kyle Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 I can't find any real reviews for the game on PS2. And all the ones i read for the game on the 360 say it sucks. So has anyone played it on the PS2? If so is it fun? I'm not a big fan of first person shooters but i do love civil war stuff so i was thinking of getting the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManShowBoy Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 (edited) My bro just bought it and he's a cival war nut and reinactor. He's says it's awesome and really authentic, with long weapon reloads and ALOT of black powder smokeSometimes authentic isn't always fun, which is why many mainstream gamers say it sucks!(what!? no lasar guns????) . Cival War fans will love it though. I say the smoke from the weapons make the game awesome from videos i've seen. I've shot and old 1800's colt pitol and there is a ton of black powder smoke for each shot and the game recreates that quit well. Cival War looks a lot better than previous attemps at the genre. Edited December 11, 2006 by ManShowBoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atariboy Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 Reload times are around 10 seconds or so, its not really authentic at all, at least on the 360. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted December 12, 2006 Author Share Posted December 12, 2006 (edited) I have found a few player reviews online for the PS2 port and they all sound good. Yet no officail reviews for the PS2. So i dunno? Maybe it's good on the PS2 and sucks on the 360? Oh well i think i'll add it to my chritsmas list to my wife LoL. Edited December 12, 2006 by kyle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moycon Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 I heard the game is a rental game, nothing more. Its linear, short and has no online play. I still plan on trying it out. I'll probably try and snag a used copy for $9.99. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenomorpher Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 I saw this at EBGames and this popped right in my head. "That would be the funniest game on XBOX LIVE." I didn't take the time to check if there was multiplayer though which I doubt it has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Tyler Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 No multiplayer. I thought it sounded interesting but I'm not so sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_ruck Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 The problem with multiplayer is that with the new Live Camera, people would call you weird if you played it dressed in street clothes. I know that Confederate Uniform must be around here somewhere... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PressureCooker2600 Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 i'm hoping to get the game as a stocking stuffer.....since i am a big FPS fan and a big Civil War buff....i love all the medal of honors and this game seems to look alot like them.....as for the authenticity, the story has some true elements but as for the reload times.......should be more like 15-20 seconds, and thats if you could reload FAST back then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narutofan Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 but as for the reload times.......should be more like 15-20 seconds, and thats if you could reload FAST back then The skilled shooter (meaning everyone in the militia) could fire at least three shots in under a minute. So, no, 15-20 seconds isn't fast. Maybe for a hunter, yes, but not for the army. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+remowilliams Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 The problem with multiplayer is that with the new Live Camera, people would call you weird if you played it dressed in street clothes. Oh yeah this would be a gem with the Live camera. The hairy asses in the north fighting the nutsacks in the south. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PressureCooker2600 Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 but as for the reload times.......should be more like 15-20 seconds, and thats if you could reload FAST back then The skilled shooter (meaning everyone in the militia) could fire at least three shots in under a minute. So, no, 15-20 seconds isn't fast. Maybe for a hunter, yes, but not for the army. hunter......but it was all about the bushwhackers and snipers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narutofan Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 snipers Yeah, that had a lot of those during the civil war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PressureCooker2600 Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 snipers Yeah, that had a lot of those during the civil war perhaps you do not know that much about the civil war.... there were many snipers on both sides...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narutofan Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 snipers Yeah, that had a lot of those during the civil war perhaps you do not know that much about the civil war.... there were many snipers on both sides...... Do you mean snipers or bushwackers? The weapons didn't have much of a range back then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PressureCooker2600 Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 the weapons did not have the range they do today........but they DID have the range enough to where if you were good enough, you could put yourself in a tree and pick off people. maybe the preferred term is sharpshooter for Civil War era snipers.....one good example of a sniper is the unknown Confederate sharpshooter who, on July 1st 1863, during the battle of Gettysburg, shot General John Reynolds from his horse and thus led the First Corps to back down until Hancock was put in charge. sorry for the ranting......my major is in history so i tend to get into lecture mode when it comes to this stuff....especially military history Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narutofan Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 the weapons did not have the range they do today........but they DID have the range enough to where if you were good enough, you could put yourself in a tree and pick off people. maybe the preferred term is sharpshooter for Civil War era snipers.....one good example of a sniper is the unknown Confederate sharpshooter who, on July 1st 1863, during the battle of Gettysburg, shot General John Reynolds from his horse and thus led the First Corps to back down until Hancock was put in charge. sorry for the ranting......my major is in history so i tend to get into lecture mode when it comes to this stuff....especially military history Ah, sharpshooter was probably the word I was looking for, when I said "bushwacker". Yes, and I agree that that is definitely the coolest job in the civil war by far. I thought you were talking about sniper as in, someone who had the advantage due to sheer range of weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustblackend Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Sounds like a neat game to me. Speaking of the Civil War, where my house is used to be a confederate prison camp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PressureCooker2600 Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 almost all my ancestors were killed in action during the Civil War, on my dad's mother's side...there were five brothers who fought for the Confederacy in the Missouri militia and four died during the First Battle of Booneville....if the fifth brother had died also, I wouldn't be here right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogmeister Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 I found a review from Gamespot via Game Rankings. They didn't like it. The link: http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/l...reviewid=749466 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narutofan Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 This looks like it could have been great with better graphics. I know it's the gameplay that counts and not the graphics, but the only people this game could apply to is the history buffs, and we want it as real as it can get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.