Hisagawa wrote:

Where is my scout update?!



Btw, wouldn't it have made a hell of a lot more sense if they just did one big update instead of having everyone flocking to one class each time they decide to finish one?



Spies are going to get rocked once theirs hit.

It takes about two months for them to come out with an update just for one class. 9 classes, 2 which have been done so.. 7, that's 14 months, a little over a year to come out with all that. I don't think people are willing to wait an entire year without content.

The Pyro update could have been worse...

Sweet Counter Strike meets Bugs Bunny...


Ill be sure to pick this right up NOT

Sweet Counter Strike meets Bugs Bunny...


Ill be sure to pick this right up NOT

Traditionally, Team Fortress was based off realism like Counter Strike. Realistic Weapons, People, armor, etc. or at least tried to seem realistic. The problem is, Sentry Guns and killing people in the back instantly with a knife really doesn't seem realistic. They went off an earlier era, (I think 50's or 60's) back during the Spy trend. James Bond was very big back then, the Cold War made the spy vs. spy thing very prevalent. I think in the end, the fact that they made things look a lot less realistic while not off the charts trippin' balls unrealistic was a good choice. Besides, the game is made up of different classes that all excel in different situations so they're made to look vastly different from each other. It's so when you see that differential figure you know what to expect, what they're using, what their tactics are, and how you can beat them or if it's better to just run away. The artist/graphic designers made the characters in a sort of animated Pixar type way, because if I remeber correctly that's who they used, and wanted the design to be. The game isn't super-serious, super realistic, terrorists jumping out of windows hoping the C4 at Bombsite B is about to go off etc. like say, CoD4.

That doesn't mean the game is horrible though. I would know, because generally now I look at games and judge them more on quality than I do gameplay. I mean, take Crysis for example. It has from what I can tell the best graphics of any game that's been created thus far, rivaled by BioShock and few other games that are coming out soon. But I only played Crysis for like 2-3 days before I never played it again because the gameplay wasn't really that replayable. You have to look at games for re-play value. (Also one good reason why I'm definitely looking forward to L4D). Take Counter Strike, the first one, 1.6. That game has been out for over 10 years and people still play it because it's a good game. It looks like *poop* compared to the present, but people still play it. I've had Team Fortress 2 for over like 5 months. I still play it because it's fun, although repetitive I take breaks from the game when it does get boring.

All in all, don't judge a book by its cover. It works both ways.