Chromehounds
Chromehounds, développé par FromSoftware et édité par Sega, est un jeu de simulation et de stratégie sorti le 29 juin 2006 sur Xbox 360. Le titre permettait aux joueurs de créer leur propre mech géant à partir de dizaines de pièces et intégrait un mécanisme d'escouade, son attrait principal résidant dans un mode de jeu en ligne persistant.
L'accueil du jeu est reflété par un score agrégé de 75,19. La presse a salué l'expérience, comme l'indique Computer Games Magazine qui a écrit que « Chromehounds isn't just the most exciting giant robot game since MechWarrior 2 opened with that famous Digital Domain cutscene; it's absolutely a reason to buy… », ou My Gamer estimant que « Chromehounds delivers on almost every level and is one of the better titles to have been released on the Xbox 360 this year. ». Du côté des joueurs, les avis partagés sur Metacritic montrent l'un regrettant que « Since it's 2022, all we have left of this game is the single player content. Sadly, I missed the boat on this game when it released almost two decades ago (jee… », tandis qu'un autre qualifie le multijoueur d'« One of the greatest multiplayer games that was 10 years ahead of it's time. A huge global map with factions fighting over territory control, providing new mech… ».
Médias
Avis des critiques et joueurs
Critiques de la Presse (Metacritic)
« Chromehounds isn't just the most exciting giant robot game since MechWarrior 2 opened with that famous Digital Domain cutscene; it's absolutely a reason to buy a 360 and a Live subscription. [Oct. 2006, p.81] »
« Chromehounds delivers on almost every level and is one of the better titles to have been released on the Xbox 360 this year. »
« For those of you looking for a giant robot game that's distinct, exciting, deep, and eminently customizable, as long as you're willing to play with others, Chromehounds is what you've been waiting for. »
« HOUND building is borderline therapeutic. Slow in areas, but never for trivial reasons. »
« The fact that up to 20 players can compete against each other at one time with no lag is impressive. »
« Hearing your squad yelling in victory at a hard-earned tactical win or laughing at an unlucky shot in battle is a great feeling, and the best battles can create a story that people will be talking about days later. »
« While Chromehounds delivers on the multiplayer aspect of the game, it is lacking a great single player to go with it. »
« Operating the hounds is a breeze. They are even easier to operate than the mechs in Mech Assault, although they don't move as quick. Speed is sacrificed for ease of control. »
Avis des Joueurs (Metacritic)
« Since it's 2022, all we have left of this game is the single player content. Sadly, I missed the boat on this game when it released almost two decades ago (jeez, where did the time go). From everything I know and have seen, if you played this game for the multiplayer when it was active, it was a solid, above average game. That being said, I hope nobody bought it for the single player. Rarely has a game struck me as so boring, slow, and drab that I can barely play for more than 30 minutes before I need to switch it up. It's very clear that the single player was designed as a big tutorial for the multiplayer because although there is a decent selection of missions, each faction your mercenary works for focuses on a different type of mech. The story is very dull and uninteresting, the graphics are outdone by the first MechAssault on the original Xbox, the gameplay is slow and plodding... I have no desire to ever play this again. »
« One of the greatest multiplayer games that was 10 years ahead of it's time. A huge global map with factions fighting over territory control, providing new mech parts based on what countries territories your faction captures. No microtransactions, no girding EXP or levels to gain equipment. Win games, capture territories and be rewarded with technology exclusive to the faction of the territory controlled. Multiplayer forced extreme co-operation and coordination between different mech classes fighting over some of the largest maps we still have yet to see today. »
« no single player gameplay.......automatic fail!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! »
« My local GameStop threw away my friends copy of Chromehounds that he'd left there accidentally and he didn't even care. All you need to know about this game... trust me »
« My favourite Mech game since MechAssault. Chromehounds offers an insane amount of mech customisation which can lead to very varied mechs and strategies for using them. The campaign was okay but the multiplayer was awesome. The maps were massive and the combat was fun. It's really a shame that the multiplayer servers were taken down. »
« Would give an 8 or so for the Multi. 7 or maybe 6 for Single/Campaign. However, with the servers now being down (I miss you, Chromehounds) my favorite builds are unplayable (due to some parts being from the 'online' portion) in Campaign. Oh well, still one of my fav mech games, so many hours in the garage! »
« Hands-down the greatest mech game ever published. COuld the overheating system have been better? Of course! But, that's why the community got so psyched for a second game, only to be let down. (Please that second game) »
« Single Player/Multi Player (0/2) (If the single player is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no multplayer) (If the multiplayer is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no single player) Gameplay (2/2) Visuals/Story (0/2) (If the visuals are better than the story, review this section as if it had no story) (If the story is better than the visuals, review this section as if the visuals didn’t matter) Accessibility/Longevity (2/2) (Review this section only on Accessibility if the game has no longevity) (Review this section only on longevity if the game isn’t accessible) Pricing (1/2) Wildcard (0) This is a guideline for how to properly review games. Many reviewers like to get a “feel” for a game, and arbitrarily give a game a score that they believe it deserves. This results in wildly different scores between different reviewers, and vastly different scores between similar games. This guideline addresses these problems and scores games fairly and consistently. This guideline also gives scores that are usually similar to the metacritic score. The review score is based out of 10 points. There are no “half” or 0.5 increments. It is impossible to have a score above 10 or below 0. The review score will change as the game gets new dlc, drops in price, or if more secrets are found through the game increasing its appeal. The scoring is split into 6 sections. The first five sections can add a possible 2 points to the final score. The first 5 sections are Single Player/Multi Player, Gameplay, Visuals/Story, Accessibility/Longevity, and Pricing. Notice that 3 of these sections have two parts. These particular sections will be scored based on the stronger part of the game of the two. For example, **** has a lousy single player campaign, but an excellent multiplayer component, that section will be based solely on the multiplayer as if the single player did not exist. This allows games to be based on their own merits, as many unnecessary features are shoehorned into video games by publishers to reach a “feature quota”. Games that excel in both areas of a section don’t receive should be noted in the written review, but cannot increase the score past 2 in that section. However, it can be taken into account in the final section The final section can add 1, add 0, or subtract 1 to the final score. This final section is the “wildcard” section. This section is for how the reviewer “feels” about the game, but limits this only to this section, rather than the entire 10 point review. This section can include any positive or negative point that was not covered in the previous 5 sections. »
