Gaming Section 8: Prejudice Review

Is it more than Space Marines with jetpacks? No, and it doesn't need to be.

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2011/05/04/section-8-prejudice-review/1

 

Wat.

 

For a console that's huge.

 

So.. At 8eur and something its a safe buy... hum...

 

I thought this was PC-oriented site?

 

I don't know where you got that idea. Consoles are covered here too. Take a look at Bit-Gamer!

 

That's actually a mistake. It's 32-player on the consoles, 40-player on the PC. I'll correct it as soon as I get into the office - sorry for the mistake.

 

Still not huge.

 

40 is quite a big count, for example, BFBC2 only supports 32 Players..

 

i've seen old enemy territory maps with 128 players and 64 players were quite common.... too bad there aren't many games that allow for fps mass battles

 

Going by your original review for Section 8, they've improved it a lot then Joe?
Not that I've played the original Section 8, but it is in my steam folder from one of the steam sales...

 

How old are you, m'boy?

No, in all honesty, it is appalling to see multiplayer limits decrease over time. Bandwidth & performance go up but the maximum players are going down? How does that work exactly?

 

One of the things I like about Mount & Blade: Warband, is the giant player counts you can get. If you enjoy a medieval FPS (which is really what it is), even though the graphics aren't spectacular (they're passable), you're still talking some large force-on-force combats ... castle assaults being my favorite ...

 

I wouldn't bother wasting the bandwidth to find out (as in the old one)...

I'm interested by this one, but only in a 'I'll wait until it's on sale first' kind of way. The first one was just so bad...

 

I don't know, maybe from browsing the site daily for the last 3 years? As far as I was aware, consoles are more of additional coverage than the main deal.

Anyways, skill3d and perplekks45 already mirrored my original thought, it's depressing to see player count going down in spite of ever more powerful hardware and bandwidth. Even more depressing is to see a professional PC site calling 32, or even 40 player-limit huge. We had 32-player games ten years ago.

 

PC is the preferred platform usually out of personal preference, but we do cover all platforms.

The player limit is judged comparatively. It may not be huge compared to what is technically possible, but compared to most other FPS games - which average 12 players, often less - 40 players is pretty big. The most popular shooters these days - BC2, COD, etc - all support less than 40. Thus, 40 is a big number.

 

And thus, we are encouraging developers to make games with a lower limit because we are happy to announce that anything higher than 16 is HUGE. And we all know how developers feel about investing too much time/effort/money into something when all they have to do is what everyone's happy with, don't we?

 

I bought this game yesterday for a friend and mysley, gotta say we had a laugh makes a change from playing cod and bfbc2.
On a side note best mass fps games are tribes and Planetside. Planetside was well ahead of it's time imho.
Bit-tech do you haveany news on a planetside 2?.

 

Ah, I remember when ID launched the 64 player maps for Quake 2. I never did find a server with that many players on, but the maps were jolly impressive.

Truth by told 64 player deathmatch didn't exactly work - you need some sort of team mechanic to make it any good.

 

64 players TDM or CTF was awesome, though. PURE CARNAGE!