1. i'm ok with it. the single player would suck, just like counter strike single sucked. it was basically just practice for the real game mode "multiplayer". at first when i saw this game i was turned off, but due to recent videos i think i might give it a try as i normally only play online anyways.

Posted at 12:21AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Dapper Dan

2. It could possibly be the most polished multiplayer game on this side of Halo 3, but with in impending bugs from the new PC version of Live working with Xbox Live, I'm a bit hesitant on how this game will come along. While it may be fun in the end, it sounds like nothing more than a Live Anywhere test.

Posted at 12:31AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Zac LaCombe

3. this is still a fence-game for me...so yea. i'll be waiting for more content to prove that the game is worthwhile for me.

Posted at 12:32AM on Mar 6th 2007 by DjDATZ

4. This doesn't appeal to me, and I don't think it appeals to most gamers. If they're expecting big sales numbers, perhaps they should brace themselves for disappointment. Wasn't there another horrible multiplayer only game that came out at the tail end of the X-Box's life span? I can't remember what it was titled, something about magic, ancient swords and martial arts weapons. I do remember it sucking, though. I've seen zero reasons not to expect Shadowrun to suck, too.

Posted at 12:48AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Jack the Ripper

5. Shadowrun is doomed by PC.

There will never be a cross plataform online game between consoles and PC's that will be worth a single dollar ever.

PC gaming is the worst form of gaming ever.

Posted at 12:58AM on Mar 6th 2007 by T Ghost

6. To jack the ripper:

Yeah, there was a XBOX fighting game that was online only.

I got it, it sucked never played after 1st week, don't even know where this game is here. I think I gave it to someone or traded it...

Shadowrun will be the same, crappy CS style with a LOT of PC cheaters.

Posted at 1:01AM on Mar 6th 2007 by T Ghost

7. From what I've seen, it looks like its gonna be a pretty good game...No local multiplayer sucks tho. If there isn't even split-screen on Live, thats gonna be a big drawback.

T Ghost is right about the PC cheaters, that will definitely ruin the experience.

Posted at 1:10AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Tariq Abusheikh

8. Sorry but I don't buy half games. No SP means no buy for me. The funny thing is that they will probably charge $60 for this game.

Posted at 1:14AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Brandon Johnson

9. I honestly keep losing track of this title amongst other, bigger and stellar titles coming out this year. The day Shadowrun hits shelves will pass by me unscathed I'd predict. Halo 3, Alan Wake, Mass Effect, Bioshock and yeah, I kinda wanna play TMNT..just to name a few.

Posted at 1:17AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Toph

10. I might've been convinced to buy it with LAN/non-Live multiplayer, but Live only? Meh.
The only way that would be acceptable to me is if there's a decent bot to practice with/play with. It doesn't sound like it though, so the lack of any non-Live multiplayer kills the deal for me... unless they do the right thing and put out a demo that doesn't suck, of course.

Posted at 1:25AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Mythor

11. if this game has no SP then i wont even think of renting it...

Posted at 2:35AM on Mar 6th 2007 by DjDATZ

12. Yes T, the game will suck because its made for the PC as well.

Yep the downfall of videogames is PCs. ok. Nevermind the fact the a lot of the great games for xbox started off as PC games or are PC games. yep real gaming didnt start till the advent of MS's xbox.


Anyway, i think this will be a deal breaker for many people, not everyone solely games online, even if they DO play online games.

Posted at 2:52AM on Mar 6th 2007 by JJ

13. JJ, the part that you don't get is that any game that goes for PC cannot use the 360's hardware to the max due to the PC platform multiple hardware configuration requirements.

What kind of PC would be needed to run GoW like the 360 does?

Now imagine the practicality of doing the exact same game to be playable cross platform on a system like 360 and all the possible PC HW configuration that any PC game has to be made to run on.

Also, I started gaming back in 1978, at the age of 6.

Since then I gamed for a single year only, 1994 on PC's.

Before and after I always gamed on consoles and those machines like C64s and ZX Spectrum.

Games were not born on PC nor evoluted to it's pinnacle thanks to PC.

Games are waaaaaaaayyyyy older than pc's and it's mouse/keyboard gameplay, sorry if I broke any ilusion of yours...

Posted at 3:04AM on Mar 6th 2007 by T Ghost

14. Oh, yeah, and if SR with it's live gold only playing capabilities costs more than US$30 it's gonna be the laugh of the year.

Posted at 3:06AM on Mar 6th 2007 by T Ghost

15. I think MS cut and run on this title. I mean, look what Toph is saying. This is supposed to be an important title (launch for Live Anywhere), but even MS doesn't seem that interested in it.

It looked and played like crap at E3 (I played it), and I haven't heard a lot of good since.

It just seems like bad news item after bad news item for Shadowrun.

I can't believe they want to charge PC players to play it (against 360 players).

Not only does this game seem doomed, but it seems like it's not going to give the boost to Games 4 Windows and Live anywhere that they hoped.

Playing this game at E3, it felt like playing Conker Live and Reloaded, which is not a good thing.

Posted at 3:06AM on Mar 6th 2007 by why not the LS2/LS7?

16. Crafting a good multiplayer game is a whole nutha deal than making a single-player campaign. Traditionall, a campaign used to be the real meat of a game, with the multiplayer as an added bonus. For a game to have zero single-player adn not even system link or split-screen, well that would mean they're focusing on a kick ass Xbox Live experience, yes?

Shadowrun basically has to be an UNBELIEVABLY fun and well-balanced PvP game for me to justify paying full price. I also expect they'll have some game modes worth playing, not just the standard team deathmatch and CTF that's been recycled for the past 10 years.

Posted at 3:23AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Clinton

17. It's not half a game. Idiot.

Also T Ghost sounds like a crazy person who doesn't know what he's talking about.

Posted at 3:36AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Tim

18. btw...that pick is a perfect choice for this post. the only thing thats coming out.

Posted at 4:09AM on Mar 6th 2007 by DjDATZ

19. I was really turned off about the graphics and direction of the game when I first saw it at E3 but its been growing on me.

I think its gonna be one of those cult hits like Psychonauts and Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. Its gonna be a innovative game that gets great reviews that no one will buy. As long as they include a good clan system I think this game will go over well with competitive type FPS fans AKA "Rank Whores"

Posted at 4:24AM on Mar 6th 2007 by The Visualizer

20. Unreal Tournament has a half-assed campaign mode, and would probably be better without it.

Who says a game needs a single player to be good?

UT has decent bots. So will Shadowrun. That's enough as far as "Single Player" goes for me.

On the other hand, the lack of split-screen is sad, as that's the best part of console FPSes.

Posted at 5:17AM on Mar 6th 2007 by Trauts