GameSpy's Game Of The Year 2005 [Archive]

CptStern

24-12-2005, 04:55 PM

I can see how they picked COD2 over FEAR ..fear has nice graphics and excellent combat but it's a corridor crawl nonetheless with gimmicky combat ...CoD2 is a jack of trades that excels in many areas not just combat

Kiva128

24-12-2005, 05:08 PM

Indeed, F.E.A.R. was nothing special. First person max payne without the actually stuff that mad max payne good.

DigiQ8

24-12-2005, 05:14 PM

you kiddin me =\
FEAR got a great storyline, with some cool action and horror
its the best FPS this year imo

bvasgm

24-12-2005, 05:20 PM

RE4 should have won GOTY and FEAR should have gotten best FPS. The only thing they got right was that BF2 won best online multiplayer.

DigiQ8

24-12-2005, 05:23 PM

its kinda hard to me to choose between RE4 and Civ4 for Game Of The Year
RE4 was a great action game, shoot heads, kick etc..
Civ4, played it all night long, ...addicition -_-

Absinthe

24-12-2005, 05:35 PM

I've played CoD2. It's utterly linear, predictable, boring, and repetitive. You can't take two steps in that game without experiencing the feeling that the developers are holding your hand. Fear, for any of its flaws, is still miles superior to the yawn-inducing retread that is the Call of Duty series.

I really don't hold much stock in GameSpy's GOTY awards, or much of their journalism for that matter.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2003/20030919h.gif

I find myself disagreeing with a lot of their views, and not just in that "well, we have a difference of opinion" sort of way. I mean like "my god, you guys are ****ing idiots". And when Halo 2 gets GOTY (a game that should nowhere near qualify) over Half-Life 2, then it only shows the glaring contradictions, inconsistencies, and foolishness of their journalism.

They should get onto their knees and pray to God that they have Fargo who is the sole redeeming aspect of their sad institution.

Beerdude26

24-12-2005, 05:36 PM

Indeed, F.E.A.R. was nothing special. First person max payne without the actually stuff that mad max payne good.Yeah, but F.E.A.R. not in the Top 10? That's just silly.

I had much more fun with CoD 2 than with F.E.A.R., but F.E.A.R. did have me thinking about the story, and how to flank those bloody enemies without getting myself killed :D

CoD 2 was just "Throw some smoke if there's an MG, and if not, just blast 'em" albeit with very nice graphics and cool weapons :p

StardogChampion

24-12-2005, 06:08 PM

Face it. FEAR is a sucky game. I'm glad it's not in the top 10. I've just gained some more respect for Gamespy.

But still... I prefer Civ3 to Civ4...

COME ON THE KASAVIN!

Beerdude26

24-12-2005, 06:32 PM

Face it. FEAR is a sucky game.Nope, it isn't :p
It's got a much better story than CoD 2, it's got more thinking to it than CoD 2 (Action-wise) and it's got bullet-time.

And dismemberments.

Everyone loves dismemberments.

DigiQ8

24-12-2005, 06:34 PM

Face it. FEAR is a sucky game
:sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper:

Beerdude26

24-12-2005, 06:35 PM

:sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper:He's just lucky we don't have bullet-time smileys or he'd be definitely pwned :p

Absinthe

24-12-2005, 08:09 PM

If somebody can actually say FEAR is a shit game, then I weep for how low standards have fallen.

CyberPitz

24-12-2005, 08:26 PM

I loved FEAR..though not the Game of the Year..still pretty damn good. Anybody that holds a drop of water to Gayspys opinions need some help anyway.

Baal

24-12-2005, 09:25 PM

What qualifies as a "game in this year," be released between January 2005, and December 31st, 2005?

I was wondering why I didn't see WoW, that's all. Since WoW was released in late November, 2004.

Harryz

24-12-2005, 09:37 PM

I was wondering why I didn't see WoW, that's all. Since WoW was released in late November, 2005.

Lay off the doobie.

Baal

24-12-2005, 09:45 PM

I saw that mistake I made, and I edited it, and since I was actually PLAYING WoW I minimized and didn't check to make sure the edit went properly.

That's messed :\

Anyways, all fixed now.

6Three

24-12-2005, 09:58 PM

I never had much respect for Gamespy :thumbs:

mortiz

25-12-2005, 01:30 AM

COD 2 was just the same old crap from all of the other WW2 shooters out there. At least F.E.A.R. had bullet-time, an interesting plot, and good A.I..

Beerdude26

25-12-2005, 01:32 AM

COD 2 was just the same old crap from all of the other WW2 shooters out there. At least F.E.A.R. had bullet-time, an interesting plot, and good A.I..Oh yeah the A.I. :D

Yeah, it was very, very advanced indeed. They actually suppressed you while a few others would move in closer. (Which would result to a shotgun blast in the head, but you'd take damage from the others D: )

Samon

25-12-2005, 01:35 AM

I actually thought both F.E.A.R and COD2 were pretty average games.

Beerdude26

25-12-2005, 01:36 AM

I actually thought both F.E.A.R and COD2 were pretty average games.Maybe, but F.E.A.R. > CoD 2 nonetheless :p

Top Secret

25-12-2005, 01:53 AM

Personally, I don't even think they should have had a "Game of the Year" this year. Every reviewer should have stood up and said "No games deserved it. Go back to making original games and stop milking the system."

With that in mind, I enjoyed FEAR over COD2. For the sheer reason that I could have played COD2 more than a year ago. It was called COD. And also, that I could have played COD over a year before that. It was called MOH:AA.

gh0st

25-12-2005, 01:55 AM

COD 2 was just the same old crap from all of the other WW2 shooters out there. At least F.E.A.R. had bullet-time, an interesting plot, and good A.I..
wow bullet time, how revolutionary.

an interesting plot? ww2 is interesting to me.

the ai in cod2 is actually reasonably good, there were some shitty moments but all in all i think cod 2 is better. though i didnt particularly like either and regret buying both.

did you ever think that these are GAMESPYS opinions? if you want to make the "right" game of the year why dont you make your own? and see how many people give a shit. no one is right, you cant just say that game sucks or this game is good and have it fly for everyone. obviously the editors have a different taste than you - get over it.

Top Secret

25-12-2005, 02:16 AM

did you ever think that these are GAMESPYS opinions? if you want to make the "right" game of the year why dont you make your own? and see how many people give a shit. no one is right, you cant just say that game sucks or this game is good and have it fly for everyone. obviously the editors have a different taste than you - get over it.

And who are you to bag on people for their opinions? YOU get over it. I'm not claiming, nor have I seen anyone else claim, that they could produce a better game. And in the instance of say, a community made mod, you'd be right. But seeing how a lot of us people payed for these games. I believe we all have the right criticize them, and also criticize other peoples opinions about them.

So, on with the gamespy bashing.

gh0st

26-12-2005, 12:01 AM

And who are you to bag on people for their opinions? YOU get over it. I'm not claiming, nor have I seen anyone else claim, that they could produce a better game. And in the instance of say, a community made mod, you'd be right. But seeing how a lot of us people payed for these games. I believe we all have the right criticize them, and also criticize other peoples opinions about them.

So, on with the gamespy bashing.
and way to contradict yourself dipshit.

Gorgon

26-12-2005, 12:30 AM

Civilization IV (PC) hahahahhahahaha :laugh:

ehm :S

Top Secret

26-12-2005, 12:49 AM

and way to contradict yourself dipshit.

Apparently you took my post entirely out of context. By "Bagging" on other peoples opinions and "criticizing" them are entirely different. An example would be "Get over it." That's not seeing their point of view, or showing them a different light. It's being a dick. On the other hand "I think this was better because this and that" is a criticism. Or "I disagree because of that and this."

Contradiction? Hardly. Now **** off.

ríomhaire

26-12-2005, 01:41 AM

I played Civ 2 once. God that was boring.

nutcrackr

26-12-2005, 01:57 AM

Yay I don't have any of the games in the top 10, aside from HL2 but I have that for PC. Go me!

destrukt

26-12-2005, 02:16 AM

i'm guessing that most of the people bashing civ. 4 for being the goty haven't even actually played it, and are just saying 'zomg it's like boring lolz.'

Javert

26-12-2005, 02:53 AM

FEAR wasn't even in the Top 10? What a joke.
For PC games it is. But I can understand it not being in the top 10 games total. Not nearly.

Sparta

26-12-2005, 04:03 AM

i'm guessing that most of the people bashing civ. 4 for being the goty haven't even actually played it, and are just saying 'zomg it's like boring lolz.'
I haven't played it, so i can't cast judgement on it. I just gotta say, even though its been getting great reviews, it doesnt hold any interest to me. Maybe i gotta see it in action or something first i guess. I'm sure its as good or near as good as everyone says though.

As for FEAR and COD2. Got FEAR, and was really disappointed at how Monolith screwed such a good opportunity up. They have great AI, interesting and somewhat original story idea, kickass combat, and yet they managed to make it incredibly tedious and dull through lack of imagination in level design and gameplay design. Good game, but man could they have made it so much better.

Played the demo of COD2. Seemed exactly like the first one with same graphics. Nothing great there for me. I'll rent it and finish it someday.

destrukt

26-12-2005, 04:09 AM

I haven't played it, so i can't cast judgement on it. I just gotta say, even though its been getting great reviews, it doesnt hold any interest to me. Maybe i gotta see it in action or something first i guess. I'm sure its as good or near as good as everyone says though.
for the type of game it is, it is marvelous it's just that it's not a hugely popular genre, especially compared to fps so i guess that's why so many people are in a rage about it.

DigiQ8

26-12-2005, 06:56 AM

for the type of game it is, it is marvelous it's just that it's not a hugely popular genre, especially compared to fps so i guess that's why so many people are in a rage about it.
if they only really know this game.....:hmph:

Jintor

26-12-2005, 11:04 AM

I'll give Gamespy the benefit of the doubt, seeing as occasionally they really do manage to write some awesome articles (God I hope i spelled that right :/)

In my mind there have only ever been three games that deserve GOTY awards, and they are: Deus Ex, HL1 and HL2.

Alig

26-12-2005, 01:13 PM

Face it. FEAR is a sucky game. I'm glad it's not in the top 10. I've just gained some more respect for Gamespy.

But still... I prefer Civ3 to Civ4...

COME ON THE KASAVIN!

No way is FEAR a sucky game...it's the only PC game in 2005 to make me stop playing WoW for a while. I think most people agree FEAR is easily one of the top PC games this year.

>>FrEnZy<<

16-03-2006, 01:57 AM

Fear was good. I have to admit. Gripping and brand new story line, ghosts, slow mo, and dualies, but it still is a tired out and boring old shoot through the corridor, linear type of game. That type of fps genre has just died lately. With exceptions ofcourse. Fear, unfortuneatly, didnt trancend the genre, as dues ex, or the half-life series did. It wasn't open ended and diverse, like deus ex. It didnt allow you to develop an almost real interaction with the environment around you like half-life did. And because it failed to trancend the genre, in unfortuneatly still falls in that category of boring and linear fps games. However, considering it falls into this category, it still did exceptionally well.

As mush as I hate gamespy, I agree with their choice to put call of duty 2 above Fear, as it still trancends that boring linear fps genre as fear failed to do. Although little has changed between cod 2 and the first cod, I still believe that it provides the gamer with an open ended experience, and can bring the battlefield alive.

DIE GAME SPY