The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> ===SONICRAV---> wrote:
> You see, by edge standards for a game to get
> 10/1- it has to be near
> perfect- not just a must have, but also pure
> revolution.
So why give 10/10 to Halo? It may be the best of it's genre,
> but it's hardly original or revolutionary.
But it is. Some example:
AI:
The computer players act like humans- they wait for you to reload before coming out, they wait for back up before attacking and the like. But what's really impressive is the randomness- play the level in the same way (exactly) twice, and the computer will do very different things- the actions are based on random seeds. This is the kind of AI MGS2 promised but, from what I've seen, hasn't pulled off.
Multiplayer:
SIXTEEN PEOPLE in one game (4 hooked up consoles). The structure (which I haven't tried) is meant to beat Goldeneye in terms of intensity and enjoyment, and leave the rest of the pack standing.
WEAPONS:
Most FPS games have this structure. Start with a pistol. Get munigun. Get rocket launcher. etc... With Halo you can only keep 2 weapons at a time- and the weapons are perfectly balanced. A player may keep the pistol for most of the game, missing out on the slow rocket launcher, and still get just as much enjoyment out of it.
And I haven't even mentioned the actual game plot and style yet- the plot is filled with twists, and in the game you can help other groupd of soldiers who will then help you, and will fight just as humans would do.
Sonic
> ===SONICRAV---> wrote:
> You see, by edge standards for a game to get
> 10/1- it has to be near
> perfect- not just a must have, but also pure
> revolution.
So why give 10/10 to Halo? It may be the best of it's genre,
> but it's hardly original or revolutionary.
But it is. Some example:
AI:
The computer players act like humans- they wait for you to reload before coming out, they wait for back up before attacking and the like. But what's really impressive is the randomness- play the level in the same way (exactly) twice, and the computer will do very different things- the actions are based on random seeds. This is the kind of AI MGS2 promised but, from what I've seen, hasn't pulled off.
Multiplayer:
SIXTEEN PEOPLE in one game (4 hooked up consoles). The structure (which I haven't tried) is meant to beat Goldeneye in terms of intensity and enjoyment, and leave the rest of the pack standing.
WEAPONS:
Most FPS games have this structure. Start with a pistol. Get munigun. Get rocket launcher. etc... With Halo you can only keep 2 weapons at a time- and the weapons are perfectly balanced. A player may keep the pistol for most of the game, missing out on the slow rocket launcher, and still get just as much enjoyment out of it.
And I haven't even mentioned the actual game plot and style yet- the plot is filled with twists, and in the game you can help other groupd of soldiers who will then help you, and will fight just as humans would do.
Sonic
===SONICRAV---> wrote:
> You see, by edge standards for a game to get 10/1- it has to be near
> perfect- not just a must have, but also pure revolution.
So why give 10/10 to Halo? It may be the best of it's genre, but it's hardly original or revolutionary.
> You see, by edge standards for a game to get 10/1- it has to be near
> perfect- not just a must have, but also pure revolution.
So why give 10/10 to Halo? It may be the best of it's genre, but it's hardly original or revolutionary.
Turbonutter wrote:
> What about the fact that Edge have been known to be paid to up review scores?
That was just something someone on the forums made up to justify the high score for Halo... after all, Gamesmaster and Edge are written by the same teams.
Sonic
> What about the fact that Edge have been known to be paid to up review scores?
That was just something someone on the forums made up to justify the high score for Halo... after all, Gamesmaster and Edge are written by the same teams.
Sonic
I would prefer to play Luigi's Mansion to MGS2 or Halo.
Though the demo of MGS2 was alright, just very, very serious.
Though the demo of MGS2 was alright, just very, very serious.
What about the fact that Edge have been known to be paid to up review scores?
Curny wrote:
> Edge Magazine is crap..they mark everything seriously
what were the four
> games that got 10/10??
Halo is just another in the llong line of FPS..not
> original..MGS2 rules!
Halo, Gran Turismo, Zelda OOT, Mario 64.
Now, Edge reviews are not harsh- they just have a unique scoring system. You see, by edge standards for a game to get 10/1- it has to be near perfect- not just a must have, but also pure revolution.
Now, what number comes between 1 and 10- 5. So therefore a completely average game get's 5/10. Half of games get above this, half get below. And that's the way it should be. Any mag that gives over 90% to any great game is just completely unjustifying their reviews- if something get over 90% it is nearing perfection... which doesn't happen very often.
So, any game edge gives over 5 is good and worth buying. 10/10 warrants buying the console for (remember, edge is for more serious gamers), 9 and 8 are absulte must haves, and 7 and 6 are worth buying, but only if you're into them.
Oh, finally, the reason Smasg Bros got 6/10... it's certainly worth buying, but is not a must have, and doesn't add anything revolutionary to the original game.
Sonic
> Edge Magazine is crap..they mark everything seriously
what were the four
> games that got 10/10??
Halo is just another in the llong line of FPS..not
> original..MGS2 rules!
Halo, Gran Turismo, Zelda OOT, Mario 64.
Now, Edge reviews are not harsh- they just have a unique scoring system. You see, by edge standards for a game to get 10/1- it has to be near perfect- not just a must have, but also pure revolution.
Now, what number comes between 1 and 10- 5. So therefore a completely average game get's 5/10. Half of games get above this, half get below. And that's the way it should be. Any mag that gives over 90% to any great game is just completely unjustifying their reviews- if something get over 90% it is nearing perfection... which doesn't happen very often.
So, any game edge gives over 5 is good and worth buying. 10/10 warrants buying the console for (remember, edge is for more serious gamers), 9 and 8 are absulte must haves, and 7 and 6 are worth buying, but only if you're into them.
Oh, finally, the reason Smasg Bros got 6/10... it's certainly worth buying, but is not a must have, and doesn't add anything revolutionary to the original game.
Sonic
The term apples and oranges springs to mind...
It's which genre takes your preference at the end of the day, you pay your money and you take your choice.
It's which genre takes your preference at the end of the day, you pay your money and you take your choice.
Er, I do hope everyone realises you can't possibly compare these two game, because beside them being completely different genres and attitudes (silent 'n' stealthy vs. all guns blazing), everyone knows MGS2's best ;-)
As a big fan I'm really looking forward to MGS2. :-)
But with Halo, I think it has the advantage of more longevity. Its one of those games you can play and it'll be different depending how you tackle situations.
Sometimes you'll want to back up your squad rather than just run through Doom style.
But with Halo, I think it has the advantage of more longevity. Its one of those games you can play and it'll be different depending how you tackle situations.
Sometimes you'll want to back up your squad rather than just run through Doom style.
Page: