In reply to this comment by marinara:
i bet yer machine would play the second half-life...that was fun.

BUT, after you upgrade get F.E.A.R..... it's an awesome game.... maybe even Quake IV

Actually was able to run those OK. Got HL2 Orange Box, Quake IV, played FEAR. The only thing my machine doesn't really fun are the latest games that came out in the last year or so, ie. CoD4, STALKER, UT3, etc.

It's a P4 3.2 (no duo/quad proc) with 2GB PC3200 and a BFG Tech Nvidia 7800 (still AGP). So it's definitely an older rig, but still handles everything say....pre-'07 pretty good. Eventually I'll upgrade but it won't be for awhile as I'm putting myself through school on my own. I make too much to get grants, etc, but not enough to go full time and get it done and over with fast. I'm thinking I'll have to upgrade for when Fallout 3, GTA4 and Left4Dead hit. Definitely upgrade for L4D.

Playing Doom when it came out was an ongoing OMGWTF moment for me. I think the biggest reason, though, was because I knew nothing about it. The web was young and I didn't have access anyway. I didn't read any gaming magazines. I had literally never heard of Doom or seen a screenshot. One of my classmates brought a few floppy disks in at school one day and handed them to me. I asked what it was and he said, "it's the new Wolfenstein."

Playing the game without any idea of what could happen or what I might see or find brought it to a level that's probably unattainable now. I didn't know what weapons to expect. I didn't know what monsters to expect. I didn't know what the engine was capable of technically, so I had no idea of what sort of traps and secrets and such to expect.

The first time I came face to face with a pinky demon I began yelling, "Holy shit! Holy shit!" out loud. Finding a hidden chainsaw was also quite shocking. I don't think this sort of thing will ever happen again. We know everything about a game long before we ever get to play it now. We know the development decisions, the cut features, the specs and features of the engine.

So yeah, Doom is my #1 OMGWTF videogame, though largely because of the environment it was released in rather than its own doing.

As for the video, I did love the Darth Revan twist and I remember a good deal of gasping the first time we saw Scorpion torch somebody. The COD4 nuke would definitely be on my list if I had played it myself, but I pretty much quit FPS after Quake 3. My friend showed it to me, but I had already heard what happens so it took the awe right out of it.

The CoD4 nuke just totally blew my mind.

Host was annoying.

The list seems to be stuck between telling you which FPSs are awesome for the moment compared to which are the classics. The lighting and mood-setting of Doom 3 was good, I admit that, but other games have done it as well or better. The actual gameplay style and much of what the host craps on about in terms of the gameplay elements was lifted virtually unchanged from the predecessors.

Sorry, if you're talking about FPSs, putting a game that bought FPS to consoles as number 1 makes no sense. FPSs have and will always play better with a mouse. You might be able to name a great console FPS that never made it to PC, but admit it, if it did make it to PC it would be much more hectic and fun to play if ported properly. I watch videos of people playing the same FPSs with gamepads that I have played on PC such as TF2 and CoD4, and the difference in pacing almost makes it look turn-based. Now, no doubt GoldenEye was a great game and deserves to be on the list but not number 1.

The original Half-Life has to be on there one way or another, even it means having both the first and second game somewhere on the list.

I would put Deus Ex on there as well but I guess it's a bit more cross-genre reminiscent of an RPG in terms of customization/genuine storyline direction choice.

They said it was Counter-Strike, but they had video of Counter-Strike Source. There's a difference, not to say CSS is necessarily bad on it's own, but the original CS is the hallmark classic that deserves the credit.

Halo's way too high. I agree it defined the original Xbox and yes, it populised the rechargable health system over garrish health packs but it stole much of the rest from far better games.

I can't quite grasp what makes people say CoD4 is so immersive. Is it because of the obsession with warfare and realism? Other games have created far more detailed, far more believable and captivating persistent worlds and that takes far more than creating a few admittedly believable urban landscapes, and tying them together with a paper-thin plot-line and immensely cliched story.

The top 2 FPS of all time are on consoles? Sorry, but whoever made the list isn't an FPS player then. Halo and GoldenEye belong on the list, but above Counterstrike, COD4 and Quake? Boo.

This list is pretty dumb, but not just because of Doom 3.

Doom 3 is one of the best shooters ever, haters. For me it's one of the most immersive games of all time. Never had I been so convinced by the setting of a game. I had a blast playing through it and the expansion pack. It's supposed to be dark and hard to see stuff in DOOM. Plus the enemies' eyes glow if you actually stop bitching long enough to look carefully.. on my 30" monitor I could easily pick off enemies who were standing in the "dark".

I hate the multiplayer in COD4. It's too frenetic and the maps are so fake. Halo gets way too much credit and it definitely didn't "invent" teabagging. I was teabagging in Rainbow Six in early 1999...

I just tried to type out my own top 10, but it was too hard to pick the order and decide whether certain titles are distinct enough for their own entries (like the HL2 episodes..)

Bioshock? Crysis? Call of Duty 4?

To be brief in my responses:
Bioshock was the spiritual successor to System Shock 2, which if I hadn't played, would probably have been a sequel I enjoyed (beyond the aesthetics). It was much more dilute than it's predecessor in the RPG game mechanics aspects and far more linear in the level design. The fact that there wasn't any real specialisation or player classes made things like the psychic powers effectively just more reskins of shotguns and rocketlaunchers.

Crysis is exactly the sort of thing I'm referring to. It looks amazing, yes... But it boiled down to being another scripted on-rails ride once you got used to the graphics. It was fresh in Doom 1/2 and even as far as Duke3D, but beyond that, the innovation really stagnated (another e.g. is Prey)

Call of Duty 4 isn't one i've played yet, but I am very keen to try for the multiplayer aspect. Like Battlefield 2, your soldier improves with experience, unlocking new abilities/weapons/etc. This is what makes the game replayable, giving a sense of acheivement and status in a community. Which is why I carefully noted 'Single player FPS' as being the dead genre. The single player part of CoD4 I can pretty much assume is like I've mentioned above

COD4 = so good.

Had one of my regular 360 get-togethers last night here, played Halo, COD4, Tetris and Gears of War (friends bring their 360s and we set them up on a LAN - yes I'm that much of a nerd, you're just jealous). And once we were sufficiently intoxicated, we broke out the Rock Band. As fun as it is on its own, it really is a whole other experience when played with a group of friends. I still consider it money very well spent.

>> ^EDD:
I also really loved the CoD4 homage to this great line. Awesome + awesome = awesomely awesome.



Heh, good catch. I didn't even notice that.

I also really loved the CoD4 homage to this great line. Awesome + awesome = awesomely awesome.

Looks like a rental to me.

Not to rain down on the parade here, but it doesn't look like they're offering enough new features to make it worth a purchase. Not to mention the campaign of the first game being so short made me greatly regret spending 65 dollars on that one, and I don't intend on making the same mistake twice.

Don't get me wrong, the short time spent in the game is of good quality. But they haven't figured out how to bring in much replay value, and ultimately, that's what separates 'rentals' and purchase-worthy titles.

And I know about it's online features, but I also haven't forgotten how much fun I've been having in CoD4 and GTA4, and how much fun I -didn't- have in Gears of War 1's multi-player.

EDIT: And I personally think that anyone who is impressed with a 'brand new' feature being the ability to take somebody hostage must remember that this was done over six years ago in Metal Gear Solid 2.

Achievements work best when they're virtually or entirely cosmetic but you do have to admit that unlockable content is a great way to add play-time and force players to try out different gameplay facets, which they may have otherwise dismissed all too quickly.

As for gritty realism over cartoony graphics, no thanks. I'm thoroughly sick of CoD4 but end up playing it because everyone else does. Realism in FPSs particularly, is a synonym for camp whoring. Nothing says squat and wait more than overly dense foliage, non-contrasting colour schemes and players taking 'real' damage. Game designers, if I wanted to play Where's Waldo I wouldn't be playing a videogame would I?

Frankly realism along with overt reward systems are just an allure for the console crowd, which developers have serendipitously realised they should be catering for. The problem is it ends up taking a backstage to gameplay and is further accentuated by gimmicky gratuitous rewards. Look, if my score of 60 for a CoD4 map is composed of 20 gun kills, 15 grenade kills, 15 air strike kills and 10 helicopter kills, there is something wrong.

They're not allowed to use CoD4 footage for their video. It's already being used to prove Obama's military record.

If anybody plays COD4 or watches family guy, I believe they have spoofed this movie.

In the bonus mission in the epilogue of COD4 "Mile High Club" features the "Surely you can't be serious; Don't call me Shirley" gag and family guy spoofed it in one episode where they took turns beating up Meg.