This is now a 'what is your 2008 goty' thread.
Pretty shitty year imo, it would go to fallout 3
Pretty shitty year imo, it would go to fallout 3
How to win every RA3 game:
1. Go allies
2. After making two refs, go double rax
3. Spam peacekeepers
1. Go allies
2. After making two refs, go double rax
3. Spam peacekeepers
Pretty shit year? What are you smoking breadbin, it woz a sik yrAries_37 wrote:
This is now a 'what is your 2008 goty' thread.
Pretty shitty year imo, it would go to fallout 3
<3 Fallout3 *puts box on podium*
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Everyone seems to either think this was an amazing year or an awful year.Mekstizzle wrote:
Pretty shit year? What are you smoking breadbin, it woz a sik yrAries_37 wrote:
This is now a 'what is your 2008 goty' thread.
Pretty shitty year imo, it would go to fallout 3
TBH it was pretty bad.
Bad yeer??
Scuze meh, u guise r obviuosly frogetting CoD5.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
/sarcasm
Scuze meh, u guise r obviuosly frogetting CoD5.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
/sarcasm
Last edited by Finray (2009-01-02 10:30:27)
Lol RA3.
People are still impressed by the shitty tactless-rush gameplay of the later C&C games?
Interviewers have low standards nowadays.
People are still impressed by the shitty tactless-rush gameplay of the later C&C games?
Interviewers have low standards nowadays.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
DSL = DoctaStrangeLoveUzique wrote:
Lol RA3.
People are still impressed by the shitty tactless-rush gameplay of the later C&C games?
Interviewers have low standards nowadays.
If it's so tactless you should be able to counter it since you can see it coming a mile away.Uzique wrote:
Lol RA3.
People are still impressed by the shitty tactless-rush gameplay of the later C&C games?
Interviewers have low standards nowadays.
Call of Duty: World at War (not 5) > Call of Duty 4: Modern WarfareFinray wrote:
Bad yeer??
Scuze meh, u guise r obviuosly frogetting CoD5.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
/sarcasm
Actually I bet that after CoD:MW2 Call of Duty 5 is released.
Everyone would be like "wtf i toht cod5 was waw"
Enough game of the year threads.
Actually, if you don't consider UO a game (it was an expansion), then CoD:3 was CoD:5.Kptk92 wrote:
Call of Duty: World at War (not 5) > Call of Duty 4: Modern WarfareFinray wrote:
Bad yeer??
Scuze meh, u guise r obviuosly frogetting CoD5.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
/sarcasm
Actually I bet that after CoD:MW2 Call of Duty 5 is released.
Everyone would be like "wtf i toht cod5 was waw"
I don't get why IW/Treyarch/Activision couldn't just decide to put each Call of Duty title as a numberMiggle wrote:
Actually, if you don't consider UO a game (it was an expansion), then CoD:3 was CoD:5.Kptk92 wrote:
Call of Duty: World at War (not 5) > Call of Duty 4: Modern WarfareFinray wrote:
Bad yeer??
Scuze meh, u guise r obviuosly frogetting CoD5.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
/sarcasm
Actually I bet that after CoD:MW2 Call of Duty 5 is released.
Everyone would be like "wtf i toht cod5 was waw"
Technicalities.
The console versions of COD2 don't count as individual games... more like expansions on COD2Miggle wrote:
Actually, if you don't consider UO a game (it was an expansion), then CoD:3 was CoD:5.Kptk92 wrote:
Call of Duty: World at War (not 5) > Call of Duty 4: Modern WarfareFinray wrote:
Bad yeer??
Scuze meh, u guise r obviuosly frogetting CoD5.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
/sarcasm
Actually I bet that after CoD:MW2 Call of Duty 5 is released.
Everyone would be like "wtf i toht cod5 was waw"
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Ever play BRO?FloppY_ wrote:
The console versions of COD2 don't count as individual games... more like expansions on COD2Miggle wrote:
Actually, if you don't consider UO a game (it was an expansion), then CoD:3 was CoD:5.Kptk92 wrote:
Call of Duty: World at War (not 5) > Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
Actually I bet that after CoD:MW2 Call of Duty 5 is released.
Everyone would be like "wtf i toht cod5 was waw"
It was nothing like CoD2.
You do know that the full name is "Call of Duty 2: Big Red One"Miggle wrote:
Ever play BRO?FloppY_ wrote:
The console versions of COD2 don't count as individual games... more like expansions on COD2Miggle wrote:
Actually, if you don't consider UO a game (it was an expansion), then CoD:3 was CoD:5.
It was nothing like CoD2.
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
I own the game.FloppY_ wrote:
You do know that the full name is "Call of Duty 2: Big Red One"Miggle wrote:
Ever play BRO?FloppY_ wrote:
The console versions of COD2 don't count as individual games... more like expansions on COD2
It was nothing like CoD2.
I was hoping for CoD2, I got a shitty singleplayer game on a completely different engine made by a completely different company.
Hardly CoD2.
Still doesn't change the fact that it is infact branded and meant to be COD2 for consoles...Miggle wrote:
I own the game.FloppY_ wrote:
You do know that the full name is "Call of Duty 2: Big Red One"Miggle wrote:
Ever play BRO?
It was nothing like CoD2.
I was hoping for CoD2, I got a shitty singleplayer game on a completely different engine made by a completely different company.
Hardly CoD2.
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Agreed.
Doesn't make them expansions.FloppY_ wrote:
Still doesn't change the fact that it is infact branded and meant to be COD2 for consoles...Miggle wrote:
I own the game.FloppY_ wrote:
You do know that the full name is "Call of Duty 2: Big Red One"
I was hoping for CoD2, I got a shitty singleplayer game on a completely different engine made by a completely different company.
Hardly CoD2.
Doesn't mean they aren't games.
2008 GOTY for me hmmm....
most played - BF2
not counting BF2, it would be Frozen Throne
Not counting really old games, it would be COD:WAW
most played - BF2
not counting BF2, it would be Frozen Throne
Not counting really old games, it would be COD:WAW
CoH for me.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman