What do you guys think? Halo was short, and crappy on multiplayer.

I think that RC is without doubt one of the best Star Wars games and infact first person shooters I have played in a long time. Im having alot of fun playing it.

The BBC have given it a very high score in their recent review (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4319065.stm) and it hit Number one in the XBOX chart this week in the UK and number 3 in the all formats chart.

Good stuff

DMUK

I hated Halo 2. It just didn't hold me at all.

RC, I loved the demo. I haven't installed the game yet even though I have it. I'm waiting until I get a better graphics card. But going by the demo I love it. It's incredibly fun and I find myself able to play it repeatedly.

Halo is definetly better, but RC is my 2nd favorite FPS :)

The game looks much better than the demo, which did disappointment me a little. But you expect that from a demo before release, being early code.

DMUK

I think RC is great, I still don't see why people think Halo is the greatest game ever. Halo didn't do anything that hadn't already been done in a game, either in single player of multiplayer.
Halo wasn't that good. It did have good marketing which contributed to its success but that IMO was it.

Originally posted by DarthMaulUK
The game looks much better than the demo, which did disappointment me a little. But you expect that from a demo before release, being early code.

DMUK

The levels in the demo are all identical except for an extra line after Scorch asks where the maintenance shaft leads, and the advisor answers. There's also more variety in the music, nothing much. And of course the screen doesn't cut out after the MagnaGuard closes the windows.

I played the demo at least fifty times so when I got to the demo mission in the full game I was like... here we go again. :p

As a single player game, so far it's shaping up to be great. However as a Multiplayer game, its just an average shooter. It doesn't even come close to the deep gameplay and options of the JK series. I am speaking exclusively of the PC game here.

Having never played Halo 2, I can't comment on how it stacks up to that particular game. However...

This game has great graphics and music and a neat, if short SP campaign. The MP, while it can be fun, leaves a lot to be desired in today's market, and even compared to other Star Wars games.

Originally posted by Kurgan
.....However as a Multiplayer game, its just an average shooter. It doesn't even come close to the deep gameplay and options of the JK series. I am speaking exclusively of the PC game here.....

.......The MP, while it can be fun, leaves a lot to be desired in today's market, and even compared to other Star Wars games.

Really? I think it's BETTER than JA by a MILE. You don't get anyone standing around treating the game like a pretty looking IRC client, the guns act and feel more real and the game feels like it's played faster than JA too. The only real letdown is the lack of options, but thats not something that can't be fixed once the source code and editor utilities get released.

I didn't like battlefront, but that's probably because I only played it on the Xbox, and I hate playing FPS's with controllers. It just doesn't feel as natural to me as a keyboard/mouse does.

I think the MP is under rated. The maps that came with the game are well not that good. But once we get some cutom maps things should be much better. I like the fast pace and tactic feel of it. The weapons take some skill to use and there is no god like super cheap weapon for people to exploit. For me the only real problem is the poor MP maps that came with the game.

Originally posted by deloused
Really? I think it's BETTER than JA by a MILE. You don't get anyone standing around treating the game like a pretty looking IRC client, the guns act and feel more real and the game feels like it's played faster than JA too. The only real letdown is the lack of options, but thats not something that can't be fixed once the source code and editor utilities get released.

I didn't like battlefront, but that's probably because I only played it on the Xbox, and I hate playing FPS's with controllers. It just doesn't feel as natural to me as a keyboard/mouse does.

Well, JA/JK2 is not to blame for the "honorz" community, so that's honestly not a legit criticism of the game (rather of the MP community, of which RC's is simply too young to judge in that respect).

One might as well say that CounterStrike is a worse game than RC because there is rampant cheating. Well in that particular case it might be the game's fault because the developers didn't work harder to stop the exploits in the game.

But the makers of admin mods are to blame for the honorz community taking over, not the game itself. I suppose LucasArts should have simply forbade Raven to released the MP SDK, but then that would have also prevented many of the good mods from coming out, and shortened the game's lifespan.

As far as the speed of the game, it depends on what you mean by speed. In JA you can move a lot faster than you can in RC, unless you're like the heavy weapons character in Siege or something, where you are moving slowly. But RC lacks vehicles, force speed/rage and that sort of thing.

The gameplay might seem "Fast" but in an artificial way. For example, the MP maps in RC are supposedly all designed for AT LEAST 4-8 players (some for more). The two DM specific maps (not recycled as CTF/Assault) are rather small. They are not conducive to play with 8 people in them, because you basically spawn, and are killed in 3 seconds. The way to win is to fire your rockets and grenades down every corridor you see, thus hitting somebody as they are spawning in, and repeat. You win by luck, or by that extra few ms you might have advantage with your ping over others. To some, that might be "Speed" to others, no. I haven't memorized all the names of all the maps, so that one "treehouse looking map" (like a big wooden ship in space) is an example of a map that works poorly with 4 players. One person guards, and one person attacks. So it essentially plays like a 1 vs 1 map. The person who wins the 1 vs 1 showdown wins. What they should have done is say "Play this map ONLY with 4 players or less, and play these other maps with MORE than 4 players" rather than implying that they all worked equally well with 4-8 players and some of them worked well with even more players. In the base game you can't set more than 8 players anyway (without messing with the advanced options through the console, but I haven't gotten this to show up in the menu). The two DM specific maps seem to work best with 4 players or less, the rest are 6 or more players, IMHO, though that low gravity map is probably a 4-6 deal, it's tiny.

On the other hand, in JA people have gotten so good with the Force and such, that they can stay alive for long periods of time. In RC you have no such recourse. The weapons essentially kill you in two hits or one. Is that "faster"? Good players in JA have learned to overkill so that they can do something similar, but good players also know to avoid getting hit, so they seem immortal.

In RC, once you can see your opponent, one of you is as good as dead. So I wouldn't say the movement speed is faster, but perhaps the lack of shields and health might make it seem faster. But it's hard to judge from such a short period of time it's been out.

As for the weapons being more "realistic" I don't know what that means.

I agree with you that the gameplay is good, but it's definately not as deep as a game like JA's (when played properly, I'm not talking about some honorz JA+ mod server). The lack of options is a big problem. And while I have hope that modders will remedy some of this, it's a long shot. The people who really need to make those changes are the developers themselves, because it may take years for good gameplay feature adding mods to come out (ie: ones that are stable and balanced). I'm sure we'll get plenty of skins and DM maps in short order once the tools are out, but as to adding things like objective based play with classes, bots, etc. that could take awhile, so I'm not too hopeful. Will people's interest in the MP game last that long?

It may end up like the Elite Force games or SWBF, very few people playing it, and thus very few good mods being made for MP.

I hope not, I hope it prospers, but I'm not going to hold my breath...

Originally posted by Sir Smokes Alot
I think the MP is under rated. The maps that came with the game are well not that good. But once we get some cutom maps things should be much better. I like the fast pace and tactic feel of it. The weapons take some skill to use and there is no god like super cheap weapon for people to exploit. For me the only real problem is the poor MP maps that came with the game.

I dunno I've already had people complain about the "cheapness" of certain weapons. But the people who complain (and even the people who talk, period) is rather small for now.

I imagine that if these folks could, they would start disabling weapons or toning them down to make the game play more how they want it to.

Originally posted by Kurgan
I dunno I've already had people complain about the "cheapness" of certain weapons. But the people who complain (and even the people who talk, period) is rather small for now.

I imagine that if these folks could, they would start disabling weapons or toning them down to make the game play more how they want it to. The two most powerful guns the Trandoshan Repeater and DC-17M Anti-Armor Attachment both have big draw backs. One makes you move much slower and the other has 4 round limit.

The only weapon I've heard people whine about is the Wookiee Homing Rocket Launcher. I sure hope there won't be a way to disable weapons because then we'd get all these servers with the "cheap" weapons gone and it would unbalance the gameplay if there was nothing but weaker weapons.

Originally posted by TK-8252
The only weapon I've heard people whine about is the Wookiee Homing Rocket Launcher.

Really? I've heard people complain about a bunch of weapons. I even heard someone complain about the ACP Array gun!

Originally posted by TK-8252
I sure hope there won't be a way to disable weapons because then we'd get all these servers with the "cheap" weapons gone and it would unbalance the gameplay if there was nothing but weaker weapons.

Yeah, I agree. If people had it their way, I suspect all that would be left is pistols, ACP repeaters, and blasters.

<_< I'd love to have a pistols only. :D

What is really holding back the MP game is the poor MP levels that came with the game. Once the editor comes out and we get some good custom maps it should be much better. Right now maps feel small and boring. What do you guy think about adding man able turrets to the MP levels. The sniper rifle would be there to even it out and keep the game balanced. Really easy to snipe someone manning a turret.

can you just put in a certian weapons set that you find? like nothing... or just certian weapons?

I'm pretty sure right now all weapons can be found no matter what.

Originally posted by InsaneSith
<_< I'd love to have a pistols only. :D

Not if every (or most) server(s) was (were) like that. To do it once in a while would be fun, but I like using all the other weapons too.

I think it would be a bad idea to modify the existing levels and release them (as anything but a way to learn how to map, but that shouldn't be necessary because this is just the Ut2k4 engine).

Rather if turrets are going to be added (which I think would be cool) they should be put into NEW maps, thus you can balance the map with the turrets, rather than copy and pasting them into some map that wasn't designed for them in the first place.

I can see them being nice in CTF/Assault maps. In Deathmatch they would just be silly with one person using them to rack up kills.

I hope we can get some objective style maps. Like say one side has to blow up so and so. The other side must stop you from blowing up the target.

Originally posted by Sir Smokes Alot
I hope we can get some objective style maps. Like say one side has to blow up so and so. The other side must stop you from blowing up the target.

I would be happy to see even a step down from that. They could add single player elements to existing gametypes. Say an assault map that has a door in one of the paths to the enemy base. The enemy can lock and unlock it, and you can either slice the door and move through slower but quieter, or you could breach the door and do it "hard and loud". Also, I agree that turrets would be really good.

Well i personnally like RC way better then Halo. Halo had a good story and was generaly a good game, but the second hald of the game sucks, with the flood and all that.

Also i found RC way more fun to play then HL2. I'm guessing with only like 7 hours of gameplay to do they were able to focus on that and refine it so it was extremly good. I just hope that they will release new campaigns for it, cause they could do so much with this game.

Also it would be cool if they would add in some vehicle support, its using the U2 engine so it sounds be to difficults to do. And add an Onslaught and Assault like mode from UT2K4 to the MP.

The singleplayer campaign is a bit short, but it has a nice story and great atmosphere. The multiplayer is a bit above averge, but nothing special. I like how you can customize your own looks, (even though it doesn't have anything to do with the gameplay) but it just plays good.

I still like Halo 2 though, because that's essentially Republic commando with vehicles and without squadmates.