Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
Hell, if I had a botnet I would make sure their game stayed dead. ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ♥♥♥♥♥.
Well the game did have false advertising in the original description and also it had bad graphics though you did already mention that I suppose. Games aren't really based solely on how fun they are though and reviewers probably thought that there weren't enough content. Perhaps next time the 60 minute timer could be in a second mode, like a hardcore mode.
If the game wasn't good, they wouldn't be able to pull people in, ban them, and make them have to get another account. There are hackers all over the place and they are banning people that play legit. :/
This game is nothing like Last of us, NOOOOOTHING, that game got perfect scores, you cant compare a first person game to a shoddy, glitchy open world game. The two games are nothing alike, I'd like for you to tell me HOW they are similar, and don't say cause they have zombies, that part is irrelevant...
The point of their comment was the zombies though, they weren't comparing gameplay. They were saying that DayZ is too war like, and Infestation is more zombie survival like. I don't totally agree with their statement because Infestation is pretty much just like DayZ, but to each their own.
That bad eh? I didn't hear about stuff like that
No... no, it really isn't.
Which is a lie.