DigitalBattle seems disappointed with the new downloadable shooter "Breach".
They should've let the kid who stole it, keep it.
Dear Editor if your gonna write a review it would nice if you actually played the game. It's obvious that this review was written without any hands on experience. 1. The editor said "One of the selling points of Breach is the destructible environment, but the destruction is somewhat limited, and nowhere near the extend of Red Faction, or Bad Company 2." You didn't play the game cause if you did you would have said EVERYTHING in Breach can be destroyed if your gun can punch through it or have something else fall on it. Full physics all done in real time with it's built in Physics engine. Hydrogen engine I do believe. Tossing a grenade unto some giant boulders, boulders falling down the hill and knocking out the houses support beams, broken house now slides down the hill killing the other team dug in behind cover. This is not some scripted event it's done with physics in real time which means the enemy could have hit the boulder with a rpg and shattered it before it hit the house. 2. You think the editor would have mentioned that this was a First Person Shooter with a cover system which is very unique as usually 3PS only offer this. 3. Breach is is more of a TEch Demo of the engine and game-play, the graphics are bland, the controls need work, and over all you will be tired of this game in 2 hours after the enjoyment of blowing stuff up wears off. I think there is only 3 maps, maybe 5. It seems like this game was released to help generate cash for the completion of Six Days in Fallujah.
Regardless. The game is lacking. Even at that price point. I have had better experiences on last gen titles like Socom.
Well, I for one am not gonna pay $20 for a tech demo.
Why did I get disagrees when I told the truth, the game is more like a tech demo that needs work. Who would pay $20 for a tech demo. Not me!! I was just pointing out the bad writing of the Post. i wasn't trying to hype the game up or should i say tech demo.
I don't know why you are getting disagrees either. You're right. Most of the things you said should have been in the review. I don't think it being a tech demo of the engine should have been in there but I know you didn't mean it to be. You were just stating a fact. The fact that the environment IS destructible and there is even a cover system should have been in there. These facts also gave me a little hope for this game because without any innovative features these types of games are doomed to fail. Hearing this game sucks really disapointed me. I was hoping it might have done something different. I like that they are trying to make top notch downloadable multi player first person shooters . It could be great if done right. I loved BF 1943. It was great but there were still a few things that I did not like. But atleast they showed us that it can be done well and still be a decent price. I think developers need to go crazy and just try new things in this type of genre of downloadable games. I actually think Section 8 did a good job of trying new things. The first one wasn't great but I hear the second one is supposed to be really good. Games like this NEED innovation in order to succeed or else they will just be sent out to die. Now here's to hoping Body Count doesn't suck.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.