i had GR demo for sometime, and actually preferred OFP's control. in GR, when you had them go prone and move to next team, they would squat instead of staying prone. i ordered them specifics and they tend to forget something.
that GR review was one of the most debated subject back in those days, and right now, I think replay value would show that OFP beats GR hands down, due to mission editors and great modding community.
i read somewhere along the lines where PC Gamer reviewer was not satisified with how 'unrealistic' firing rate is used in OFP and such.
incidently, Computer Gaming World(?) gave OFP game of the year award in 2001(?)
A lot of American gaming magazines and websites gave OFP awards. Only PC Gamer didn't like it. God, I remember reading how angry that review made me two years ago. It still makes me angry. I'm convinced that the reviewer was paid by Red Storm.
And I remember seeing a lot of advertising for OFP. Even a couple of months ago I remember seeing ads in gaming mags for the GOTY version.
Well, I'm glad I could bring it back to brighten your day
Originally Posted by (Hellfish6 @ Oct. 03 2003,04:35)
And yes, there is no way around it. It was real close to the holidays, OFP came out first, Red Storm/UBI crapped a pickle when they all saw it, and had to execute some serious damage control to prevent the holiday loss of sales on GR.
GR was pretty decent compared to what had gone before(no doubt, I had fun with it regardless of OFP), but who would'a thunk some noname company would come out with something so revolutionary as OFP. Go anywhere and use anything. Wow. In GR, you can't even walk across the landscape without bumping into an invisible wall, no editor, very limited team controls(somehow the idiot reviewer made that seem like a good thing. Puh-leez), can't use anyone else's weapons, no iron sights, or weapon-in-hand view for that matter. And using a vehicle in OFP was somehow made to seem a bad thing. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Yes, the dude was paid off. And he wasn't even nice about it(or tried to make it convincing). It was blatant. It was abusive. It was insulting to the subscriber's intelligence.
Well, at least PC Gamer UK gave it a more realistic score (89%.)
Not the 90% that PC Zone UK gave it. PCGUK said it does not cater for all gamers. In some ways that is true, not everyone likes a strict simulation.
So, ICO is the most underated game huh...
Hehe, I like this part:
Not exactly subtle, now is it?
Originally Posted by [b
I remember the review Maximum PC gave flashpoint. They hated the game because it was 'too realistic'. I lost alot of respect for that magazine after that review. The reviewer gave it a 4-10 rating, not because of any inherent game flaws, but because of the reviewer's personal preference for frag frenzy type games like quake and unreal tournament.
"Whenever you want information on the 'net, don't ask a question; just post a wrong answer."
-- Cancer Omega
What the hell? Its not like ie. action movie fans are supposed to review romance movies.
Originally Posted by (toadlife @ Oct. 04 2003,00:27)
Haha.. I love your signature ***
Originally Posted by (EiZei @ Oct. 04 2003,13:08)
It's true even thou he was elected but he propably had more power than a dictator.
I was just merely quoting a certain polish site about Finland.
Originally Posted by (Llauma @ Oct. 04 2003,14:39)
But it's true that he was more of a dictator than a president.
Originally Posted by (EiZei @ Oct. 04 2003,15:06)
I don't believe there has been many elected presidents that has had as much possible power as Kekkonen had.
And how many elected presidents stays in power for 25 years?!