• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

"Shadowrun will be the greatest awesome I'M COVERED IN...500 - Internal Server Error"

Brimstone

my reputation is Shadowruined
Still, both games (Halo 3 & Shadowrun) appear first rate based on early reviews and they provide a level of play the other consoles, and most PCs, can’t deliver right now.

...

Sony is in trouble if these games take off. They don’t even do multi-player that well yet, MMOGs are well out of their reach and they have effectively blocked every attempt their PC unit has made to work with their game platform. This creates the very real possibility that Sony PC users will be more likely to choose an Xbox 360 over Playstation 3 if they want to experience cross-platform play.

He doesn't see Halo 3 and Shadowrun hurting Nintendo.

Nintendo is playing to the beat of a different drummer right now and I don’t see these latest efforts from Microsoft having much impact.

http://news.digitaltrends.com/talkback181.html


Rob Enderle is one of the most influential technology analysts in the world. You may remember his early support (prediction) that Blu-Ray will will the format war, then changed his mind in this article called Optical HD Battle May Be Over: HD DVD Wins.

Now he is wondering if Halo 3 along with Shadowrun will push Xbox 360 further ahead.
 
Sony's lack of great online games didn't hurt them much last generation. I'm not sure I trust this Rob Enderle, if that is his real name.
 
Brimstone posting a Shadowrun thread. SHOCK AND AWE.

Sorry, had to bring out the usual conspiracy brigade.

Anyway, if Halo 3 takes off? :lol
 
Good god. This shadowrun obsession is bordering on the pathetic.

So, now the trick is to associate Shadowrun with the most anticipated game of this generation, I guess hoping it will allow it to osmose some of the hype?
 
"Sony is in trouble if these games take off. They don’t even do multi-player that well yet"

:lol

Resistance:

40 players
Dedicated servers
Free for everyone with a PS3 to play

Halo 3:

16 players
No dedicated servers
50 dollars a year to play

Halo 3 ain't no Resistance killer. Someone needs a lesson in how to do online gaming right.

It sure as hell isn't Sony...
 
didnt this guy get some type of moneyhat to flip flop his hd choice? yeah, if they sell shadowrun at a premium price, its doa.

edit: nope he just called linux a scam, and predicted the demise of Apple many times.
 
Man...Halo 3 multiplayer and Shadowrun are still run of the mill generic multiplayer shooter types, from what we've seen, attached to a popular game franchise.

I don't get why people play these, but then again I never understood Counter-Strike either. I understand unique concepts like Splinter Cell multiplayer and Chrome Hounds. Those interest me. Those require actual physical tactics and teamwork with a unique blend of gameplay.

Running round a map blasting each other, just to be respawned, doesn't do it for me. In my eyes, these games' multiplayermodus are overrated by definition. We'll see how good they do and help the platform though, which might be interesting in itself, despite probable lackbuster multiplayer gameplay innovation (tweaks, more like it, it seems).
 
MachoInfinity said:
"Sony is in trouble if these games take off. They don’t even do multi-player that well yet"

:lol

Resistance:

40 players
Dedicated servers
Free for everyone with a PS3 to play

Halo 3:

16 players
No dedicated servers
50 dollars a year to play

Halo 3 ain't no Resistance killer. Someone needs a lesson in how to do online gaming right.

It sure as hell isn't Sony...

WOW.
 
homez99 said:
Stop the Shadowrun hate you swines, give it a chance, see what happens, and then lay the smackdown if necessary.


People kind of get tired of thread after thread praising the game as some sort of gift from god.
 
MachoInfinity said:
"Sony is in trouble if these games take off. They don’t even do multi-player that well yet"

:lol

Resistance:

40 players
Dedicated servers
Free for everyone with a PS3 to play

Halo 3:

16 players
No dedicated servers
50 dollars a year to play

Halo 3 ain't no Resistance killer. Someone needs a lesson in how to do online gaming right.

It sure as hell isn't Sony...

Good assumption, considering Halo 1 and 2 both had dedicated servers. You may be right on this one; Halo 3 will not have dedicated servers. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
 
sonycowboy said:
Good god. This shadowrun obsession is bordering on the pathetic.

So, now the trick is to associate Shadowrun with the most anticipated game of this generation, I guess hoping it will allow it to osmose some of the hype?



Shadowrun represents more than just a game though. It is an effort to make a FPS shooter hardware agnostic for online play.


Microsoft is sending a message, it's the software that matters, not the platform.
 
MachoInfinity said:
"Sony is in trouble if these games take off. They don’t even do multi-player that well yet"

:lol

Resistance:

40 players
Dedicated servers
Free for everyone with a PS3 to play

Halo 3:

16 players
No dedicated servers
50 dollars a year to play

Halo 3 ain't no Resistance killer. Someone needs a lesson in how to do online gaming right.

It sure as hell isn't Sony...


:lol
 
MachoInfinity said:
Halo 3 ain't no Resistance killer.

frustrated.jpg
 
NinSoX said:
Good assumption, considering Halo 1 and 2 both had dedicated servers.

Both are great games but they didn't have servers for online play. The first game didn't even have online play on Xbox.
 
Kobold said:
Man...Halo 3 multiplayer and Shadowrun are still run of the mill generic multiplayer shooter types, attached to a popular game.

I don't get why people play these, but then again I never understood Counter-Strike either. I understand unique concepts like Splinter Cell multiplayer and Chrome Hounds. Those interest me. Those require actual physical tactics and teamwork with a unique blend of gameplay.

Running round a map blasting each other, just to be respawned, doesn't do it for me. In my eyes, these games' multiplayermodus are overrated by definition. We'll see how good they do and help the platform though, which might be interesting in itself, despite lackbuster multiplayer gameplay innovation (tweaks, more like it).

You haven't played Shadowrun.

It will bomb, but it's anything but run of the mill.
 
NinSoX said:
Good assumption, considering Halo 1 and 2 both had dedicated servers. You may be right on this one; Halo 3 will not have dedicated servers. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
what? :lol

halo 1 didn't even have online multiplayer, yet you think it has dedicated servers?

halo 2 uses peer 2 peer servers. that's why when the host leaves, it pauses the game and puts the game on someone else's xbox.

:lol
 
JB1981 said:
Both are great games but they didn't have servers for online play. The first game didn't even have online play on Xbox.

:lol Well you got me. To be honest I've never played Halo 1 or 2 online. I don't like the series.
 
HD DVD wins? First insticts are always the best!

And doesn't everyone who wants Halo 3 already own a 360?

Don't trust a dude with white hair about tech predictions I say!

:lol @ thread change while typing this reply.

m
 
MachoInfinity said:
"Sony is in trouble if these games take off. They don’t even do multi-player that well yet"

:lol

Resistance:

40 players
Dedicated servers
Free for everyone with a PS3 to play

Halo 3:

16 players
No dedicated servers
50 dollars a year to play

Halo 3 ain't no Resistance killer. Someone needs a lesson in how to do online gaming right.

It sure as hell isn't Sony...

a) amount of players doesn't equate to game quality. And you're fighting a losing battle comparing Resistance to Halo / Halo 2... The games are classic MP games... with the only real rival being CS: Classic...

b) Dedicated servers... Not sure if you noticed but even 2.5 years after release, Halo 2 is still pulling 500K matches a day. During it's peak it was hitting 1.5-2 million/day. That would require an incredible amount of dedicated servers.
 
:lol Shadowrun???

Has this guy not seen the recent coverage of this game?

And MMOs are out of the reach of Sony? Since when? SOE has two or three MMOs (multiplatform, at that) already in the works for PS3 if I've read right, MS has all but abandoned 1st Party MMO effort (I'm thinking True Fantasy and Mythica), and any new 3rd Party MMO would likely be on any platform it can run on (provided it can work within Xbox Live and still allow cross-play like FFXI did) to get the subscriber base going.

Also, how has Sony blocked every attempt to make their PC unit work with the PS3? They've turned the PS3 into a freaking PC with Linux Kit. They allow USB connections, they read all kinds of open file types, they have a more diverse and open (but still screwed) media player than Xbox. The only thing they're not doing is PC-to-PS3 video streaming like the Xbox Media Player (which ain't free.) If I bought a Vaio, I don't think I'd think for a second how it worked with my Xbox or PlayStation unless my console told me I could do something.

I agree, the voice support on PS3 has been sucky for no good reason (MK2 launched, no mics ... why??), but that's the only point I can understand in this guy's rabble.
 
MachoInfinity said:
"Sony is in trouble if these games take off. They don’t even do multi-player that well yet"

:lol

Resistance:

40 players
Dedicated servers
Free for everyone with a PS3 to play

Halo 3:

16 players
No dedicated servers
50 dollars a year to play

Halo 3 ain't no Resistance killer. Someone needs a lesson in how to do online gaming right.

It sure as hell isn't Sony...
Vyse The Legend said:
rod said:
pilonv1 said:
Perhaps not coincidentally, this is the exact sequence of my own reactions after reading Macho's post.
 
If someone honestly believes Resistance does online play better than Halo, who are we to say they're wrong? Both games do such a good job of it, that it basically boils down to preference at this point.

It's not like Halo (or any game for that matter) has this impenetrable Bubble Shield of quality that no other game can meet or surpass. ;)
 
Confidence Man said:
You haven't played Shadowrun.

It will bomb, but it's anything but run of the mill.
This amuses me. I have in fact played Shadowrun. I'm not saying it's not fun in that moment, for a bit. Of course every game has it's context.

Personally I don't see the expansion of options to choose from in a game as such, or a slight addition or some interactive element, as anything fundamentally different. The gameplay still revolves solely around killing, respanwing, repeat, etc. Whether you are allowed to float half the map, teleport, or whatever. This has been done before. Putting it all together in one gametype, sure, why not? But it's not innovation, it's a tweak to an existing genre that does not evolve and personally doesn't interest me anymore. :)

I can still remember from early in the Halo days, the multiplayer was to become something of a scale never before imagined. You would be on the ring world, large scale battles, etc. That sounded interesting. It ended up being just another Quake 3/UT mod in the Halo universe, which was madly successful and therefore will not be changed anymore to the original vision, since it would hurt sales. Of course they shouldn’t do it just for me. Hell, they can do what they want. But there have only been tiny evolutions in the multiplayer shooter front, as opposed to the new forms of real strategy and customization in Chrome Hounds, and the sneak gameplay in Splinter Cell, and the unique twist with the Mercenary units that game has as well, MMO's are also getting better and better. I mean good chance Halo 3 will be 16 players again due to their inability, need or whatever, to go further then they need to...

Anyway, doesn't matter, just personally peeves me that these games are being rehashed formats of something that was successful before, just to sell them. Of course they deserve respect for the things they try to do and change. But it's no real biggy if you look back in the past five to ten years. It just doesn’t excite me anymore. It did when it was new a gazillion years ago.

And again, I understand other people like it, it's like sports. I don't get someone running down the track every day for 20 years just to beat some stupid record either. I like running or walking in nature, smelling the air, seeing the sights. Variation, tension, surprise...etc. Anyways, end of rant on why these multiplayer games lost their appeal to me. :)
 
Top Bottom