ID:190583
 Jan 3 2003, 3:10 pm
|
|
I've noticed like if its march and a great game comes out they call it "Game of the Year!!" and then like a month later a dif game is "Game of the Year!" anyone else notice this???
| |
|
Jan 3 2003, 3:25 pm
|
|
Jotdaniel
 |
Yeah, I noticed this. Its quite annoying. Can't they just make up their damned minds?
|
They're obviously referring to lunar years, which only last about 28 days.
| |
You've obviously missed the really small print afterwards that says: "...so far"
| |
Its a term thrown around to loosely, instead of "Game of the year" They should call it "Best Advertised Game of the Month" All the best games don't even get reconized...Gore is the best game ever **starts to drule at the thought of playing Gore**
| |
Lol, and i think CS sucks...but thats besides the point. Most(not all) who play it love it. It has game of the year writen all over it, but it never saw it because it wasnt published enough, the publishers of the game were very cheap with it and made the maker ruin part of the game by adding a single player mode(taking away from the multi player mode when it comes to time worked on) The publishers really screwed the game up, and i feal sorry for the man who made most of the game(it was like a 7 person devopment team, but 6 of them did very little, and are no longer around). I also like that the main developer stuck around and you can make segestions(kinda like BYOND) to help the progress of the updates. He has even been known to join in a few games, and i hear he is really good, but i havnt had the privlage to blow hos face off with a quad shotgun. Anyways, Gore(like many others) never even seen the chance to make it big, and not for lack of being a good game. Its for lack of not having a big name like EA behind them. And to all games who fall into this catigory, i feal sorry for there makers, who spent years on there devopment, to just be screwed by there publisher.
| |
Wow, you hate them both, you must not be much for FPS in general, if you dont like ether of these, theres not much diffrent, only games like dues ex that are between the two.
| |
I like quake 3. I like, umm.....Jedi knight(but just becuase its star wars, as an fps it kinda sucks.) I don't like pc fps games. Just console fps games(if theyre still considered that on a console, I can't see why they wouldnt be.)
| |
I have always hated console FPS(sept 007), i like the pc because you have a mouse and a keybourd, plus you have the added feature of mods, but i suppose thats my style not yours. I think now days there is a very fine line between consoles and computers, and every new system we get closer to breaking that line, heck you can get XP for your PS2(not legal, but posible) and windows NT for your dreamcast, also lunix for dreamcast, turning your dreamcast into a computer capible of running programs and stuff if you have a harddrive, other wise you dont have room for much.
| |
ok than you can add some other windows, but im not sure which one, i knew that it ran winNT, but was not thinking at the moment(i know because i have one, and on the front it has a sticker saying winNT), maybie you can upgrade it to winNT non palmpilot type, i dont remeber.
| |
Could be, but I got what I said from the bootup screen in Tomb Raider:(hell I dont remember which one) for my dreamcast, it says just what I told you.
| |
I've noticed this also I believe it is quite ridiculos.
| |
It's called "Game of the Year" by different people/associations. Duh.
| |