Games you don't think got the credit they deserve.

[Vy'drach]

I was looking at my game collection, and saw one I hadn't thought about in a while, a game called Run Like Hell for the PS2 (Also on Xbox). It was a really good game actually, good story, good characters, game play was a little lacking (But it had only 10 months of programming when the game was in development for 5 years), and I liked it since it was rather anti-cliché. It was a bit like Resident Evil meets Aliens, but in a good way. People got messed up in the game, the enemy creatures became more resilient to your weapons, and the point of the game was to survive. Also, the tutorial was more than that, for a full continuity of the game, you should play it because it introduces you to the main characters and helps the story fall into place better.

Here's a video of the first few minutes of the game, if you don't want a pointless boring cutscene, I recommend starting the video at 2:05.

*WARNING* Video does contain blood, violence, and swearing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBluHHpOPAA

Here's also what Wikipedia says about Run Like Hell.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_Like_Hell_%28video_game%29

And a final thing, the manual for this game had the best ad ever. Since they were sponsored by Bawls energy drinks apparently, and you could drink some for a small health boost, there was an ad in the back showing a bottle of Bawls, a Brute, and the slogan, "Grab your Bawls and Run Like Hell!"

[Guest FoXXX]

Star Fox, Duke Nukem

[X-Gamer]

Star Fox, Duke Nukem

Yeah. SF is definitely one. I also think Army of Two. That was an awesome game.

[Sabre]

Army of 2 had a great cover system, but was to bland due to market research, they should have left in the brash stuff and bromance.

Freedom Fighters

Soviats win the cold war, invade the USA

Dino Crisis 2

1 and 3 were crap, this one is a great action game type thing.

Evil Genius

Manage a 60s bond villain base.

Startopia

Mange a space station. Very funny too.

Zombie Driver

Run over zombies. Alot.

Parasite Eve 2

Tactical monster combat RPG type thing. Was panned in the day for not being scary, because it looked like resident evil.

Ratchet Gladiator

Scourge Hive

GTA China Town Wars

Fossil League

All 3 DS games are not great, but enjoyable enough. They are all seen as rip offs (or toned down cash ins) of popular games. That is true, but they are fun enough.

[CrypticQuery]

Starfox, Sly Cooper, Ratchet and Clank, Just Cause 2, Little Big Planet, etc

[Matt Macdowel]

Red faction, The conduit, starfox did get its credit well a little of it., Farcry 2

[Guest FoXXX]

Red faction, The conduit, starfox did get its credit well a little of it., Farcry 2

No, SF deserves way more than what it's gotten :S

[EazyIN]

Star Fox, Sly Cooper, I wanna be the guy, Resident Evil 4  :oops:

[Guest DRL]

No, SF deserves way more than what it's gotten :S

My clone says: TRUE!

StarFox, of course.

X-COM: Apocalypse.

The game was much better than the

previous ones. First of all, you are

no longer "alone" - You are in a city,

civilians/police move along, ect.

And the destructable environments

were jus AWEsome.

I think there are MANY others as well,

but by the time they were realeased,

people was in the rush for "+++graphics"

style games.

[Geo Stelar]

No, SF deserves way more than what it's gotten :S

It's beyond true.

[Showtime 1-1]

Sly Cooper. It kinda got overshadowed by Ratchet and Clank and other PS2 games.

[Sabre]

I'd like to say Modern Warfare 2. People rant and rave about how bad that game is, but it is in fact fantastic.

[Star Fox Runner]

The Legend of Zelda The Wind Waker. Some of the people I've talked to said they hated it because of the art style, I thought the art style was FANTASTIC! Plus it has my favorite story of the Zelda franchise.

[Asper Sarnoff]

Evil Genius

Manage a 60s bond villain base.

Second that really. Been playing it quite a lot this last month. Great fun, and pretty unique. Unfortunatly, it's bugged as hell. Often forcing you to open your save games in a text editor and remove stuck objects to be able to progress in the game.

[Vy'drach]

I'd like to say Modern Warfare 2. People rant and rave about how bad that game is, but it is in fact fantastic.

Might not want to use the word fact when stating an opinion, and I happen to strongly dislike Modern Failure 2 for a number of reasons, such as getting rid of the "modern" part. A large number of weapons in that game are not modern, such as the FN FAL, the 1887s, the Rangers, the AA12 and such. Also, the weapon's capabilities are ludicrous. the SPAS-12 is in reality, Semi-auto when firing 12 gauge shells, and they made it the weakest shotgun, when it should be the most powerful. the 1887s somehow have a longer ranged with a sawed off barrel, and the Striker, AA12, and Rangers barely have a shorter range with a much higher fire rate. Also, some of the other sidearms are ridiculously overpowered, mostly due to every gun in that game being unrealistically first shot accurate at all ranges, and the Glock Model 18 and the PP2000 having no recoil and the ability to drop someone across the map. Speaking of the PP2000, that would be more of a primary weapon than the MP5K, which was designed to be carried in holsters, or in another variation of it, clothing pockets. I remember when Call of Duty used to test their weapons to make them as realistic as they could, I can guarantee they don't do that anymore since none of the weapons behave correctly, a good example is the FN P90, which in reality has good penetrating and stopping power, and less recoil than a 9mm, where as in game, it jumps everywhere and does not put people down. And it was not a balancing issue since the M16 and FAMAS are 1 burst kill guns. They said themselves Modern Failure 2 was supposed to be more accurate, yet they put in perks such as Cold Blooded and Commando, the first making you immune to nearly everything from kill streaks to thermal scopes, while the latter gives you the ability to HALO lunge and fall from about five stories without dying.

Incorrect weapons and poor perks aside, the game play itself is also sorely lacking, with maps that leave you wanting, and lack of dedicated servers making it the laggiest multiplayer game. Also, for -people that play on consoles, they tried to "help" them but having aim assist, which was also in Modern Warfare, that causes way more problems than it helps. I personally can aim nearly as well on the console as I can on the computer, and the aim assist only succeeds in jerking my gun off target, or for the people that HALO jump, slamming it into the ground.

And one more little rant, I just love dying to the throwing knife as it slides across the ground a few feet and the handle taps my foot.

[Sabre]

Second that really. Been playing it quite a lot this last month. Great fun, and pretty unique. Unfortunatly, it's bugged as hell. Often forcing you to open your save games in a text editor and remove stuck objects to be able to progress in the game.

Get the minon patch

http://www.strategyplanet.com/evilgenius/TheGame/populationmod.asp

and maybe the unofficial patch from the evil genius wiki

Might not want to use the word fact when stating an opinion, and I happen to strongly dislike Modern Failure 2 for a number of reasons, such as getting rid of the "modern" part. A large number of weapons in that game are not modern, such as the FN FAL, the 1887s, the Rangers, the AA12 and such. Also, the weapon's capabilities are ludicrous. the SPAS-12 is in reality, Semi-auto when firing 12 gauge shells, and they made it the weakest shotgun, when it should be the most powerful. the 1887s somehow have a longer ranged with a sawed off barrel, and the Striker, AA12, and Rangers barely have a shorter range with a much higher fire rate. Also, some of the other sidearms are ridiculously overpowered, mostly due to every gun in that game being unrealistically first shot accurate at all ranges, and the Glock Model 18 and the PP2000 having no recoil and the ability to drop someone across the map. Speaking of the PP2000, that would be more of a primary weapon than the MP5K, which was designed to be carried in holsters, or in another variation of it, clothing pockets. I remember when Call of Duty used to test their weapons to make them as realistic as they could, I can guarantee they don't do that anymore since none of the weapons behave correctly, a good example is the FN P90, which in reality has good penetrating and stopping power, and less recoil than a 9mm, where as in game, it jumps everywhere and does not put people down. And it was not a balancing issue since the M16 and FAMAS are 1 burst kill guns. They said themselves Modern Failure 2 was supposed to be more accurate, yet they put in perks such as Cold Blooded and Commando, the first making you immune to nearly everything from kill streaks to thermal scopes, while the latter gives you the ability to HALO lunge and fall from about five stories without dying.

Incorrect weapons and poor perks aside, the game play itself is also sorely lacking, with maps that leave you wanting, and lack of dedicated servers making it the laggiest multiplayer game. Also, for -people that play on consoles, they tried to "help" them but having aim assist, which was also in Modern Warfare, that causes way more problems than it helps. I personally can aim nearly as well on the console as I can on the computer, and the aim assist only succeeds in jerking my gun off target, or for the people that HALO jump, slamming it into the ground.

And one more little rant, I just love dying to the throwing knife as it slides across the ground a few feet and the handle taps my foot.

Sounds like your playing pre patch. I do agree saying fact was wrong, but that said, most of the complaints are unjustified. For example, are you playing Hardcore mode?

The claim of 'less realistic' is dumb die to the fact that it's a game. They have tried 100% realism in shootings games before and they failed. Why? because you are piloting a man via remote control with a window for eyes. Even Flashpoint is not 100% realistic. There is a mod for HL2 that adds 100% realistic armour, weapons, ammo ect. No perks or any of that stuff you hate so much. Guess what? It's awful. Everyone ould just pick the Aug with FMJ and Composate armour, choosing anything else was an instant death sentence.

The point about auto aim, you can turn it off and trust me, even the best joypad player connot compair to a mouse and keyboard set up.

[Asper Sarnoff]

Get the minon patch

http://www.strategyplanet.com/evilgenius/TheGame/populationmod.asp

and maybe the unofficial patch from the evil genius wiki

Allready done. Still one of my Valets managed to get stuck in my hotel, blocking me from sending any of them to the world domination map.

Anyway, I've stopped playing it, or any game for that matter, now. Simply haven't got the time.

[Vy'drach]

While I did hear that there was a patch that did fix some of the weapons, there shouldn't of been the need for a patch, it's just common sense that a SPAS 12 with a 22 inch barrel would have farther range than a sawed off Model 1887, which still outranges it when not used akimbo, since the range is the same on the 1887 when using only one. That is a "WTF were you thinking" thing. Also, every gun should not be first shot accurate, such as the MP5K, which has a 4.5 inch barrel and fires a 9mm round at a muzzle velocity of 1230 fps. A full sized MP5 with an 8.85 inch barrel is barely able to be effective at 100m, an MP5K doing that is going beyond unrealistic into pure fantasy. While it is true that it is a game and should not be 100% realistic, Call of Duty used to be known for testing their guns to get them as realistic as possible. Now, they have 9mm rounds doing more damage than .45s, and a minuscule sound suppressor turning a .50 BMG rifle's gunshot into the sound you get when you fire a paintball gun. I am fully convinced that not only have they not even seen over 1/2 of these guns, they likely haven't held any of them. It doesn't need to be realistic, but it should at least be plausible. Horrid weapon depictions aside, there is still the matter of horrendous lag, spawn locations, and maps.

As far as playing normal or hardcore, I played both, there was little difference between the two. I preferred hardcore because I didn't want some scrub to see my dot on the map on the rare occasion I used an unsuppressed gun, I wanted them to actually have to listen and figure out where the shot came from. Also, there was no point to sniping with the kill cam and instant respawns.

As for computer vs. console, the computer will have a slight edge, but the difference isn't that big. It's more about your opponent's skill and reaction time than what input devices you are using.

And not trying to do an arguement, just saying that my (and MANY other's) standpoint is not unsounded. I tried very hard to enjoy MW2, but I couldn't. Modern Warfare 1 was very fun.

[CrypticQuery]

While I did hear that there was a patch that did fix some of the weapons, there shouldn't of been the need for a patch, it's just common sense that a SPAS 12 with a 22 inch barrel would have farther range than a sawed off Model 1887, which still outranges it when not used akimbo, since the range is the same on the 1887 when using only one. That is a "WTF were you thinking" thing. Also, every gun should not be first shot accurate, such as the MP5K, which has a 4.5 inch barrel and fires a 9mm round at a muzzle velocity of 1230 fps. A full sized MP5 with an 8.85 inch barrel is barely able to be effective at 100m, an MP5K doing that is going beyond unrealistic into pure fantasy. While it is true that it is a game and should not be 100% realistic, Call of Duty used to be known for testing their guns to get them as realistic as possible. Now, they have 9mm rounds doing more damage than .45s, and a minuscule sound suppressor turning a .50 BMG rifle's gunshot into the sound you get when you fire a paintball gun. I am fully convinced that not only have they not even seen over 1/2 of these guns, they likely haven't held any of them. It doesn't need to be realistic, but it should at least be plausible. Horrid weapon depictions aside, there is still the matter of horrendous lag, spawn locations, and maps.

As far as playing normal or hardcore, I played both, there was little difference between the two. I preferred hardcore because I didn't want some scrub to see my dot on the map on the rare occasion I used an unsuppressed gun, I wanted them to actually have to listen and figure out where the shot came from. Also, there was no point to sniping with the kill cam and instant respawns.

As for computer vs. console, the computer will have a slight edge, but the difference isn't that big. It's more about your opponent's skill and reaction time than what input devices you are using.

And not trying to do an arguement, just saying that my (and MANY other's) standpoint is not unsounded. I tried very hard to enjoy MW2, but I couldn't. Modern Warfare 1 was very fun.

^ This = WIN  I can't take MW2

[Falcool]

Both Starfox Adventures and Okami got good reviews but could have sold much more, and they both got too little credit.

[Sabre]

Both Starfox Adventures and Okami got good reviews but could have sold much more, and they both got too little credit.

I disagree, people won't shut up about okami.

[Falcool]

I disagree, people won't shut up about okami.

Yeah, well, it didn't sell very much considering it's reviews and popularity though.

[ThePointingMan]

Shack Fu!

[CrypticQuery]

Shack Fu!

*BARF* I found that game to be TERRIBLE!!

[ARWINGCOMMANDER 3987]

The Vector Man games, both were amazing.