No-one Brothers in Arms(PC)?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

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

Its out in the US or GB, would be nice to have some realworld comments...

Hopefully its a blast, because i like WW2 games (basicly shooting nazis 😛,
but didn't like the latest overscripted ones that hit the market last year.

cheers,

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

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, "F r e e" wrote:

be patient
we must go and buy it in our retail store and that takes a little time
but expect lots of posts about brother in arms in this weekend

ps: hope brother in arms will be a big success for ubisoft so they can
fight back the wrong hostile ea takeover, cause we want an ubisoft
independent!

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

sayNO2steam wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, "F r e e" wrote:
>
> be patient
> we must go and buy it in our retail store and that takes a little time
> but expect lots of posts about brother in arms in this weekend
>

Can I take it from the use of the word 'we' that you will be buying it
and that you will be reporting back this weekend?


--
I mean, you've been around a bit, you know, like, you've, uh... You've
'done it'...
What do you mean?
Well, I mean like,... you've SLEPT, with a lady...
Yes...
What's it like?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Shawk <shawk@clara.co.uk.3guesses> looked up from reading the entrails
of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>sayNO2steam wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, "F r e e" wrote:
>>
>> be patient
>> we must go and buy it in our retail store and that takes a little time
>> but expect lots of posts about brother in arms in this weekend
>>
>
>Can I take it from the use of the word 'we' that you will be buying it
>and that you will be reporting back this weekend?

Nah, he's just imitating the way the nurses who gave him his medication
talked.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

F r e e wrote:
> Its out in the US or GB, would be nice to have some realworld comments...
>
> Hopefully its a blast, because i like WW2 games (basicly shooting nazis 😛,
> but didn't like the latest overscripted ones that hit the market last year.
>
> cheers,
>
> f r e e
>
>
>

Just been playing for a few hours and the verdict so far - bloody hard,
graphics not the best but also bloody good as long as your not looking
for gung-ho COD play.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:13:19 GMT, JAB <nothanks@nohope.net> wrote:

>F r e e wrote:
>> Its out in the US or GB, would be nice to have some realworld comments...
>>
>> Hopefully its a blast, because i like WW2 games (basicly shooting nazis 😛,
>> but didn't like the latest overscripted ones that hit the market last year.
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> f r e e
>>
>>
>>
>
>Just been playing for a few hours and the verdict so far - bloody hard,
>graphics not the best but also bloody good as long as your not looking
>for gung-ho COD play.

Wish they'd do something about the horribly inaccurate weapons,
careful aim, take your time to line up the badly wobbling gunsight on
a German about 30 feet away, pull the trigger <BANG> you miss because
the bullet hit two feet away from the aim point.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Shawk wrote:

> Can I take it from the use of the word 'we' that you will be buying it

yes, i will buy for sure brother in arms cause its a kind of game i
like to play, but i will not buy it during this year... the best bet
is me only buying it next year, and you ask why?
well the reason is mainly budget limitation, cause a limited edition
with a great packaging will for sure be only available in the next
months so to have it you must buy it now, but i have already many
pc games i want to buy and i can't at this point in time afford to
buy all of them at once, also realistic historical based war theme
fps don't give me as much pleasure playing as sci-fi based ones, and
there is another reason, cause brother in arms is a high profile and
at it seams a quality title, so i will never have any problem getting
it even in one or two or three years time when other less known titles
like psychotoxic probably in 6 months will be out of the market
so for now the priority is buying psychotoxic over brother in arms

so brother in arms yes, but only for a 2006 purchase, so don't count
on me for any reviews at least until next year

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:50:04 -0500, "sp" <scottp118REMOVE@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I agree. There should NOT be so much wobble with the guns. Like many people,
>I've fired a Garand "for real," and it is not nearly so hard to hit things.
>I guess the programmers can rationalize that it's war, you're under fire,
>etc., but there are times where the enemy doesn't fire for MANY seconds, and
>you're just sitting there with the rifle wobbling hoping like hell you can
>get the crosshair over something. It's a great effect, and I LOVE this game,
>but it is slightly overdone IMO....

It's not just the wobble, I can live with that. It's the inaccuracy
even after you line up a shot. 30 feet away you get a perfect lineup
on some kraut head behind a wall and pull the trigger, most of the
time you will still miss.

Or you put a high powered rifle round through the head of the kraut
and he doesn't die, which is no less acceptable.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 12:20:24 +0000, sayNO2steam
<sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Shawk wrote:
>
>> Can I take it from the use of the word 'we' that you will be buying it
>
>yes, i will buy for sure brother in arms cause its a kind of game i
>like to play, but i will not buy it during this year... the best bet
>is me only buying it next year, and you ask why?

Hah, some "TRUE pc gamer" you turned out to be.

>well the reason is mainly budget limitation, cause a limited edition

What's the matter, I thought that a TRUE pc gamer spent all his
resources on pc games to the exclusion of all else.

Here you go crying that you aren't going to buy yet another game for
more than 8 months, if ever, right after blasting me for having enough
money to buy ALL the games I want to play and spending $50 a year on a
console.

You are pathetic.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Johnny Bravo wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:50:04 -0500, "sp" <scottp118REMOVE@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I agree. There should NOT be so much wobble with the guns. Like many people,
>>I've fired a Garand "for real," and it is not nearly so hard to hit things.
>>I guess the programmers can rationalize that it's war, you're under fire,
>>etc., but there are times where the enemy doesn't fire for MANY seconds, and
>>you're just sitting there with the rifle wobbling hoping like hell you can
>>get the crosshair over something. It's a great effect, and I LOVE this game,
>>but it is slightly overdone IMO....
>
>
> It's not just the wobble, I can live with that. It's the inaccuracy
> even after you line up a shot. 30 feet away you get a perfect lineup
> on some kraut head behind a wall and pull the trigger, most of the
> time you will still miss.
>
> Or you put a high powered rifle round through the head of the kraut
> and he doesn't die, which is no less acceptable.
>

Haven't got the game yet but from your descriptions this sounds a little
like the MOHPA bug where the gun floated around and you couldn't aim no
matter what you did - eventually fixed with a patch but made the game
unplayable initially.

Does the 1.02 patch help? Haven't seen a list of fixes.

http://patches.ubi.com/brothers_in_arms/brothers_in_arms_1.02_us_uk.exe

--
I mean, you've been around a bit, you know, like, you've, uh... You've
'done it'...
What do you mean?
Well, I mean like,... you've SLEPT, with a lady...
Yes...
What's it like?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:36:30 +0000, Shawk <shawk@clara.co.uk.3guesses>
wrote:

>Haven't got the game yet but from your descriptions this sounds a little
>like the MOHPA bug where the gun floated around and you couldn't aim no
>matter what you did - eventually fixed with a patch but made the game
>unplayable initially.
>
>Does the 1.02 patch help? Haven't seen a list of fixes.

Have to ask, I didn't buy the game, just played it for a bit on a
friend's computer. He's really into FPS, he'll buy just about
anything that comes out.

>http://patches.ubi.com/brothers_in_arms/brothers_in_arms_1.02_us_uk.exe

Saw that it just said it had multiplayer fixes so I didn't even
think of it improving the aiming. From what I can tell, they designed
it like that on purpose, so that you would be nearly useless and rely
on your squad commands to actually do anything in the game. But given
my squad's prepensity to stand in the open in front of machinegun
nests I fail to see how they are more help than hinderance.

It's just disappointing to see "the finest battlefield implement
ever devised."* being portrayed as a badly maintained 60 year old
cheap chinese SKS with a worn out barrel but holding 2 less rounds.

*General George S. Patton Jr.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> Saw that it just said it had multiplayer fixes so I didn't even
> think of it improving the aiming. From what I can tell, they designed
> it like that on purpose, so that you would be nearly useless and rely
> on your squad commands to actually do anything in the game.

The wobble has been increased from the xbox version because the designers
felt the mouse would be too much of an advantage. That said, I don't think
the wobble is all that bad. It's bad when you stand up; it gets better when
you crouch. Worse for me is the recoil when I shoot - it's realistic recoil
causing you to take quit a long moment to regain your aim. I'll shoot, my
gun flys up into my face blocking my view, and when the gun lowers I'm like,
'were'd he go?'
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Johnny Bravo wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:36:30 +0000, Shawk <shawk@clara.co.uk.3guesses>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Haven't got the game yet but from your descriptions this sounds a little
>>like the MOHPA bug where the gun floated around and you couldn't aim no
>>matter what you did - eventually fixed with a patch but made the game
>>unplayable initially.
>>
>>Does the 1.02 patch help? Haven't seen a list of fixes.
>
>
> Have to ask, I didn't buy the game, just played it for a bit on a
> friend's computer. He's really into FPS, he'll buy just about
> anything that comes out.
>
>
>>http://patches.ubi.com/brothers_in_arms/brothers_in_arms_1.02_us_uk.exe
>
>
> Saw that it just said it had multiplayer fixes so I didn't even
> think of it improving the aiming. From what I can tell, they designed
> it like that on purpose, so that you would be nearly useless and rely
> on your squad commands to actually do anything in the game. But given
> my squad's prepensity to stand in the open in front of machinegun
> nests I fail to see how they are more help than hinderance.
>
> It's just disappointing to see "the finest battlefield implement
> ever devised."* being portrayed as a badly maintained 60 year old
> cheap chinese SKS with a worn out barrel but holding 2 less rounds.
>
> *General George S. Patton Jr.
>

Yup, took a look on the BIA forum since and a lot of folk complaining
about this. Most asking for it to be fixed in a patch and a couple
making their own patch. I guess someone will shortly post the part of
the ini file that needs to be adjusted to improve what sounds like a
potential gameplay killer.

--
I mean, you've been around a bit, you know, like, you've, uh... You've
'done it'...
What do you mean?
Well, I mean like,... you've SLEPT, with a lady...
Yes...
What's it like?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:00:44 -0500, "Nonymous" <noham@nospam.com>
wrote:

> I'll shoot, my
>gun flys up into my face blocking my view, and when the gun lowers I'm like,
>'were'd he go?'
>

I doubt that's realistic either.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 23:58:50 +0000, Shawk <shawk@clara.co.uk.3guesses>
wrote:

>Yup, took a look on the BIA forum since and a lot of folk complaining
>about this. Most asking for it to be fixed in a patch and a couple
>making their own patch. I guess someone will shortly post the part of
>the ini file that needs to be adjusted to improve what sounds like a
>potential gameplay killer.

They get that fixed and I might buy it myself, I did like the squad
aspects from Full Spectrum Warrior. Although I hope it gets better
than (Suppress enemy, Flank Enemy, Kill enemy; repeat until game
over).

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Nonymous wrote:
>> Saw that it just said it had multiplayer fixes so I didn't even
>>think of it improving the aiming. From what I can tell, they designed
>>it like that on purpose, so that you would be nearly useless and rely
>>on your squad commands to actually do anything in the game.
>
>
> The wobble has been increased from the xbox version because the designers
> felt the mouse would be too much of an advantage. That said, I don't think
> the wobble is all that bad. It's bad when you stand up; it gets better when
> you crouch. Worse for me is the recoil when I shoot - it's realistic recoil
> causing you to take quit a long moment to regain your aim. I'll shoot, my
> gun flys up into my face blocking my view, and when the gun lowers I'm like,
> 'were'd he go?'
>
>

The recoil isn't so bad if you have a good sight of the target but when
it just the head it's bloody impossible. Still that's why I like this
game a lot more then COD etc.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005, Johnny Bravo wrote:

i have over 10 pc games in my to buy list! and at this point i can not
afford to extend my limited budget to pc games...
and cause i'm still buying pc games release in 2004 i have to postpone
buying some 2005 released pc games

i defend pc gamers buying pc games at release with full price if they
can afford it! but i also defend pc games being affordable and widely
accessible to as many pc gamers as possible!
in pc games we must always "include" and not "exclude" pc gamers!

yes, i defend some attitudes i don't practice myself, but like i told
this is only for the time being and cause of my specific limitation

i still feel i'm a totally honest and true pc gamer
i'm totally faithful to pc games
i only buy games for the pc
i try my best to buy as much pc games possible
i try my best to buy pc games at release although lately it as been
difficult to do it

you can't put me down cause i have a clear conscience i'm doing the
best i can do support pc games and being a true pc gamer
do you have the same clear conscience? probably not!

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 08:13:31 +0000, sayNO2steam
<sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 19 Mar 2005, Johnny Bravo wrote:
>
>i have over 10 pc games in my to buy list! and at this point i can not
>afford to extend my limited budget to pc games...
>and cause i'm still buying pc games release in 2004 i have to postpone
>buying some 2005 released pc games

So it's ok for you to get games from the bargain but, but not for
me?

If you spend half as much time working as you did crying about
Steam, you wouldn't be a year behind in your purchases.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Johnny Bravo wrote:

i never attack you for your pc game purchases... i only attacked
you cause you are a defender of steam and an opponent of retail,
and those are the worse things you can do against pc games!

so all my criticism to you is for you being pro steam and against
retail two things that damage pc games!

you buy the pc games you want at the price you find fair!

and btw don't take it wrongly... yes you have almost 2 times the
number of pc games i have but your number is not very impressive

a couple of months ago i created a poll in this group asking for
the number of pc games each pc gamer owned and let me tell you
that most of the regulars and highly respected pc gamers in this
group had numbers above the thousand... yes over 1000 pc games
i'm not trying to put you down or anything... but please don't
make yourself more important than what you are in reality ok

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html

what steam does to pc gamers in a million word worth picture:
http://www.nforce.nl/forum/images/avatars/1405845568421463c26ef44.gif
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly sayNO2steam <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> Spake Unto All:

>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Johnny Bravo wrote:
>
>i never attack you for your pc game purchases... i only attacked
>you cause you are a defender of steam and an opponent of retail,

As it should be. The money should go to those who make the game.
Middlemen should be cut out.

>so all my criticism to you is for you being pro steam and against
>retail two things that damage pc games!

Bullshit.

>and btw don't take it wrongly... yes you have almost 2 times the
>number of pc games i have but your number is not very impressive

Hypocrite.

Besides, you don't own any games at all.

>a couple of months ago i created a poll in this group asking for
>the number of pc games each pc gamer owned and let me tell you
>that most of the regulars and highly respected pc gamers in this
>group had numbers above the thousand...

Bullshit. Your "x-noarchive: yes" tag removes your posts so people
can't show you've been a the lying dweeb you are, but it doesn't
remove their posts. Remember that.

>i'm not trying to put you down or anything... but please don't
>make yourself more important than what you are in reality ok

As spoken by a retard who pontificates about gaming without playing
anything himself.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:00:56 +0000, sayNO2steam
<sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Johnny Bravo wrote:
>
>i never attack you for your pc game purchases... i only attacked
>you cause you are a defender of steam and an opponent of retail,
>and those are the worse things you can do against pc games!

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I don't know how the
billion dollar pc software market ever survived without you to tell us
that defending steam and buying directly from the developer are the
worst things we can do to pc gaming.

I've seen the light, I promise that from here on out I will support
retail, oppose steam, and pirate every single game I play for the rest
of my life. I am gladdened beyond mere words to know that even though
I will be stealing the hard work of others, there will be plenty of
others who are damaging pc gaming far worse than I ever can and you
will only think better of me for being a pirate.

Glad we got that cleared up.

Hey, anyone got an estimate of when they will crack the Starforce
protection on Silent Hunter 3?

</sarcasm mode off>

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:28:20 +0100, Mean_Chlorine
<mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>a couple of months ago i created a poll in this group asking for
>>the number of pc games each pc gamer owned and let me tell you
>>that most of the regulars and highly respected pc gamers in this
>>group had numbers above the thousand...
>
>Bullshit. Your "x-noarchive: yes" tag removes your posts so people
>can't show you've been a the lying dweeb you are, but it doesn't
>remove their posts. Remember that.

I also go with "bullshit", 20 years of gaming and more than a
thousand games, roughly 1 new title every week. There is no way
"most" of the regulars buy 1 new game each and every week.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"sayNO2steam" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:itss31tunfiu0sb64bal21jf962ngm9ide@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Johnny Bravo wrote:
>
> i never attack you for your pc game purchases... i only attacked
> you cause you are a defender of steam and an opponent of retail,
> and those are the worse things you can do against pc games!
>
> so all my criticism to you is for you being pro steam and against
> retail two things that damage pc games!
>
> you buy the pc games you want at the price you find fair!
>
> and btw don't take it wrongly... yes you have almost 2 times the
> number of pc games i have but your number is not very impressive
>
> a couple of months ago i created a poll in this group asking for
> the number of pc games each pc gamer owned and let me tell you
> that most of the regulars and highly respected pc gamers in this
> group had numbers above the thousand... yes over 1000 pc games
> i'm not trying to put you down or anything... but please don't
> make yourself more important than what you are in reality ok
>

A person's importance in here is based on the number of games that they own?

IMHO Everyone in here should be treated the same regardless of the number
of games they own, the computer system that they own, or if they use Steam
or not. 😉
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:38:33 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@city.pound> wrote:

>A person's importance in here is based on the number of games that they own?

If that were the case sayNO wouldn't even be able to post.

>IMHO Everyone in here should be treated the same regardless of the number
>of games they own, the computer system that they own, or if they use Steam
>or not. 😉

But do we have to treat them the same based on intelligence, or lack
thereof? <grin>


--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Johnny Bravo wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:38:33 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@city.pound> wrote:
>
>
>>A person's importance in here is based on the number of games that they own?
>
>
> If that were the case sayNO wouldn't even be able to post.
>
>
>>IMHO Everyone in here should be treated the same regardless of the number
>>of games they own, the computer system that they own, or if they use Steam
>>or not. 😉
>
>
> But do we have to treat them the same based on intelligence, or lack
> thereof? <grin>
>
>

Oh come on... you cant just exclude all us folk just based on lack of
intelligence ... we have other redemming characteristics such as...
erm... it'll come to me in a minute.. erm... ... ... ... I'll get back
to you...


--
I mean, you've been around a bit, you know, like, you've, uh... You've
'done it'...
What do you mean?
Well, I mean like,... you've SLEPT, with a lady...
Yes...
What's it like?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom