What game do you guys think will win Game of Year?

[Jack Shipsteel]

Originally Posted by WitchdoctorDan

Halo 2: ODST

It's Halo 3: ODST, Witchdawkta.

Marketing matters, yes, about 5%. The rest is on pure game performance.

Fallout: New Vegas is one of those games that was started way back when, and has maintained a cult, as some would say, but the game has since evolved. It is no longer a Cult Classic, but a RPG-shooter game based upon Post-Apocalyptic America, and the regression of the people there. It appeals to a broad amount of people, whether you're purely interested in shooting mutated monstrocitys, want a good an humourous storyline, or are interested in just wasting your time in a virtual casino, with actual ways to get kicked out of the places.

Halo: Reach is NOT a game of a dying franchise. People are upset that Bungie is no longer going to make the games for the franchise, but this Bungie era ended with nothing less than a Bang. You have your classic campaign against all-odds, which tells the beginning of the storied games, your multiplayer, where you can slaughter as much people as you see fit, or Forge, where imaginations run rapid.

Call of Duty: Black Ops is what it is, a shooter. CoD has always been known for its multiplayer, and people will once again triumph against others using this new engine, with the campaign largely ignored. But, you cannot knock it, for it appeals to millions for its gameplay, whether you want to climb the ranks and become a trained killer or just waste away goofing off with friends.

Just though I'd sneak in, not let any of those games get run over or trounced.

[WitchdoctorDan]

Originally Posted by Jack Shipsteel

It's Halo 3: ODST, Witchdawkta.

Marketing matters, yes, about 5%. The rest is on pure game performance.

Fallout: New Vegas is one of those games that was started way back when, and has maintained a cult, as some would say, but the game has since evolved. It is no longer a Cult Classic, but a RPG-shooter game based upon Post-Apocalyptic America, and the regression of the people there. It appeals to a broad amount of people, whether you're purely interested in shooting mutated monstrocitys, want a good an humourous storyline, or are interested in just wasting your time in a virtual casino, with actual ways to get kicked out of the places.

Halo: Reach is NOT a game of a dying franchise. People are upset that Bungie is no longer going to make the games for the franchise, but this Bungie era ended with nothing less than a Bang. You have your classic campaign against all-odds, which tells the beginning of the storied games, your multiplayer, where you can slaughter as much people as you see fit, or Forge, where imaginations run rapid.

Call of Duty: Black Ops is what it is, a shooter. CoD has always been known for its multiplayer, and people will once again triumph against others using this new engine, with the campaign largely ignored. But, you cannot knock it, for it appeals to millions for its gameplay, whether you want to climb the ranks and become a trained killer or just waste away goofing off with friends.

Just though I'd sneak in, not let any of those games get run over or trounced.

Actually, Halo: Reach IS the last Halo game. I mean, if anyone besides Bungie makes it, is it really Halo? And they're signing on with Activision. Let's ask Infinity Ward how that turned out for them. And I never said there was anything wrong with Black Ops, in fact, I love it. My favorite franchise ever. Not sure how you got I was trouncing it. And I know that it is Halo 3: ODST but it takes place during Halo 2. I often do that to upset the fanboys. *clears throat*Jack*clears throat*

[Pirate J]

Apparently Black Ops ins't as good as Mw2, multiplayer isn't as good, story and even worse the graphics! Treyarch isn't as good game makers as Infinity Ward, Modern Warfare: Great Success makers: Infinity Ward, W@W: Not that good :/ Makers: Treyarch, Modern Warfare 2: HUGE Success $10 Billion Makers: Infinity Ward, Black Ops: Same as W@W Makers: Treyarch. Treyarch maybe better Advertisers but not the best game company, I personally think that Black Ops will only sell because it's in the CoD series and the Zombie mode.

J,

[WitchdoctorDan]

Originally Posted by Pirate J

Apparently Black Ops ins't as good as Mw2, multiplayer isn't as good, story and even worse the graphics! Treyarch isn't as good game makers as Infinity Ward, Modern Warfare: Great Success makers: Infinity Ward, W@W: Not that good :/ Makers: Treyarch, Modern Warfare 2: HUGE Success $10 Billion Makers: Infinity Ward, Black Ops: Same as W@W Makers: Treyarch. Treyarch maybe better Advertisers but not the best game company, I personally think that Black Ops will only sell because it's in the CoD series and the Zombie mode.

J,

I would suggest playing the game before trashcanning it. Multiplayer is completely overhauled, the game is beautiful (Especially WMD) and the weapons are innovative. The maps are creative, and the attachments (Like underbarrel flamethrower). The differences between W@W and BO are as big as the differences between CoD2 and MW. This trumps MW2 to me. The story has some grand curveballs, epicness, and it ISN'T historically confined like WaW was. These are Deniable Operations, not the life of some Joe Shmoe soldier.

[Jack Shipsteel]

Originally Posted by WitchdoctorDan

Actually, Halo: Reach IS the last Halo game. I mean, if anyone besides Bungie makes it, is it really Halo? And they're signing on with Activision. Let's ask Infinity Ward how that turned out for them. And I never said there was anything wrong with Black Ops, in fact, I love it. My favorite franchise ever. Not sure how you got I was trouncing it. And I know that it is Halo 3: ODST but it takes place during Halo 2. I often do that to upset the fanboys. *clears throat*Jack*clears throat*

The Halo Franchise isn't dead, but it won't be the same. Halo without Bungie is like GTA without Rockstar. However, it will continue. Someway, somehow.

Me, personally, don't see the point of all the CoD games. The First Modern Warfare was spectacular, and World at War wasn't too shabby. Just, too many coming out too quickly. Not a fan.

I also posted that to compare all the three games, for those seems to be the talk of the town these days. Most people were just putting Blacks Ops way over the head of the other games, so I just wanted everybody to know what's what, gamer or not.

And yes, I know Halo 3: ODST was set in New Mombasa, right after the Covenant carrier opened a slipspace drive. But it's the title of the game.

[WitchdoctorDan]

Originally Posted by Jack Shipsteel

The Halo Franchise isn't dead, but it won't be the same. Halo without Bungie is like GTA without Rockstar. However, it will continue. Someway, somehow.

Me, personally, don't see the point of all the CoD games. The First Modern Warfare was spectacular, and World at War wasn't too shabby. Just, too many coming out too quickly. Not a fan.

And yes, I know Halo 3: ODST was set in New Mombasa, right after the Covenant carrier opened a slipspace drive. But it's the title of the game.

I agree, with everything. BUT especially the CoD part. You see, Activision is milking CoD for money. Infinity Ward was fired for wanting 3 years to make a SPECTACULAR MW3, but that was too long for Activision. Imagine how perfect Black Ops would be if they had more time? Probably be unbelievable, but still, I congratulate Treyarch for making it as good as it is in about two years. And yes, Halo will continue. Why? Because Microsoft knows money when they see it. And, I believe ODST was supposed to be an expansion pack for Halo 3, therefore it was named that.