Best WWII game?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Hey all,
I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

dawg wrote:
> Hey all,
> I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
> America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
> the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.
>
>

For shooters, Call of Duty was a fun ride while it lasted.

http://www.fileplanet.com/129742/120000/fileinfo/Call-of-Duty-Demo
http://www.fileplanet.com/145751/140000/fileinfo/Call-of-Duty:-United-Offensive-Demo


Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault came out a few months back but stores
were quick to drop its price and the demo wasn't too satisfying. It
could be worth giving the demo a try if you're curious, but I'd stick
with the Call of Duty recommendation.

--
best regards, mat
np: [winamp not running]

www.pdxshows.net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:43:20 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>Hey all,
>I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
>America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
>the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.
>
Don't listen to the dweebs. The best WWII shooter is
Hidden&Dangerous2.

http://www.illusionsoftworks.com/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Vader des Vaderlands" <vader@vaderlands.nl> wrote in message
news:39bqajF5vmc3nU1@individual.net...
> dawg wrote:
> > Hey all,
> > I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
> > America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out
in
> > the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.
> >
> >
>
> For shooters, Call of Duty was a fun ride while it lasted.
>
> http://www.fileplanet.com/129742/120000/fileinfo/Call-of-Duty-Demo
>
http://www.fileplanet.com/145751/140000/fileinfo/Call-of-Duty:-United-Offensive-Demo
>
>
> Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault came out a few months back but stores
> were quick to drop its price and the demo wasn't too satisfying. It
> could be worth giving the demo a try if you're curious, but I'd stick
> with the Call of Duty recommendation.
>
> --
>

Obso-xxxxx-inglooty, Call of Duty is the best of the WWII FPS. Medal of
Honor: Pacific Assault was okay (better I thought that the original--in it
tried to copy a bit of the squad help from CoD); however, it was awful
repetitive (much more so than the first). That said, I enjoyed it and the
changes near the end were a pleasure.
Battlefield '42 was great and I still break it out now and again. Yes, very
much an active on-line game better suited (I guess) for multiplayer mode,
but the FPS aspect of it is still great.
Check back in a month, and I'll let you know about Brothers in Arms (the
road to hill 30)


If you move to Vietnam, then:
Viet Cong (Purple Haze and the first) were damn good. Once you get past the
corny dialog and horrible facial graphics, it is a pleasurable game.


My opinions, not yours necessarily.

--
Dr. Dickie
Skepticult member in good standing #394-00596-438
Poking kooks with a pointy stick.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' ('I found it!'), but rather 'hmm....that's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:43:20 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>Hey all,
>I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
>America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
>the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.

Battlefield 1942 and Call Of Duty get my votes.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:43:20 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>Hey all,
>I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
>America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
>the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.
>
Go with Call of Duty. I've played all the way through it and the
United Offensive expansion. Great games. (the expansion is pretty
tough though)
In my opinion, FAR better than the MOH series.

You can try the demo to see if you like it:
http://www.callofduty.com/



Remove nospam_ to reply by email

Jeff H........


Lies, All lies. Don't believe a word Difool/sayNO says.
He fears the truth!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:43:20 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>Hey all,
>I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
>America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
>the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.
>
I'm torn between BF1942 and MoHAA: Spearhead on-line at the mo.
Spearhead for the more personal objective matches, and BF1942 for the
team, take and hold ground aspect, and it's vehicles.

--
Alfie
<http://www.delphia.co.uk/>
Intelligence is useless unless it goes hand in hand with common sense

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 21:14:21 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:43:20 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Hey all,
>>I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
>>America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
>>the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.
>
>Battlefield 1942 and Call Of Duty get my votes.
>--

Andrew,

BF Vietnam did not turn me on like BF1942, which I still enjoy
playing almost as much as when it was released. And I still
wonder why.

Seems as if all the embellishments took away the clean simplicity
of the BF1942 gameplay, and even destroyed some of the
"immersion-factor". In BF1942, everything that was implemented
was implemented very cleanly, from water-effects to exploding
vehicles to rag-doll physics ( and with a lot of visual
humor with regard to some of the effects...). Hopefully BF2
will be closer in style to BF1942 than to BFV.

What is your opinion of BFV vs BF1942 in terms of
technical and UI implementation ( not theatre of combat ) ?

John Lewis

>Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
>Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
>please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
>Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

dawg wrote:
> Hey all,
> I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
> America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come
> out in the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games
> please.Thankee.

Call of Duty is probably the best for single player. Online is very fun
too. It's the more traditional first-person shooter set in WWII. If you
want the first-person point of view type game this is it. It's definitely a
step above the Medal of Honor games, although they're pretty good too.

Battlefield 1942 is excellent but for online only, and you *need* broadband
and a flightstick. It's rather pointless as a single player game.
"Battlefield" is a good name for it. Primarily it's playing large maps with
lots of players online, obtaining some kind of vehicle or plane and working
in teams to capture the objective. I consider the single-player mode just a
trainer for going online.

GS.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> Don't listen to the dweebs. The best WWII shooter is
> Hidden&Dangerous2.
>
> http://www.illusionsoftworks.com/

Yes! Its the best in single and multiplayer. Its pretty real, not like the
others.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:56:04 -0800, "Greg Sumner" <See@Signature.com>
wrote:

>Battlefield 1942 is excellent but for online only, and you *need* broadband
>and a flightstick. It's rather pointless as a single player game.

I enjoy it a lot as a single player game, and it has a damn sight more
replay value than CoD. Sure the bots can be dumb, but crank up the
difficulty and you still get a good challenge. If you want to do a lot
of flying then a stick is a good idea, but personally I prefer being
on the ground so I can capture the control points.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Hey all,
>I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
>America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come out in
>the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games please.Thankee.

They should make a vietnam war game based on the tv show Tour of Duty.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Connected wrote:

> Don't listen to the dweebs. The best WWII shooter is
> Hidden&Dangerous2.
>
> http://www.illusionsoftworks.com/

Gamespot wrote in their review that the game had "major bugs,
cumbersome controls, questionable AI, and other flaws," while praising
it in other areas and giving it 7.3.

How do you feel about the review?

Tara
--
"Condoms encourage promiscuity - in the same way that seat belts
encourage automobile accidents." O.C. Brown

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:16:45 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>Thanks guys.I'll give COD a shot. You know, I think I got a copy with me FX
>5900 video card. I'll have to look.

...full version of CoD bundled with BFG FX5900/128 (genuine, non-XT) ?
Now that was a deal... I got the bundle for $175 from Newegg about a
year ago. FX590 still works like a champ; overclocks very nicely
too...

John Lewis

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:423250a6.38264057@news.verizon.net...
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:16:45 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Thanks guys.I'll give COD a shot. You know, I think I got a copy with me
FX
> >5900 video card. I'll have to look.
>
> ..full version of CoD bundled with BFG FX5900/128 (genuine, non-XT) ?
> Now that was a deal... I got the bundle for $175 from Newegg about a
> year ago. FX590 still works like a champ; overclocks very nicely
> too...
>
> John Lewis

And hopefully we'll get CoD 2 for Xmas this year.

Are Brothers in Arms and CoD2 pretty much it for WWII shooters this year?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 05:19:17 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@city.pound> wrote:

>
>"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:423250a6.38264057@news.verizon.net...
>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:16:45 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Thanks guys.I'll give COD a shot. You know, I think I got a copy with me
>FX
>> >5900 video card. I'll have to look.
>>
>> ..full version of CoD bundled with BFG FX5900/128 (genuine, non-XT) ?
>> Now that was a deal... I got the bundle for $175 from Newegg about a
>> year ago. FX590 still works like a champ; overclocks very nicely
>> too...
>>
>> John Lewis
>
>And hopefully we'll get CoD 2 for Xmas this year.
>
>Are Brothers in Arms and CoD2 pretty much it for WWII shooters this year?
>
>

Probably. However, I would not be surprised if some of the most
popular BF1942 maps were ported (with embellishments) to BF2.

John Lewis

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Well,it was the eVGA brand 5900 ,no XT,No Ultra. I still like it but I am
disapponted with DX9 support.
"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:423250a6.38264057@news.verizon.net...
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:16:45 GMT, "dawg" <don't look@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Thanks guys.I'll give COD a shot. You know, I think I got a copy with me
FX
> >5900 video card. I'll have to look.
>
> ..full version of CoD bundled with BFG FX5900/128 (genuine, non-XT) ?
> Now that was a deal... I got the bundle for $175 from Newegg about a
> year ago. FX590 still works like a champ; overclocks very nicely
> too...
>
> John Lewis

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 12 Mar 2005 00:17:57 -0800, taragem72@yahoo.com wrote:


>Gamespot wrote in their review that the game had "major bugs,
>cumbersome controls, questionable AI, and other flaws," while praising
>it in other areas and giving it 7.3.
>
>How do you feel about the review?
>
>Tara

Gamespot are losers and not worth my time.

 

[Sam]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:56:04 -0800, "Greg Sumner" <See@Signature.com>
wrote:

>dawg wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> I haven't played any of these,whether strategy or shooter. I did try
>> America's Army.Didn't much care for it.What's the best one to come
>> out in the last 18 months or sh yeah,Single player games
>> please.Thankee.
>
>Call of Duty is probably the best for single player. Online is very fun
>too. It's the more traditional first-person shooter set in WWII. If you
>want the first-person point of view type game this is it. It's definitely a
>step above the Medal of Honor games, although they're pretty good too.
>
>Battlefield 1942 is excellent but for online only, and you *need* broadband
>and a flightstick. It's rather pointless as a single player game.
>"Battlefield" is a good name for it. Primarily it's playing large maps with
>lots of players online, obtaining some kind of vehicle or plane and working
>in teams to capture the objective. I consider the single-player mode just a
>trainer for going online.
>
>GS.
>

CoD is MoH on steroids.