Comparing a mod created by devs on their own unpaid time compared to full retail games created by a team full of advanced and highly paid coders.. sounds good. Then again, 1942 was mediocre and got stale quick. 12v12 was always fun to organize back then.
personally i considered dod to be better than most of its contemporaries, whether free mods or retail games despite its graphics which really werent that bad for its time.
well, bia wasnt exactly meant to be the same kind of game as dod and cod. it was supposed to give you the "feeling" you were in comabt and using real life tactics. admittedly, it pretty much failed at doing that unless you told yourself to play along with it, but atleast they tried.
#14 you didn't like BIA? i thought that both them were real fun and the squad tactics made it pretty interesting. the new one coming out looks pretty good also if you haven't checked it out.
p.s. dods is worse than console shooters. and thats saying something.
no i didnt really like it tbh. the whole meter over the head in response to covering fire was nice in theory, but not so good in practice. most of the time it wasnt really necessary to suppress and flank even though thats what the game obviously wanted you to do.
dod 1.3
rofl
cod2/3 > dods
brother in arms > dods
i like games where my bullets go where i aim them.
in bia, bullets don't go where you aim them. they did that on purpose for "realism effects to simulate nervousness under fire".
Even if the thread was about Source looking better than 1.3? It's true but it would fail? Conundrum?
not a characteristic of either game
you failed
p.s. dods is worse than console shooters. and thats saying something.
L@L
options
suppression meter: off
okay
continue chapter
Submit Comments
Registered Users Only
In order to post comments, you must be a registered member. If you have not registered, it's free and easy!