Caltrops - Postal II





	[quote name="Ice Cream Jonsey"][quote name="Fussbett"]There is a good <a href="http://www.quartertothree.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3200&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0" target="erik">Qt3 thread</a> on the Gamespot 4.8 rating that Erik gave Postal 2. In <a href="http://www.shacknews.com/ja.zz?id=7239817" target="george">this thread</a> on ShackNews, George "3D Realms" Broussard said, among many other horrors, that Postal 2 deserved an 8, and...[/quote] If that actually came out of Broussard's mouth and it wasn't that someone guessed his Shacknews (the fuck is he doing on Shacknews?) password, then he's officially passed both Scott Miller, and Miller's cabinet of secret marketing documentation as the most retarded member of the Duke Nukem Forever team. [quote name="George Broussard"]NO game is worth a 4.8/10. [/quote] Outpost? The Take Two release of BC3000? Front Page Sports: Football 99? Rise of the Robots for the Amiga? Jesus Fucking Christ. These games are all at least 5.0 for him. When the publisher offers to <i>buy the game back from you</i> and then shut down their non-redneck sports division entirely, like Sierra did for FPS:F99, I think it's fucking safe to say that JUST POSSIBLY the thing is at 49% or lower. Maybe if George had been working for a game magazine back when "E.T" came out those seven million cartridges would have found safe, stable and loving homes and not been casually buried in the desert. Postal 2 isn't as bad as those games. But at $50 with those load times and level design that brought the load times to the forefront (as Erik detailed on Qt3), giving it a score just under a five is very, very fair. The only way I think I can justify Broussard getting involved in this is that DNF's load times are so bad that they can be measured using a sundial, and he's trying to condition all of us not to care. I know they've changed engines a couple times, maybe the one they are currently on is the same as Postal 2's. the dark and gritty...Ice Cream Jonsey![/quote]