 | |  |  |  | Menu |  | | | Login | | | Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name. | | | | | | Online | | 152 guest(s) and
0 member(s)
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here | | | | | |
 | |  | Re: Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 (Score: 0)
by on Friday, July 20 @ 14:13:37 EDT
It's people like you who are really just a waste of time. Gears of War allowed you to "blindfire" but is not really blindfire if you are as accurate as you are aiming. And you understanding of the storyline quite poor. You don't magically teleport to a new mission, it is called a transition, it even tells you after the first level that the next mission takes place five years after the first. Oh, and if you pay attention to key dialogue, it explains the whole story. I know, some half-witted newbies don't like a good story line, but prefer a run and gun experience. I played gears 1 and 2. So boring that I couldn't even finish the first one. Take cover and you magically saved from oncoming bullets makes total sense, as in Vegas enemies can just shoot through thin enough materials or lay down a supressive until they manage to hit you. You probably wouldn't like Call of Duty either, it requires more than just wanting to kill enemies, you need to understand the meaning of "key dialogue" to play these games. Oh, and you can't really compare the cover systems because gears has a loose cover system, as soon as your finger slips back you would be out of cover. And the story in gears was not that great, because am I supposed to believe that all of this bull crap situation happens in the spam of a few days? My brother beat btw first game, we both were sad at such a boring game. He had higher hopes. Now I'm not going to just pretend Vegas is perfect, there are many flaws, but gears has just as many if not more, so choose a better comparison next time. One that is truly worse.
|
| | | |
|
|
