Summary: ok for starters this game is not that good. i don't see why everyone is freaking out about it. this game would have easily passed as an alright game for the ps2 like 7 years ago. the graphics are good, the story is good, but that is about it. the combat is not really that great. the fact that you cannot choose where to go, just follow a set path all the time is horrible. as for the gameplay, here is what 99% of the levels boil down to: A.
Summary: i thought i was buying a FPS but who knows what the developers were trying to create with this. it goes from sneaky/stealth to puzzle solving to platformer to FPS. to frustrate things even more, the subtitles are microscopic and the voice acting was done by out-of-work pornstars. you either need a theater-sized tv or plenty of patience if you even care as to what's going on with the story. and what a story it is (granted four chapters was all i could handle).
Summary: This game is by far the worst first person shooter I have ever played. The graphics are mediocre at best and the handling is horrific. Being able to shoot is like trying to shot an peanut with a spitball from 50 feet away. The storyline is all over the place and doesnt amount to anything else I have ever played. In all, this game wasnt worth what I paid for it.
Summary: I was eagerly waiting for "Call of Juarez" because it looked like it would be an updated, more freeform version of "Gun" from last year which I liked a lot, except that it was short, and much too linear, and thus, in my opinion not worth $60. Well this game is a tiny bit better as far as visuals, and a little more bloody (which I like; if you're playing a shooter, it's more realistic to have a HAVOC type engine with blood, ragdoll physics and so on, instead of the...
Excerpt: je croyais que le jeu était bon car il ya eu le numéro deux et bien non. Le scenario est nul, les themes sont malsain et les perso vulgaires. Pour viser c'est pas terrible. Franchement il n'arrive pas a la cheville de RED DEAD. Je l'ai vendu tres vite !