for me personally yeah....its not the worse game its just the one i was let down most by
Biggest Letdown This Generation
- Thread starter rjk
- Start date
for me personally yeah....its not the worse game its just the one i was let down most by
My PS3.
It simply hasnt delivered on games, why do we have to pay more for inferior versions of 360 games(even import games cost up to a fiver more). The exclusives that were to make the PS3 special still havent arrived yet either. Such a damned shame.
and
The much hyped Halo 3 on the 360, i enjoyed it better than Halo 2 and i do like it, but the visuals and gameplay hadnt really improved as much as it should have.
Thoroughly enjoyed GTA 4, COD4 and Assassins creed though.
It simply hasnt delivered on games, why do we have to pay more for inferior versions of 360 games(even import games cost up to a fiver more). The exclusives that were to make the PS3 special still havent arrived yet either. Such a damned shame.
and
The much hyped Halo 3 on the 360, i enjoyed it better than Halo 2 and i do like it, but the visuals and gameplay hadnt really improved as much as it should have.
Thoroughly enjoyed GTA 4, COD4 and Assassins creed though.
Last edited:
DirectX versions are not generations.
Because PCs don't have generations.Nobody else has gave a good definition of PC generations
They do have generations though. You can see it in the engines. You may not be able to define it as something hard and fast, but with the bigger engines being built, you can see the same techniques getting used and it is as close to generations as you will get with PC's.
The engines have generations yes, but all engines update independently.
Don't forget that console games have generations too and they don't just wait on the console.
- Assassin's Creed, could have been great but ended missing the mark. All style no substance.
- Bioshock - great story/setting/audio but average linear FPS and completely missed the RPG aspect.
PS - Halo 3 was exactly what I expected it to be - just another over hyped Halo shooter. Still don't understand people's surprise.
- Bioshock - great story/setting/audio but average linear FPS and completely missed the RPG aspect.
PS - Halo 3 was exactly what I expected it to be - just another over hyped Halo shooter. Still don't understand people's surprise.
Yes they do update independently, but they all start adding the same features and same increases in textures, lighting etc around the same time.
You can't say a quake 3 engine game and a source engine are not different generations, because they are. Source engine and Doom 3 are the same generation.
it's is as close as you will get, and you only get it because, the hardware moves along in stages, like the consoles, just there is more fluidity between PC hardware generations than their console counterparts.
it is like PC's are analogue and consoles are digital.
God i am answering a question that was asked to someone else and they ducked out it lo.
Not at all. If you want to defend a game on its merits, fair enough, doesn't matter what format.
PC's do have graphical generations, DX7, 8, 9 and 10 for example.
i didnt answer it as i didnt feel i needed too lol.
the question was biggest dissapointment this generation...it didnt say hardware/engine/software...the Q wasnt specific so i named a game.
we all know there are different generations even in a pc as every so often new graphics cards are show on magazine covers with the title 'next gen graphics cards'. but it seemed to me the guys asking questions were doing it for the sake of an argument which could have went on ...for more time than i cared to talk to them
I'd definitely say the latter 2 deserve to be there, mainly as Kane and Lynch was coming off the back of Hitman and Burnout is Burnout, but Army of Two was an original IP (though I hope they make a sequel just to see what they call it
), so that's a little unfair.It simply doesn't work that way though. Most PC games that have recently come out will happily play on a graphics card such as a Radeon 9800 Pro but would look and play nothing like they would on the latest cards.
Then you have to take other things into account like CPU power, etc. Games like Supreme Commander would graphically run fine on GPUs from the 6800 era but would suffer immensely on CPUs of the time.
There are simply far too many factors to even begin to define a generation for a PC or a PC game.
I'm still disagreeing with this. Not all games switch to the new version of DirectX when a new version comes out, we're still seeing tons of DirectX 9 games being released and DirectX 10 has been around for two years now which, in a generational sense, means the "DX9 generation" is not over.
I'm of the opinion that if all PC hardware updated at the same time, as opposed to just the components updating, then PC gaming would be generational. As it is though PCs are more dynamic, the back catalogue for PC gaming is almost totally backwards-compatible depending on your OS and which software you use, and as such there's really only one PC gaming generation.
Last edited:
I'd definitely say the latter 2 deserve to be there, mainly as Kane and Lynch was coming off the back of Hitman and Burnout is Burnout, but Army of Two was an original IP (though I hope they make a sequel just to see what they call it
I guess so mate, I was just expecting great things from Army of Two.
my post says "different generations in a pc"...could be graphics cards...could be cpu's...could be game engines...could be DX.
also as far as playable back catalogue goes...go take a look at the ps3.
now bye...time for some food.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,754
Not quite sure about this thread. "Biggest Letdown This Generation" suggests to me that its ment in the vein of "Worst Game", I guess its open to interpretation.
I see Halo 3, Bioshock and GTA 4 popping up a lot but to me the only 'bad' thing about them is not living upto a hype that no game could possibly live upto imho. Certainly wouldnt class any of the above as a bad game or even dissapointing if you take hype out of the picture.
Of course, an opinion is something personal but seems some 'Biggest letdowns' are just a tiny bit pedantic.
For me, Resistance FOM is shockingly poor. Bought a PS3 about a month ago to compleate the console set and thought it would be a good punt as I was after PS3 only titles.
Nothing about the game so far to me is anything other than dissapointing for a next gen title and is outdone by plently of other FPS titles around. Compleatly unremarkable or inspired.
Kane & Lynch ... Why oh why did I get sucked into parting with my hard earned, utter tripe.
GT5 - Bit harsh due to it being a glorified tech demo but I really had expected the series to have moved on considerably since the last version I played (GT3). With the exception of the incar camera I find nothing, absolutly nothing in the game that isnt done far batter in other driving games. To me it still feels identical as most of the rest of the series without evolving at all other than cosmetically.
'Real Driving Simulator' my arse. If one thing is for sure, its certainly not that.
I'll still probably but GT5 when its finished as I hope a lot of my grumbles would have been addressed and before I get jumped on again I shall state that "I KNOW ITS A DEMO ... GERROFF FANBOY TROLL MONSTERS !".
I see Halo 3, Bioshock and GTA 4 popping up a lot but to me the only 'bad' thing about them is not living upto a hype that no game could possibly live upto imho. Certainly wouldnt class any of the above as a bad game or even dissapointing if you take hype out of the picture.
Of course, an opinion is something personal but seems some 'Biggest letdowns' are just a tiny bit pedantic.
For me, Resistance FOM is shockingly poor. Bought a PS3 about a month ago to compleate the console set and thought it would be a good punt as I was after PS3 only titles.
Nothing about the game so far to me is anything other than dissapointing for a next gen title and is outdone by plently of other FPS titles around. Compleatly unremarkable or inspired.
Kane & Lynch ... Why oh why did I get sucked into parting with my hard earned, utter tripe.
GT5
- Bit harsh due to it being a glorified tech demo but I really had expected the series to have moved on considerably since the last version I played (GT3). With the exception of the incar camera I find nothing, absolutly nothing in the game that isnt done far batter in other driving games. To me it still feels identical as most of the rest of the series without evolving at all other than cosmetically.'Real Driving Simulator' my arse. If one thing is for sure, its certainly not that.
I'll still probably but GT5 when its finished as I hope a lot of my grumbles would have been addressed and before I get jumped on again I shall state that "I KNOW ITS A DEMO ... GERROFF FANBOY TROLL MONSTERS !".
But the games don't depend on what "generation" each individual bit of hardware is. We're talking about PCs, PC gaming specifically, having generations but you cannot pin one point in time as a specific generation due to the overlapping/customisable nature of the hardware and APIs.
I didn't want to start some fanboy argument about which platform has the better back catalogue, but I can play DOS games from the late eighties and early nineties, and most Windows games, on the machine in my sig. So I think it's safe to say it has a slightly larger back catalogue than the PS3 does. Don't you?
Last edited:
