Xta Large said:Five hours of playing this game.
Every single facet of this game, sans the control scheme, is thoroughly unimpressive. The gameplay is your standard corridor shoot-em-up fare. There are some nice visual effects, wrapped around pretty mediocre art and level design. The enemies are generic, in more than one sense - you've got your typical tiered enemies, except there are only a few kinds, so you see them over and over and over and over and over. The sound design is bad - the guns don't sound like guns, the background music is either not there, it doesn't fit the situation at all, or it doesn't fit the situation well enough. The animations aren't good, some of the death animations made me cringe, and the guns lack any real 'punch'. The story is a bit convoluted, though at this point it's the only thing keeping me playing. The multiplayer isn't that great, either. Every match I've been in so far has held a solid 10-15 frames per second (woooooow), and the graphics take a pretty extreme hit - you'd think you were playing Far Cry: Vengeance if not for the character models. The multiplayer map design is decent (some, like Pentagon, flat out suck), and while the multiplayer modes are fun, the combat isn't complex AT ALL - skill is thrown out of the freaking window, and a lock on system where all you have to do is hold Z and mash at the center of the screen takes its place. The weapons aren't balanced (you don't give a SMAW eight rounds of ammunition and set it right near an ammo base, are you crazy!?), and sometimes your shots don't even register. And the controls? They're not that good. Before you dig into me with the 'oh you must hate Wii for FPS' or 'The Conduit is so customizable', I'm aware of this. I sat there for thirty minutes fiddling with the controls. While the limits (or lack thereof) of customization are impressive, in the end, the feel of the controls is, uh, rubbery. It's hard to explain. You can't get it to feel like MoH:H2 or CoD:WaW, you can't get it to feel as tight. Maybe you can. I don't know, maybe I didn't spend enough time with it. So far, though, I'm only semi-impressed, and when you're only semi-impressed with a game's selling point... you know you've got a problem on your hands.
I figured this game wouldn't live up to the hype, but I wanted to give it a chance. So far, though, not only has this game not lived up to the hype, it's just a mess. I'll still be playing it for the next week or so - I don't start a game without finishing it, after all. I hope I begin to like it more as time goes on. I'll be posting my FC shortly.
Xta Large said:I agree with the rest of your cool post wholeheartedly, ReverseFate, but as I am an argumentitive person there's one part I have to dispute.
ReverseFate said:The mere fact that he is trying to compare this game to Xbox 360 and PS3 games makes his entire review a biased piece of crap.
Why? Why shouldn't the Wii be compared to the other two systems? The only time I hear this is in cases where a certain element of a Wii game is inferior to something available on another console. But oh boy, you get into a conversation about controls and the comparisons start flying all over the place - right out of the mouths of Nintendo fans, no less. There's a double standard out there, and it's that only certain things the Wii does can be compared to the PS3 and 360, and only when the Wii does 'em well. Otherwise? Oh, its totally uncool to compare the Wii to the PS3/360.
I still believe that when a console is so behind that its fans claim it's unfair to compare it with the competition because of a guaranteed inferiority... well, that's a huge problem, perhaps something that can't really be justified.
bio31 said:lol, so many mixed reviews..that's why I pay no attention to reviews. To each their own I say!Xta Large said:I agree with the rest of your cool post wholeheartedly, ReverseFate, but as I am an argumentitive person there's one part I have to dispute.
ReverseFate said:The mere fact that he is trying to compare this game to Xbox 360 and PS3 games makes his entire review a biased piece of crap.
Why? Why shouldn't the Wii be compared to the other two systems? The only time I hear this is in cases where a certain element of a Wii game is inferior to something available on another console. But oh boy, you get into a conversation about controls and the comparisons start flying all over the place - right out of the mouths of Nintendo fans, no less. There's a double standard out there, and it's that only certain things the Wii does can be compared to the PS3 and 360, and only when the Wii does 'em well. Otherwise? Oh, its totally uncool to compare the Wii to the PS3/360.
I still believe that when a console is so behind that its fans claim it's unfair to compare it with the competition because of a guaranteed inferiority... well, that's a huge problem, perhaps something that can't really be justified.
Why? It's because FPS (if it's wii vs other consoles) are compared because of GRAPHICS. And about the controls? They didn't judge the conduit's control right. It's their inability to be able to adapt or adjust their own Wii controls. It's fully customizable for pete's sake(whoever the hell pete is). Now, Gamepro didn't even give the conduit a chance to prove its multiplayer section which is its STRENGTH. If you think about it, if you judged halo solely without multiplayer, without a doubt I would rate it around 7.0!
They can compare this game to other consoles. But they should NOT compare this game because of the lack of graphical power the wii has-that's not the conduit's devs fault, that's the Wii's.
There's a double standard because the wii is different. Different controllers, powers, weaknesses, and strength.
Sooo true. I couldn't imagine playing Halo 3 single player (again). Multiplayer (online or local) is where the fun and competition is at.
QUOTE(Empyr69er @ Jun 25 2009, 05:23 PM)