[Ghostavo]

No. Because he does not seem to understand that Halo was just about the first FPS to limit your inventory to two weapons

I thought you were talking about amunition, and no, Halo was NOT the first FPS to limit your inventory to two weapons. Tons of games limited weapons inventory, and if you want to be a pedantic about that (two weapons, not three or four, etc...), check Battlezone 2 for example.

the AI was indeed brilliant and DID NOT blindly charge you. Rather, it would retreat when weakened and use supressive fire effectively while flanking.

Tell that to the elites who like to charge now and then while you are unloading rounds in their torsos. Or like to aproach grunts who have grenades stuck in their head.

[Deepblue]

I take it you play on normal then. And that's not stupid, that's good. Panicked grunt soldiers should run to their superiors. Elites only charge when there's no cover around, and it gives them a chance to kill the player.

The point is, that sure, some things were done before, other things were new, but Halo is special because it puts it all in one package.

[aldo_14]

Um, I'd disagree with most of that.  That the storyline was rather bland and not particularly innovative, that the limited guns aspect didn't add anything to the game (I'm sure this had been done by the likes of System Shock, anyways, and the likes of Flashpoint) because the guns themselves were rather dull (and I never noticed much of a difference between guns beyond the obvious of rocket launchers), that vehicles were done previously (Tribes, Goldeneye, Flashpoint) and that - on PC - were a bit crap, the AI didn't seem any better IMO than, say, Goldeneyes (certainly never saw anything approximating intelligent tactics), the shield was a very simple mechanic (scarcely cerebral - run away to somewhere quiet and wait a bit) and one very similar to the use of armour packs in Goldeneye.

The grenade control was handy, though.  Albiet I think it precluded having dual-fire on weapons, which wasn't nice.

To me it was very generic and dull in appearance, structure, levels, and gameplay.  Certainly by modern standards it's been well surpassed, something which I don't feel has happened so much with (some) other games of similar or older age.  Obviously it's a matter of opinion and perspective, but calling someone 'stupid' for finding it generic and dull is...well, stupid.

[WeatherOp]

mrah. You all are the same. Everyone loves you if you bash HALO and XBox, but say anything negetive against the game cube almighty and meet a fervor of angry responses. When will you people learn that taste is subjective and that your individual opinions mean little in the grand scheme of things?

I see it in every one of these threads.

But its the internet, people arn't entitled to tastes.

Damn annoying. No one seems to be entitled to an opinion anymore. Saying I like HALO will get all the elitists who dispise all FPS on my back, not to mention the FPSers that just didn't like halo.
I could give two ****s if the game does anything new as long as it's fun.  Sonic 3 didn't do anything different than sonic 2 or 1 and it never got bashed like this.

I think mostly it's the fact that everyone is tired of Halo. Tired of people comming into other games forums and saying "it doesn't compare to Halo or Halo 2. I really think that is the reason, if you scream something that much you are allmost promised that you will get a healthy amount of oppisition.

[MrBig101]

It's Official.

Worldwide Release in November.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/696/696054p1.html

[Andreas]

Um, I'd disagree with most of that.  That the storyline was rather bland and not particularly innovative, that the limited guns aspect didn't add anything to the game (I'm sure this had been done by the likes of System Shock, anyways, and the likes of Flashpoint) because the guns themselves were rather dull (and I never noticed much of a difference between guns beyond the obvious of rocket launchers), that vehicles were done previously (Tribes, Goldeneye, Flashpoint) and that - on PC - were a bit crap, the AI didn't seem any better IMO than, say, Goldeneyes (certainly never saw anything approximating intelligent tactics), the shield was a very simple mechanic (scarcely cerebral - run away to somewhere quiet and wait a bit) and one very similar to the use of armour packs in Goldeneye.

The grenade control was handy, though.  Albiet I think it precluded having dual-fire on weapons, which wasn't nice.

To me it was very generic and dull in appearance, structure, levels, and gameplay.  Certainly by modern standards it's been well surpassed, something which I don't feel has happened so much with (some) other games of similar or older age.  Obviously it's a matter of opinion and perspective, but calling someone 'stupid' for finding it generic and dull is...well, stupid.

I agree entirely. I never quite understood what got people so worked over about it; in my opinion Halo is barely an average FPS. IMO There are dozens of FPS's made before and after Halo that are way, way better and funnier to play. 

[Deepblue]

Funnier to play sure, but not necessarily more fun.

[aldo_14]

Funnier to play sure, but not necessarily more fun.

I think he meant funner, anyways.  but it's a matter of opinion anyways, so lets drop it.  You like it, I don't, a few people have similarly diametrically opposed positions and their own reasons for them, let's just all hug and make up, m'kay?

[Andreas]

I think he meant funner, anyways.  but it's a matter of opinion anyways, so lets drop it.  You like it, I don't, a few people have similarly diametrically opposed positions and their own reasons for them, let's just all hug and make up, m'kay?

Yes, I ment funner. *Grouphug* 

[Grug]

LoL.

Group Hug!

*hugs*

[aldo_14]

Furthermore, when you have games like GRAW coming out now, there isn't any reason for the casual consumer to wait for the PS3.

Just a sort of note/rant; GRAW is being advertised on the telly, and it's using pre-rendered footage (replete with 'NOT ACTUAL GAME FOOTAGE' disclaimer).  Why in the name of **** is that necessary?  I mean, really, it's not exactly a bad looking game, is it?  Why do they advertise it that way?

[Roanoke]

just saw that ad now on telly. Probably for the same reason none of the EA movie tie-game ads show ingame footage ?

[aldo_14]

just saw that ad now on telly. Probably for the same reason none of the EA movie tie-game ads show ingame footage ?

I have no idea.  It's so inane, like a movie trailer without any clips from the actual movie, or an album with tracks by a completely different artist.

[Deepblue]

I think it's pretty stupid to use the CGI trailer, when the game DOES look so good, and that trailer actually serves as the intro movie. All they need to do is put up a video of the helo rides replete with vast city below to serve as a commercial. IMHO, that looks BETTER than the trailer (not quality-wise, but content and impressiveness).

[Scuddie]

Ahh, classic sonic. Now there was a game.
I reckon they should go back to the 2d scrolling sonic, only with 3d graphics. That would be awsome.

Back then, kids didn't have easy access to the internet.

Pull a marvel vs capcom 2 and use 2d sprite characters sidescrolling with 3d backgrounds. It looks really good, IMO.

Are you serious?  That looked god awful.  Capcom Vs SNK looked better than that blended garbage.  The music sucked too.

But I agree, it would be good to see the Side Scrollers return to their true heritage.  In full 3D glory, but limited to two planes.  Side scroller doesnt work when you're playing with three planes.  I think Sonic 3/Sonic and Knuckles was the best time the franchise was working, and Mario World at the same time.  Everything after that was garbage.

[aldo_14]

Yoshi's Island was gold, though.

[WeatherOp]

Yoshi's Island was gold, though.

As were Kirby Superstar.

[delta_7890]

I rather enjoyed Mario 64.  Still pretty fun to play today.