Google+

We Recommend

64 comments

  • Tonydiablo13 - December 15, 2008 12:08 a.m.

    i love saints row 2. its way better than the first
  • zeldafanjohn - December 14, 2008 3:03 p.m.

    @Smeggs - You have the 360 version correct? Well, that's why. the AI director isn't in the 360 version because the hardware isn't powerful enough. The 360 is running a IBM tri-core processor at something under 2GHz. I'm running a quad-core at 3GHz (The basic proc for a "gaming" PC) see the difference? While most gaming PC's have the power to run he AI director, the 360 can't. It's just too underpowered in terms of hardware.
  • Yellowhat17 - December 13, 2008 9:51 p.m.

    The Resistance 2 multiplayer is like Left 4 Dead in some aspects... but it gives me a splitting head ache and hurts my eyes, while Left 4 Dead feels good and perfected on multiplayer, making it much more enjoyable. So yeah, I think Left 4 Dead, Then Gears 2 and then CoD is the correct order if you ask me.
  • Smeggs - December 13, 2008 3:53 a.m.

    L4D was a great game but Valve bullcrapped me. "The AI Director adds endless replayability", after about 3-4 runs through each campaign I already knew all of the cycles of when and where huge hordes came from, where the Witches "Random" spawn points were, and already had down that there are TWO Tanks in every finale before help arrives and if you don't get to the escape point in time then more tanks spawn and rape you. Also the the items that were supposed to spawn when the game thought we needed them just seemed to spawn in 3 different locations on the map, not some random "AI Director decides" place. Same goes for throwing weapons, there were ALWAYS cocktails to throw in this one room (Not a safe house) and pipe bombs in another that never disappeared. Valve made the game sound better than it was, which is what game developers do, but the AI director seems to me more of a joke since they all still have predictable set spawn points for a horde, I found myself already aimed for the point where I knew they'd come from on my FIRSt playthrough. In the "No Mercy" campaing I always shoot the car so its alarm will sound just for kicks, zombies come from 3/4 places, around the corner where you came from, the alley near the stairs down to the safehouse, the stairs from the safehouse, or hopping the fence blocking off the road. Really no surprises after 2 playthroughs of that area, especially since we can all just make a dash down the stairs to the safe house anytime we feel like it. all in all though its a good game and being able to pull a giant "Zombie Force Jump" onto a surviver and then rip out his ribcage is never boring.
  • ChaoticInfinityX - December 13, 2008 3:07 a.m.

    @ mjmont92 Watch anyone new to a game play it, and it'll feel sluggish. All the location discovery and random shooting at anything that moves... enough to turn anyone off to anything. L4D is definitely a multiplay must. I got to try single and multiplayer on the PC demo, and there's a huge difference in dynamic when the other 3 people are humans. Although, based on some comments on other game boards and that Destructoid article, it seems L4D is going the way of Halo with 12 year olds. I hope they improve the matchmaking over time. @ Soulreaverm Just because the shooter dynamic included more than just the basic point and shoot, simple visual queues (like health/ammo assist) could've clued in even the greenest gamer on their task. That and the countless tips the game throws at you while selecting your character and while loading into levels. My point is that the 'seasoned gamers' were so stuck on the gameplay elements from their favored game that they almost had an expectation for other games to follow those same elements, and that by not doing so... this different game was at fault.
  • Soulreaverm - December 13, 2008 2:36 a.m.

    @mjmont: ...which is why there is no point playing single player. It's literally exactly the same except with dumb bots instead. @chaoticinfinityx: While you may be right about the mistakes the GR team made about the game, the fact that you had to point out those mistakes pretty much proves their point. That those gameplay elements were so difficult for seasoned gamers to figure out suggests that, just as has been stated, the game is far too difficult to start, with unclear gameplay mechanics.
  • ChaoticInfinityX - December 13, 2008 1:21 a.m.

    @ AzRedsk1n Well, when you have 360-sentric gamers playing and reviewing PS3 games, you'd like to still have some level of accuracy whether it's biased. And you're just wasting your time trying to buff up the 'experience' over all because there are just as many arguments about the 360's faults as there are any other system.
  • ChaoticInfinityX - December 12, 2008 11:47 p.m.

    Sorry to have to geek out like this but the R2 article was horribly flawed and while they try to justify their judgments with a brief praise at the end, I think some clarifications are in order: - Soldier shields don't Regen (unless you have one of the upgrades that converts damage to shield ammo). Spec Ops replenish it with ammo drops. - You asked for a way to know when someone's low on health or ammo? Well, you will see icons over peoples heads when they need something based on your class (Spec Ops will see ammo indicators and Medics will see health indicators). - Medics do more damage than you think. Against a single enemy they drain slowly (depending on your level), but you'll notice the huge XP boost when you attack a cluster of anything with the Phoenix. Add on the Chloroform berserk, and you are a beast. - Respawn time is 30 seconds because your team is supposed to revive you sooner. Medic wasn't the only one able to revive, but they naturally revived faster than the other 2 classes could. - The Campaign story and Co-op stories are different because they don't follow the same teams. You play as SPECTER team on Co-Op, while Hale is with the Sentinels (other infected humans) in the standard campaign. Personally I'll take 2 perspectives of a story within 2 modes to 1 story that you play through either alone or with people. There were some other parts to the article I didn't completely agree as much with, like the Graphics, difficulty, or Gray-tech, but those were valid opinions... all entitled to them. Overall, while I'm sure the people involved were all seasoned gamers, the article seemed to be written by heavy Gears players playing other games they wished were like Gears.
  • -FABLExFAN- - December 12, 2008 10:11 p.m.

    for co-op L4D takes top no question, i knew witch one would win after reading the names of the games that were in it, i cant say i'm not a fan of fable (name/picture) but the co-op on it sucked, that game is meant for single player, for co-op I'd go L4D,then CoD-WaW, then Gears2 only for horde, an di own a WII , ps3 and 360
  • zeldafanjohn - December 12, 2008 7:12 p.m.

    Tikicobra shut the fuck up. There was not one peice of fanboyism in that whole article. Every comment you've posted has been flaming.
  • GwaR - December 12, 2008 4:35 a.m.

    Yes, L4D is definently lacking without other players to game with... but why the hell wouldn't you play it with others? Not only do I give it props for being the most intense co-op game I've ever played, but it's one of the few multiplayer games where the griefing is kept to a minimum. People needing to work together to succeed tends to keep your teammates from getting too cocky or being asses to each other. And if they are being ass-hats, well, you can always just leave them there when a hunter nails them. :) As for all the people trying to defend R2's co-op, seriously, get another console or a PC to broaden your horizons. What a piece of crap...
  • NintendoNerd655 - December 12, 2008 2:35 a.m.

    Tikicobra shut the hell up. The PS3 does need it. Not to succeed, but because it is truly an awesome game. Must be a rogue digg user or something....
  • PerezI - December 12, 2008 12:54 a.m.

    Great Choice GR! Best coop game in the past year. Gears of War has a great campaign and the horde is phenominal, but after a few games it just becomes a bit boring. CoD's coop is honestly just a let down. Good campaign and zombies is fun for a while, but the xbox live play is way too similiar to CoD 4s. Too much of the same if you ask me, and all of my friends who played CoD 4 and CoD Waw cant stand WaW. Honestly, Ive never played Resistance 2 because I have an xbox 360 but by the looks of it, it just seems too difficult to kill enemies. The other people who commented said it is much easier but I think that GR people are pretty good at reviewing which means good players. Saints Row2, never got into. Fable 2, seems like a foreign coop and looks hard. All in all, Gears of War 2 has a great coop, but is overall killed by Left 4 Dead. Left 4 Dead has crazy missions where uncountable hordes of zombies come out to kill you. not to mention, the xbox live play on it is also phenominal and the gamebattle games on it are very intense and nerve racking.
  • Pocotron - December 12, 2008 12:34 a.m.

    I gotcha Joe. Just saying, maybe do an article about this from the gamer's viewpoint; like a guy who spends his life on Gears 2 or is the guru on R2. Jus sayin... Thnxs tho
  • Tikicobra - December 11, 2008 10:59 p.m.

    Oh yeah, and "You know what the PS3 needs? Left 4 Dead" is the most biased thing you've ever said. You guys are a bunch of fucking fanboys.
  • Pocotron - December 11, 2008 10:02 p.m.

    I felt the results were right, but I have to agree with the others: Resistance 2 did feel a bit one-sided; like a big ole' steroided up monster and a baby. The real way to fully understand (and have a kick-ass time) is to level up. Now, have a fun time leveling up as a soldier, medic, or spec-op, but level up and THEN review from a gamer or your perspective. (Quick way to level up as soldier is to have a level with all 3 classes with the soldier taking all the kills and absorbing damage. P.S. Have fun with Overload and the best time to use it is the Grims 2nd part, in Axbridge) That'd be nice, thanks.
  • BadLadJon - December 11, 2008 9:34 p.m.

    OMG, i told my mum i would w8 till Xmas for L4D, im gonna go find her credit card RIGHT NOW
  • GamesRadarJoeMcNeilly - December 11, 2008 3:01 p.m.

    "shield" uses "ammo"? what a country! and in russia, hamburger eats you!
  • RCTrucker7 - December 11, 2008 2:12 p.m.

    In the Saints Row 2 section: "Mikel: Yeah, no matter where you were, too. That was cool. The only thing I don't really like about the co-op is how, when playing alone, I get constantly bombarded with strangers asking to be let into my game." That is easily remedied by going into Options and selecting either Friends Only or None.
  • CarToons - December 11, 2008 10:57 a.m.

    Left 4 Dead is probably the best in co-op but CoD World at War comes in a close second. PS. Love the new updates and stuff GR.

Showing 41-60 of 64 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.