Platinum Announces 360/PS3 MadWorld Follow-Up 'Max Anarchy'

  • 63 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by TwoOneFive (9459 posts) -

yeahhhhh this wont work

#52 Posted by Example1013 (4807 posts) -

off-topic--can we put harsher bans on people posting the spam? Like IP or region bans? Or maybe get some sort of AdBlocker that automatically hides/deletes posts that say bc2shop in them?

#53 Posted by bybeach (5002 posts) -

Ahh...same pic as on at least another prominent site so obviously from Mad World, and  also a  clear prominent disclaimer the Max Anarchy world does not revolve around jack. Why am I neither confused or offended?.
 
 Though I could give a shit about Max Anarchy really, and I will be surprised this works. But I am eventually going to get Vanquish. If nothing else, it's for not having the sophistication to enjoy Bayonetta, odd as that may well be.
#54 Posted by billyhoush (1195 posts) -

I guess they realized how much interest CliffyB's knock off got. Platinum get your money, baby.

#55 Posted by roughplague (131 posts) -

Anything from platinum games have my immediate attention, creating both Bayonetta and Vanquish, they are my most adored company today^^

#56 Posted by Icemael (6364 posts) -
@Lind_L_Taylor said:
" I don't know how this game was ever put first on the fucking Wii.  There better be a single-player campaign, otherwise I don't see the point of yet another online multiplayer shooter.  Mindless run & gun just doesn't entertain that well anymore. "
Read the article. It's not a shooter.
#57 Posted by Lind_L_Taylor (3966 posts) -
@Icemael said:
" @Lind_L_Taylor said:
" I don't know how this game was ever put first on the fucking Wii.  There better be a single-player campaign, otherwise I don't see the point of yet another online multiplayer shooter.  Mindless run & gun just doesn't entertain that well anymore. "
Read the article. It's not a shooter. "
I did read it. Replace gun with chainsaw. Is it that much different?
 
From the sound of it, I would wager this game will have serious
controller issues.  And if it's just a short campaign story like the
CoD series puts out, then I don't see how the game isn't any more
mindless than today's run & gun.  Online multiplayer combat, done
over & over on the same set of maps, no storyline, etc, that makes
for a disposable, boring game.
 
But I guess we'll see. I'm still curious to see how it turns out &
whether it will win me over.
#58 Edited by Icemael (6364 posts) -
@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:
" I don't know how this game was ever put first on the fucking Wii.  There better be a single-player campaign, otherwise I don't see the point of yet another online multiplayer shooter.  Mindless run & gun just doesn't entertain that well anymore. "
Read the article. It's not a shooter. "
I did read it. Replace gun with chainsaw. Is it that much different? "
Yes. Compare for example Resident Evil 4 and Call of Duty to God Hand and Bayonetta. Pretty damn different.
 
@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" From the sound of it, I would wager this game will have serious controller issues. "

From what sound? That it's an competitive multiplayer 3D beat 'em up? Because that's all we know.
 
@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" And if it's just a short campaign story like the CoD series puts out, then I don't see how the game isn't any more mindless than today's run & gun. "

So if the single player is short, the game must be mindless? lol.

@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" Online multiplayer combat, done over & over on the same set of maps, no storyline, etc, that makes for a disposable, boring game. "

Yeah. Look at for example Quake III. So disposable and boring, people are still playing it twelve years after its original release.

I'm not saying the game will be great (I honestly doubt it, considering that the MadWorld people are developing it), but all of your complaints are complete bullshit.
#59 Posted by Lind_L_Taylor (3966 posts) -
@Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:
" I don't know how this game was ever put first on the fucking Wii.  There better be a single-player campaign, otherwise I don't see the point of yet another online multiplayer shooter.  Mindless run & gun just doesn't entertain that well anymore. "
Read the article. It's not a shooter. "
I did read it. Replace gun with chainsaw. Is it that much different? "
Yes. Compare for example Resident Evil 4 and Call of Duty to God Hand and Bayonetta. Pretty damn different.
 

In a multiplayer game?  Not really.  I didn't even know that Bayonetta had 
multiplayer.  Otherwise if it isn't, what the hell are you talking about? Not
a very good comparison.
 
 @Lind_L_Taylor said:

" From the sound of it, I would wager this game will have serious controller issues. 
 
@Icemael said: "From what sound? That it's an competitive multiplayer 3D beat 'em up? Because that's all we know.

 Based on what we know, it sounds pretty god-awful.
 

@Lind_L_Taylor

said:

" And if it's just a short campaign story like the CoD series puts out, then I don't see how the game isn't any more mindless than today's run & gun. " 
 
@Icemael said: So if the single player is short, the game must be mindless? lol.

YES!   Multiplayer is mindless so if the single-player is short then it's a mindless
game that is a complete waste of $60.
 

@Lind_L_Taylor

said:

" Online multiplayer combat, done over & over on the same set of maps, no storyline, etc, that makes for a disposable, boring game. 
 
@Icemael: "Yeah. Look at for example Quake III. So disposable and boring, people are still playing it twelve years after its original release.I'm not saying the game will be great (I honestly doubt it, considering that the MadWorld people are developing it), but all of your complaints are complete bullshit. "

A lot of people play a lot of old games, but I don't know any of them
So what?  It probably won't be great, so why do you disagree?  I
have as much a right to say my opinion as you do.  That is all.
 
 
PS: Fuck you.
#60 Edited by Icemael (6364 posts) -
@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:
" I don't know how this game was ever put first on the fucking Wii.  There better be a single-player campaign, otherwise I don't see the point of yet another online multiplayer shooter.  Mindless run & gun just doesn't entertain that well anymore. "
Read the article. It's not a shooter. "
I did read it. Replace gun with chainsaw. Is it that much different? "
Yes. Compare for example Resident Evil 4 and Call of Duty to God Hand and Bayonetta. Pretty damn different.
In a multiplayer game?  Not really.  I didn't even know that Bayonetta had 
multiplayer.  Otherwise if it isn't, what the hell are you talking about? Not
a very good comparison. "
How exactly does multiplayer make diversity impossible? Even within the shooter genre, there are radically different multiplayer games -- compare for example Battlefield to Senko no Ronde! Pretty damn different, wouldn't you say? And you're suggesting that, even though such diversity is possible without leaving the realm of gun-based combat, going outside it can't make for something especially different from Call of Duty-style shooters? Laughable.

@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:

" From the sound of it, I would wager this game will have serious controller issues. 
 
@Icemael said: "From what sound? That it's an competitive multiplayer 3D beat 'em up? Because that's all we know.

Based on what we know, it sounds pretty god-awful. "
We know nothing, for fuck's sake! 
 
@Lind_L_Taylor said:

@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" And if it's just a short campaign story like the CoD series puts out, then I don't see how the game isn't any more mindless than today's run & gun. " 
 
@Icemael said: So if the single player is short, the game must be mindless? lol.

YES!   Multiplayer is mindless so if the single-player is short then it's a mindless
game that is a complete waste of $60. "
"Multiplayer is mindless", lol. You know nothing about video games. Of the least mindless games of all time, the majority are multiplayer-focused. Take for example Guilty Gear and Starcraft. These are games being played on a professional level, for fuck's sake, games that one can spend hundreds, even thousands of hours on and still not have mastered -- there is not a single mindless thing about them.

And as for shortness = mindlessness, I dare you to try and 1CC a Metal Slug or a Cave shoot 'em up and say that again.
 
@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor  said: 

" Online multiplayer combat, done over & over on the same set of maps, no storyline, etc, that makes for a disposable, boring game. 
 
@Icemael: "Yeah. Look at for example Quake III. So disposable and boring, people are still playing it twelve years after its original release.I'm not saying the game will be great (I honestly doubt it, considering that the MadWorld people are developing it), but all of your complaints are complete bullshit. "

A lot of people play a lot of old games, but I don't know any of them So what?  It probably won't be great, so why do you disagree?  I have as much a right to say my opinion as you do.  That is all.   PS: Fuck you. "
Bolded the most important part. You even admit yourself that you don't know what you're talking about.
#61 Posted by Lind_L_Taylor (3966 posts) -
@Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:

" @Icemael said:

" @Lind_L_Taylor said:

" I don't know how this game was ever put first on the fucking Wii.  There better be a single-player campaign, otherwise I don't see the point of yet another online multiplayer shooter.  Mindless run & gun just doesn't entertain that well anymore. "
Read the article. It's not a shooter. "
I did read it. Replace gun with chainsaw. Is it that much different? "
Yes. Compare for example Resident Evil 4 and Call of Duty to God Hand and Bayonetta. Pretty damn different.
In a multiplayer game?  Not really.  I didn't even know that Bayonetta had 
multiplayer.  Otherwise if it isn't, what the hell are you talking about? Not
a very good comparison. "
How exactly does multiplayer make diversity impossible? Even within the shooter genre, there are radically different multiplayer games -- compare for example Battlefield to Senko no Ronde! Pretty damn different, wouldn't you say? And you're suggesting that, even though such diversity is possible without leaving the realm of gun-based combat, going outside it can't make for something especially different from Call of Duty-style shooters? Laughable.
 I'm saying it doesn't make it any more interesting.  I'm not looking at spending years at
at a game so I can match wits with the Lites!  That's a serious waste of fuckin' time.
 
@Icemael said:

@Lind_L_Taylor

said:

@Lind_L_Taylor said:

" And if it's just a short campaign story like the CoD series puts out, then I don't see how the game isn't any more mindless than today's run & gun. " 
 
@Icemael said: So if the single player is short, the game must be mindless? lol.

YES!   Multiplayer is mindless so if the single-player is short then it's a mindless
game that is a complete waste of $60. "
"Multiplayer is mindless", lol. You know nothing about video games. Of the least mindless games of all time, the majority are multiplayer-focused. Take for example Guilty Gear and Starcraft. These are games being played on a professional level, for fuck's sake, games that one can spend hundreds, even thousands of hours on and still not have mastered -- there is not a single mindless thing about them.

And as for shortness = mindlessness, I dare you to try and 1CC a Metal Slug or a Cave shoot 'em up and say that again.
 

Like I said, some fucking game that somebody else eats, sleeps, & breaths in order
to beat everybody online is not a fucking game.  It's an exercise in frustration &
pain!  And screw that.
 
 @Icemael said:

 
@Icemael: "Yeah. Look at for example Quake III. So disposable and boring, people are still playing it twelve years after its original release.I'm not saying the game will be great (I honestly doubt it, considering that the MadWorld people are developing it), but all of your complaints are complete bullshit. "

A lot of people play a lot of old games, but I don't know any of them So what?  It probably won't be great, so why do you disagree?  I have as much a right to say my opinion as you do.  That is all.   PS: Fuck you. "

Bolded the most important part. You even admit yourself that you don't know what you're talking about. "
 
You idiot!  I was referring to THEM meaning PEOPLE.  As in I don't know anyone that
plays those games??  So much for trying to take the high road by outsmarting
me, huh?
#62 Posted by Icemael (6364 posts) -
@Lind_L_Taylor said:
" I'm saying it doesn't make it any more interesting.  I'm not looking at spending years at
at a game so I can match wits with the Lites!  That's a serious waste of fuckin' time. "
Because you need to spend years on a multiplayer game to have fun with it, lol.
 
@Lind_L_Taylor said:
" Like I said, some fucking game that somebody else eats, sleeps, & breaths in order
to beat everybody online is not a fucking game.  It's an exercise in frustration &
pain!  And screw that. "
First off, you do not need to eat, sleep and breathe Guilty Gear or Starcraft to enjoy them. Second, if you don't want to put your mind into games, playing them will always be mindless, and in that case you can hardly complain about it -- it's you who are mindless, not the games.
 
@Lind_L_Taylor said:
" You idiot!  I was referring to THEM meaning PEOPLE.  As in I don't know anyone that plays those games??  So much for trying to take the high road by outsmarting me, huh? "
Whether or not you know people who play those games has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. You bring up irrelevant bullshit, and then feel triumphant because I interpret it in a way that makes it relevant (something every sensible person would do)? I think it's clear who the idiot is.
#63 Posted by Lind_L_Taylor (3966 posts) -
@Icemael said:

@Lind_L_Taylor said:
" You idiot!  I was referring to THEM meaning PEOPLE.  As in I don't know anyone that plays those games??  So much for trying to take the high road by outsmarting me, huh? "
Whether or not you know people who play those games has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. You bring up irrelevant bullshit, and then feel triumphant because I interpret it in a way that makes it relevant (something every sensible person would do)? I think it's clear who the idiot is. "
The new game was shown yesterday & it looks like ass, so big deal?
You don't even know what I'm talking about so I don't see how you
can tell me what is relevant or not.  I don't know anyone that plays
the games you cite as an examples (like Quake 3), hence, it's probably only a 
handful of people. I don't see how that is a valid example with your
precious handful of fans of old games.  So somebody might spend 
5 fucking minutes reliving the past.  So what??  You might as well 
call your own argument complete bullshit, because that's what it is.
Or call yourself bullshit, because that seems to be what you're full
of.  Enjoy your shitty game, turd.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.