The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Halo'.
Is halo on the pc going to be much better than the xbox halo and is it going to have many extras like free online play?
Page:
klasovdan_1 wrote:
> i bought the PC version today and found that the single player game is
> just the same and maybe a slight differnce in the graphics but not
> much difference. i exspected a least a new gun or vechile but nothing
> but a new gun for multiplayer though. but saying that i do like the
> flame thrower.
Well, if single player was different, it wouldn't be the same game, now would it?
> i bought the PC version today and found that the single player game is
> just the same and maybe a slight differnce in the graphics but not
> much difference. i exspected a least a new gun or vechile but nothing
> but a new gun for multiplayer though. but saying that i do like the
> flame thrower.
Well, if single player was different, it wouldn't be the same game, now would it?
i bought the PC version today and found that the single player game is just the same and maybe a slight differnce in the graphics but not much difference. i exspected a least a new gun or vechile but nothing but a new gun for multiplayer though. but saying that i do like the flame thrower.
As far as I'm concerned, Halo on PC is basicly Halo on XBox with online multiplayer. There is no new real improvement, even the graphics are the same.
Which means it won't do anything for me again.
Which means it won't do anything for me again.
Never played the X-Box version, but I'm informed not much has changed in the single player bit. It certainly is fun, some nice big battles and some great vehicles, but it's incredibly repetative. Legion upon legions of aliens have to be waded through, and while this is fun in a brainless kind of way, I just get bored of it after prolonged play.
Multiplayer is a blast though, as fun as Battlefeild 1942 but on a much smaller scale, only 16 player limit when some maps really do deserve a 32 player limit.
Multiplayer is a blast though, as fun as Battlefeild 1942 but on a much smaller scale, only 16 player limit when some maps really do deserve a 32 player limit.
It's the same game. A few tweaks "for the better" will hardly make it significantly different, and certainly wouldn't make XBOX experience "ignorant" as a view in terms of how the game is likely to play.
If they were changing it to the extent whereby it would be unrecognisable in comparison to the XBOX version, it would be labelled "Halo 1.5" or something. As far as I know, it's just Halo.
If they were changing it to the extent whereby it would be unrecognisable in comparison to the XBOX version, it would be labelled "Halo 1.5" or something. As far as I know, it's just Halo.
lnsane Bartender wrote:
> Who says he hasn't "experienced it"? It's been available
> for over a year on XBOX. I've played it myself, and I can say that it
> doesn't deserve the hype. It's very pretty, but as for the claims re:
> revolutionary AI etc, that's BS, and the levels are so incredibly
> repetitive it became quite nauseating.
>
> I'm sure it's a blast in deathmatch, but again, other than pretty
> grpahics, I can't see how it would differ much from the QuakeIII
> engine games out there.
Heh, the ignorance of this post is quite amusing. :D
The PC version is changed in multiple ways, 'apparently' for the better, but remarkably different nonetheless. Hence, having played the XBOX version in no way gives you insight as to what the PC has turned out like.
Let me make it clear that I have not stated my opinion over the hype of Halo, and have not said whether I think the game is any good or not. I simply dislike statements that bear a strong declaration (ie. Halo isn't that good) that come from someone who has not experienced the item in question.
> Who says he hasn't "experienced it"? It's been available
> for over a year on XBOX. I've played it myself, and I can say that it
> doesn't deserve the hype. It's very pretty, but as for the claims re:
> revolutionary AI etc, that's BS, and the levels are so incredibly
> repetitive it became quite nauseating.
>
> I'm sure it's a blast in deathmatch, but again, other than pretty
> grpahics, I can't see how it would differ much from the QuakeIII
> engine games out there.
Heh, the ignorance of this post is quite amusing. :D
The PC version is changed in multiple ways, 'apparently' for the better, but remarkably different nonetheless. Hence, having played the XBOX version in no way gives you insight as to what the PC has turned out like.
Let me make it clear that I have not stated my opinion over the hype of Halo, and have not said whether I think the game is any good or not. I simply dislike statements that bear a strong declaration (ie. Halo isn't that good) that come from someone who has not experienced the item in question.
lnsane Bartender wrote:
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> Your opinion doesn't carry a lot of weight until you've actually
> played the game. What makes you think you can dictate what sort of
> hype a game deserves without even experiencing it?
>
> Who says he hasn't "experienced it"? It's been available
> for over a year on XBOX. I've played it myself, and I can say that it
> doesn't deserve the hype. It's very pretty, but as for the claims re:
> revolutionary AI etc, that's BS, and the levels are so incredibly
> repetitive it became quite nauseating.
>
> I'm sure it's a blast in deathmatch, but again, other than pretty
> grpahics, I can't see how it would differ much from the QuakeIII
> engine games out there.
Thank you IB. I've played it a lot on XBox, and I agree with your points too.
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> Your opinion doesn't carry a lot of weight until you've actually
> played the game. What makes you think you can dictate what sort of
> hype a game deserves without even experiencing it?
>
> Who says he hasn't "experienced it"? It's been available
> for over a year on XBOX. I've played it myself, and I can say that it
> doesn't deserve the hype. It's very pretty, but as for the claims re:
> revolutionary AI etc, that's BS, and the levels are so incredibly
> repetitive it became quite nauseating.
>
> I'm sure it's a blast in deathmatch, but again, other than pretty
> grpahics, I can't see how it would differ much from the QuakeIII
> engine games out there.
Thank you IB. I've played it a lot on XBox, and I agree with your points too.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Your opinion doesn't carry a lot of weight until you've actually
> played the game. What makes you think you can dictate what sort of
> hype a game deserves without even experiencing it?
Who says he hasn't "experienced it"? It's been available for over a year on XBOX. I've played it myself, and I can say that it doesn't deserve the hype. It's very pretty, but as for the claims re: revolutionary AI etc, that's BS, and the levels are so incredibly repetitive it became quite nauseating.
I'm sure it's a blast in deathmatch, but again, other than pretty grpahics, I can't see how it would differ much from the QuakeIII engine games out there.
> Your opinion doesn't carry a lot of weight until you've actually
> played the game. What makes you think you can dictate what sort of
> hype a game deserves without even experiencing it?
Who says he hasn't "experienced it"? It's been available for over a year on XBOX. I've played it myself, and I can say that it doesn't deserve the hype. It's very pretty, but as for the claims re: revolutionary AI etc, that's BS, and the levels are so incredibly repetitive it became quite nauseating.
I'm sure it's a blast in deathmatch, but again, other than pretty grpahics, I can't see how it would differ much from the QuakeIII engine games out there.
Ahh, Sr have now lowers Halo's price from £35 to £30 in line with the other retailers out there. Still more expensive than where I got mine from though.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> cipro wrote:
> Well mine has being posted to me as we speek, though I won't say
> from
> which retailer since SR doesn't like people advertising rivals.
>
> Play.com? ;)
I still wouldn't like to say, it won't make SR happy, but the place I did get it from was not only £8 cheaper than SR, but also delivered to me 2 day before it's release.
> cipro wrote:
> Well mine has being posted to me as we speek, though I won't say
> from
> which retailer since SR doesn't like people advertising rivals.
>
> Play.com? ;)
I still wouldn't like to say, it won't make SR happy, but the place I did get it from was not only £8 cheaper than SR, but also delivered to me 2 day before it's release.
Page: