Teblos
My feelings on the Xfire/Combat Arms Con...
2008-07-28 5:18 AM PDT
Well, don't get me wrong, it is a very nice contest. But for the love of bob, rob, and the holy goat, it's just a contest of how long someone can leave their computer on with Combat Arms idling. Mostly this is 12-16 year old kids that have a computer in their room that they can leave on while they sleep or whatever. It makes it unfair to people who can not do this, and like to play fair by the rules. Now, if they had done it by something trackable. Like how many kills they can accumulate in a week, flag captures, mission accomplishes, things like that, then it would be a bit fairer. Some of us have to actually worry about an electric bill.
Combat Arms vs SoldierFront
2008-07-13 9:42 AM PDT
Hmm, where to begin? There is alot of differences between the two, but I shall name the ones most important.
Graphics
Here is where Combat Arms by far surpasses Soldier Front. Where the character models and landscapes are all slightly blocky and...well..FLAT, the graphics in Combat Arms are smooth, well textured, and, well, great. It isn't Crysis or Half Life 2, but Combat Arms does stand out great.
Sound
Well, here, both games have their ups and downs. The firing effects in Combat Arms could use a bit of tweaking, since they don't sound quite realistic. But the environ sounds are great, even if they don't travel very far. The sounds of boots crunching through the snow are completely realistic, and the sounds of a grenade bouncing off the wall have a great metal on metal tink about it.
Here's where SF has one up on CA. The sounds of boots coming down a metal/concrete hallway travel more than 3 feet in Soldier Front. You can hear someone coming up behind you to stab their knife into your supple rear end, if their walking regularly. In CA...you really can't hear them that close, even if you have an extreme sound system with the bass on full blast.
Controls
Here, CA outranks SF. There are quite a few more options in controls, like the ability to run. In SF, if you want to run (or rather, move quicker) you have to switch to your knife, leaving you exposed to anyone who's coming around the corner with even their pistol drawn. CA, on the other hand, has the run button set to the Shift button, allowing you to drop your gun to your side while you haul tushy to wherever you need to go.
There are many, many more differences between the two games, but for now, this is all i shall post.
Graphics
Here is where Combat Arms by far surpasses Soldier Front. Where the character models and landscapes are all slightly blocky and...well..FLAT, the graphics in Combat Arms are smooth, well textured, and, well, great. It isn't Crysis or Half Life 2, but Combat Arms does stand out great.
Sound
Well, here, both games have their ups and downs. The firing effects in Combat Arms could use a bit of tweaking, since they don't sound quite realistic. But the environ sounds are great, even if they don't travel very far. The sounds of boots crunching through the snow are completely realistic, and the sounds of a grenade bouncing off the wall have a great metal on metal tink about it.
Here's where SF has one up on CA. The sounds of boots coming down a metal/concrete hallway travel more than 3 feet in Soldier Front. You can hear someone coming up behind you to stab their knife into your supple rear end, if their walking regularly. In CA...you really can't hear them that close, even if you have an extreme sound system with the bass on full blast.
Controls
Here, CA outranks SF. There are quite a few more options in controls, like the ability to run. In SF, if you want to run (or rather, move quicker) you have to switch to your knife, leaving you exposed to anyone who's coming around the corner with even their pistol drawn. CA, on the other hand, has the run button set to the Shift button, allowing you to drop your gun to your side while you haul tushy to wherever you need to go.
There are many, many more differences between the two games, but for now, this is all i shall post.
