Chromehounds reviewed 8.7

on teamxbox no less. other sites/mags are not so forgiving.

Games Radar: 70%
Gamepro: 60%
Games Brink: 56%
Eurogamer: 40%
 
Bad_Boy said:
on teamxbox no less. other sites/mags are not so forgiving.

Games Radar: 70%
Gamepro: 60%
Games Brink: 56%
Eurogamer: 40%
exactly, I'll wait for IGN and Gamespot reviews
 
Hmm... I wonder if TeamXBox has a bias. I played the demo yesteday, and it seemed pretty generic.
 
I have a huge gaping soft spot for the more sim-like mech games. I was dangerously close to buying that one game that came with the $200 joystick for xbox ( and I still might someday lol ). I am desparately praying for a persistant mechwarrior-type game, something similar to planetside, but with a mechwarrior 3 style of play.

This might be the game to finally make me want a 360 if the online play is actually as tactical as they let on, and especially if it's not full of 12-year-old rejects that forever soiled my experience with xbl when I bought mechassault.

Although I prefer the mouse/keyboard or hotas (or dual joysticks even) for the best mech games, I find I really enjoyed mechwarrior2 on the ps1, even though I didn't even have the dual shock yet.
 
prtzlboy said:
This might be the game to finally make me want a 360 if the online play is actually as tactical as they let on

There's no such thing as "tactical" on Xbox Live.

prtzlboy said:
full of 12-year-old rejects

.... and that's why.
 
PoweredBySoy said:
There's no such thing as "tactical" on Xbox Live.



.... and that's why.

Guess there aren't any "tactical" PC games either then.
 
And even though it's TeamXbox, they give crap games crap scores, so while they are generous they aren't blind in the face of bias.
 
Bad_Boy said:
on teamxbox no less. other sites/mags are not so forgiving.

Games Radar: 70%
Gamepro: 60%
Games Brink: 56%
Eurogamer: 40%

Never heard of ONE of those sites.
 
PoweredBySoy said:
There's no such thing as "tactical" on Xbox Live.



.... and that's why.

Bitter much ? I guess we should just abandon online play altogether then ? :rolleyes:
 
theNoid said:
Bitter much ? I guess we should just abandon online play altogether then ? :rolleyes:

Thats what I've done. It's the other people that have ruined games for me. Single player for the win!

For me, teamplay is nigh intolerable on public servers for any online game. It just doesn't work. The higher the tactical complexity, the worse it is. I mean, the game is fun and great and the gameplay mechanics are solid. It's the other people who ruin it. Idiots who rush to the vehicles, TKing anyone who gets ahead of them, even though they don't know how to drive them. People who just camp to avoid dying and do nothing so you are basically playing a man short. People who rush out ASAP and get killed, once again, so you are basically playing a man short. In fact, trying to organize any sort of team tactics is near impossible with most people.

If its an old school deathmatch type of arrangement, it becomes tolerable for me. At least in this case all the idiots get killed and don't drag a team down with them.

Voice chat still makes me hate. I can't stand listening to all those mid-pubescent rejects.

I suppose joining a solid clan would alleviate all these problems. But I'm just a casual gamer, and the time commitment required for most clans is just too much for me.
 
You don't even have to join a clan, Namork. I have players from [H] and [M] on my friends list that are all casual gamers. When we're playing, we only talk about the goings-on in the game.
 
Namork said:
Thats what I've done. It's the other people that have ruined games for me. Single player for the win!

For me, teamplay is nigh intolerable on public servers for any online game. It just doesn't work. The higher the tactical complexity, the worse it is. I mean, the game is fun and great and the gameplay mechanics are solid. It's the other people who ruin it. Idiots who rush to the vehicles, TKing anyone who gets ahead of them, even though they don't know how to drive them. People who just camp to avoid dying and do nothing so you are basically playing a man short. People who rush out ASAP and get killed, once again, so you are basically playing a man short. In fact, trying to organize any sort of team tactics is near impossible with most people.

If its an old school deathmatch type of arrangement, it becomes tolerable for me. At least in this case all the idiots get killed and don't drag a team down with them.

Voice chat still makes me hate. I can't stand listening to all those mid-pubescent rejects.

I suppose joining a solid clan would alleviate all these problems. But I'm just a casual gamer, and the time commitment required for most clans is just too much for me.

Just join a casual clan, a clan can be up to 20 people and they just play with whoever's online (up to 6 at a time). Xbox LIve isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be, i mean i never played the orginal xbox so maybe that was worse, but it's pretty damn good now. I most definitely meet more cool people than idiots on PGR3.
 
theNoid said:
Never heard of ONE of those sites.

How old are you? Gamepro's been around since 1989 before the internet even really existed in its popular current form - as a magazine... and Eurogamer is one of Europe's most reliable gaming sites, and they've been around since 1999.
 
toelessfoot said:
Xbox LIve isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be, i mean i never played the orginal xbox so maybe that was worse, but it's pretty damn good now.

In the past week playing Table Tennis, I think I've been called a "n!gger" more times than I can count. I even had a guy send me a voicemail calling me a "chinaman" and squint-eye (or something) because my name was Soy. I made sure to keep it because I thought it was humorous in a pathetic, deep south kind of way.

Anyways..... hey, you guys know Chromehounds is out?
 
Wow i've never experienced anthing like that before, although someone did send me a voicemsg calling me a sassy black woman.
 
LOL... I don't play much on XBL but I really didn't think it comes to even sending people voicemails with insults and stuff... funny.
 
Ah yes, Live... much like Counterstrike on PC, I tend to avoid using it for good reason.

BTW... An XBox-related site gave the game 8.7... and IGN gives it a 6.9 - which is in line with most other reviews on the 'net... I wonder which site has a bias.
 
tosp said:
BTW... An XBox-related site gave the game 8.7... and IGN gives it a 6.9 - which is in line with most other reviews on the 'net... I wonder which site has a bias.

Well, in TeamXboxs' defense, they do give Xbox games bad scores. I just think this is one of those love-it-or-hate-it games, and the guy on TeamXbox loved it. Nothing wrong with that.

But that's the great thing about Live. There's a freakin' demo, so people can just try it and think for themselves.
 
tosp said:
Ah yes, Live... much like Counterstrike on PC, I tend to avoid using it for good reason.

Considering your record on the Xbox, I doubt you've even played one for more than a few minutes(Let alone Live), but that's another discussion.

Anyone with Live knows that you can easily;

1. Travel from game to game with people you know.
2. Filter people who annoy you.
3. Set Live to automatically pair you with gamer realms that you choose (Recreational, Competitive, etc. etc.)
4. You have the ability to report others based on their behavior. Enough reports will get a user banned permanently if the evidence proves it to be true (Logs are kept).

Every online gaming community has this. It isn't limited to the Xbox; fortunately, it is remedied by many of the features that Microsoft implemented.

tosp said:
BTW... An XBox-related site gave the game 8.7... and IGN gives it a 6.9 - which is in line with most other reviews on the 'net... I wonder which site has a bias.

...and this is any different with Nintendo-related sites?
 
tosp said:
Ah yes, Live... much like Counterstrike on PC, I tend to avoid using it for good reason.

BTW... An XBox-related site gave the game 8.7... and IGN gives it a 6.9 - which is in line with most other reviews on the 'net... I wonder which site has a bias.


IGN gave Prey a 9 which puts their reviewing integrity in question for me.
 
K600 said:
Considering your record on the Xbox, I doubt you've even played one for more than a few minutes(Let alone Live), but that's another discussion.

Anyone with Live knows that you can easily;

1. Travel from game to game with people you know.
2. Filter people who annoy you.
3. Set Live to automatically pair you with gamer realms that you choose (Recreational, Competitive, etc. etc.)
4. You have the ability to report others based on their behavior. Enough reports will get a user banned permanently if the evidence proves it to be true (Logs are kept).

Every online gaming community has this. It isn't limited to the Xbox; fortunately, it is remedied by many of the features that Microsoft implemented.

Honestly, WHAT is your problem? I OWN an XBox. I've played many MANY times on Live, and I can tell you that the people on there (MOST of them) annoy the hell out of me, particularly with the voice feature. What am I going to do, filter more than half the entire service? Personally, I'd rather play with friends on the couch - at least then if they annoy me, I can whack them like they deserve. Not put a "note" on their account for "further review" :rolleyes: I *choose* to no longer pay for the Live service. Not because it's a terrible service (it certainly is not), but because I didn't think I was getting value for my dollar. Free sounds much better, even with less features, which is what PC gaming has been doing for decades.
 
tosp, there are many players here on this site who don't put up with bullshit on Live. I don't smack talk in games and I rarely ever cuss (Unless in a joke, or if someone is exploiting). None of the people I play with do either.

If you think there is a problem with the XBL/PC online demographic, what do you think is going to happen when online gaming is provided for free to the younger demographic of the Wii?

toelessfoot said:
IGN gave Prey a 9 which puts their reviewing integrity in question for me.

No kidding. They barely even mention the fact that the game could be beaten ten times in the span of a damned rental.

I'm all for supporting small developers, but I'm not paying $60 for a six hour game no matter how good it is.
 
Bad_Boy said:
on teamxbox no less. other sites/mags are not so forgiving.

Games Radar: 70%
Gamepro: 60%
Games Brink: 56%
Eurogamer: 40%
You'd be surprised. Teamxbox reviews are rarely biased. Unlike OXM.
 
toelessfoot said:
IGN gave Prey a 9 which puts their reviewing integrity in question for me.

I've been questioning IGNs integrity ever since they gave WWE Raw 2 for the Xbox a 9.1. It was such a horribly buggy game.

I suppose nobody is perfect though, because GameSpot gave Perfect Dark Zero a 9.0 (single player = not so good) while they only gave Super Mario Sunshine an 8.0 (should have been higher in my opinion)

Maybe Chromehounds is a love it/hate it game that should be rented before deciding on a purchase?
 
Yeah Perfect Dark was a weird case, one of the worst games i've ever played but it was pretty impressive and fun at times, brutal singleplayer and yet multiplayer is great, terrible art direction but incredible graphics... up and down. I don't think it deserved a 9.0 but i think Gamespot was being generous for the launch since the system didn't really have a killer app. Even though i hate Perfect Dark i would still give it a 8.5... weird....
 
theNoid said:
Neither of those were listed in the reply I quoted ;)
ofcourse, you quoted me. I posted links to those other 4 on the first page. Im giving you more links/review. Waiting on gamespot.

but I wouldnt expect a completely low number from them, their page is filled with Chromehounds ads.
 
i'd rather play mechwarrior 2.

or better yet, mechwarrior 2: mercenaries
 
If this is really one of those love it or hate it games, then it's a rental if I love it I will shell out if I don't I won't regret spending money for a rental. Now, I'm going to read some of those reviews.
 
Back
Top