Microsoft's. I have no doubt that the company is making a killing, but that doesn't change the fact that $400 is still too much for what is essentially a poorly-crafted, second-rate PC. Compare that, for example, to the Wii, which offers more for a far lesser cost, even if it has less raw processing power.

As far as game library, I think it's pretty decent. There are a lot of games and some of them a pretty good as far as console games go. The problem is that most developers don't want to make PC only games anymore because they don't think they sell as well. That means making changes to games that shouldn't be on consoles, to make them appear on consoles. In my opinion, it's the developers' fault. Their desire to make money is understandable but most allow their products to suffer needlessly. Valve and Blizzard develop games for PC and then do or don't port them, and they seem to be doing very well.
Click to expand...
The game library would be decent if it didn't consist almost exclusively of action games that are either cross-platform or inferior to what is available on other platforms. I honestly don't think any game system in the history has had a game library this unremarkable. It's just one mediocre shooter upon another, without a single distinguishing franchise or game style that would make the 360 stand out as a platform and carve its spot in the gaming history. Nintendo has Mario, Zelda and JRPGs, Sega had Sonic, PlayStation has JRPGs and beat 'em ups... What does Xbox have, other than an overrated first person shooter series that can barely hold a candle to its five-years-old PC counterparts? Nothing. It is and always will be a game system of idiots and pantywaists. A decade from now it will be little more than a footnote in the history of gaming, utterly irrelevant to development of games and gaming culture, with the ubiquitous RRoD meme remaining as its only lasting legacy.
 
maximaz said:
BloodyPuppy,
what makes Halo a mediocrefest?
Click to expand...

Mediocre isn't the right word, but it's okay. The issue is that it gets far too much undeserved hype and is often billed as the best FPS ever. It's an alright game, but nothing special. Besides, they implemented regenerative health in 2 and 3, and I hate regenerative health. Overall it's just an okay and highly overrated series that sort of represents the plentiful other overhyped and generic series that populate the market.

The first one does hold a special place in my heart for introducing me to PC FPS games.
 
Halo 1 was a decent game, and a middle ground between UT and HL in terms of game mechanics. I actually sort of enjoyed that one. 2 and 3 were just plain boring to play.

But it deserves a title of "mediocre" just because it is not as great as some other shooter games out there, and most definitely not as great as the hype makes it out to be. It's just your average, decent but pretty boring shooter game with little to no contribution to the genre.

When we talk about original UT, Quake series, HL series, CS, STALKER, then the Halo series is really on the lower end of the spectre. It's not quite horrendous, but not revolutionary - a.k.a. "mediocre".

I haven't played much of CoD, but it looks like your average wartime shooter, taking best of its ideas from older games like Battlefield or Operation Flashpoint.

GoW now, is a pretty looking game, but it is absolutely bland, boring, straightforward and atrocious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top