Author Topic: Hongfire Team Fortress 2 Servers (Read 25146 times)

Hyperguy · « **on:** September 04, 2009, 05:47:08 pm »

http://www.hongfire.com/forum/showthread.php?t=114248

Server Address: 208.167.224.34

To ease the wait for other online games like Emil Chronicle Online and Dungeon Fighter I've been fairly active at Hongfire's new Team Fortress 2 server. If you play, please join. Listing your SteamID would be nice too. O_o

JG · « **Reply #1 on:** September 04, 2009, 10:24:36 pm »

Note to self:
For some unbeknownst reason, tampons can mortally wound Hyperguy. Keep fact in mind for inclusion in future world domination plans.

Hyperguy · « **Reply #2 on:** September 04, 2009, 10:46:10 pm »

But only if they're strawberry flavored so yeah!

Moge · « **Reply #3 on:** September 05, 2009, 02:35:11 am »

Haven't played Team Fortress since TFC.

Those 56k days were really something.

MMX · « **Reply #4 on:** September 07, 2009, 07:18:28 pm »

Aw can't you play a really fun multiplayer game like.... uhh, I dunno... was never into TF but now that I think about it I can't think of any computer game I've played in the past three yeras that I've genuinely enjoyed...

What's the best shooter you - wait no I'll put th is on the video game boa- *checks main forum page* oh never mind.

What's the best shooter/fps multiplayer-capable game you've played in the past three years?

Like say... actually let's stretch it out.

between the release of UT2004 and today.

bfg00 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 07, 2009, 11:31:07 pm »

Probably Halo (I don't really play that many FPS's). But really my heart still pines for Goldeneye on the 64. Good stuff.

Hyperguy · « **Reply #6 on:** September 08, 2009, 01:43:48 am »

I tried to recall good FPS that I've played since UT2004, but couldn't come up with many since I don't play a variety of FPS games to begin with. I pretty much just find one I like and play it for half an eternity. Halo was good, I enjoyed Deus EX 1 and 2, Soldier of Fortune was fun for letting off steam with it's graphic killing, but core FPS titles like Battlefield, Half-Life, CounterStrike, and Unreal Tournament were pretty much off limits to me when they came out because my rig wasn't up to spec.

I could play them now, but as a lot of their communities have diminished or moved on I don't really see the point.

And I wanted to mention Tribes, but can't really lump it into the same category. Tribes had its day. Tribes was awesome when it came out, but sadly, didn't quite capture the level of fun of the first one and failed to with each additional sequel. That didn't stop me from picking up Tribes Vengeance though, and at the low, low, bargain bin price of $.32 brand new during Circuit City's liquidation.

JG · « **Reply #7 on:** September 08, 2009, 07:46:38 pm »

I don't play any FPSs in multiplayer mode cause I suck. But apparently I do play quite a few of the "bigger name" futuristic/scifi types. So my experience is completely single-player focused and doesn't include World War or modern combat games. So of the ones introduced 2004 or later, I think I'd rank them in this order, based solely upon my personal enjoyment of them:

1 - BioShock (great story and truly replayable with two major, divergant story arcs)
2 - Gears of War 2
3 - Metroid Prime 3
3A - Metroid Prime Trilogy (if you consider it a seperate game)
4 - Halo 3 (way, way too short though at only about 8 hours playtime, which is much shorter than the previous two in the series)
5 - Gears of War (more realistic but needed more single-player playtesting, as evident by the impossible to defeat final boss in 1P mode due to stupid AI of your partner)
6 - Halo 2 (the story is incredibly confusing until Halo 3 makes some sense of it)
7 - Metroid Prime 2 (not as good as the first, and the third is just simply a better sequel)

Moge · « **Reply #8 on:** September 08, 2009, 08:57:54 pm »

Not into deathmatch, but i do enjoy going either solo or co-op campaigns.

5. Metroid Prime 3 - VERY linear game
4. Resident Evil 5 - Having an AI partner tag along the entire time was clunky, but it did made for an excellent game with a buddy

3. Halo 3 - Everything about Halo is in one word: EPIC
2. TimeSplitters 3 - Until a proper Rareware FPS comes out this was the next best thing. Wish there were more comedy FPS' like this one.

1. Resident Evil 4 - Can't believe Cap almost entirely scrapped what made the original REs good, but in return we get one of the funnest shooting games i've played in a long time.

JG · « **Reply #9 on:** September 09, 2009, 08:11:51 pm »

Quote from: Moquin on September 08, 2009, 08:57:54 pm

3. Halo 3 - Everything about Halo is in one word: EPIC

Unfortunately, Halo 3 is also epicly short. It plays rather well and has a decent story (not as good as BioShock or either GoW though) but I was mightily pissed off when I beat it on day 2 of ownership. When the credits started rolling I thought, "What? That's all?" I mean, really. Why are the original Xbox games so much longer (15-20 hours) and engaging (deeper stories) and the final one, on a much more powerful system, so much shorter? Its almost as if the developers wished they could make the game a big multiplayerfest with no storyline at all. In other words, ODST.

Also, Gears of War is developed by a company named EPIC, and is therefore, epic in a way that Halo can not be.

bfg00 · « **Reply #10 on:** September 09, 2009, 11:41:52 pm »

I think you hit the nail on the head there. Developers are just bowing to the trend that more people play FPS's for the multiplayer content not the single player campaign.

I also played the PC version of Mass Effect which is pretty good but it totally kicked the ass of my machine.

Moge · « **Reply #11 on:** September 10, 2009, 07:35:40 pm »

I've played Gears. Its drab worlds, meathead designs, and gruesome spectacles are something to behold, but Halo's gameplay experience is far more diversified in part owed to its vehicular combat.

I'll take the colorful vistas of Halo over Gears' "ruined beauty" any day of the week. And, Gears is also a fairly short game.

JG · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2009, 09:29:45 pm »

Quote from: bfg00 on September 09, 2009, 11:41:52 pm

I think you hit the nail on the head there. Developers are just bowing to the trend that more people play FPS's for the multiplayer content not the single player campaign.

Except that's not true. They may spend more time playing the multiplayer mode, but show me the person that owns Halo 3 that hasn't played one bit of the single player campaign (barring recent purchases.) Developers are focusing on the 80% playtime/60% saturation aspect rather than the 20% playtime/100% saturation aspect. I'm not sure that's the best way to go. I don't see why the player can't have their cake and eat it too.

Quote from: Moquin on September 10, 2009, 07:35:40 pm

I've played Gears. Its drab worlds, meathead designs, and gruesome spectacles are something to behold, but Halo's gameplay experience is far more diversified in part owed to its vehicular combat.

I'll take the colorful vistas of Halo over Gears' "ruined beauty" any day of the week. And, Gears is also a fairly short game.

Gears has vehicles. In GoW you play the gunner for a short while in one chapter. In GoW2 there's an escort gunner stage (which Halo doesn't have), two back-to-back flying stages, and a tank stage. I'll yield though that none of that is more fun than driving Halo's Scorpion tank though. ("Tank beats everything!")

Gears (either one) is slightly shorter than Halo 1 or 2 but longer than 3. Any of the Metroid Primes trumps them in length.

bfg00 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 10, 2009, 10:48:48 pm »

Quote from: JG00 on September 10, 2009, 09:29:45 pm

Except that's not true. They may spend more time playing the multiplayer mode, but show me the person that owns Halo 3 that hasn't played one bit of the single player campaign (barring recent purchases.) Developers are focusing on the 80% playtime/60% saturation aspect rather than the 20% playtime/100% saturation aspect. I'm not sure that's the best way to go. I don't see why the player can't have their cake and eat it too.

Well I'm hoping that the rise of co-op play will help with that. I mean it would have been so awesome to have co-op on Starfox 64. Then again it would have been so awesome to just have more multiplayer on Starfox 64.

JG · « **Reply #14 on:** September 11, 2009, 09:57:16 pm »

Maybe if we see a StarFox Wii. But like F-Zero, the StarFox franchise has been badly mishandled and I have doubts we'll see another title. Even the series producer doesn't want to have anything to do with it anymore.

Moge · « **Reply #15 on:** September 12, 2009, 12:35:12 am »

Star Fox could be as epic as Halo in the right hands, and i can't believe Rareware totally struck out on that one.

Maybe Retro will save the day.

bfg00 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 12, 2009, 01:05:20 am »

Treu that. There really needs to be a good space shooter for the Wii.

MMX · « **Reply #17 on:** September 15, 2009, 10:18:57 pm »

Quote from: Hyperguy on September 08, 2009, 01:43:48 am

I enjoyed Deus EX 1 ~~and 2~~

Ahh yes, fine taste my young friend. Fine taste, indeed.

I don't even need to read the rest of this thread Hyperguy has already won it. Or at least the segment involving my threadjacking.

bfg00 · « **Reply #18 on:** September 15, 2009, 11:08:01 pm »

Well threadjacking is one of the standard sports of CoA.

MMX · « **Reply #19 on:** September 15, 2009, 11:13:18 pm »

It's one of the standard sports of... well, internet society in general. I mean it begs the question, how does an internet community mistakenly believe it could survive without threadjacking?

Online discussion boards are a place for real conversation. Conversation is malleable, transient, fleeting.

To think of threadjacking as an unsatisfactory occupation is... insulting to me, as a human being.

News:

Author Topic: Hongfire Team Fortress 2 Servers (Read 25146 times)