Brothers in Arms - Page 6

LiquidX · 03-16-05, 09:20 PM

My buddy and I want a copy , $25 paypal shipped? for dudes who dont like it?

Geordan · 03-16-05, 09:38 PM

Man this sucks. I have yet to play it, but I can tell already from other people's impressions and the screenshots, that we got short changed. This definitely isn't the game it was supposed to, or very easily could have been. There's not even EAX support! What the hell is that.

Please go post your opinions and complaints at the Gearbox forum. Randy Pitchford reads and replies to everything. It's really important that they get feedback on their poor decisions regarding the PC.
http://gbxforums.gearboxsoftware.com...splay.php?f=20

I'm really angry, I'll reserve ultimate judgement till when I actually play it, but this game was going to be a marvel in all aspects, not just gameplay (which many reports are saying to not be fully realised anyways)

Don't slag me for dissing the graphics either, I know that it's the gameplay that "truly counts" but those screenshots represent the cutting edge two or more years ago. Sub-par graphics do alot to take the player out of the experience.

Keep posting those frustratingly awakening screenshots. Any shots of some of the gore effects? There's one on ign, but the graphics levels are on medium or something like that.

I leave for Europe tomorow, which is cool, but I have to wait to play this. Hopefully there'll be a demo by the time I get home though. To even think that I wouldn't buy this game I'd have shot myself a month ago.

-Geordan

**zoomy942** · 03-16-05, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiquidX

My buddy and I want a copy , $25 paypal shipped? for dudes who dont like it?

i'lll get in on that

XP_GUN · 03-16-05, 10:48 PM

sucked that bad hu?

MustangSVT · 03-16-05, 10:53 PM

I haven't heard one comment on the online part. How's the online part of BiA stack against the multiplayer of Call of Duty? The only reason I would buy it is if it has a very good online part.

whiskeychaser · 03-16-05, 11:14 PM

I'm about 2 hours in and I think it's a terrific game. It's different than CoD and doom3 etc. The control design for the guns seems the most realistic to date. The AI seems solid so far, no bugs or odd behavior yet, which is surprising considering how much of the game depends on where you send your guys. The graphics are a notch better than CoD, except that there is a LOT more vegetation/terrain changes and such. Nothing groundbreaking, but a lot of fun so far. Now if multiplayer is good, than it's a must have, IMO.

03-17-05, 12:19 AM

Gotta love how the Fanbois defend the game and practically outright say your wrong if you think there are problems with the game...

whiskeychaser · 03-17-05, 06:14 AM

I could care less about BIA. I just read all the negatives and wanted to throw my 2 cents in.

**MUYA** · 03-17-05, 06:17 AM

All right folks. Keep it to feedbacks and let's not head down the flame fest it apeears to be.....you have all been warned. Please be nice

**zoomy942** · 03-17-05, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MUYA

All right folks. Keep it to feedbacks and let's not head down the flame fest it apeears to be.....you have all been warned. Please be nice

agreed

jcossin · 03-17-05, 02:43 PM

Well, IGN reviewed the PC version specifically, and they seem to like it a lot (9.1 out of 10)

http://pc.ign.com/articles/596/596196p1.html

They harp on the graphics a bit, but overall find the gameplay experience to be compelling. It's definitely not a "run 'n' gun" so UT and Doom players might not like the game, but if you dug Operation Flashpoint or Rainbow Six where a shot or two will kill ya, you may like this one.

My Best Buy didn't have it at lunch. I'm gonna try another one after work...

**Ninjaman09** · 03-17-05, 02:54 PM

Not to dog on your post or anything, but IGN gives pretty much everything a 9+, unless it's just total dog crap (then it gets an 8). Their reviews mean jack IMO. Gamespot are the only reviewers I really trust anymore.

This game is obviously designed to be a console game. I'm sure the high reviews the X-Box version is getting are deserved but a console port is usually inferior - Halo being a great example. A game this ugly should run well, and it just doesn't. It's MUCH slower than CoD, which looks very noticably better (and is more fun). Granted, some of the gameplay aspects are very interesting but the overall presentation just really ruined it for me. I imagine it'd be totally worth playing on the X-Box (which I just sold recently...go figure

).

03-16-05, 09:20 PM	#61
LiquidX xxxxxxx Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: xxxxxxxx Posts: 2,113	Re: Brothers in Arms My buddy and I want a copy , $25 paypal shipped? for dudes who dont like it?

03-16-05, 09:38 PM	#62
Geordan Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 91	Re: Brothers in Arms Man this sucks. I have yet to play it, but I can tell already from other people's impressions and the screenshots, that we got short changed. This definitely isn't the game it was supposed to, or very easily could have been. There's not even EAX support! What the hell is that. Please go post your opinions and complaints at the Gearbox forum. Randy Pitchford reads and replies to everything. It's really important that they get feedback on their poor decisions regarding the PC. http://gbxforums.gearboxsoftware.com...splay.php?f=20 I'm really angry, I'll reserve ultimate judgement till when I actually play it, but this game was going to be a marvel in all aspects, not just gameplay (which many reports are saying to not be fully realised anyways) Don't slag me for dissing the graphics either, I know that it's the gameplay that "truly counts" but those screenshots represent the cutting edge two or more years ago. Sub-par graphics do alot to take the player out of the experience. Keep posting those frustratingly awakening screenshots. Any shots of some of the gore effects? There's one on ign, but the graphics levels are on medium or something like that. I leave for Europe tomorow, which is cool, but I have to wait to play this. Hopefully there'll be a demo by the time I get home though. To even think that I wouldn't buy this game I'd have shot myself a month ago. -Geordan

03-16-05, 10:48 PM	#64
XP_GUN Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Orange CA. Posts: 1,084	Re: Brothers in Arms sucked that bad hu? __________________ Computer: Cortana "Antec Solo II" (Intel Core i5-3570K @4.2GHz)-(Antec H20 620)-(EVGA Geforce 680 GTX Signature2)-(16GB Corsair Vengeance 1600)-(Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H)-(Intel 320 SSD 120GB)-(2TB RAID 0 Western Digital Black)-(Corsair 750W PS)

03-16-05, 10:53 PM	#65
MustangSVT Stop looking at me Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,602	Re: Brothers in Arms I haven't heard one comment on the online part. How's the online part of BiA stack against the multiplayer of Call of Duty? The only reason I would buy it is if it has a very good online part. __________________ 1. Q6600 @ 3.2, ASUS P5Q Pro Turbo, Powercolor HD 4890 CrossFire, 4GB Mushkin DDR2-1066, 3x 24" LCD, Matrox TripleHead2Go, Audigy 2 ZS 2. Q9550 @ 3.7, ASUS P5K, Galaxy 8800GT G92, 2GB Mushkin DDR2-1066, Samsung 710N + Samsung 205BW, Audigy 2 + SB Live! 5.1 (hooked up together, really), dad's comp 3. XP-M 2500+ @ 205x11.5, Gigabyte nForce2-400, GeForce4 Ti4200, 2x512MB OCZ DDR-400 "Premier", oldie

03-16-05, 11:14 PM	#66
whiskeychaser Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Mahopac, NY Posts: 117	Re: Brothers in Arms I'm about 2 hours in and I think it's a terrific game. It's different than CoD and doom3 etc. The control design for the guns seems the most realistic to date. The AI seems solid so far, no bugs or odd behavior yet, which is surprising considering how much of the game depends on where you send your guys. The graphics are a notch better than CoD, except that there is a LOT more vegetation/terrain changes and such. Nothing groundbreaking, but a lot of fun so far. Now if multiplayer is good, than it's a must have, IMO.

03-17-05, 12:19 AM	#67
\|MaguS\| Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Brothers in Arms Gotta love how the Fanbois defend the game and practically outright say your wrong if you think there are problems with the game...

03-17-05, 06:14 AM	#68
whiskeychaser Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Mahopac, NY Posts: 117	Re: Brothers in Arms I could care less about BIA. I just read all the negatives and wanted to throw my 2 cents in.

03-17-05, 06:17 AM	#69
MUYA Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 6,774	Re: Brothers in Arms All right folks. Keep it to feedbacks and let's not head down the flame fest it apeears to be.....you have all been warned. Please be nice __________________ I5-2500k@4.7GHz - MSI Z77A-GD65 - 4GB X2 A-DATA DDR3 1600 - Corsair H100 - Antec Quatro 850W Gigabyte Windforce X3 GTX 680 OC - Dell 24" IPS Intel 320 300 GB SSD - 1 TB Hitachi HDD - 2x 250 GB WD HDD Corsair K90 - Corsair Venegance 2000 Headset - Razer Naga Epic Corsair 600T Case

03-17-05, 02:43 PM	#71
jcossin -=> Indy <=- Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 476	Re: Brothers in Arms Well, IGN reviewed the PC version specifically, and they seem to like it a lot (9.1 out of 10) http://pc.ign.com/articles/596/596196p1.html They harp on the graphics a bit, but overall find the gameplay experience to be compelling. It's definitely not a "run 'n' gun" so UT and Doom players might not like the game, but if you dug Operation Flashpoint or Rainbow Six where a shot or two will kill ya, you may like this one. My Best Buy didn't have it at lunch. I'm gonna try another one after work... __________________ http://www.cardcycle.com - Send greeting cards and gifts with a click! http://www.greetingcardsgirl.com - Check out the weekly Free Sale list posted every Sunday. Asus G71Gx Laptop nVidia 260m GTX 1GB DDR3 Intel Core2Duo P8700 (2.53GHz) 6GB 800MHz DDR2 64GB Corsair Xtreme SSD 500GB 5400RPM SATA HDD 17" 1440 x 900 WXGA+ LCD Windows 7 64-bit

03-17-05, 02:54 PM	#72
Ninjaman09 Takin 'er easy Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Jowjah Posts: 6,687	Re: Brothers in Arms Not to dog on your post or anything, but IGN gives pretty much everything a 9+, unless it's just total dog crap (then it gets an 8). Their reviews mean jack IMO. Gamespot are the only reviewers I really trust anymore. This game is obviously designed to be a console game. I'm sure the high reviews the X-Box version is getting are deserved but a console port is usually inferior - Halo being a great example. A game this ugly should run well, and it just doesn't. It's MUCH slower than CoD, which looks very noticably better (and is more fun). Granted, some of the gameplay aspects are very interesting but the overall presentation just really ruined it for me. I imagine it'd be totally worth playing on the X-Box (which I just sold recently...go figure ). __________________ Core i7 920 @ 3.2 \| ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 6GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 RAM eVGA GTX 570 SC \| Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1 CORSAIR CMPSU-850TX Dell U2410

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Act Of Valor: Bandito Brothers' Jacob Rosenberg, Interviewed	News	Latest Tech And Game Headlines	0	05-23-12 05:10 AM