Darth_Squoobus wrote:Even though I still like it a lot, Mario Kart Wii isn't that great. Even though the AI always cheat, this is egregious. Just as I'm in first place in the second lap, I'm either struck by lightning or knocked over the edge. Not to mention respwaning takes forever, so if you're in first and you fall of the edge, any chance of victory you had is dead in the water.

Blue shells are the bane of my existence.

EraOfDesann wrote:

Darth_Squoobus wrote:Even though I still like it a lot, Mario Kart Wii isn't that great. Even though the AI always cheat, this is egregious. Just as I'm in first place in the second lap, I'm either struck by lightning or knocked over the edge. Not to mention respwaning takes forever, so if you're in first and you fall of the edge, any chance of victory you had is dead in the water.

Blue shells are the bane of my existence.

The red ones are mine.

Well some people aren't just built for certain games, IDK.

However, to add in my dos pesos here, I will have to comment on the Halo games. Halo 2 was great. Never played Halo: CE, but Halo 3 is one of the most overrated and overhyped games to exist. ODST wasn't worth a $60 buy, but doing co-op campaign certainly makes the game better.

Of course, I have to disagree with Fallout 3 and Half-Life 2, they are revolutionary games in their own rights, and meh, some people just don't flow that way.

I would have to say that Star wars empire at war was overrated. i usually like rts games but it was just to slow and the expnsion to buggy.

Lord Bardar wrote:ODST wasn't worth a $60 buy...

Bungie didn't want it to be a $60 buy. It was sposed to be 40.
@Merc: By more powerful, I meant better. AKs are not more accurate than an M16. Besides, in real life an M16 is not a 3-shot burst, last I checked.

SilvaDalek wrote:

Nihillo wrote:

Grev wrote:How can you judge a game to be overrated if nobody has played it or even rated it yet at all? (reach)

I think he meant "overhyped" (not that I know of anything about Halo Reach; I'm just saying).

It deserves the hype.

Sorry to mini-mod here, but I feel something has to be said. This isn't a: "my game is better than yours" topic. Can we not get into this argument, please?

SilvaDalek wrote: The games I find to be overrated are Borderlands, Grand Theft Auto, MAG, Uncharted 2, and just about any Nintindo game with the word Mario involved.

Soooo true. The three Nintendo franchises that aren't overrated are Metroid, LoZ, and SSB.

And while this isn't exactly a game, I've played the restored content for TSL (don't worry, through perfectly legal means - a group of people got impatient and did their own restoration from scratch and released it), and while it does add in some missing pieces to the story, it didn't really make TSL feel as awesome as everyone was hyped about.

EraOfDesann wrote:Blue shells are the bane of my existence.

Warning-profanity usage in the title.
Blue shells keep us all up at night.

Dinomight wrote:I would have to say that Star wars empire at war was overrated. i usually like rts games but it was just to slow and the expnsion to buggy.

If its too slow you're supposed to lower the graphics setting. If it still runs bad after all settings are at their lowest, I'd guess its your computers fault, not the games. I mean, my computer is CRAP. We get blue screens like twice a week and a beep code every 2 months and EAW still runs well for me.
I'm surprised you tried to bring up a game like EAW in this. Is it popular enough to where like, the majority of the people would know about it like...Halo or COD...or, blast what the devil do these kids call it nowadays...Fallout?
Maybe someday I'll put the Gamecube controller down...

Fluffy_the_ic wrote: (AK-47s are NOT more powerful than M16s, UMP-45s are not as powerful as an assault rifle, a Barret 50-caliber would not be weaker than an intervention)

Actually the 7.62x39mm round the AK-47 uses is more powerful then the M16/M4 5.56x49mm round. Its larger bore allows for greater penetration in targets and can create large entry and exit wounds. The 5.56x49mm has greater range and accuracy due to the M16/M4 design (compared to a AK-47) but most of its damage comes from internal tumbling of the round in soft targets. 7.62mm bore is more common in Sniper and Mid range rifles then 5.56mm is.

UMP .45 is as powerful as a assault rifle. .45 ACP rounds are roughly equivalent to a 9mm parabellum round. 9mm has excellent power and penetration (against soft targets) but lacks the range of smaller bore rounds such as 7.62mm and 5.56mm, this is due mostly to its length. It lacks penetration against lightly armored targets due to its lesser velocity and its shape. .45 ACP does have alot of recoil though, which the Kriss Super V/Vector eliminates in its design. .357 and .44 magnum rounds are lighter in bore then the .45 ACP but are designed for higher velocity and greater impact due to powder loads and shape.

.50 is the strongest round that can be fired from a rifled infantry weapon. It will decimate a target upon impact. .408 which the Cheytac Intervention fires a modified version of, is a lighter round but made for greater range and accuracy. M82-M102 Barrets are used mostly for EOD disposal at range and other non-soft target uses.

On Topic:

Halo series is generally over rated. The Modern Warfare line of CoD games are, but CoD4 is still quite fun.

Fluffy_the_ic wrote: @Merc: By more powerful, I meant better. AKs are not more accurate than an M16. Besides, in real life an M16 is not a 3-shot burst, last I checked.

I wasn't sure about this myself, so I did a little searching: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spjDzvA6 ... re=related

Another vid (SMG-based), mostly because this one points out an important issue with testing accuracy, and comments on the stat indicators: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWxz_XnqdxY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle#M16A4 wrote:This model retains the 3-round burst mode of the M16A2.

I picked that from the M-16A4 section, since that's the designation given to what's in the game. There are fully automatic M-16s, but the A4 does not appear to be one of those.

Before I get this topic completely derailed on MW2, I just wanted to comment on these because I feel these arguements are invalid. They can't be used as a means of claiming the game is overrated, since there's evidence to the contrary on those matters. Sorry fluffy.

MercuryNoodles wrote:Before I get this topic completely derailed on MW2, I just wanted to comment on these because I feel these arguements are invalid. They can't be used as a means of claiming the game is overrated, since there's evidence to the contrary on those matters. Sorry fluffy.

Eh, it's okay. I had a feeling I was gonna be wrong about something. I have other arguements anyways for it based on gun vs. gun.

When i said eaw was to slow i meant that the game it self seemed to have been made in a permanent state of lag because my computer is good machine. The expansion fixed this problem but the main thing i never liked about the game is the fact that tanks wil always hit the infantry super amazing accuracy. And by the way it did get very good reveiws.

Dinomight wrote:When i said eaw was to slow i meant that the game it self seemed to have been made in a permanent state of lag because my computer is good machine. The expansion fixed this problem but the main thing i never liked about the game is the fact that tanks wil always hit the infantry super amazing accuracy. And by the way it did get very good reveiws.

The graphics seetings are too mcuh for your comp. I had to lower them, and my machine is pretty much outdated by now. EAW was actually the strategy game I never got tired of, and it's actually pretty underrated if you ask me.

VF501 wrote:

Fluffy_the_ic wrote: (AK-47s are NOT more powerful than M16s, UMP-45s are not as powerful as an assault rifle, a Barret 50-caliber would not be weaker than an intervention)

Actually the 7.62x39mm round the AK-47 uses is more powerful then the M16/M4 5.56x49mm round. Its larger bore allows for greater penetration in targets and can create large entry and exit wounds. The 5.56x49mm has greater range and accuracy due to the M16/M4 design (compared to a AK-47) but most of its damage comes from internal tumbling of the round in soft targets. 7.62mm bore is more common in Sniper and Mid range rifles then 5.56mm is.

UMP .45 is as powerful as a assault rifle. .45 ACP rounds are roughly equivalent to a 9mm parabellum round. 9mm has excellent power and penetration (against soft targets) but lacks the range of smaller bore rounds such as 7.62mm and 5.56mm, this is due mostly to its length. It lacks penetration against lightly armored targets due to its lesser velocity and its shape. .45 ACP does have alot of recoil though, which the Kriss Super V/Vector eliminates in its design. .357 and .44 magnum rounds are lighter in bore then the .45 ACP but are designed for higher velocity and greater impact due to powder loads and shape.

.50 is the strongest round that can be fired from a rifled infantry weapon. It will decimate a target upon impact. .408 which the Cheytac Intervention fires a modified version of, is a lighter round but made for greater range and accuracy. M82-M102 Barrets are used mostly for EOD disposal at range and other non-soft target uses.

On Topic:

Halo series is generally over rated. The Modern Warfare line of CoD games are, but CoD4 is still quite fun.

Wait, so if gun stats are wrong in a game, it's an overrated game? I'm pretty sure that's an invalid reason to not like a game/ game franchise.

Ping wrote:EAW was actually the strategy game I never got tired of, and it's actually pretty underrated if you ask me.

Woah, woah, woah! Hold up. Just because people find games 'overrated' it doesn't necessarily mean it's 'not fun'. Overrated =/= A Bad Game. It seems a lot of communities have this mindset. Yes, Halo is WAY overrated....but I love it.

I love the Call of Duty series and the Half-Life series. What can I say? I'm easily entertained. Fallout 3 is awesome to me, though I wish it retained a little more of the classic FO1/FO2. But that's fine. Using VATS is pretty damned fun sometimes, especially if one uses it for machinimas.

I tend to think a lot of games are fun. It's not really easy to 'disappoint' me. I guess, to each their own, right?

Fluffy_the_ic wrote:(AK-47s are NOT more powerful than M16s, UMP-45s are not as powerful as an assault rifle, a Barret 50-caliber would not be weaker than an intervention)

I don't mean to sound rude, but please research before you spout things like that.

The AK-47 is way more powerful than the M-16. It fires the 7.62x39mm round, whereas the M-16 fires the 5.56x49mm round. The AK-47 has amazing stopping power. While the M-16/M-4 fires a weaker round, the bullet does travel faster and farther than the 7.62, but it doesn't beat the fact that if you fire a 5.56 into someone's chest and they're wearing body armor, it's especially dangerous for the guys using the weapons using the 5.56, because the people with the 7.62 are still going strong. Luckily, we're coming up with combat rifles to compete with that, but for now, a lot of our soldiers are going to be having to use M-series standard combat rifles.

As for the H&K UMP .45 comment. That's because H&K UMP .45's are SMG's. But they still have more power than a 5.56 rifle. .45 Caliber is not as high as a .50 Caliber, but it's still pretty powerful. The Kriss Super V SMG .45 ACP was introduced to tame the .45 caliber...and the Kriss is pretty accurate, from what I've seen. Hopefully it'll be used more unless the project for it stopped.

And I can't necessarily agree with the .50 cal statement, because I haven't played the game. But I guess if I'm not talking about MW2, I can agree that the .50 caliber should be the most powerful caliber....short of being a freakin' mortar shell. However, stats for weapons shouldn't judge whether it's a good or bad game anyways, so....

Not attacking you Fluffy, just....wanted to share what I was taught over the years (or rather learned from books, explanations, Military Channel, Internet, etc. etc.)

Military Channel ftw. Futureweapons is one of the coolest shows ever.

Oblivion is waaaaaay overrated.

Firstly, I have to say that Halo, World of Warcraft, and Modern Warfare (And on a lesser scale Counter-Strike) are all overrated games. If there's a game where at least 50% of its players live by it like a creed, then it's obviously overrated. Halo, I tried for like 30 minutes in multiplayer (Might've been Halo 2, dunno.) and it really didn't impress me. it was fun I suppose, but in my opinion overrated. For World of Warcraft, need I explain? Modern Warfare seems fun from the demo I played yesterday, but if at school it's supposed to be "cool" to play it? Ugh.... As for Counter-Strike, it's really old and people still play it like crazy. Just...no. It gets boring after an hour or two.

Secondly, I have to disagree with some of you. In my opinion, Half-Life 2 was one of the best games made. For it's time (2004) it had some of the best graphics and best story. Sure, nowadays, it might not have the best graphics or story, but where do you think gaming would be today if it weren't for the Half-Life series? We'd probably still be in generic DOOM / Quake-esque games, shooting baddies with Rocket launchers, and saving princesses from fire breathing turtles. Like it or not, game developers have said they were inspired by Valve's work, and I think that's the truth.
(Yes, I am a Valve fanboy, but I liked Half-Life 2 before I even cared about the company attached to it.)

Also, I have to mention Crysis. Even though I didn't really like it, it was a pretty good game and fulfilled it's purpose of looking good very well (Along with being decently fun.)

EDIT: Oh, and @Fluffy about Mirror's Edge, it gets a while to get into, but in the end it's probably one of the most stylized and funnest games I've played.

RevanSithLord wrote:The AK-47 is way more powerful than the M-16. It fires the 7.62x39mm round, whereas the M-16 fires the 5.56x49mm round. The AK-47 has amazing stopping power. While the M-16/M-4 fires a weaker round, the bullet does travel faster and farther than the 7.62, but it doesn't beat the fact that if you fire a 5.56 into someone's chest and they're wearing body armor, it's especially dangerous for the guys using the weapons using the 5.56, because the people with the 7.62 are still going strong. Luckily, we're coming up with combat rifles to compete with that, but for now, a lot of our soldiers are going to be having to use M-series standard combat rifles.

Round length= velocity and range as the powder load is what affects that. Shape of the round and its bore affect penetration and range.

5.56x49mm has more range then 7.62x39mm due to a larger powder load. The 7.62x51mm fired by snipers and rifles like the M14/M21 are longer and carry a larger powder load for more range and accuracy. Sniper model M16s (655/656) are not true sniper weapons so much as designated marksman weapons for intermediate range sniper shots.

There are no M-series weapons. The M prefix is a US Military designation given to all weapons approved for use by the US Military. If/When the Magpul/Bushmaster ACR is given the green light, it will be given a M designation.

The M16/M4 was originally designed by Armalite and was called the AR15 which is still the name used for the civilian model. Springfield Armory weapons though seem to be given a M designation before hand.