When single-player enthusiast Dave McConkey went hands-on with the likes of Halo 4, Crysis 3 and Aliens: Colonial Marines at this year’s Eurogamer Expo, he was left thoroughly unimpressed. Here, the disgruntled gamer explains why the dominance of FPS deathmatching – rather than campaign previews – sent him into a furious rage.
Battlefield Bad Company 2, Dead Space 2, Crysis 3, and a handful other EA games have finally had their online services shut down.
I had no idea that Bad Company 2 was still running, and only now that I know, I want to jump on! 😥
I was able to find games in the Vietnam dlc on ps3 the last week. There were articles on here about the server closure when it was announced in April
BF1943 is the only online MP game that I was genuinely interested in. Been playing since launch 14 years ago. Hate that I couldn't put in as much time to play as I'd hoped for during the final week.
I got really into 43 when I bought Bf3, and preferred it. Everything that I disliked or found annoying about Bf3, wasn't an issue in 43. Too bad they never bothered releasing it on PS4 or PC.
Dead Space 2...... I wasn't even aware that had multiplayer. Nevermind that it was apparently one of their best multiplayers!
Dead Space 2 multiplayer had been hanging on for years - I'd boot my PS3 up to see some familiar names in lobbies. This will definitely be missed!
There have been plenty of great villains in video games over the years. Now it's time for the VGU crew to name a few of their favorites.
If you’re new to this long-running franchise, we’ve got you covered.
I recently tried 3 for the first time but the frame rate was a turnoff.
I liked 5 and 6 though.
If you have a Series X or S, the Xbox 360 version runs at 60 fps with fps boost. It's a shame the remaster doesn't.
2 and 3, pretty much the only ones i really enjoyed. 1 was amazing for the time but aged quite poorly. 4 has the elephant gun, all i can praise from any entry after 3 lol
Ummmm 3 than stop.
Okay maybe two as well. But yeah probably 3 and then move on.
Far Cry 2. People constantly rant about games now being too easy, holding your hand, having too many unnecessary RPG-lite leveling features, etc. People specifically complain about open world games being too focused on tons of collectibles and "checkmarks" that just waste time.
Far Cry 2 is an answer to all of those complaints. It was made by Ubisoft before they fell into all the traps discussed above (and before they started inserting towers into their games to defog the map). It has respawning enemies, weapons that degrade, and the collectible diamonds are very useful in the game (which you find in a similar way to the way you find shrines in BOTW with a radar system). The map you have is an in game item you pull out while playing, not a pause menu that is unnecessarily detailed. Also the enemy AI and physics are much better than later entries in the series.
It has a mixed reputation because people at the time said it was too hard, the weapon degradation was annoying, and then respawning enemies were annoying. FC2 came out in 2008, so this was before games like Dark Souls and BOTW had come out and made it cool to like these types of features.
Far Cry 2, the one with the AI that find you through walls and trees, can one shot you from a mile away and have 100% accuracy? That was frustrating not fun because cheap AI.
Uhh, I mean, it isn't one of these games where once the enemies have detected you they will magically forget you exist because you walked behind a wall or went into a bush. And yeah the AI isn't stormtrooper level accuracy. Again, these are positives, not negatives to me.
To be fair, I'm really directing this at the people most critical of "Modern Ubisoft" or "Modern Open World" design elements. Like the type of people who fawned all over Elden Ring because it had a clean UI because they are so burnt out by the "checkbox" type of open world design.
If you like those types of games, then a later FC game like 3 and especially 4-5 would be more your style.
I think it would be better to ask reviewers to stop putting games down that don't have multiplayer.
It is sad. Trying to get some of that cod crowd they waste money and resourses on a tacked on MP Mode that no one plays.
Once we figured out how to have online multiplayer I never looked back.. It takes a great one player experience to make me feel like I'm not wasting my time against dumbed down AI.
" I am a genuine games journalist (and not just a semi-literate man-child with a sympathetic friend who runs a website, and is happy to let me vomit out the odd article in the vain hope of someday earning some money for my efforts)."
Who was that directed to?
Anyway if I'm going to get COD, Medal of Honor, or Halo, I'm getting it for Multiplayer, Maybe Medal of Honor can tempt me on it's Single Player. To me anygame with good gameplay that can be attributed to a MP competition should experiment in some sort of MP mode.
We need Innovation and fresh experiences in MP, not just adjustments/upgrades to the same formulas we've been playing for 20 years.