Gamers Thread
- Thread starter Jimmy... Dead.
- Start date
mutantllama
Active Member
SweptbackFlame
twitch.tv/SweptbackFlame
He actually think Halo is decent at best.
In terms of Halo 2...not Halo 3, and if you say Halo 2 wasn't decent...your out of your fucking mind.
Besides...look at how many copies have been sold in total from Halo to the rest of every other shooter. Call Of Duty is obviously the winner in that case. But still. Saying Halo wasn't decent is pretty fucking obnoxious.
mutantllama
Active Member
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
Also, what was your point in showing this video? It doesn't even load properly.
The only complaints I've seen leveled against the game is that it's very difficult. And yes, it is, but that's part of the challenge. The combat is amazing, the attention to detail extraordinary. Atlus, rock on, bros!
This amused the shit out of me:
"The game is very imaginative. It's based on western fantasy" over shots of a dude running through a castle.
"The environments are varied" over shots of different places in a castle.
"The monster design is very creative" - shots of dragons, skeletons, etc.
Those aren't complaints about the game itself, just about the idiot reviewing it.
Looks enjoyable, but the combat looks repetitive. I am confused by the comparison to Diablo.
Last edited by a moderator:
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
The combat is intuitive, fluid, and with actual strategic depth. For instance, using a two-handed sword in narrow passgeways is not recommended, since you'll only hit walls, and not your enemies.That's just a minor feature;there's plenty more. I've found little to no flaws in the game.
Srontgorrth
Member
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,849
- 113
It's crap compared to what Bungie had released in 1994, let alone the dozens of great shooters by 2001. The demo level is great; it's large and feels open, there are several enemies to shoot and weapons to shoot them with, and overall does feel quite fresh. Too bad the rest of the game takes 80% of the same assets and stretches them over many more hours thanks to good old Ctrl + C and Ctrl + V.
EDIT: Unless you're a console gamer that was stuck with Goldeneye for four years, of course.
rms
Active Member
There wasn't any real reason to play halo because a real man played Counter Strike and if they got bored they played one of the bajillion mods, unless you're gay
Srontgorrth
Member
It was the first game (to me) that felt much more of a movie/story that immersed the player. But then again I hadn't been growing up with Half Life, Counter Strike and Doom.
And what game is there that doesn't Ctrl + C and Ctrl + V weapons, enemies, allies and so on?
And what game is there that doesn't Ctrl + C and Ctrl + V weapons, enemies, allies and so on?
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,849
- 113
You obviously didn't grow up with System Shock 2, Deus Ex, the Thief games, Duke Nukem 3D, and other such games either. Most shooters peter out towards the end, but Halo is a joke. By the time you enter The Library you have practically experienced the entire game. No new items, vehicles, enemies, or even levels unless walking through the same place backwards and burnt-out somehow counts. On the rare chance there is some scripted event of note (stealthily killing sleeping aliens, for example) they drive it through the dirt through repetition anyways. The game is great in the same sense that Korn is brutal; pure marketing geared towards the common denominators of their respective artforms.
You got into the Halo single-player? I try not to judge the people who play it for multi because I have a general dislike for multiplayer, but the single player is pretty shit. As far as games that don't get repetitive? There are kind of a lot. I recommend you try Half Life 2.
Mort Divine
Shrine Maiden of the In-Crowd
Srontgorrth
Member
Read my post, I said at the time, when I was 11 or so, and hadn't experienced most PC shooters, and in the past decade or so is when most great FPSs have come about. By now, 7 or so years later, I've played HL 2 and a variety of others. I've also played System Shock 2, Deus Ex: Invisible War, Counter Strike 1.6, Team Fortress and so on, but one of the most that I personally enjoyed was Halo.
What ever the case may be, I don't see how Halo can just be called decent for what it was at the time.
Edit: Also, did/does anyone like the Timesplitters series?
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,849
- 113
But what was it? What did it do that deserved such accolades? It did nothing that hadn't been done before, so Halo fanboys make a list of things that have been done before and say "Well, Halo wasn't the first game to have vehicles, large outdoor levels, a storyline heavily punctuated with cut-scenes, a two-weapon system, or a grenade button, but it was the FIRST to have all those things at once! Oh golly, how innovative it was!"
Always wanted to play those, but now that I have a computer that can run any game in existence with all settings maxed at 1680x1050 with a smooth framerate while doing other stuff in the background it seems like a waste of processing power. I might go back and try them, though.
Also, Invisible War? Not bad, but Deus Ex is so much fucking better.
Srontgorrth
Member
Obviously it doesn't deserve all the hype and praise, and no it wasn't innovative by any means, but it did combine everything it had into a smooth, bugless, enjoyable game.
Again not just decent, but definitely overrated.
And yeah WAIF you should definitely give the series a try, though skip the first one and begin with the 2nd, it's pretty cool. I know you don't like multiplayer, but it's pretty fun on Timesplitters with bots playing.
