|
|
Post by Gen Gravy on Mar 20, 2006 21:48:18 GMT -5
There are more, Nam, but those are the only ones I am interested in. And what do you have against boobiefests?
|
|
|
|
Post by Zaku on Mar 20, 2006 21:48:58 GMT -5
Only Gays and commies hate boobies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gen Gravy on Mar 20, 2006 21:56:12 GMT -5
Nam, you got some 'splainin to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Almightynam on Mar 20, 2006 23:07:15 GMT -5
Haha, Its just I play fighting games 'cause I like fighting games. I don't need any more incentive, and the boobies are distracting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zaku on Mar 20, 2006 23:22:03 GMT -5
They are supposed to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Almightynam on Mar 20, 2006 23:24:33 GMT -5
Meh, I've always been opposed to boobies for the sake of boobies in video games. I also am opposed to the fact that when women are playable characters in war games, they are totally unequiped to be in a war. Armor is only covering the boobies and the waist area, which is great against blows to the totally unguarded belly, head, arms, shoulders, legs, etc. etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zaku on Mar 20, 2006 23:26:59 GMT -5
Blame D&D.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyle20 on Mar 21, 2006 8:16:46 GMT -5
I like the same genres that Nam does (though I'm not a BIG fan of fighters) and still, the games you listed, and may there be more, aren't enough for me to buy such an expensive system. If there were more, and it weren't so expensive, I'd 360.
Even though I'm expecting a "You're just a little kid" reply to this, making a fighter but secretly making it all about boobies, is a pretty stupid idea. The hardcore fighter gamers aren't even going to want to buy it. Or if they do, they'll be disappointed. And Nam has a point, I'm sure a lot of people don't notice that nobody could fight wearing something like that. Face it, the developers are just making them to create cool, effective commericals and to have people buy and then stare at the screen. And then there are the weird people who pleasure themselves to it. Sad...sad people.
Let's make sure we're on the same page here, Gen. You DO agree that there are A LOT of FPS for 360, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gen Gravy on Mar 21, 2006 15:58:58 GMT -5
I hate to burst your bubble, Kyle, but their are not a lot of FPS for the 360.
There are:
Quake 4
Perfect Dark Zero
Call of Duty 2
Condemned, King Kong, and several others are first-person, but are not shooters. GRAW and Gun are third-person.
|
|
|
|
Post by 8bitbluemage on Mar 21, 2006 16:07:54 GMT -5
Meh, I'm not getting the 360 either for the same reasons Nam and Kyle aren't getting it. Ijust don't like any of the games for it. Oblivion does look good however, but I'm not gonna spend god knows how much money for a 360 just for that one game. I might get a DOA game when I move out of the house however. I'd get one now, but there are too many children in the house, and DOA is not exactly something a 9 year old (let alone 6) should be seeing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyle20 on Mar 21, 2006 18:48:18 GMT -5
I think several other people here would agree with me when I say there are more than that. 360 is gonna follow in Xbox's footsteps and make many more too.
|
|
|
|
Post by 8bitbluemage on Mar 21, 2006 19:24:06 GMT -5
Exactly. The 360 is gonna rely on FPS as much as (if not more than) Sony relies on RPGs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gen Gravy on Mar 21, 2006 19:43:03 GMT -5
I think several other people here would agree with me when I say there are more than that. 360 is gonna follow in Xbox's footsteps and make many more too. But as of right now, those are the only FPS games they have. And you guys just think X-Box is nothing but FPS, but there are other games that go unnoticed that are not FPS. I have around sixty X-Box games, and not even a fourth of them are FPS. I would doubt a sixth of them are FPS. You guys just group all shooters under FPS. |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle20 on Mar 21, 2006 19:47:34 GMT -5
So, you agree that Microsoft will flood SHOOTERS, then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gen Gravy on Mar 21, 2006 19:48:19 GMT -5
Microsoft doesn't flood shooters. It floods Ubisoft, EA, Bungie, etc. games.
|
|
