Ghosk wrote: I prefer the old style.
Same here, when I try a modern game, I'm always complaining about the lack of options; in particuliar for the mouse settings. And about the lack of smoothness of those games.
Modern games having only 2 options for the mouse (one slider for the speed and one checkbox for inverting the y axis) is just not enough! I'm always complaining about how much latency or accelerations there is and how innacurate the slider is... I only like the mouse input of quake 3 based games and valve's engines probably because they offer a console and a wide set of commands.
For frame speed, I firstly feel the lack of frames in the controls because it doens't react well. Just for this, I'd say that 60fps is the lower limit; less is just unplayable for any games that highly use the keyboard/mouse/etc. 30fps is good for a movie, but not for a game.
Ghosk wrote:I just HATE these "super realistic omfg real life graphics" (...) It's all about killing and winning.
Agreed, it always saddens me when I looks how many western shooter there is compared to all those games that will be forgotten after like 6 months because another concurrent will make a more realistic game. But I don't say that graphics doesn't matter, it's part of the ambience of the game. And for me, this ambience is what make a successful game. I enjoyed Metro Last Light on my Linux machine because of this.
Anyway, it's sad that people trend to play those games instead of discovering things out of their classic cod/bf combo... And it's even sadder when you realize they are earning a shitload of money by just using Ctrl-c and Ctrl-v...
"Chuck Norris had to shorten his beard in the presence of Richard Stallman because two beards that awesome, so close would segfault the universe (again)."