Just Finished Wolfeinstein...

#21Sevi_neyPosted 7/14/2014 1:16:11 AM
This game looks cool though. Pick it up later.

WOW! How have I not ignored Jedi454 by now? LOL I'll just correct that right now
---
http://imgur.com/8nh2xDC
#22da_StoOgePosted 7/14/2014 1:37:02 AM
Just got my play trophy on it last night. I might even buy my brother a copy of it because it's that good I know he'll enjoy it.
---
Well I'll be damned. Watch Dogs is quite good.
#23RS_YELARAKAPosted 7/14/2014 2:04:04 AM
PlayaMadeTxn05 posted...
RuinerEraser posted...
60 bucks for 12 hours of fps single player? No thank you sir.


I absolutely agree with you. I wouldn't purchase it at that price. I believe I told a user this in another topic. But if you're able to rent it, it's absolutely worth it. I rented it from Hastings. Had to keep it two weeks to platinum it. Hard to play between work and such.

At least hes saying 12hrs now instead of his previous "8hrs tops" lol. And the game is $39.99 at like 5 different places ruinereraser boy. You cant get anything right in your posts.
---
GT - YELARAKA (Member of RS Squad)
NNID - YELARAKA
#24da_StoOgePosted 7/14/2014 2:08:22 AM
Yeah. Where does the 12 hours come from? You'd have to be trying to finish the game as fast as possible to finish it that quick. And if that's the case then what's the point in that?
---
Well I'll be damned. Watch Dogs is quite good.
#25EllesarienPosted 7/14/2014 7:32:08 AM
AgentLocke posted...
RuinerEraser posted...
60 bucks for 12 hours of fps single player? No thank you sir.


RuinerEraser posted...
The thing about Gamefaqs is, if you enjoy something...someone is waiting around the corner to tell you that you suck and should be as miserable as they are!


Every time I see you hate on this game I'm posting that quote of yours. When did the wolfenstein dev's s*** in your Fruit Loops? Is there a reason you hate on this game every time it's brought up? Or are you just dead set on making people "as miserable as you are" ?


Now that is pure ownage.
---
I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
#26Swan3624Posted 7/14/2014 8:01:15 AM
Honestly, the ending was also my only issue. Up until that point, the story was tight and tense, with amazing character development and writing. But then the ending... it was incredibly meh. But I don't fault them for dropping the ball on that. Everything leading up to the game was almost perfect, with immensely entertaining and sharp combat sections everywhere, in addition to the aforementioned fantastic story. For them to craft such an amazing experience for 30 hours straight (for me), I can give them a pass for not writing a great ending.

The game is made for replayability, too. It has so many collectibles, yes, but it also is just plain fun. It's like the Super Mario 3D World of first-person shooters; in saying that, I mean that even after I beat it, I still want to go back and play it all over again. The only regret is that I won't be able to play it through for the first time, ever again. Brilliant game :D

BioShock Infinite and now Wolfenstein: The New Order... two FPS games that focused solely on single-player and removed the multiplayer component completely. If this is a sign of what happens when you focus on an absolutely tremendous single-player campaign, I wish more FPS games would stop focusing on the multiplayer so heavily. Give the crown to Call of Duty and Halo. For everything else, where the online is active for a couple weeks until everybody moves back to Call of Duty and Halo, just drop the multiplayer research and development completely.
#27boolzeroPosted 7/14/2014 8:22:29 AM
RuinerEraser posted...
60 bucks for 12 hours of fps single player? No thank you sir.



So let me get this straight: you've never bought a "12 hour game for $60" (and let's be truthful here, it's a 20 hour game unless you know exactly everything you are going to encounter and how to handle it and run through the game, and you can get it for $40 new). Ever? Period? I find that highly doubtful. I'm even willing to bet you've bought games with multiplayer at that price that you've never even put in that amount of time between the single and multiplayer total.

Personally, I'd pay for a game with 12 hours of excellent single player (in the case of Wolfenstein) as opposed to a game with mediocre single player and 12 hours of serviceable but forgettable multiplayer, which is the case with most games. Every game has multiplayer and most of them have unremarkable multiplayer.

Also: what's funny about comments like these is that no one had an issue with this previous gens or with other genres; they seem to make a pint if it with FPS as a genre. Nobody seemed to complain about a 12 hour Metal Gear spin off, or 10 hours to beat a single player Batman game or other third person game last gen with no multiplayer. Unless you have only been gaming since the last gen, there is no way that you have not bought a game for the single player and it only been about that length. Trust me, I've been gaming since the C64 and Atari era if the 70's and early 80's.

Paying that kind of money for "short" gameplay is more common than not. People tend to only remember the gaming in a haze. I've beaten far too many $60 games in my lifetime inside the time of a lazy afternoon. I remember bringing home games like Super Castlevania after paying close to $60 for them, staying up and beating them and then beating them again, then passing the controller to my friend so he could do the same. I remember working at EB games part time and checking out Resident Evil 3 and beating it in under 4 hours. Those games sold well, mind you...

For example and the sake of argument: inflation-wise adjusted, games from previous generations cost roughly the same. The point is that people have always paid that for single player games. Only people with no perspective assume that a game at 12 hours is short and that some how $60 is too much in the respect that it's more expensive than "it used to be"; because economically, it's not, rather, the converse is true...


But none of that matters in my long post anyway. The point is that you are being disingenuous with yourself and with others through your posting here. You own a 12 hour single player game that you've paid full price for, period. Everyone does. You wouldn't be here on this site if you didn't. This is a gamer site. Gamers are impulsive about the things they love and there is always going to be some Achilles heal to your buying sensibilities no matter how frugal you are that would make even the most cheapskate gamer willing to pay any price for...
---
Death is a dish best served with gravy...
#28jmf1Posted 7/14/2014 8:47:28 AM
I personally didnt mind the absence of MP. There are plenty of shooters nowadays that have great MP but dont have much in the campaign department. I liked the campaign a good bit. But i can agree about the price - i paid forty for it and thought that was worth the money but wouldnt want to pay more than that.
#29sonicteam2k1Posted 7/14/2014 1:31:37 PM
RuinerEraser posted...
60 bucks for 12 hours of fps single player? No thank you sir.


I'm normally with you but Wolf is worth it IMO
---
See The Game Collection
http://people.ign.com/nights_team2k7/games
#30D3x1Posted 7/14/2014 1:35:44 PM
I've seen the trailers, haven't got the chance to try it. My girl on the other hand apparently has it, and was so hyped and happy and overall crazy to tell me how she love to kill everyone.

I'm scared.
---
o_o