HaMM4R (User)

  • Trainee
  • 5 bubbles
  • 5 in CRank
  • Score: 26850
""

Comments

Alls I'm saying is that having 4k support is no where near enough to make me want to buy the game for the third time. I'm sure its a big deal for those who perhaps haven't experienced it, or really really care about graphics but personally it means next to nothing to me, as I'm sure it does to many others who don't have rigs powerful enough to support 4k. #6.1.1
4d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
This list is retarded. Most of the points all come under the banner graphics, the only real valid point is the 1080p/60fps as most people aren't running 4k, nor are they really going to notice the texture res while in the middle of playing. One of the points is completely subjective (one about controls) and the grammar/spelling is just appalling. #6
5d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
For me its all about the custom games and the amount of fun I can have with the game. Given the track record of 343 and their custom game/forge options no doubt custom games will be a massive let down, matchmaking comes a close second, and the fantastic matchmaking is enough to boost it far above the other halo titles, except 3/2. Nothing to do with nostalgia :P #7.1.2
12d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
3>2>5>Reach>1>4

Halo 5 is a great evolution for the halo multiplayer expernece no doubt, but is it as good as 2/3? Nah. #7.1
14d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
I always liked first person out of vehicles and inside 3rd. #2.2.2
21d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
I know the feels. Just bought my xbone on the 23rd to play today and I can't even install the initial 500mb patch :\ #6.2
35d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
They could just give it the halo treatment, eg keep the original game 100% the same and then just replace all the assets then there is no chance of that. God forbid though developers actually invest money and time into their titles. #1.2.2
54d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
A standard rig is usually around where the minimum specs are and not the recommended ones. If the recommended specs had have been the minimum that would have been completely fair. A game should be able to run fine on low with a >460 + 4/6GB RAM + 2.7GHz CPU and if not the developers are doing something wrong. #11.1.2
56d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Oh, because you're totally able to tell the amount of tris every model (and the amount of models) has as well as the texture resolution from some compressed footage on the internet? Makes sense. I suppose you also know how many lines of code there are (not that it would take up much space) as well as every single audio file that is in the build? #2.1.2
56d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Its all well and good but not all PC gamers have the rig to handle it. I wouldn't have a problem if the game looked as though it warrants these specs (as that is actually progress), but it doesn't and seems to me it is just poorly optimized and when most games that are coming out still run on med - high with my 660 you know there is something wrong when I supposedly would hardly be able to run this on low, especially when this doesn't look much better. #16.1.2
56d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Perhaps its the fact that they want a GTX670 as their minimum, or the fact that 8GB is also the minimum. A 3.3GHz CPU for minimum is also massive. The problem is, is that the minimum for this is usually more around the recommended for other games and in reality this does not look that much better than titles released recently (eg, FC4) #11.1
56d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Even if we didn't get proper zombies i'd love to see some infection type mode. That would be pretty awesome. #7
68d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Damn. Hopefully it'll run for a while as I plan on picking up an xbone for Christmas and was hoping to get in on this beta, if not it is likely the reason they bought it forward, so they could miss the Christmas rush and not kill the servers. #13
71d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
For me, anything above 7.5 is usually where I draw the line at the game being good, between that and 5 is average and 5 below is bad. #1.2.5
73d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Did you even watch the gameplay? It hardly anything like halo 3. #3.1
73d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Well the managed to add ADS, sprint (even if better balanced) as well as jetpacks and parkour. Hey, why shouldn't they put the game even further away from original halo titles? #12.1
80d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Not really, seeing as the console and the MCC are £400 without AC. #1.5.1
83d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Well in terms of remastering the MCC far outdoes GTA 5 and the last of us. Very little was done to the game graphically and GTA 5 looks better, but just no where near as better as Halo 2 anniversary looks compared to halo 2. Plus the MCC packs far more content. #1.3.1
84d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
Ah. Its likely these are just vcols then. Dat makes sense. #3.2.2
89d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
The models look amazing but jeez, those textures are flat as fuck plus the spec map is waayyyyyyyy too high. #3.2
90d ago by HaMM4R | View comment
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 15
Showing: 1 - 20 of 284