The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I know theres another 'overrated' topic in FOG chat, but this one is a little different.
****
Now, before I begin, and before you all leap down my throat, these three games are good - certainly not poor by any means. The reason I am slating them is because of the hype around them - the sheer over appreciation that has floated around because of them. So....
****
Deus Ex -
Many people know I dislike this game. Having played it all the way through, I can honestly say its a real disappointment.
The game has been praised (massively) for its freedom, player/environment interaction, and free plotline. Sure, these are all apparent in some shape or form, but are certainly not what the hype says they are, and certainly not particularly central to the game. I shall digress.....
First of all, the freedom. Well, shall I say, limited freedom? You are only allowed to run around a small area, and yes, do pretty much what you want in that place. However, the hype has proclaimed it 'free', as in you can do anything. No it isn't. It (to quote IB) gives you an impression of freedom, that is instantly torn away once you realize you can't kill certain people, or do certain things. Its very annoying to hear all the hype, play the game, and be limited to some drab streets.
The player/environment interaction is good. Yeah, you can pick up pretty much anything, and throw it. But what else? Well, use pre-scripted computers to control certain guns and cameras and things. Whats the big deal? If it mixed Geo-mod technology with that, then it might be worth the claims of freedom and marvelous interaction. As it stands, all you can do is hack boxes.
The free plotline is perhaps the least over rated thing. There are many ways of playing this game all the way through, and several ways of killing certain people (hang on, shouldn't that be lots - this game is totaly free anyway, isn't it?!). Its fun to play through and do different things, choose different augmentations (the only fun bit of the game). However, the hype would have you believe that you can do what ever you want. What?! Sure, the game needs a plot to keep players interested, but you are so limited in the little freedom of control you have, the hype is not justified one bit.
Along with this, the environments are drab, ugly and very unimpressive. Of course, a street is not supposed to be exciting, but its not exactly as interesting as it is in real life - where you DO have freedom. Due to the flaws in the freedom, the locations suffer from it. The combat is weak and flimsy, and you never feel any real attachment to the characters. However, if you take the hype away, you DO have a good game, just one that really does not deserve the hype it got. The amount of times I got bored of hacking at pipes with crowbars, and then having to fight boring guards is uncountable. However, the dialogue is excellent, as is the freedom you DO have, such as choosing your attack method on freeing hostages. Apart from that, its totaly overrated. But it tried, which is commendable
*****
Halo - Oh! Another controversial one. This in my opinion, has been totaly blown out of proportion.
Before I begin, it is good, and certainly above average. However, the hype is ridiculous. The AI, the story and characters, and the 'epic' feel of the game are all overrated.
First of all the AI. 'Some of the best ever'. Or something to that effect. I have played the game all the way through, on Heroic setting. Sure, it may not be the Legendary setting, but many people will not bother with that. Lets see. AI. Well. Apart from either running away from me, chasing me incessantly until destruction, or charging madly at me, the AI did little else. The only reason you have to duck and cover is because you don't want to get shot, not because you have to outsmart the enemy. They simply roll around, like in any other shooter, and attempt to kill you. While you do the same. Nothing is added to the genre by this. Friendly AI is okay, and the sense of keeping your comrades alive is cool, but certainly not exclusive to Halo - you want to keep any prized possessions safe in any game. I shall use the 'Silent Cartographers' beach attack to highlight my points. Sure its quite cool, but what do you do? Charge up the beach, gun blazing. Hide for a bit, let sheild recharge. Jump out, burst, run, burts, grenade. Done. Oh, lets watch the pre scripted Warthog drop. Now, if the game dropped in a Warthog during the battle, IF you needed. Cool, but not clever.
The story and characters are good. No doubt about it. The story is presented with finesse and panace - 'A gun pointed at the head of the universe' is particularly cool. The characters are slightly less commendable, with no-one to really attach yourself to. The hype would have you believe that the game has an epic story - with amazing twists and turns. To be quite frank, I didn't care. I didn't care about the generic marines, except that they had an assault rifle that aided me. And the helped my use a Warthog. Great fun. The story however, is very, very linear, and so the 'epic battle' feel, that the game is treasured for, feels ridiculous.
I have seen Sav say that he loves the 'epic battles'. Sure they are large scale, in the impressive and lovely locations, but the lack of freedom in the story makes a mockery of it. You can't help feel that the epic engagements in the snow drifts, outside the Halo control centre, and on the beaches of that island, are all scripted to make you go 'wow'. They do just that, but you can never escape the impression that you are following a paper trail, with lots of treats for each discovery. Nothing wrong with that in games, it what makes them enjoyable. Its just when people say that it makes it such a fantastic game, that I get annoyed.
However, there is one fatal flaw that the game itself is guilty of. It has hardly any atmosphere. So little tense locations, enemies or feelings. Sav said that 'epic battles make a FPS'. Sure. But you need excitment. There is not one moment where I actualy feared for myself. Even the most atmospheric level, the Jungle place - 'Guilty Spark' I think its called, is quite tense, but the fear that the Floods build up created was dispelled over the next few sections. The game had no atmosphere to build on. There was no cautious, AvP2 style creeping through corridors. Even in games where fear is not a gameplay element, such as Perfect Dark, you feared for your life - because you were not given checkpoints every 10 minutes. Halo has not got any tense excitment, or any atmosphere to draw you in. It feels a little soul-less as a result. The library level is a perfect example. After 15 minutes of running through generic areas, you get bored of shooting the endless supply of thick enemies.
However, it looks and sounds good. It has excellent vehicle interaction, and this adds a lot of fun. It is way above average. It is quite innovative *in places*. Just I feel it does not deserve 1/10th of the hype it got. But it IS GOOD.
*****
Timesplitters 2 - Cube said it was the new Goldeneye. Pish.
This game is so overrated its incredible. It has been claimed that its the new 'King of shooters' and better than Goldeneye and its sequel, Perfect Dark. Ridiculous. Its main flaw is its single player.
Any shooter worth its salt has to have a good single player. The UT series is an exception because it is built entirely around its multiplayer. On a platform that has a maximum of 4, or an unlikely 16, the multiplayer is not the area to emphasise on. Sure, multiplayer on TS2 is excellent - but still not as good as Perfect Darks!
I find it quite incredible that a game such as TS2 is hailed as such a classsic. First of all the multiplayer has less options, less things to do, and less features than Perfect Dark, a game aobut 3 years older than it. While it is still its strongest feature, and very good, you cannot help but feel disappointed with it. If a game does not build on the excellent groundwork layed out by its spiritual ancestor, then whats the point? Especialy with the extra capabilities of the next generation consoles.
Then we have the single player. This is not (supposedly) its main emphasis, but PDs single player was almost second fiddle to its multi, and it was still excellent. I feel that any shooter that is worth praise needs a good multi and single player - unless, as is the case with Metroid Prime, the single player is out of this world. Which TS2s certainly isn't. Its pathetic. The challenges add a little extra stuff, but they are not what we were expecting. And its the new king of shoothers? Give me a break.
Having said that, it is cool, with good humour, good sound and graphics, and a bit of life. But not what the mags said about it.
*****
All good games! They all are above average etc.
Just thats my opinion.
Cheers
*runs away*
****
Now, before I begin, and before you all leap down my throat, these three games are good - certainly not poor by any means. The reason I am slating them is because of the hype around them - the sheer over appreciation that has floated around because of them. So....
****
Deus Ex -
Many people know I dislike this game. Having played it all the way through, I can honestly say its a real disappointment.
The game has been praised (massively) for its freedom, player/environment interaction, and free plotline. Sure, these are all apparent in some shape or form, but are certainly not what the hype says they are, and certainly not particularly central to the game. I shall digress.....
First of all, the freedom. Well, shall I say, limited freedom? You are only allowed to run around a small area, and yes, do pretty much what you want in that place. However, the hype has proclaimed it 'free', as in you can do anything. No it isn't. It (to quote IB) gives you an impression of freedom, that is instantly torn away once you realize you can't kill certain people, or do certain things. Its very annoying to hear all the hype, play the game, and be limited to some drab streets.
The player/environment interaction is good. Yeah, you can pick up pretty much anything, and throw it. But what else? Well, use pre-scripted computers to control certain guns and cameras and things. Whats the big deal? If it mixed Geo-mod technology with that, then it might be worth the claims of freedom and marvelous interaction. As it stands, all you can do is hack boxes.
The free plotline is perhaps the least over rated thing. There are many ways of playing this game all the way through, and several ways of killing certain people (hang on, shouldn't that be lots - this game is totaly free anyway, isn't it?!). Its fun to play through and do different things, choose different augmentations (the only fun bit of the game). However, the hype would have you believe that you can do what ever you want. What?! Sure, the game needs a plot to keep players interested, but you are so limited in the little freedom of control you have, the hype is not justified one bit.
Along with this, the environments are drab, ugly and very unimpressive. Of course, a street is not supposed to be exciting, but its not exactly as interesting as it is in real life - where you DO have freedom. Due to the flaws in the freedom, the locations suffer from it. The combat is weak and flimsy, and you never feel any real attachment to the characters. However, if you take the hype away, you DO have a good game, just one that really does not deserve the hype it got. The amount of times I got bored of hacking at pipes with crowbars, and then having to fight boring guards is uncountable. However, the dialogue is excellent, as is the freedom you DO have, such as choosing your attack method on freeing hostages. Apart from that, its totaly overrated. But it tried, which is commendable
*****
Halo - Oh! Another controversial one. This in my opinion, has been totaly blown out of proportion.
Before I begin, it is good, and certainly above average. However, the hype is ridiculous. The AI, the story and characters, and the 'epic' feel of the game are all overrated.
First of all the AI. 'Some of the best ever'. Or something to that effect. I have played the game all the way through, on Heroic setting. Sure, it may not be the Legendary setting, but many people will not bother with that. Lets see. AI. Well. Apart from either running away from me, chasing me incessantly until destruction, or charging madly at me, the AI did little else. The only reason you have to duck and cover is because you don't want to get shot, not because you have to outsmart the enemy. They simply roll around, like in any other shooter, and attempt to kill you. While you do the same. Nothing is added to the genre by this. Friendly AI is okay, and the sense of keeping your comrades alive is cool, but certainly not exclusive to Halo - you want to keep any prized possessions safe in any game. I shall use the 'Silent Cartographers' beach attack to highlight my points. Sure its quite cool, but what do you do? Charge up the beach, gun blazing. Hide for a bit, let sheild recharge. Jump out, burst, run, burts, grenade. Done. Oh, lets watch the pre scripted Warthog drop. Now, if the game dropped in a Warthog during the battle, IF you needed. Cool, but not clever.
The story and characters are good. No doubt about it. The story is presented with finesse and panace - 'A gun pointed at the head of the universe' is particularly cool. The characters are slightly less commendable, with no-one to really attach yourself to. The hype would have you believe that the game has an epic story - with amazing twists and turns. To be quite frank, I didn't care. I didn't care about the generic marines, except that they had an assault rifle that aided me. And the helped my use a Warthog. Great fun. The story however, is very, very linear, and so the 'epic battle' feel, that the game is treasured for, feels ridiculous.
I have seen Sav say that he loves the 'epic battles'. Sure they are large scale, in the impressive and lovely locations, but the lack of freedom in the story makes a mockery of it. You can't help feel that the epic engagements in the snow drifts, outside the Halo control centre, and on the beaches of that island, are all scripted to make you go 'wow'. They do just that, but you can never escape the impression that you are following a paper trail, with lots of treats for each discovery. Nothing wrong with that in games, it what makes them enjoyable. Its just when people say that it makes it such a fantastic game, that I get annoyed.
However, there is one fatal flaw that the game itself is guilty of. It has hardly any atmosphere. So little tense locations, enemies or feelings. Sav said that 'epic battles make a FPS'. Sure. But you need excitment. There is not one moment where I actualy feared for myself. Even the most atmospheric level, the Jungle place - 'Guilty Spark' I think its called, is quite tense, but the fear that the Floods build up created was dispelled over the next few sections. The game had no atmosphere to build on. There was no cautious, AvP2 style creeping through corridors. Even in games where fear is not a gameplay element, such as Perfect Dark, you feared for your life - because you were not given checkpoints every 10 minutes. Halo has not got any tense excitment, or any atmosphere to draw you in. It feels a little soul-less as a result. The library level is a perfect example. After 15 minutes of running through generic areas, you get bored of shooting the endless supply of thick enemies.
However, it looks and sounds good. It has excellent vehicle interaction, and this adds a lot of fun. It is way above average. It is quite innovative *in places*. Just I feel it does not deserve 1/10th of the hype it got. But it IS GOOD.
*****
Timesplitters 2 - Cube said it was the new Goldeneye. Pish.
This game is so overrated its incredible. It has been claimed that its the new 'King of shooters' and better than Goldeneye and its sequel, Perfect Dark. Ridiculous. Its main flaw is its single player.
Any shooter worth its salt has to have a good single player. The UT series is an exception because it is built entirely around its multiplayer. On a platform that has a maximum of 4, or an unlikely 16, the multiplayer is not the area to emphasise on. Sure, multiplayer on TS2 is excellent - but still not as good as Perfect Darks!
I find it quite incredible that a game such as TS2 is hailed as such a classsic. First of all the multiplayer has less options, less things to do, and less features than Perfect Dark, a game aobut 3 years older than it. While it is still its strongest feature, and very good, you cannot help but feel disappointed with it. If a game does not build on the excellent groundwork layed out by its spiritual ancestor, then whats the point? Especialy with the extra capabilities of the next generation consoles.
Then we have the single player. This is not (supposedly) its main emphasis, but PDs single player was almost second fiddle to its multi, and it was still excellent. I feel that any shooter that is worth praise needs a good multi and single player - unless, as is the case with Metroid Prime, the single player is out of this world. Which TS2s certainly isn't. Its pathetic. The challenges add a little extra stuff, but they are not what we were expecting. And its the new king of shoothers? Give me a break.
Having said that, it is cool, with good humour, good sound and graphics, and a bit of life. But not what the mags said about it.
*****
All good games! They all are above average etc.
Just thats my opinion.
Cheers
*runs away*
It's my topic name.
It's also better than mine.
Kind of.
*runs away from scary forum*
It's also better than mine.
Kind of.
*runs away from scary forum*
I know theres another 'overrated' topic in FOG chat, but this one is a little different.
****
Now, before I begin, and before you all leap down my throat, these three games are good - certainly not poor by any means. The reason I am slating them is because of the hype around them - the sheer over appreciation that has floated around because of them. So....
****
Deus Ex -
Many people know I dislike this game. Having played it all the way through, I can honestly say its a real disappointment.
The game has been praised (massively) for its freedom, player/environment interaction, and free plotline. Sure, these are all apparent in some shape or form, but are certainly not what the hype says they are, and certainly not particularly central to the game. I shall digress.....
First of all, the freedom. Well, shall I say, limited freedom? You are only allowed to run around a small area, and yes, do pretty much what you want in that place. However, the hype has proclaimed it 'free', as in you can do anything. No it isn't. It (to quote IB) gives you an impression of freedom, that is instantly torn away once you realize you can't kill certain people, or do certain things. Its very annoying to hear all the hype, play the game, and be limited to some drab streets.
The player/environment interaction is good. Yeah, you can pick up pretty much anything, and throw it. But what else? Well, use pre-scripted computers to control certain guns and cameras and things. Whats the big deal? If it mixed Geo-mod technology with that, then it might be worth the claims of freedom and marvelous interaction. As it stands, all you can do is hack boxes.
The free plotline is perhaps the least over rated thing. There are many ways of playing this game all the way through, and several ways of killing certain people (hang on, shouldn't that be lots - this game is totaly free anyway, isn't it?!). Its fun to play through and do different things, choose different augmentations (the only fun bit of the game). However, the hype would have you believe that you can do what ever you want. What?! Sure, the game needs a plot to keep players interested, but you are so limited in the little freedom of control you have, the hype is not justified one bit.
Along with this, the environments are drab, ugly and very unimpressive. Of course, a street is not supposed to be exciting, but its not exactly as interesting as it is in real life - where you DO have freedom. Due to the flaws in the freedom, the locations suffer from it. The combat is weak and flimsy, and you never feel any real attachment to the characters. However, if you take the hype away, you DO have a good game, just one that really does not deserve the hype it got. The amount of times I got bored of hacking at pipes with crowbars, and then having to fight boring guards is uncountable. However, the dialogue is excellent, as is the freedom you DO have, such as choosing your attack method on freeing hostages. Apart from that, its totaly overrated. But it tried, which is commendable
*****
Halo - Oh! Another controversial one. This in my opinion, has been totaly blown out of proportion.
Before I begin, it is good, and certainly above average. However, the hype is ridiculous. The AI, the story and characters, and the 'epic' feel of the game are all overrated.
First of all the AI. 'Some of the best ever'. Or something to that effect. I have played the game all the way through, on Heroic setting. Sure, it may not be the Legendary setting, but many people will not bother with that. Lets see. AI. Well. Apart from either running away from me, chasing me incessantly until destruction, or charging madly at me, the AI did little else. The only reason you have to duck and cover is because you don't want to get shot, not because you have to outsmart the enemy. They simply roll around, like in any other shooter, and attempt to kill you. While you do the same. Nothing is added to the genre by this. Friendly AI is okay, and the sense of keeping your comrades alive is cool, but certainly not exclusive to Halo - you want to keep any prized possessions safe in any game. I shall use the 'Silent Cartographers' beach attack to highlight my points. Sure its quite cool, but what do you do? Charge up the beach, gun blazing. Hide for a bit, let sheild recharge. Jump out, burst, run, burts, grenade. Done. Oh, lets watch the pre scripted Warthog drop. Now, if the game dropped in a Warthog during the battle, IF you needed. Cool, but not clever.
The story and characters are good. No doubt about it. The story is presented with finesse and panace - 'A gun pointed at the head of the universe' is particularly cool. The characters are slightly less commendable, with no-one to really attach yourself to. The hype would have you believe that the game has an epic story - with amazing twists and turns. To be quite frank, I didn't care. I didn't care about the generic marines, except that they had an assault rifle that aided me. And the helped my use a Warthog. Great fun. The story however, is very, very linear, and so the 'epic battle' feel, that the game is treasured for, feels ridiculous.
I have seen Sav say that he loves the 'epic battles'. Sure they are large scale, in the impressive and lovely locations, but the lack of freedom in the story makes a mockery of it. You can't help feel that the epic engagements in the snow drifts, outside the Halo control centre, and on the beaches of that island, are all scripted to make you go 'wow'. They do just that, but you can never escape the impression that you are following a paper trail, with lots of treats for each discovery. Nothing wrong with that in games, it what makes them enjoyable. Its just when people say that it makes it such a fantastic game, that I get annoyed.
However, there is one fatal flaw that the game itself is guilty of. It has hardly any atmosphere. So little tense locations, enemies or feelings. Sav said that 'epic battles make a FPS'. Sure. But you need excitment. There is not one moment where I actualy feared for myself. Even the most atmospheric level, the Jungle place - 'Guilty Spark' I think its called, is quite tense, but the fear that the Floods build up created was dispelled over the next few sections. The game had no atmosphere to build on. There was no cautious, AvP2 style creeping through corridors. Even in games where fear is not a gameplay element, such as Perfect Dark, you feared for your life - because you were not given checkpoints every 10 minutes. Halo has not got any tense excitment, or any atmosphere to draw you in. It feels a little soul-less as a result. The library level is a perfect example. After 15 minutes of running through generic areas, you get bored of shooting the endless supply of thick enemies.
However, it looks and sounds good. It has excellent vehicle interaction, and this adds a lot of fun. It is way above average. It is quite innovative *in places*. Just I feel it does not deserve 1/10th of the hype it got. But it IS GOOD.
*****
Timesplitters 2 - Cube said it was the new Goldeneye. Pish.
This game is so overrated its incredible. It has been claimed that its the new 'King of shooters' and better than Goldeneye and its sequel, Perfect Dark. Ridiculous. Its main flaw is its single player.
Any shooter worth its salt has to have a good single player. The UT series is an exception because it is built entirely around its multiplayer. On a platform that has a maximum of 4, or an unlikely 16, the multiplayer is not the area to emphasise on. Sure, multiplayer on TS2 is excellent - but still not as good as Perfect Darks!
I find it quite incredible that a game such as TS2 is hailed as such a classsic. First of all the multiplayer has less options, less things to do, and less features than Perfect Dark, a game aobut 3 years older than it. While it is still its strongest feature, and very good, you cannot help but feel disappointed with it. If a game does not build on the excellent groundwork layed out by its spiritual ancestor, then whats the point? Especialy with the extra capabilities of the next generation consoles.
Then we have the single player. This is not (supposedly) its main emphasis, but PDs single player was almost second fiddle to its multi, and it was still excellent. I feel that any shooter that is worth praise needs a good multi and single player - unless, as is the case with Metroid Prime, the single player is out of this world. Which TS2s certainly isn't. Its pathetic. The challenges add a little extra stuff, but they are not what we were expecting. And its the new king of shoothers? Give me a break.
Having said that, it is cool, with good humour, good sound and graphics, and a bit of life. But not what the mags said about it.
*****
All good games! They all are above average etc.
Just thats my opinion.
Cheers
*runs away*
****
Now, before I begin, and before you all leap down my throat, these three games are good - certainly not poor by any means. The reason I am slating them is because of the hype around them - the sheer over appreciation that has floated around because of them. So....
****
Deus Ex -
Many people know I dislike this game. Having played it all the way through, I can honestly say its a real disappointment.
The game has been praised (massively) for its freedom, player/environment interaction, and free plotline. Sure, these are all apparent in some shape or form, but are certainly not what the hype says they are, and certainly not particularly central to the game. I shall digress.....
First of all, the freedom. Well, shall I say, limited freedom? You are only allowed to run around a small area, and yes, do pretty much what you want in that place. However, the hype has proclaimed it 'free', as in you can do anything. No it isn't. It (to quote IB) gives you an impression of freedom, that is instantly torn away once you realize you can't kill certain people, or do certain things. Its very annoying to hear all the hype, play the game, and be limited to some drab streets.
The player/environment interaction is good. Yeah, you can pick up pretty much anything, and throw it. But what else? Well, use pre-scripted computers to control certain guns and cameras and things. Whats the big deal? If it mixed Geo-mod technology with that, then it might be worth the claims of freedom and marvelous interaction. As it stands, all you can do is hack boxes.
The free plotline is perhaps the least over rated thing. There are many ways of playing this game all the way through, and several ways of killing certain people (hang on, shouldn't that be lots - this game is totaly free anyway, isn't it?!). Its fun to play through and do different things, choose different augmentations (the only fun bit of the game). However, the hype would have you believe that you can do what ever you want. What?! Sure, the game needs a plot to keep players interested, but you are so limited in the little freedom of control you have, the hype is not justified one bit.
Along with this, the environments are drab, ugly and very unimpressive. Of course, a street is not supposed to be exciting, but its not exactly as interesting as it is in real life - where you DO have freedom. Due to the flaws in the freedom, the locations suffer from it. The combat is weak and flimsy, and you never feel any real attachment to the characters. However, if you take the hype away, you DO have a good game, just one that really does not deserve the hype it got. The amount of times I got bored of hacking at pipes with crowbars, and then having to fight boring guards is uncountable. However, the dialogue is excellent, as is the freedom you DO have, such as choosing your attack method on freeing hostages. Apart from that, its totaly overrated. But it tried, which is commendable
*****
Halo - Oh! Another controversial one. This in my opinion, has been totaly blown out of proportion.
Before I begin, it is good, and certainly above average. However, the hype is ridiculous. The AI, the story and characters, and the 'epic' feel of the game are all overrated.
First of all the AI. 'Some of the best ever'. Or something to that effect. I have played the game all the way through, on Heroic setting. Sure, it may not be the Legendary setting, but many people will not bother with that. Lets see. AI. Well. Apart from either running away from me, chasing me incessantly until destruction, or charging madly at me, the AI did little else. The only reason you have to duck and cover is because you don't want to get shot, not because you have to outsmart the enemy. They simply roll around, like in any other shooter, and attempt to kill you. While you do the same. Nothing is added to the genre by this. Friendly AI is okay, and the sense of keeping your comrades alive is cool, but certainly not exclusive to Halo - you want to keep any prized possessions safe in any game. I shall use the 'Silent Cartographers' beach attack to highlight my points. Sure its quite cool, but what do you do? Charge up the beach, gun blazing. Hide for a bit, let sheild recharge. Jump out, burst, run, burts, grenade. Done. Oh, lets watch the pre scripted Warthog drop. Now, if the game dropped in a Warthog during the battle, IF you needed. Cool, but not clever.
The story and characters are good. No doubt about it. The story is presented with finesse and panace - 'A gun pointed at the head of the universe' is particularly cool. The characters are slightly less commendable, with no-one to really attach yourself to. The hype would have you believe that the game has an epic story - with amazing twists and turns. To be quite frank, I didn't care. I didn't care about the generic marines, except that they had an assault rifle that aided me. And the helped my use a Warthog. Great fun. The story however, is very, very linear, and so the 'epic battle' feel, that the game is treasured for, feels ridiculous.
I have seen Sav say that he loves the 'epic battles'. Sure they are large scale, in the impressive and lovely locations, but the lack of freedom in the story makes a mockery of it. You can't help feel that the epic engagements in the snow drifts, outside the Halo control centre, and on the beaches of that island, are all scripted to make you go 'wow'. They do just that, but you can never escape the impression that you are following a paper trail, with lots of treats for each discovery. Nothing wrong with that in games, it what makes them enjoyable. Its just when people say that it makes it such a fantastic game, that I get annoyed.
However, there is one fatal flaw that the game itself is guilty of. It has hardly any atmosphere. So little tense locations, enemies or feelings. Sav said that 'epic battles make a FPS'. Sure. But you need excitment. There is not one moment where I actualy feared for myself. Even the most atmospheric level, the Jungle place - 'Guilty Spark' I think its called, is quite tense, but the fear that the Floods build up created was dispelled over the next few sections. The game had no atmosphere to build on. There was no cautious, AvP2 style creeping through corridors. Even in games where fear is not a gameplay element, such as Perfect Dark, you feared for your life - because you were not given checkpoints every 10 minutes. Halo has not got any tense excitment, or any atmosphere to draw you in. It feels a little soul-less as a result. The library level is a perfect example. After 15 minutes of running through generic areas, you get bored of shooting the endless supply of thick enemies.
However, it looks and sounds good. It has excellent vehicle interaction, and this adds a lot of fun. It is way above average. It is quite innovative *in places*. Just I feel it does not deserve 1/10th of the hype it got. But it IS GOOD.
*****
Timesplitters 2 - Cube said it was the new Goldeneye. Pish.
This game is so overrated its incredible. It has been claimed that its the new 'King of shooters' and better than Goldeneye and its sequel, Perfect Dark. Ridiculous. Its main flaw is its single player.
Any shooter worth its salt has to have a good single player. The UT series is an exception because it is built entirely around its multiplayer. On a platform that has a maximum of 4, or an unlikely 16, the multiplayer is not the area to emphasise on. Sure, multiplayer on TS2 is excellent - but still not as good as Perfect Darks!
I find it quite incredible that a game such as TS2 is hailed as such a classsic. First of all the multiplayer has less options, less things to do, and less features than Perfect Dark, a game aobut 3 years older than it. While it is still its strongest feature, and very good, you cannot help but feel disappointed with it. If a game does not build on the excellent groundwork layed out by its spiritual ancestor, then whats the point? Especialy with the extra capabilities of the next generation consoles.
Then we have the single player. This is not (supposedly) its main emphasis, but PDs single player was almost second fiddle to its multi, and it was still excellent. I feel that any shooter that is worth praise needs a good multi and single player - unless, as is the case with Metroid Prime, the single player is out of this world. Which TS2s certainly isn't. Its pathetic. The challenges add a little extra stuff, but they are not what we were expecting. And its the new king of shoothers? Give me a break.
Having said that, it is cool, with good humour, good sound and graphics, and a bit of life. But not what the mags said about it.
*****
All good games! They all are above average etc.
Just thats my opinion.
Cheers
*runs away*