Left 4 Dead!

[Guilmon and a shotgun]

Games can be entertaining and realistic at the same time. Even fantasy has a basis in reality. Judging from most of what you say in your posts in this forum section, I don't think our taste in games overlaps very much, if at all.

You never know, i'm not against Left for Dead completely you know, i just think it could be much better.

My only problem there is that you didn't say "in my opinion."

No, but i did say "I THINK" therefore highylighting my chain of thought based on little or no fact. However, if that wasn't enough for you Senjuro then i apologise.

The enemies will always be in the same place, the powerups will always be waiting for you in that next room. I mean, hey, if you derive enjoyment from a predictable gaming experience that you can whip through with little to no challenge because you have it memorized, then knock yourself out.

Well frankly i have so many games and so little gaming time that i hardly find it repetitive at all. Maybe it is for you, seeing as you're probably a faster and better gamer then me but for me if i ever feel like it's getting reptitive or boring, i switch games.

In >MY< opinion, FPS titles that romanticize and endlessly rehash global conflicts are a waste of VG development money that could be going toward developing the next great idea. There hasn't been one in a really long time. All that's on the horizon lately is predominantly sequels with ever-increasing numbers.

I respect that, and you're right there will be alot of video game title sequels. But how is this a problem? the sequals are likely to be better then the originals, and new games like Halo:ODST and Diablo 3 are coming out so whats changed?
Also, could you give me some examples of FPS that romanticise conflicts or other events that you find to be a waste of money? i only ask so i can just verify your statement about us not sharing the same interests in video games.