The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
What do you thinks best?
Page:
I think DrDragon has made my point very succintly - it's an evolution, rather than a revolution.
AI improvemtns are commonplace - enemies in MoH:AA also wait for reloading before coming out at you.
Networking games is nothing new - and people have already commented on the the need for multiple TV's and copies of GT3 as a negative aspect; four Xboxes and TV's is just as unlikely. Of course, there may be an online option, but then it's nothing that PC's haven't done for years, with MoH:AA supporting up to 64 networked players. Again, evolution, not revolution.
Weapons... again, an evolution. A logical step in realistic terms as most people simply couldn't carry the amount of weapons you get in some games! But a limit has I'm sure been done before - was it Duke Nukem or Soldier of Fortune? I can't recall, but I have definitely had to drop weapons to carry others in an FPS game before.
If I was being as strict as Edge claim to be, Halo would still only get a 9/10 max, because - as fantastic a game as it may be - it simply doesn't contain anything truly original or revolutionary. I'm not basing that on any bias, just on what I've read (in the Edge review) and what you've told me.
If Halo had been released on the PC first as originally planned, a platform inundated with FPS games all boasting improved features over their rivals - do you honestly think that it would be a 10/10 game?
Come to think of it, if it HAD been on the PC and a 10/10 game... would we even be having this discussion? I doubt anyone would care! :-)
AI improvemtns are commonplace - enemies in MoH:AA also wait for reloading before coming out at you.
Networking games is nothing new - and people have already commented on the the need for multiple TV's and copies of GT3 as a negative aspect; four Xboxes and TV's is just as unlikely. Of course, there may be an online option, but then it's nothing that PC's haven't done for years, with MoH:AA supporting up to 64 networked players. Again, evolution, not revolution.
Weapons... again, an evolution. A logical step in realistic terms as most people simply couldn't carry the amount of weapons you get in some games! But a limit has I'm sure been done before - was it Duke Nukem or Soldier of Fortune? I can't recall, but I have definitely had to drop weapons to carry others in an FPS game before.
If I was being as strict as Edge claim to be, Halo would still only get a 9/10 max, because - as fantastic a game as it may be - it simply doesn't contain anything truly original or revolutionary. I'm not basing that on any bias, just on what I've read (in the Edge review) and what you've told me.
If Halo had been released on the PC first as originally planned, a platform inundated with FPS games all boasting improved features over their rivals - do you honestly think that it would be a 10/10 game?
Come to think of it, if it HAD been on the PC and a 10/10 game... would we even be having this discussion? I doubt anyone would care! :-)
MGS2, by far.
If it's anything like MGS (and you all know how much I love it,) then MGS2 will have an intricate plot with some brilliant character interaction, emotional scenes and judging from the demo, some amazing gameplay. MGS2 will be the most tense and atmospheric game you've ever played.
Halo, although excellent, will just be an FPS with better graphics. In my mind, it won't offer as good a gaming experience as MGS2 will.
If it's anything like MGS (and you all know how much I love it,) then MGS2 will have an intricate plot with some brilliant character interaction, emotional scenes and judging from the demo, some amazing gameplay. MGS2 will be the most tense and atmospheric game you've ever played.
Halo, although excellent, will just be an FPS with better graphics. In my mind, it won't offer as good a gaming experience as MGS2 will.
Salvatore wrote:
> Spendig wrote:
> i think halo looks good and so does mgs2 but you cant
> really compare them as
> they are differant types of game its like puttin
> red faction and say burnout
> 2gether sayin which is better coz they are
> better in their own ways. but
> popularity will go to mgs and story. but
> halo is a great futuristic shooter
exactly
thanks salvatore, the PC version of halo looks good but as i sed B4 u cant choose a better one because the buyer will choose the game they like out of the 2 either first person shooter or a stealth type game
> Spendig wrote:
> i think halo looks good and so does mgs2 but you cant
> really compare them as
> they are differant types of game its like puttin
> red faction and say burnout
> 2gether sayin which is better coz they are
> better in their own ways. but
> popularity will go to mgs and story. but
> halo is a great futuristic shooter
exactly
thanks salvatore, the PC version of halo looks good but as i sed B4 u cant choose a better one because the buyer will choose the game they like out of the 2 either first person shooter or a stealth type game
DrDragon wrote:
> Smash Brothers is a must have. It is just amazing. A must have for GC owners,
> and worth at least 7.
From what I have read Smash brothers isnt much of a leap from the original on the N64, which wasnt that special anyway.
> Smash Brothers is a must have. It is just amazing. A must have for GC owners,
> and worth at least 7.
From what I have read Smash brothers isnt much of a leap from the original on the N64, which wasnt that special anyway.
DrDragon wrote:
> SoniCrav, what were the other 3 games to get 10/10?
BTW Halo is not
> revolutionary. It is evolution. A 9 methinkss. Mario 64 was revolutionary.
PS
> Smash Brothers is a must have. It is just amazing. A must have for GC owners,
> and worth at least 7.
That's SonicRav, or just plain sonic! Not SoniCrav!
The 4 10/10s were:
Halo, Mario64, Zelda OOT, Gran Turismo.
Now, as for the Halo being evolution or revolution, I bet if MGS2 boasted the AI of Halo, along with the story, weapon balance and a 16 player multiplayer you'd expect it to get 10/10.
Saying that, no one here (from what I know) has played Halo to the end, so it's hard to be a back seat judge on whether it's a 9 or 10.
Oh, and to whoever said it, jokes about the size of the Xbox are just getting stupid. If you discount a console on it's size, you don't deserve to be called a true gamer.
Sonic
> SoniCrav, what were the other 3 games to get 10/10?
BTW Halo is not
> revolutionary. It is evolution. A 9 methinkss. Mario 64 was revolutionary.
PS
> Smash Brothers is a must have. It is just amazing. A must have for GC owners,
> and worth at least 7.
That's SonicRav, or just plain sonic! Not SoniCrav!
The 4 10/10s were:
Halo, Mario64, Zelda OOT, Gran Turismo.
Now, as for the Halo being evolution or revolution, I bet if MGS2 boasted the AI of Halo, along with the story, weapon balance and a 16 player multiplayer you'd expect it to get 10/10.
Saying that, no one here (from what I know) has played Halo to the end, so it's hard to be a back seat judge on whether it's a 9 or 10.
Oh, and to whoever said it, jokes about the size of the Xbox are just getting stupid. If you discount a console on it's size, you don't deserve to be called a true gamer.
Sonic
Spendig wrote:
> i think halo looks good and so does mgs2 but you cant really compare them as
> they are differant types of game its like puttin red faction and say burnout
> 2gether sayin which is better coz they are better in their own ways. but
> popularity will go to mgs and story. but halo is a great futuristic shooter
exactly
> i think halo looks good and so does mgs2 but you cant really compare them as
> they are differant types of game its like puttin red faction and say burnout
> 2gether sayin which is better coz they are better in their own ways. but
> popularity will go to mgs and story. but halo is a great futuristic shooter
exactly
i think halo looks good and so does mgs2 but you cant really compare them as they are differant types of game its like puttin red faction and say burnout 2gether sayin which is better coz they are better in their own ways. but popularity will go to mgs and story. but halo is a great futuristic shooter
SoniCrav, what were the other 3 games to get 10/10?
BTW Halo is not revolutionary. It is evolution. A 9 methinkss. Mario 64 was revolutionary.
PS Smash Brothers is a must have. It is just amazing. A must have for GC owners, and worth at least 7.
BTW Halo is not revolutionary. It is evolution. A 9 methinkss. Mario 64 was revolutionary.
PS Smash Brothers is a must have. It is just amazing. A must have for GC owners, and worth at least 7.
Page: