Halo 2 Reviews

SilentChris writes "As of 3 PM EST, major websites were finally 'permitted' to release their reviews of Halo 2. The verdict: near perfect scores. Check out reviews by Gamespot, IGN, and GameSpy. Bungie has done it again!"

Comments

One thing that's always bugged me ...

[YetAnotherName]

... why doesn't the Halo guy get Lasik surgery?

Oh, that's the Half-Life guy?

Ummmm ... nevermind!

Re:One thing that's always bugged me ...

[nerd256]

Well, we've never seen the halo guy's eyes, so how do we know they exist? Bungie probably didn't want to bother rendering them.

As far as Mr. Freeman, you'd think the glasses would put off a lot of customers as unattractive, I mean look at the target audience.... Oh wait, nevermind

Re:One thing that's always bugged me ...

[Tobias Luetke]

For the same reason as the Lasik surgeons wear glasses.

Re:One thing that's always bugged me ...

[brain159]

It's always been my firmly-held belief (that I came up with 30 seconds ago) that the justification for the HUD in Half Life is that it's actually displayed on Gordon's glasses by means of integrated LCD (or whatever) screen stuff. Some of the Wearable Computing pioneers have the basics of that sorted already.

Re:One thing that's always bugged me ...

[stratjakt]

Maybe he's aware that there have been no long term studies into the full effects of the lasik surgery over your lifetime. What happens in old age? Who knows.

Also, I assumed (the game didn't tell you, that I can remember) that Half Life took place back in some secret government lab during the height of the cold war. I guess I just assumed that from the plot, atmosphere, and that all the characters with square heads looked like 80s pop stars.

Re:One thing that's always bugged me ...

[KDR_11k]

The HUD is only displayed once you put on the HEV suit. The HEV suit includes a helmet (pictures of Gordon rarely include it but it's in the first game's data files and the suit wouldn't really offer protection without any form of headgear). I'd assume it's in the helmet.
Outside of a loading screen and the multiplayer model Gordon is never shown in the first game, the player wasn't supposed to know what he looks or talks like, Gordon was supposed to be exactly like the player and the player didn't know Gordon has glasses.

I dont know why..

[bluewee]

...these reviews are so late, my copy of the game has been blowing me away for a week or so since I got it. Also my parents have been praising my newly learned language, French... :D

Re:I dont know why..

[bluewee]

hmm the only thing that I dont like about this game is that there is this black van out side. wait I hear some other cars driving up... hmm now there seems to be a whole caravan of black SUVs driving up... I will give you an update after I go answer the door...

Re:I dont know why..

[Anonymous Coward]

re your sig and comments, you know that funny doesn't give you any karma, right?

Re:I dont know why..

[mbrewthx]

Gosh I hated that version, Master Chief kept surrendering so he could go home and watch Jerry Lewis movies.

On Soviet Halo the Game reviews you!!!!!!!

Re:I dont know why..

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, here come the french jokes again.

Re:I dont know why..

[Stormwatch]

Nonono, it's like this:
In Soviet Russia, Halo reviews YOU!

Re:I dont know why..

[Anonymous Coward]

"Gosh I hated that version, Master Chief kept surrendering so he could go home and watch Jerry Lewis movies.

On Soviet Halo the Game reviews you!!!!!!!"

Internet nerdhumor, how I loathe thee.

hmm

[che.kai-jei]

hmm

More Reviews and averages ...

[Hank Chinaski]

here: http://www.gametab.com/xbox/halo.2/1472/

Re:More Reviews and averages ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like a classic case of rating inflation.

Re:More Reviews and averages ...

[Hank Chinaski]

... and karma whoring too

Permitted...

[Anonymous Coward]

error... not "near perfect" score:
permission denied

Wow, bungie has done it again!

-Regards,
disillusioned HL2 fan

All our hopes are on Halo 2

[The_Mystic_For_Real]

Since we haven't played a good single player FPS game since Halo 1!

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[Tobias Luetke]

Thats a very bold thing to say with a worldclass game as Chronicles of Riddick readily available !

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[PKPerson]

I Its not that the single player is bad, just halo will be just like any other game. Recently, we have seen many new high quality engines come out (The Doom 3 engine and CryEngine) that are sure to lead to a brand new set of completly unique games that are likly to blow us away. Halo 2 will be just like the original, plus computer is the only true playform for FPS's.

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[Siniset]

I'm going to have to disagree with you on the computer being teh only true playform. It all depends on what the game was first designed for. Golden Eye and Halo 1 are some of the finest first person shooters out there. Why? A fun single player campaign combined with excellent multiplayer, and excellent controls. I repeat, halo and golden eye used the controller correctly, so instead of feeling limited to a controller rather than a keyboard and mouse, i felt like i could do things i couldn't do on a keyboard and mouse. And it's so easy to play with someone else. Yes, most good first person shooters come out for the computer, but these two games are simply masterpieces.

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[packeteer]

The biggest problem with an FPS on a controller is that is lacks the up-down dimension. A keyboard and mouse works fine for looking and shooting up and down. Goldeneye and Halo in my opinion were too 2D. Look at a game like Half Life 1 and youll notice how much more immersive a game can be when you can look up and down in massive caverns.

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[lmnfrs]

Hey, no offense but..
Halo was designed for the COMPUTER not for the XBOX. Perhaps you weren't around on the Internet way back in 1998 when it was slated to be released, but I was, and I had been around. I remember the (then groundbreaking) features like mouth movement (who else remembers the wazzzaaaaaaa! video they released?) and realistic plant and wildlife.
Unfortunately, now in 2004, Halo 2 still doesn't have the environment Halo had in the late 90's. That's my problem with the franchise, neither game comes anywhere near the level of hype surrounding it. As for being a competitive rather than casual game, consoles don't compare to PC's. Sorry. Remember that supposed Halo "tournament" they had? If you didn't already know, they played large FFA matches (!!?) not 1on1's.

Several years after I had decided that Halo looked like a cool game, the release hype started up, and I had all but forgotten about the game. I didn't pay much attention to the hype around the Xbox release, and when I finally saw the game I said "What the hell? This doesn't look as good as what I remember seeing". It wasn't and isn't. Halo 2 has some new game modes and new features, but nothing I can think of that hasn't been around a while.
For a console, it's a very good game, it opens up the ability to LAN with just 1 machine per 4 people. In the arena of FPS games, though, it's nothing. Sorry.

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[Babbster]

You're high, right? I mean, that's cool and everything, but you should probably wait until you come down before hitting the submit button.

Console FPSs DO have the "up-down dimension." They also have the right-left dimension and the forward-back dimension. They are indeed fully featured in the dimensional respect.

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[mr_jrt]

I would imagine he was referring to the fact that looking up/down is somewhat ungainly on a console. With a mouse, its a flick of the wrist to look up and start shooting, and tiny adjustments to keep pointing at a target whilst you strafe. With WASD setups you have a number of left hand options free to jump, switch weapons etc.

On a joypad...usually the movement and look controls are somewhat muddled with dual sticks (if availible), and thus one thumb is moving you, one is rotating you, and then you're restricted to any trigger buttons availible for things like jumping, shooting, and weapon switching, etc.

Re:All our hopes are on Halo 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially compared to something that it so hardcore PC as... Say... UT2004... As far as online FPS' go, UT2004 is the king in my book. Besides, lets not forget about mods and mutators, shall we?

Hope the level design is better this time

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo 1 had horrible level design. For some stages level design went like this:

1. Take a room and make 20 identical copies
2. Join all the rooms together with corridors
3. ???
4. Profit

Absolutely horrible. The alien spaceship was some of the worst level design I have seen in the last 5 years. I hope things are better this time.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[benna]

I think they went too far the other way this time. The levels are so huge and complex that on several occations I was completly lost for 20 minutes or more.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a big Halo fan, that reason being one of them (another being that I have a mystical device called a PC), but from what a friend of mine tells me they pretty much stuck to similar designs with Halo 2, though they tried to disguise it a bit better this time around.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[jerkychew]

Yeah, that's the biggest complaint of the game, but it's well documented as to why that happened.

From what I understand, Bungie was in mid-development when MS came to them with truckloads of cash. They wanted to buy the company, and release Halo at the same time as the Xbox.

So, level design was scrapped, and the production time on the game was pushed up considerably, to get it ready for the Xbox launch date.

Since the game was so short in its original format, they just added a few layers of repetition to the single player maps, and shoved it out the door.

From a game design perspective, it wasn't the best thing to do... But from a monetary perspective, any economist would tell you they did the right thing.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[name773]

any economist would tell you they did the right thing.
so, essentially, they did the wrong thing.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[Majik Sznak]

Actually, the reviews start off saying "Halo 2 is great!" then devote several paragraphs to describing how bad it is: that the level design is boring and repetitive, yadda yadda. (GameSpot)

Looks like the world has gone cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Halo again.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[Zentac]

I find that rather hard to accept, the game was near finished when Microsoft bought Bungie, everyone knew and was waiting for the PC release, the XBOX was not out for an other year after the aquisition, I can understand that some parts had to be reworked, maybe the levels had to be cropped, to save memory usage, and maybe the level design had to be simplified, but thats a bit unlikely aswell, so I think they just underestimated the impact the level design would have on the actual gameplay.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[kleinux]

any economist would tell you they did the right thing.
so, essentially, they did the wrong thing.
Only if you are on /. and really hate to get paid.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, Mr Wannabe-funny ^H User, ever heard of ^W?

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[Anonymous Coward]

yes, they did start from scratch to make Halo for the xBox.

http://www.insidemacgames.com/features/view.php? ID =93

"IMG: During the transition from computer to console game, what was the most difficult part of making the game?

Seropian: When we got here and began to focus on Xbox, we basically had to start over. It was tough compressing all the 'making game' part of the project into the last 6 months - which is essentially what happened. We really had to take the approach of how do we make this fun on a console, sitting 10 feet away with a controller. We also got to do things we've never had the chance to do before, like full-on cinematics and surround sound. All that was hard."

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[John Harrison]

But from a monetary perspective, any economist would tell you they did the right thing.

I think you are confused about the difference between an economist and an MBA.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[Anonymous Coward]

That's partly right, but the whole "room joined with a s-bend corridor" format was required to reduce level load times. Its the same trick as in Quake2. You need the s-bend so you can't see into the new room before it loads.

Re:Hope the level design is better this time

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Take a room and make 20 identical copies 2. Join all the rooms together with corridors

Yeah, because in real life that never happens. I know I love walking around real life buildings because every single room is uniquely shaped and different. Why apartment buildings, hotels, planned housing is just so amazing the way that every single time you enter another room it is nothing you've ever seen before...

(Hint - you have just encountered sarcasm. But I bet it was nothing you've ever seen before.)

Not Credible Sources

[fux0rbob]

Unfortunately, these sources can't be considered credible. Which may sound like a troll, but it's not. These people are funded by advertisers. Advertisers like Microsoft and Nintendo and Sony. These sources will almost *always* report favorible, if not glowing reviews of the major advertisers' games.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Billobob]

Hi, my name is proof. Where am I?

Re:Not Credible Sources

[pilot1]

Umm.. no, I find that the IGN and Gamespot reviews are accurate 99.9% of the time. If I liked the game, IGN/Gamespot are sure to have given it a good rating. If I didn't, they're sure to have rated it badly and to explain why.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Templaris]

Gamespot's reviews are generally not to far distant from the large number of reader reviews they get. Also it depends mainly on the author. Some authors seem to like a type of game more than another. In the past couple years I dont think I seen Gamespot give a PC game higher than a 9.4. I have never seen them give a game a much higher score than it deserved. Have you played Halo 2 yet? Play it, then cast your judgement.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Shadow Wrought]

Hi, my name is proof. Where am I?

I don't know, but they keep asking for you in Missouri.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[the HIM]

It is pretty common knowledge that ign.com, gamespot, and gamespy are a total joke. I go there when I want to click past 4 ads to get to a review of a popular game that got a high score. Wow! GTA: San Andreas got a near-perfect score! As far as Halo 2 goes, it will get near-perfect scores too. Just like Halo did. Was Halo a good game? No. But, was it a good console shooter? No. Is it popular? Yes. Perfect 10!

Re:Not Credible Sources

[gl4ss]

somehow these games that get rated badly never happen to be the ahead-of-time-big-name-exclusives.

like... even if there's real things worth critique, like the game being fucking short, it doesn't really affect the 90+ score.

(well.. at least they've probably really played the game - it used to be that you couldn't be sure about even that when you read the pre-release-reviews..)

Re:Not Credible Sources

[dfj225]

Well, I can't speak for most of the online ratings, but 1up.com does have the review that will be printed in EGM. The game got all 10s. Now the reason I mention EGM is that in the past game publishers who advertised in the mag became upset over a few games that got low ratings. EGM's response was to say that they stick by their ratings and if they lose a few ads, so be it. I find EGM and most web sites to be pretty accurate as far as my tastes are concerned.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Rubbish. Read the Driv3r reviews on each of those sites. It's the print mags I'd be worried about.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, these sources can't be considered credible.

Neither can Michael.

These people are funded by advertisers.

Just as Michael is.

Advertisers like Microsoft and Nintendo and Sony.

Advertisers love Michael.

These sources will almost *always* report favorible, if not glowing reviews of the major advertisers' games.

Michael will too, if you pay him enough.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[drewmca]

Maybe you didn't think it was a good game, or a good console shooter, but a lot of people did. Hence, its popularity.

A lot of people tend to mistake their own opinion for "the truth". Judging games is about as subjective an activity as could be imagined, so please, recognize that before making blanket statements. "I didn't think it was a good game" is as true a statement as you could make. "Was it a good game? No." is just pissing in the wind.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[sangreal66]

I agree. Slashdot is also funded by Microsoft ads which is why there are no anti-microsoft articles on the site.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[cgenman]

That's not necessarily true. You'd be surprised how hard it is to buy a glowing review these days in a non-"official" magazine (I.E. the Official XBox magazine). As we're down to basically 5 companies, E.A. Activision Sony Atari Microsoft, they would basically have to report glowing reviews of everything. Sometimes they glow more than they should, as the person who likes a genre is going to get games of that genre to review. Would you put the FPS guy on Winning 11 8 and expect them to give a comprehensive, well-thought out review? No, you give it to the guy who has played every other Winning 11 game, as well as every soccer game in existence and some that aren't, who will have perspective on where Winning 11 fits into the universe of soccer games and will probably love it.

One of the other reasons why most of the games people would look up are reviewed favorably is because comparatively reviewers have to wade through a tremendous amount of real crap. No matter what you may feel about the redundancy and lack of innovation of GTA: San Andreas, it is in no where near the same category of junk as Big Motha' Truckers. Likewise, Fifa may not be as hot as some of the top soccer games coming out of japan, but compared to Atari's Backyard Soccer series it's Pulitzer material. On the other hand, give them a truly mediocre game that you spent years working on, and they will crush it ruthlessly. The press can be quite cold sometimes... I've read more than one review of a project I've worked on where the reviewer complained of the lack of a feature that was actually there.

No matter what your personal opinions on the subject, Halo 2 is unarguably one of the most polished and destined to be one of the most enjoyed games of the year. Microsoft didn't buy that with their ads, Bungee bought that with their sweat. And good for them: Bungee has always released quality games and deserves success.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Er... did you miss the whole Killzone thing? One of them (can't remember which) ended up getting hate mail because they had the audacity to rate it below 80%, which apparently means "crap" in the ridiculously inflated scoring system they use these days.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[pilot1]

I always see IGN complaining about short games.. what specific website does that?

Re:Not Credible Sources

[AvantLegion]

>> Hi, my name is proof. Where am I?

In my liquor. 80 of you.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, my name is Common Knowledge, and I was present in the grandparent, but not yours. Why do you insist on flirting with my special-ed cousin, Ignorance?

Re:Not Credible Sources

[YaRness]

so, how's the pay at ign?

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

I find that the IGN and Gamespot reviews are accurate 99.9% of the time.

Bullshit. So you've read at least 667 of their reviews and found only one bad review?
(666 / 667 = 99.85% ~ 99.9%)

I hate it when people say "99.9% of the time."

-Anonymous Math Nazi

Re:Not Credible Sources

[SpookyFish]

Hmm.. Sure, reviews can be biased, but the accuracy of your comment in this particular case is questionable.

Listing Nintendo and Sony is hardly a relevant example to this particulary story -- Sony and (especially) Nintendo would kill to have Halo(2) on their respective platforms.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[gl4ss]

well for one, they rave about how big and vast halo 2 is. it isn't. they even mention the length of the game and still don't bitch. then, of course you could call a "it's obvious the story needs a sequel" ending 'curious' like ign puts it.

**So, with nearly four times the amount of discourse from the first game and almost 20,000 lines of dialog, Bungie's story is deeply woven into every aspect of Halo 2, from the heart-stopping first hour to the climactic (and perhaps curious) ending. During the course of the game's 15 levels and just like the first game, you'll hear dozens of funny quips and memorable lines delivered by human soldiers that reverberate throughout its 10-15 hours of gameplay (yeah, that's what I said, 10-15 hours)**

enuff said, they got 10 hours of gameplay, and make it sound like it's big(10 hours isn't. and the game feels like it's 'cut' at the end a bit.. like a two episode movies first part or something).

bungie says the game is twice as long as halo 1 - this simply isn't true and should be critiqued.

ign's review is 8 fucking pages with 2 paragraphs worth of content( and basically.. apart from the halo2 name.. the whole review has been seen a thousand times before, it's boring, the praises are rehashes basically and as such quite empty, like the whole review).

but what's more to note is that game mags are now AGAIN at valueing games at 97-99 out of 100 scores(they did it at least here locally in the early 90's, as they failed to take evolution into account in giving the points.. like, they gave games bigger scores because they were better than the games 3 years ago).

(besides all this, halo2 offers _nothing_ in the creativity department into gameplay)

Re:Not Credible Sources

[DaveDiode]

Hi, my name is proof. Where am I?

Wait! I know!! ... You're in pudding?

That's right... I'm a gay robot.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[fimbulvetr]

You're right on with about the reviewing, and how much it sucks, but I have a bone to pick:

(besides all this, halo2 offers _nothing_ in the creativity department into gameplay)

You mean dual wielding is common on FPS? I know I could dualwield daggers on my MUDs, but this is the first FPS outside of the crappy gun on UT where I can dual wield(or even a few d&d based games, but those are not FPS).
How about bringing about a HUGE revolution on online gaming? I don't have facts, but I will presume that activity for Halo2 on Xbox live will far outnumber all xbox games put together, and blow the shit out of sonys bandaided online garbage.
Maybe the jacking the vehicles is something that's common in your fps, but I've never seen it.
Having not played the game, I can only base my response on what I read in the reviews, but I will bet my left nut that this game has at least one new thing in it.

You've obviously shown your complete and total ignorance if you think software that took 10s of thousands of man hours to create contains absolutely nothing new in it. This isn't specifically in defense of halo2; it's to point out that you should pay closer attention to the worthless trash your mouth is spewing.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[fimbulvetr]

99.1% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[fimbulvetr]

The ps2 couldn't handle halo2. I haven't kept up with nintendo, but I doubt their consoles could either.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[TheHonestTruth]

Not great I imagine. I was offered a position at their old competitor Daily Radar. 50k as a webmaster, in San Francisco. Not too bad considering I would occasionally be able to do game reviews, but 50k in SF ain't a lot, and that was in 2000. I imagine there is no competition. I mean, who many people want to play games all day? /sarcasm

-truth

Re:Not Credible Sources

[beerits]

You mean dual wielding is common on FPS?

It is in Bungie FPS. Marathon had dual pistols back in 1994. I was surprised that Halo 1 did not a have it.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

silly. it's only his own opinion that matters. the masses, they're all idiots (according to the grandparent).

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Buelldozer]

There are dual wields in RTCW as well.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[irc.goatse.cx troll]

Dual Weilds:

RTCW(ET atleast, I dont remember about the original)
Counterstrike (dual elites. completely worthless guns unless you want to humiliate some cal-o clan by using nothing but them in a clan match, but theyre there.)

The Specialists. (Akimbo is an option on just about all pistols in that game, and some SMGs like uzis.)
As you mentioned, the dual MGs in UT.
And a ton of other games/mods.

What, new to console gaming? Nope. Goldeneye for the N64 let you dual any weapon, even mixing between weapons.

Revolution in Online gaming? Nope. I'd say QuakeWorld brought about the only revolution(optimizing for online play). After that its all been evolution.

Jacking vehicles? Hell, even HalfLife (1998) had vehicles in them. They wernt good, but neither are halos (point to steer? how skillless.) Other notable examples: Battlefield 1942, UT2k4.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Dizzle]

Ever play a game called Goldeneye? Everyone knows you could dual wield in that game. And that was long before Halo. So shut yer pie hole. Unless you're putting pie in it.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[gl4ss]

good bye for your left nut unless you count graphics (better models) as a new thing.

evolutionary, not revolutionary(online revolution? bleh, hardly, tell that to ut or cs folks, or even tribes guys with their vehicles.... dual wields? guns akimbo! even bungie has had them before).

*You've obviously shown your complete and total ignorance if you think software that took 10s of thousands of man hours to create contains absolutely nothing new in it.* and you havent been following games for the past 15 years obviously! there aren't a that lot of new things in any game! yes there's "new things" but they're new only in the same sense 'new' as a new seen-it-a-million-times arnold flick would be, different props and a short bit of some 'masterplan' plot. sure, they might be the best movie of the month or whatever.. but masterpieces? no. good entertainment perhaps for a while, but not the *perfect* games these mags hype them up to be.

hell, sometimes there's even (obvious in name or just because they're total clones) sequels that are in every category worse than the first installement in the 'series'.

compare halo to something like gish, which one of the two games is more fresh? the just yet another fps or the one with a new edge on game controls and physics? which one deserves a medal for innovativity?

in the first person genre there hasn't been that many new things added since System Shock(which even had an adjustable difficulty system so that you could play the game mainly as a puzzler OR as a straightforward shooter - or both).

back in the day it was possible that a game got in a national magazine such reviews as: "shitty commando clone"( - total whole review) because the game was just that - a shit clone of commando.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[KDR_11k]

E.g. Terracide didn't just allow for dual wielding, you had three mount points to attach weapons to (the game was a crappy Descent clone but it allowed you to have three weapons out at once). Some mods allow you to dual wield, AFAIK all of the Action [insert game name] mods did and there were Akimbo mods for various multiplayer FPSes. I think there was even a quad weapon mod for Quake 3 Arena.

Besides, the Dual Enforcer isn't crappy, it's really powerful!

Re:Not Credible Sources

[justaddwater]

No where near the bush administration?

Re:Not Credible Sources

[John Pliskin]

Mind you Proof was no where to be found around John Kerry and his Magic gate jumping purple hearts.

$

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Kid_Korrupt]

ok, I'm not sure if I entirely agree with these sites to be 'bought' by developers, Gamespot usually gives fair reviews. But 9+? Think about what that means for a minute? I'm in university and the kids getting 95% are super genius' that spend their entire life doing school work. They are a shining ideal of what students are supposed to achieve. THEY HAVE NO NEGATIVE ACADEMIC TRAITS. Reading the review for Halo 2 it seems like it isnt a perfect game. 10 hours? More of the same? 9.5? I dont get it.

I dont think that sites are being bribed, but I think that hype plays a huge role in skewing results. Reviewers have already decided what to give the game before they get into it. It makes me kind of mad (although its tempered by the fact that I've been seeing this sort of stuff for about 15 years now) that games arent given honest reviews. Fable, Doom, GTA:SA, and now Halo 2.

Note to reviewers: Its ok to give a great game 8. A million rabid fanboys wont come tear your house down, I promise

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Kid_Korrupt]

You've been flamed enough so I wont go with what I was first going to write ;)

but let me ask you this: What does dual wielding add to the game experience?

I havent played halo 2 yet, but I have played some dual wield games (most recently the lastest GTA) and I would have to answer not much. Visually it is kind of cool, but it doesnt change the mechanics of combat. You are still just pointing and shooting, but instead you are now doing more damage. Its not like you cant target multiple enemies, John Woo style.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

When talking about "dual weilds" (or "akimbo") the Action mods (Action Quake2 and Action Halflife) should not be forgotten. Max Payne also featured this kind of weapon setups. However, unlike Halo2 those games only allowed two of the same weapons to be used at ones.

I'm getting quite sick of these reviews claiming everything to be revolutionary and new. For me personally, the real revolution was called Operation Flashpoint. IIRC the first FPS with really usefull vehicles.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[qoa]

Dual wielding added the disadvantage of not being able to throw toned down grenades in H2. Better find some other way to destroy those newly destructable vehicles.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[NonSequor]

Yes, it was very popular, but few (or possibly even no) games are really popular enough to warrant these inflated scores.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. No one loves Michael.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[mausmalone]

See, I tend to think that the idea of having an all 10's review would automatically discredit the review. They're pretty much saying that the game is perfect... but we all know it isn't. There will be some complaint eventually, and there are always more things to add to a game. It can't be perfect, it's an FPS that uses joysticks instead of a keyboard and mouse, and it definitely doesn't have the graphical bang of Doom 3. Not that I'm saying it's terrible,... but seriously, perfect?

My roommate was talking to some guy at Game Informer recently and he brought up that they were completely off the mark with a few games, as were the rest of the gaming mags. He explained it like this: they never put what they actually think about the game personally. They put what they think you'll think about the game. Maybe a lot of these Halo 2 scores are actually reviewers saying "wow, I'm sure everybody will love this, no need to add my opinion."

Re:Not Credible Sources

[swv3752]

You forgot, dual wield is not even new to bungie. Those that remember Marathon, are sure to remember the great fun when you get to dual wield pistols.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

"bungie says the game is twice as long as halo 1 - this simply isn't true and should be critiqued"

They will make things good in the first patch soon to come...

The solution they choosed was to half the walkspeed and the speed of all vehicles

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

They advertise on Google too. Maybe you should stop using it.

Get fucking real. Microsoft probably advertises on damn near every popular source of gaming there is. I guess we should quit reading them all.

Shit Microsoft advertises on SLASHDOT for crying out loud.

You're a fucking idiot.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah because the length of a game is the ONLY thing that determines how good it is.

You complain about the lack of content in the IGN article but you obviously didn't take a step back and read your own post which has almost no content other than the fact that you're pissed off about 15 hours of single player game play.

And that gets you a +3 interesting LOL what a fucking joke.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[gl4ss]

the amount of time a game can keep you captivated is more than 95% of how good a game is.

I wouldn't have a problem with the game being short.. IF it was sold as a short game like a short film is sold.

would you be pissed if you went to see lotr and all you saw was some 30 min tv episode, even if it was a very good 30 min tv episode? sure you would.

(and if the game was truly exceptional then ok, 10 hours could be enough for to merit 94+ rating. but it isn't truly exceptional)

Re:Not Credible Sources

[AzraelKans]

Well Ive played the game (lucky me) and seen the video review in gamespot and I think its dead on, (although quite a bit filled with spoilers they even mentioned the ending) Halo 2 is incredibly good but far from perfect, most fans will be sincerely dissapointed at some details (they say that at the review) however anyone who already loves FPS will have a REALLY good time with it, single player is pretty good, but CO-OP is incredible (just like in halo1) and the multiplayer is priceless. Its just like the first one, but with xbox live, lots of mutators, new vehicles and weapon features and "good guy, bad guy" models, All that I found lacking in the first one.

Anyway all reviews are failing to comment on a major feature missing: downloadable content, all fpss need that in order to stay alive for more than a few months. And halo 2 wont be different.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

You are wrong, it is 97.31%

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, then they lost a few adds realized they were about to go bankrupt and wisened up. Now they are just like the rest of the review sites with huge over inflated ratings.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello, my name is Common Knowledge, your name is really Urban Legand. Some people like to pretend that we are the same person, but we are not.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[fimbulvetr]

I didn't say dual wielding was new.
Yeah I guess I meant revolution in online console gaming.
I've haven't played ut2k4, just 3. bf1942 sucked.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[fimbulvetr]

I never said Halo 2 was the only fps to have dual wielding. Instead of me shutting my pie whole, you should RTFP.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[fimbulvetr]

Why wouldn't graphics be a new thing? I'd say it is.

I'm sorry, I didn't specify console gaming, but that's what I meant. And yes, it is a revolution in online console gaming.

Yeah, new things. In case you didn't notice, I was refuting the line: "halo2 offers _nothing_ in the creativity department into gameplay". This is clearly incorrect, regardless of how you want to spin it. That's all I'm trying to say. I agree with most of your other points.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[gl4ss]

play the game through in singleplayer and say it again... won't take too long(hell, even pa's tycho agrees it to be short).

(new plot, new gfx != new gameplay)

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Jormundgandr]

Actually, a million rabid fanboys tear up these poor game reviewers no matter what score they give them. Head over to last Friday's Penny Arcade to see Tycho give a thorough description.

If they had given Halo 2 an 8, Halo 2 fanboys would be up in arms about what is undoubtedly a great game getting an undeservedly low score.

If they give it a 9, idiots like you post their weird ideas about how the rating system should be related to grades in academia and, having never played the game, conclude that 9 is too high.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[blahplusplus]

QUOTE: " No matter what your personal opinions on the subject, Halo 2 is unarguably one of the most polished and destined to be one of the most enjoyed games of the year. Microsoft didn't buy that with their ads, Bungee bought that with their sweat. And good for them: Bungee has always released quality games and deserves success."

Of course they forgot the quality with the PC version of Halo which was released TWO god damn years after Xbox halo, how hard is it to fucking get it righ with TWO YEARS of an already finished game? Then gearbox ends up releasing, Halo custom edition anyone because of the framerate issues and poor multiplayer networking?

The guys at bungie are no iD or epic IMHO, they are babes in multiplayer FPS land.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[mink]

First FPS I remember dual wield was Rise of the Triad, back in 1995. I wouldnt be suprised if ROTT was not the first game with it.

Re:Not Credible Sources

[Anonymous Coward]

Turn off most of the bump mapping and reduce the texture resolution and the PS2 would handle it just fine.

PS2's transform rate is pretty decent, and the fill rate is OK if you can stay in the anemic EDRAM on the GS.

I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Tojo-Mojo]

To me, it was like you were just going through the same repeating rooms over and over fighting endless hoards of monsters. Especially the library. I didn't play all the way through, I gave up once I got to the part where you go through the core stage again - only this time BACKWARDS! I think I had more fun playing Unreal 2 or Red Faction or other games that got considerably less critical acclaim.

I guess I just don't get the big selling point behind Halo- do people just like it for the action? I mean the story was interesting, but the levels definately were not.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Bionic_Baboon]

I agree with the library part. Most of the levels are decent, but once you get to the library it looks like the game designere just gave up. All it is is you killing the same three types of monsters for about 15 minutes, and the map is even worse. It's repetitive and you can tell that parts of it are the same part you just fought through, just with the monsters coming from the other wall.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

There are two basic reasons why Halo is so popular.

1) All those people that own X-boxes, but have never seriously gamed on a computer got thier first real exposure to an FPS game.

2) Even before X-box live, LAN action exposed these same people to FPS multiplayer gaming.

This is simply Quake for another generation of people that missed the first round 5 years previously. (The Quake brand *still* has huge draw, even after two mis-matched (although excellently executed) sequels, and many people are hoping that the next one fixes the Doom 3 multiplayer problem (i.e. that it sucks)).

Halo is simply another Quake, but for a different set of people.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo is primarily played by console gamers, who haven't had a decent shooter since Goldeneye. So even a subpar shooter in 2004 blows away the crap they've been getting. Halo wasn't bad by any means, but it deserved more of a 7 than a 10.

I don't know what has all these console gamers fooled, but you simply can NOT create a good shooter without mouse and keyboard. When Microsoft gets off their asses and releases the PC version of Halo 2, I'll probably warez it and give it a try. I might actually be tempted to purchase the game if it lives up to the hype.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[nomadic]

Actually my favorite part of Halo was the music.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[EvilAlien]

See the point above about it being the best shooter a console can offer. I think that is it in a nutshell. Consoles and FPS games is a fairly awkward combination, but for some reason people like Halo. I've never played Halo on the Xbox, and I'm not sure I care to after playing it on the PC. I'm still debating getting Halo 2 now or waiting for the PC version, which is still a far superior gaming platform.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[PhoenixFlare]

I don't know what has all these console gamers fooled, but you simply can NOT create a good shooter without mouse and keyboard.

I think you're forgetting about (for example) Perfect Dark and Timesplitters 2, along with (as you mentioned) Goldeneye. Why do you consider said games not to be worthy, other than "no mouse and keyboard = automatic doom"?

There may not be many good console FPS's out there, but they do exist.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Metroid Prime is another great example of this. It took all the fun out of FPS gaming by slowing the game down, crippled the AI and added in auto-aim, and replaced big levels with levels that require endless backtracking across jumping puzzles to keys and switches. In short, it was just a typical platform jumping game from a first-person perspective.


Hi, umm, Metroid WAS, IS and ALWAYS WILL BE a platform jumping game.

If you expted anything else from a Metroid game, that's your own problem.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

i think the first problem with metroid prime would be you thinking its an fps. its a fucking adventure game, your dumb cunt, it just happens to be from the first person perspective

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[PhoenixFlare]

. A good console FPS is one where the control scheme sort of makes up for the fact that only an idiot would want to play an FPS with a console gamepad as opposed to a keyboard/mouse combo.

See my other post on this subject.

Metroid Prime is another great example of this. It took all the fun out of FPS gaming by slowing the game down, crippled the AI and added in auto-aim, and replaced big levels with levels that require endless backtracking across jumping puzzles to keys and switches. In short, it was just a typical platform jumping game from a first-person perspective.

Metroid Prime is NOT meant to be played as an FPS or "typical platform jumping game". If you did, you're missing the whole point of the game and, dare I say, the entire Metroid series (if you've even played any of the others, which I doubt).

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

as opposed to a keyboard/mouse combo

Input devices aimed for entering text (the keyboard was first designed for the typewriter!) and for selecting large objects with a margin of error are somehow better than a controller that was half-designed with Halo in mind.

Oh, and people who buy consoles are innately less of a human beings.

You make a lot of sense.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, I've had enough of the people saying Halo on Xbox is only for people that have never "really gamed".

I've gamed heaps - still remember Wolfenstein 3D when it was the best thing out there. Used to kick my friends butts at Doom and Quake. Quake 2 and beyond just didn't appeal to me though.

Tried Unreal Tournament, and didn't like it. Just my personal preference I suppose.

I've got an XBox, and I love Halo. Don't know why, just the feel for the game, moving around, the environments. Multiplayer is heaps of fun too. It is much easier to transport an Xbox to a friends house for some multiplayer than a whole computer. Most of my friends have a spare TV, none have a spare monitor lying around.

Controls - don't mind them at all. I prefer to be pulling on a trigger when shooting than clicking on a button. I find using the dual analogue joysticks great for moving and looking around.

I find the weapons and health system to be well balanced. A good player will get 3-4 kills for every one of a bad player. The point here is that a bad player can still frag a good player every now and again.

The only complaint I have is that you run so darn s..l..o..w..l..y...

I don't like Microsoft as much as the next /. fanboy, but I do enjoy Halo, and I do enjoy getting the XBox out every now and again for some fun.

I'm looking forward to Halo 2. Unfortunately, exams finish for me on the 16th, so I think I might just wait a week before getting it....

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Benw5483]

I guess I just don't get the big selling point behind Halo- do people just like it for the action? I mean the story was interesting, but the levels definately were not.

Perhaps the appeal behind Halo lies within its excellent multiplayer gameplay. If you've never played with at least 6 other people over lan on Halo you most likely won't understand all the hype behind it. It makes for one hell of an experience because it brings great multiplayer from the computer room to the living room and dorm room...

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[katarac]

Console-only gamers don't have a clue about... blah blah blah ...and milking the cash cow for years.

Hold on, I think I remember you. Didn't I shut you out in a match of Goldeneye back in 1999 in Kansas City? Remember, I was laughing and shooting you in the face, and you were bitching the whole time about how you can't jump, how grenades "don't bounce like that" when shot out of grenade launchers, and how you would totally own me on a quake II lithium server?

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Daleks]

As a DOOM LAN player I can say the same thing about Quake as you did Halo. Every group has that first hit game that makes them a nerd, or even more of a nerd. Sad, but true. Hell, as a Marathon LAN player I can say the same thing about DOOM.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[SilentChris]

From a LAN-party standpoint, I think they were able to do something fairly revolutionary. This wasn't Quake for the next generation of gamers -- this was Quake for the next generation period.

Think about it: how many LAN parties have you gone to where people trucked over a few dozen 20-lb cases, set up all their equipment, and the entire gamer base was techies.

Contrast that with Halo, which my little brother (a 16-year old who knows nothing and could care little about computers) would bring over his Xbox, 16 players would jack in, and they just had fun playing (instead of figuring out why one machine needed new drivers and why some others couldn't talk to each other.

Live play is going to be VERY interesting this time around. I look forward to 16-person LAN parties against other 16-person teams on the other side of the country. Should be some major fun.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't compare Halo to quake. Have you actually played Halo? The game is a _LOT_ slower to play than quake (which was frantic). Not that this is a bad thing. The game is extremely well balanced and can lead to very tactical situations due to the speed at which it plays. I have played both quake and Halo extensively, and prefer Halo.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[harvardian]

I don't think Halo's Quake-like draw is only for newbies.

I was an old school Quake player (clan Deimos rules!), and I was in college when Halo came out. Halo had that same spark that Quake did: you could play it with your friends over a network and have a crapload of fun doing it. Except this time around, people could do it on their couches with a console.

Seriously, IMHO that opened up a whole new dimension to things, since non-nerds are much more likely to get into a long-ass CTF match together on a couch rather than holed up with their own box. None of my non-nerd friends (including an ec major, a gov major, and a jock) have a machine even close to being able to handle HLII right now.

I'm not even planning on spending the $1000 I'd need to to play HLII/QuakeDoom on my machine since my need for a fun networked game is satisfied by Halo. So for some of us, Halo is the next Quake even more so than Quake itself.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[PPGMD]

Well being someone that has been online gaming since Descent and Kali. Later moved onto the Quake series, HL, et al. I would say that I have had some exposure to FPS games.

I enjoyed Halo, it was one of the best FPS's that I have played since I left Comdex to pick up Half-Life (planned ahead brought my computer and reserved it in Lost Wages, since I had to be there for the show anyways). The game just felt right, and the controls worked really well, even though I still prefer the mouse and keyboard overall.

I think the funniest thing is that my recent purchase of a 6800 GT so I can play Half-Life 2 coming out at the end of the month, could have bought me a complete Xbox, with Halo 1 and 2, HD pack, and a Xbox Live subscription, and still have had money left over to buy pizza.

Oh well I still believe it was cheaper than my SLI Voodoo 2 upgrade I made years ago.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Tojo-Mojo]

I notice no one has mentioned Metroid Prime. I have to admit, it's the only console fps I played (not all of it but a bit), and I thought the controls were pretty awful. Mainly because they inhibited moving and looking at the same time I guess.

I personally thought Halo was pretty hard on PC with a mouse/keyboard combo. Was the difficulty increased for the PC version or were the XBox controls just that good?

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget the Bungie cult factor. I bought Halo PC primarily because of nostalgia for Marathon.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Tojo-Mojo]

Should have used the preview button, I meant no one has mentioned Metroid Prime's controls in relation to other FPS.

You know what would probably make a great console FPS controller? A DDR mat. That would be pretty awesome.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[vhold]

I couldn't agree more with the basic concept of this sentiment. Doom 1 is a nearly unplayable game by today's standards, but at the time it was the most unbelievable thing ever to me.

A decent portion of my marketable skills were once all attributable to the desire to play networked Doom. I spent 6 months convincing a couple key faculty at my high school in early 94 that we should build a computer lab, and after a year of acquiring and repairing free 286s and networking them, we finally maanaged to scrounge four grungy 386s just barely powerful enough to play doom with no sound and network them, it was the most incredible thing ever.

Based on our successes we eventually ended up getting a real budget to build a 486 lab and we went so far as to operate a Doom and Descent arcade for money during lunch and after school to buy more computers. That's some seriously pre-columbine stuff right there.

A couple sensitive faculty caught wind of the full picture of what was going on, but because our school was so underfunded our faculty supporters were able to convince them it was harmless enough to be worth it. In fact, their suspcisions were instigated by the fact we had a computer lab at all, it seemed impossible to them after 20 or so years of only being able afford new books every 7 years or so.

Even though I don't particularly employ the specific technical skills I acquired then anymore, the first experience of working with others in an adult mentality and actually creating something matured me from a nihilistic wannabe punk to something resembling a half way useful person. Earning the right to be treated like an adult in an environment where traditionally I'd been treated like a criminal was priceless. Thanks Doom, it took my selfish desire to play you networked to grow up.. .. ?

When Halo came out, I was basically, eh, that's pretty good, nice use of physics there, a bit slow paced and repetitive level design though. The fact that so many people saw it as the best game ever was pretty alien to me without the perspective of how totally floored I was by the original Doom. I still have these emotions burned into my brain by just how blown away I was by the leaked alpha and beta. It was that extreme sentiment that actually changed my life.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[fsterman]

That's bullshit. A keyboard and mouse are a pain in the ass and quite slow. One just has to look at this cognitibly to see that one can do more things with a joystick faster. I have been playing with a joystick and quickly beat the shit out of all my friends who had played for years. Only problem is my wrists, they are carpel tunnel shit and after about three days of gaming they are gone.

And yeah, auto aim blows. But consoles you can play without worrying if your downloads need to be shut down, parties are about 10x easier, the time for power up to play is tremendously smaller, and they are cheaper. When the Xbox came out it was quite impressive.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Well that's not fair... you are comparing technology from 10-12 years ago to what X-Box has now. If you can connect your X-Boxes together as such, you can sure as hell be sure that you can connect your PCs just as easily. Have a pretty recent computer, get yourself some WHQL certified drivers and you are on your way.
Hell the fact that you could do what the X-Box can do now, 12 years ago on a PC speaks volumes about the advancement in console technology. I always wondered why my favourite fighting game wasn't LAN multiplayer on my Dreamcast (Soul Caibur) and why the MK series *just* introduced multiplayer now.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[bitwiseNomad]

To me, it was like you were just going through the same repeating rooms over and over fighting endless hoards of monsters.

But now you get to do it with two guns!!!!1

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[drewmca]

Um, that's about as poorly justified a statement as you could possibly make. Do you have some sort of information on Halo demographics that the rest of us don't? That's pure conjecture on your part.

I've been playing FPS games since the first time I got a copy of the three-floppy shareware of Doom back in 93. Sorry, my "street-cred" doesn't reach back the year before to Wolfenstein. I've played them all, from the early doom clones to the later quake clones and so on and so forth. For most of the 90s I was exclusively a pc gamer, since none of the consoles at the time interested me. But this latest generation did, and Halo is by far my favorite game on the consoles.

It's appeal lay in the fact that it does what it does extremely well. It is a very polished game, and plays exceedingly well on xbox. It can appeal to PC gamers and console gamers alike because it's very well done. To claim that only non-pc players would like it, or to imply that it's somehow FPS gaming on training wheels, is simply granting yourself far too much credit as a gamer. As if somehow you know the "real deal" while the rest of the sheep just follow trends. Bullshit. People recognize a good game when they see it, and therein lay its popularity.

And before you spend too much time on your PC gamer high horse, remember that PC games caught on in popularity well after console games (atari, intellivision, and later, nintendo). Any attempt to see PC gaming as a precursor to the more "childish" console gaming just shows a lack of understanding about the history of videogames.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo doesn't deserve the hype it receives but honestly though, very few things do. The arguments I've read against Halo have missed the magic of the game. Yes, computer FPSs have more precise control, better graphics, and deeper game play but that's not what makes Halo fun. Even with all the things that make computer FPSs "better" I never have as much fun hunched over my desk playing a game on my computer than when I'm sitting on my couch playing co-op with my friends. Halo revolutionizes few things, if anything at all, however, it does bring together elements in an addictive way. The addictive ease of play draws people in and together making for a good social network around the game. The game alone my fail to raise eyebrows but really, that's only half of the experience. The other half comes from the aura that Halo has garnered around it. It's that element which, at least, makes Halo deserving of some of its praise.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[nolife]

A keyboard and mouse are a pain in the ass and quite slow

To each his own I guess but I like the KB/Mouse setup better. I used an "ASDF" KB setup and 3 button mouse setup starting back with Duke3D and love it. With ASDF, I could strafe left, right, jump and duck. Other keys nearby for backwards and turn around. The three button mouse with dual functions for two clicks like left mouse was fire/kick, middle mouse was run backwards, turn around, and right button was run forward and open. I was out of the FPS scene for a while but started back with the Socom series. I find it much harder to move as good in that game with just the PS2 joystick. I guess Socom is supposed to be more realistic and stategy based then Duke, Doom, and Quake so maybe some of those movements you could do with the KB/Mouse would not fit into that games scope of play anyway.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[guinsu]

Actually, I've been playing 3d since Wolf 3d. I loved Doom, couldnt stant any quakes and loved Half Life and Halo. I've played plenty of PC 3d shooters, and Halo really is that good.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Jagasian]

Exactly. Halo is in 2004 what the original Quake was for PC gamers back in 1996: internet/LAN based multiplayer first person shooter. The PC gaming crowd has been professing the importance and fun of first person shooters, especially multiplayer ones, for a long long time now.

Halo is nothing special except it delivers this great genre to more people than Quake did, simply because consoles are more affordable and easier to setup than a PC gaming system.

Of course, a PC capable of playing Quake these days can be had for a couple hundred bucks.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[one4nine4two]

I think you're forgetting about (for example) Perfect Dark and Timesplitters 2, along with (as you mentioned) Goldeneye. There may not be many good console FPS's out there, but they do exist.

All of those games were made by the same developers. Granted they're all great games, but it's easier when you've already got a winning formula.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

obviously his claim wasn't that only non-pc players like it or any of other stupid assumptions you made. You're really a closed minded idiot i have to say and nobody gives a damn how much gaming experience you had.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[ajd1474]

Man, this argument is so freaking old....who cares what you as a PC gamer think of console games. I will never play against you on Xbox Live, and I am glad. I still play CS, Doom and UT occasionaly, but am now pretty much a "console-only gamer". On a friday night nothing beats kicking back on the couch with a beer and dealing out some pain on Halo (or any other Console game). When you talk all i hear is "Console-only gamers blah blah blah".... the thing that makes games like Halo fun is the fact that the game is ... well... FUN. It doesnt need uber-shading, or mega-lighting-deluxe with cheese, or HAL-strength AI. Who gives a flying squirrel nut!! As long as the game is fun!! And i fail to see how i am a clueless numbskull for shelling out $50 ($90 here in Aus), when my total investment on console gaming for the last 3 years is less than what my friend just paid for a VIDEO CARD ONLY just so he could play Doom 3 and Half Life 2. The fun to $$ ratio is my side.....and i have more beer to show for it.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice troll.

Care to explain how you maintain accurate aiming while at the same time being able to turn around 180 in a fraction of a second with a joystick?

Hint, dimwit: you don't move your character with the mouse and aim with the cursor keys.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[king-manic]

That'd be great, if in fact that many people got halo. It sold well*. and the astrix is, it sold well for a xbox game. Which means it did tier 2 PS2 numbers.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[drewmca]

Awesome point. Great. Way to invalidate anything I said. Selling a few million copies must mean it's a bad game.

If you don't like the game, that's fine, but if you can't understand that others might, and for valid reasons, then I don't know what to say. Enjoy wearing the blinders. I hope your side wins.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

I've played FPS's since the days of Doom. Halo was not my first FPS experience, not even a console, and I love it. I think some of the main innovations in the game are the vehicles, and even though it doesn't seem that interesting, the shield. Halo 2 introduces Dual-Wielding which I'm pretty sure is new, and the overall feel of the game is very solid. Plus, it's a heck of a lot easier to get 4 xboxes and 16 people together than 16 PCs and 16 people.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[SpookyFish]

I agree, sort of. I've had an xbox since day 1, so of course I had Halo. Being a major FPS keyboard and mouse fan (Halflife DM still rules!) -- unimpressed, played it for perhaps 15 minutes over the first several months I had it.

Then, fairly late one quiet Sunday evening, a friend came over and we started playing through it, co-op. Needless to say (at least to others who have experienced it,) I was "sick" for work the next day.

~19 hours, some green stuff smoked we *DID* inhale, a ton of beer, and two Domino's deliveries later, we finished it. :)

After that, I understood.
HUGE disappointment that co-op doesn't go over live in 2.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[SnprBoB86]

Halo has got that lil special magical something that makes it super fun.

I personally am a big PC FPS fan and was skeptical of Halo 1 when watching some friends play. When they let me play I realized why they couldn't stop. There is just something about it... its fun.

The single player campaign of Halo 1 was rather lackluster in my opinion, but the multiplayer is just non stop brilliance. The multiplayer is perfectly balanced, easy to pickup and play, fast paced, and just plain fun.

The controls are finely tuned and responsive which creates a breed of shooter completely unlike a PC FPS. I have never heard a Halo player ever blaim the game or the controller, and here at school I PLAY A LOT OF HALO...

I can understand why some people just dont "get" Halo, it seemingly makes no sense. There are some obviously cool features such as the sheild/health and plasma/bullet system as well as easy access grenedes and melee, but these are nothing revolutionary. The fun is in the perfect blend of everything that needs to be experianced to believe.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[stratjakt]

I've played Wolf3D, Doom, Quake, Half Life, Unreal, NOLF, Far Cry, Doom 3... You name it..

Halo for the XBox has so far been the ONLY FPS game I've played that didnt freeze, lockup, or crash to desktop. I didn't have to spend any time on rage3d or nvforums or any other e-outhouses to figure out why the shadows looked stupid or the sound stuttered.

Maybe that has something to do with it.

More importantly, Halo was (and is) fun. Especially multiplayer. People's criticisms are all valid, yeah yeah, levels look the same but I was too busy taking out Covenant to notice.

It's just a fun and well put-together game.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd have to say that your logic is flawed. Unreal Championship was released on the X-Box well before Halo if I remember correctly.

Then you have Rainbow 6, Ghost Recon, and a host of other first person and squad based games that while good didn't seem to create the same impact that Halo did.

You're assuming that Halo picked up a following based on the "novelty" it held for a "new generation" of gamers. In truth the "new generation" of gamers you're talking about are most likely the previous generation of gamers that grew up on CW, DOOM, HEXEN, QUAKE, THIEF, MARATHON, etc. That would be the late twenties to early thirties crowd.

You're also assuming that everyone playing it does so on an X-box. I don't even own a copy for my x-box. I bought it for my PC before I owned an x-box. Many people did. It might be "more" popular on the x-box (meaning higher sales) but PC gamers enjoy it also and are just as supportive about what a well rounded game it is.

Here are some thoughts about why it might be popular.

1. Decent story line
2. Good graphics
3. Few bugs (that I've ever seen)
4. Degree of difficulty (it doesn't hold your hand through every little thing)
5. Atmosphere (I was creeped out for days after encountering the flood).
6. Though repetative the repetition drove home a sense of futility. Some people actually enjoy fighting through that futility. The hope against hope kind of mentality that says "Hey, the end is going to be just around this corner. Oops. Okay maybe behind this one. Nope. Okay how about this one.."
7. It kept people guessing about what was coming next. Little twists and turns. Times when you just know something is around the corner. You turn the corner and there's nothing and you breath in relief and BAM! you get attacked.
8. Multiplayer - kill your friends for FUN.
9. Realistic limitations. You have a couple of weapons - you can't carry the rocket launcher, machine gun, needler, laser rifle, pistol, kitchen sink with you every where you go. You learn to specialize and become proficient with certain weapons or you learn when and where to improvise using weapons you can steal off of dead enemies. Technique begins to become important over run and gun.
10. Mystery. The regular game play leaves just enough mystery for certain personality types. they want to learn more about the character and the situation and the only way they can is to KEEP PLAYING.
11. Vehicle combat. WEEEEEE!
12. AI with attitude (and chicken shits). I loved the little guys running around hands waving in the air screaming for their lives. They're like the fat kid that taunts the bully until the bully gets good and mad. QUAKE et al pretty much had the same character over and over - evil guy with weapon "x" attacks immediately. The characters in Halo actually fit into personality types - the scared grunt, the agressive but careful elites, the patient jackals, and the hulking oaf hunters. One of the reasons most FSP games are popular is because you can play against real people. It wasn't until Halo that the AI made me feel almost like I was playing against real entities.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[king-manic]

Awesome point. Great. Way to invalidate anything I said. Selling a few million copies must mean it's a bad game.

If you don't like the game, that's fine, but if you can't understand that others might, and for valid reasons, then I don't know what to say. Enjoy wearing the blinders. I hope your side wins.


Thanks, I think my side did win. Have a nice day.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Jace of Fuse!]

Um, that's about as poorly justified a statement as you could possibly make. Do you have some sort of information on Halo demographics that the rest of us don't? That's pure conjecture on your part.

Actually, there is plenty of evidence to support the statement. But mostly it's in the fact that most XBOXers are not die-hard gamers, though most die-hard gemers do have an XBox.

So while it's true that many hard core players like Halo, it's easily witnessed that most Halo fans are either new to gaming in general, or new to multiplayer deathmatch.

I've read statements repeatedly stating just this, I've witnessed it in person working around people who are avid Halo fans (but have never even SEEN Quake), and I've talked to a lot of people who bought an XBox simply because they believed the simple Microsoft hype claiming it was the "most powerful game machine on the planet".

So, in some respect, your thoughts on the quality of Halo may be justified feelings about the game, that does not remove the fact that most Halo fans are new gamers.

I'd go search for articles about the XBox Demographic (and indeed the same thing was written about the PS1 years back), but they're easy to find. Just hit Google up. It makes for interesting reading.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

console games can CTD?? Oh, and console games can be more stable than PC games because they only have to program the game to one specific hardware set, but PC games need to be compatible with a multitude of video cards and sound cards, and all other hardware variables.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo is basically just Unreal for XBox. The PC version sucked ass. It was dog slow, and the gameplay was nothing we hadn't seen before, aside from a couple of nifty gimmicks. Give me Far Cry, Doom 3, Half-Life, or any of about a half a dozen other games before I'll be interested in the sloppy play of Halo 2.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, at the end of the Atari 2600 days, the big deal was the Commodore 64 for a couple of years. Sure, there were the Atari 400 and 800, but PC gaming really was primed very well by the C-64. Apple ]['s were too expensive (can you imagine paying over $100 for a 2600 back then? Well, lots of people did. The follow-on consoles kind of sucked, but were better, and then Commodore got the ball rolling with the Vic20 then the C64. You really did get a lot of computer in a C64, especially for the price ($200 or so is what I paid for mine).

The IBM PC came out, but color graphics were a slow-to-market add-on for an already $3000-ish "professional" system.

Sure, there were some pretty bitchin' games for other computers besides the C64, but I definitely burned FAR more hours playing C64 games than anything else.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

I have some great information backing this up. First hand observations. I known many people who are total Halo fan boys. Each one of these people play the networked Halo games every chance they can. They have Halo on the brain. After talking to them (okay they talked to me to find out why I was such a good FPS player but not interested in endless Halo action) I found out that Halo was their first FPS ever. Some had played some of the crappy ports of doom 2 out on the older consoles but this was their first taste of a real good shooter. Every other PC gamer I have talked to about Halo has mentioned having similar experiences.

Is every Halo fan a newby FPS player? No. Are a lot of them newbs? No, they have had a lot of practice on Halo 1 but they were newbs went it came out.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi I'm a diehard Quake fan and so I'm going to let you know that your statement "I loved Doom, couldnt stant any quakes and loved Half Life and Halo." is flawed, since Half Life is a Quake game.

P.S. Don't try to argue that I'm wrong and that Half Life was actually based on Quake 2 because
a) it wasn't, and
b) Quake 2 is a Quake-engine game too.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm well I have some counter points for you :)
First, disclaimer: I do really like Halo for an easy to set up LAN with friends. That niche was filled very nicely.

"It is a very polished game, and plays exceedingly well on xbox."
You're probably talking about it overall, but a multiplayer game on a system with known hardware specs shouldn't have any graphics lag. Halo does in some graphically intense firefights.

"it's very well done"
This is subjective, I could list many things I believe are problems with Halo, silly 'features', and options that should be more configurable than they are.

"it's somehow FPS gaming on training wheels"
Again, this is subjective since many people, even the vast majority of PC gamers, don't have much knowledge of everything that can go on in a multiplayer FPS.

Even the definition of FPS is debatable. For example, thousands of people would say Counter-Strike is the best FPS. IMO a "shooter" should be action-packed, so CS is only technically an FPS game because it doesn't have action (yes, I said action).
It all depends on what kind of player you are; since I'm a QuakeWorld player, CS lacks action by its design, but most CS players wouldn't understand what I mean by that.
Since it's safe to say that the majority of PC FPS gamers only play CS, they (and the console FPS crowd) aren't very aware of the type of action that can be found in FPS's.
So virtually everybody, PC gamer or not, who is a hardcore Halo fan doesn't have enough experience to be familiar with many aspects of FPS gaming. That doesn't mean Halo is easy to play or learn, it just means there is a lot of experience missing, and with the small amount of experience you'd get from that game, it's not much different from an introduction to the FPS world, or "FPS gaming on training wheels" as you say.
All of that stuff is based on my preference of fast paced action/strategy over the more 'relaxed' style of gameplay in Halo, but most people with a decent amount of FPS experience don't think much of Halo as a serious/competitive game.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[qoa]

That level was a hell of a lot longer than 15 minutes sir. In fact I recall killing Flood for at least 20 minutes before that stupid Librarian flew up to me and said "Only 9 doors to go". Cut to me Uninstalling Halo.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[qoa]

The Halo music made me enjoy the game much more than I would have without it. One of the best soundtracks ever.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[wjsteele]

Sorry, my "street-cred" doesn't reach back the year before to Wolfenstein.

Actually, Wolfenstien was years before Doom... I used to play it on my Atari 400 and my Apple ][. It was "Wolfenstien 3D" that was just a year or so before Doom.

Bill

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[The-Bus]

First off, you're not correct. At least not in what I've seen.

Most people that played Halo played THE console FPS before, and I mean Goldeneye for the N64. If you were of age to play that game when it was out, you played it. Now at that time its PC competition (Quake 2, Unreal) completely blew it away, but Goldeneye was still ridiculously popular. So I would say the people whose first exposure to an FPS game was Halo would be extremely limited. Since multiplayer FPS gaming on the console went back to Goldeneye as well, I would say the same for the second statement. (Perfect Dark was an awesome game, but was extremely unpopular, I found).

The people I know who play Halo are a big mix of extreme "street" cred gamers (owned Neo-Geo, played iD games before Wolf3D) and casual gamers (had consoles, no real computers). It's pretty evenly spread out.

That said, I would 100 to 1 prefer to play a game on the couch with my friends with beer/soda/drinks in hand than sitting on a computer.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[59Bassman]

Mmmmmm....Wolfenstein on the Apple ][+.

"Halt! Commenzie!"

(or some such)

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[bluntos]

Oh, and people who buy consoles are innately less of a human beings. You hit the nail on the head. Even if you are grammatically incorrect. You bought a console because you do not understand PC's enough to have one. Sorry about that. Use a mouse+keyboard and play a proper FPS online with everyone else. Like ET or UT then you might finally get it, if u ever get good enough to play online. A controller does not offer the level of accuracy that u need for an angry exchange of bullets. WOLF ET -- AIA`shunter

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[EvilNight]

I'm sure those reasons are a part of it, but they aren't the biggest factors in its success. The reason Halo was so successful is simply that it is a damn good game. Far better than Quake, IMO.

1) Far better than average story. Seriously... none of iD's titles has ever had anything approaching a story. Doom 3 was their best effort in this direction. The last FPS I can remember that had a truly involving story was Half-Life, and we all know how well history has judged that game. Halo 2 actually tops Half-Life in my book, and until I played Halo 2, Half-Life was my golden standard (well, Half-Life and Marathon). Story is important to a lot of gamers. Halo has a badass story, cool characters, and good execution in their storytelling. Halo 2 has a far superior story to the original. I'm hoping Half-Life 2 has a better story than Halo 2, but it will by no means be easy to top. I think Valve has the chops to do it, though. Either way we all win.

2) Good gameplay. While gameplay may not win you any awards, bad gameplay will kill you dead. Halo's greatest failing was the repetitive nature of the levels, but it wasn't enough of a failing to kill the game. Controls were good, weapons were fun and fairly well balanced, multiplayer was exceptional. Single player was challenging and entertaining. Halo 2 is more of the same, without the repetition, and with better balance. The level design in Halo 2 tops any other FPS I have played, and I don't give that out lightly. They have a level of interactivity and epic scope that I've never seen before. I was so busy oogling the surroundings on several occasions that it got me killed. I get the impression it was designed that way... it happened too often to be coincidence.

3) Kickass soundtrack. Halo has one of the best I've ever heard in a FPS. Again, a kickass soundtrack won't make your game succeed (see Fable, for example), but it'll definitely cost you if the music sucks. Halo 2 is mainly a retread of Halo's music, with enough differences to keep it from sound too familiar. They added a touch of metal to it.

4) ATMOSPHERE. I cannot stress this one enough. The most important aspect of any video game is its ability to immerse the player. Doom 3 had phenomenal atmosphere, but no story. Doom 3 was all premise. Halo has plenty of both, as did the original Half-Life. Half-Life is still my all time winner in this category... it is pure atmosphere from start to finish. The original Unreal had decent atmosphere (especially in the first few levels and at the end), but crappy story.

Halo was also one of the first to do vehicle combat well, and I think that played a large part in its novelty. The vehicle combat in Halo 2 is phenomenal.

You've got to score well in all categories to have a kickass game. Halo scores well by most gamer's estimations, and that's why it did well. The PC port was late and crappy, and the levels were repetitive (especially compared to a normal PC FPS), and these are its only real failings. Halo 2 does not have these failings... in fact the level design is now undoubtedly one of its chief strengths, so it will likely do far better than the original Halo. It'll be a win for folks who just couldn't get in to the original.

By the way, on Legendary difficulty, Halo 2 is HARD as HELL. I could thump the original on Legendary without deaths... in Halo 2 I can't even get off the first damn level yet playing solo (although playing co-op a friend and I managed to beat it on Legendary after about 30 hours invested... this time, if one dies, you both respawn at the checkpoint, so no more cheating). My hat is off to any player who can finish this solo on Legendary. If you can do it, you're tournament material.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, you forgot the two most important things. In reality, Halo is very popular even with people who have been PC Gamers since Quake1 or earlier. The reasons?

1) Incredibly fun vehicles. It's a blast running down enemies in the warthog, and also lets you get places faster, taking away a lot of the monotony of most games with big open levels.

2) Co-op. Halo is still the only FPS that I can think of that does co-op and does it well. It *makes* the game for a lot of us. I was incredibly dissapointed that the PC version of Halo doesnt have co-op, and ended up getting an X-box just for that one feature.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[crimson30]

I'm not obsessed with the game, but I rather like it. Why?

1. I dig the vehicles.
2. Plenty of snipe space in places like Blood Gulch.
3. Decent look and feel.

I champion gameplay above all. I don't give a damn about the storyline. And since you mention fighting "hoards of monsters", I'm wondering if you've played it in a LAN party? I played single player for about 10-15 minutes before getting bored and quitting... it appears that you liked the game even better than I in this regard.

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[dindi]

2 things I have to fight with:

halo 2 is soo clumsy, you feel like really wearing that 10 ton suit, while your dual wielded weapons cover 50% of the screen ... ok maybe i need better than my 32' ....

ATMOSPHERE: well for me atmosphere is doom 3 ... or chronicles of riddick ... or something that you feel like smelling touching ...
halo and halo 2 are deserted ... I just felt like walking in artificial spaces, and sterile environments .... eg sw battlefront has nicer fields and interiors than that emptiness ...

Vehicle combat : just hate the idea of seeing 3rd person in a 1st person shooter ...

While riddick made the mistake of 3rd personizing ladder moves ... it did a good job with that robot you can climb into ....

no head move: i dunno, do we just float ? like in wolfenstein3d ?

I enjoy halo 2 as a little shooting excercise, however it just does not take me there where I am with other games ...

ahm yep science fiction games rule .... but wait ... I am shooting big pink monsters with weapons that make "piu-piu" and emit lightgreen goo-laser ...

dunno .... I would give it a strong 8/10 maybe

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

If I said, "You bought a PC because you do not understand consoles enough to buy one...Use a gamepad and play a proper FPS online with everyone else, like Halo. Then you might finally get it, if you ever get good enough to play online. An input device for typing does not offer the level of accuracy that you need to easily perform multiple tasks or coordinate your shooting," would my argument make any less sense?

I don't find an "angry exchange of bullets" the motivation for playing FPSes. I find the strategy combined with first-person defense much more important. (This is why I prefer CTF to Slayer for Halo online. Slayer tends to devolve into get-the-gun-first. CTF will almost always allow you to keep strategy.)

I find that one advantage of a controller is the differential motion: keeping it slightly to the left means a slight, constant motion that way, not a one-time movement and then a stop. This makes it easier to pan around the area or to circle someone (hold both control sticks in opposite directions). And I can also not manage variable walking speeds on a computer as well as I can with, say, the Xbox controller - even if you say there's a run key, that still only offers you two speeds.

And as for grammar, tu quoque, or should I say, "u" quoque?

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[mink]

Playing FPS games since Doom and you missed Dual Wield (early/mid 1990's feature to some FPS games)?

Re:I've never understood the obsession with Halo

[drinkypoo]

OTOH Halo for PC was a buggy piece of crap until the latest release. Even with the earlier updates I would crash to the desktop frequently.

You've heard this before, but I don't want to play without a keyboard and mouse. Aiming with a thumbstick is awful. The only first person anything I've played with a gamepad that wasn't horrible was Zelda, and that had targeting.

Not soo good...

[grazzy]

I've been playing this game for almost two weeks now, and yeah well, I gotta tell you, it has a couple of flaws.

1) Everyone speaks french? What is up with that?
2) It doesn't work with xbox live gameplay...
3) My xbox now says I'm banned from xbox live?!

I give it 5/10 for good efforts, but why french??

Re:Not soo good...

[Anonymous Coward]

I was in Electronics Boutique on Saturday, picking up Donkey Konga, and while I was chatting to one of the clerks, a guy walked in, maybe early thirties. He wanted to put down a pre-order for Halo 2.

The other clerks took his name, phone number, etc. He then went on to run his jaw about how he hadn't been too blown away by what he'd played so far, but was going to order it anyway. Everyones jaws dropped, as this guy just stood in front of three people who make their living by selling games, and at least one more that dabbles in the idea of writing them, as this guy talked about how much software he ripped off, and how it was unfair that he had to fiddle with his modchip to use XBox live.

Now I know a lot of people dabble in console piracy, but do you have to come out and declare it to the whole world in the middle of a computer games store? Sheesh, almost makes me begin to understand how Gord must feel some days.

Re:Not soo good...

[Cyno01]

He played a pirated copy, wasn't impressed with it and was buying a copy anyway? Why would they complain?

Re:Not soo good...

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminds me of the time we were in the grocery store contemplating renting a movie, and right as a lady was pointing us toward the movie on the shelf I exclaimed "Wait, let's just download it!" From the look on the employee's face I don't think she realized you could pirate DVDs on the Internet.

Re:Boring?

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the first Halo sucked. I played it on PC and I was bored to tears after 20 minutes. Hell, DOOM3 was better. :)

PA

[mentalflossboy]

Hell, even Penny Arcade liked it.

Re:PA

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell, even Penny Arcade liked it.

Yes, and if you hit that back button on the site, or click this link you'll find a much more compelling story.

Re:PA

[nzAnon]

You slashdot'd penny-arcade! You bastard

Re:PA

[faust2097]

Microsoft has been exceedingly good at hooking the PA guys up with exclusive peeks at their games and presumably free copies of them. I'm not going to go so far as to say that they're buying editorial content from PA but their opinion on Microsoft and the XBox has improved a whooooole lot over the last year or so.

I'd say the one thing Microsoft has really nailed in marketing the XBox is whipping their online fans into a frenzy. They have an amazing PR agency that can somehow turn Fable in to the EB's best selling game ... ever *cough* infirstdayafterreleasefromthemanufacturer *cough*

Couldnt disagree more.

[hine_uk]

From ...ahem play testing at a uh friends house...all the way through I got to be honest when I say I wish I didnt have this arriving in the post in a weeks time. The magic of the first one jsut isnt there. Its about half the length and you can tell that it is just getting strugn out into a fresh "chapter" each year. It dosent play as smoothly, the multiplayer aspect of it is lacking compared to the first, the story is not as tight and fun as the first and its about half the length. To be honest it feels more like an expansion pack rather than a full and slaved over game. Its just a pity that the magazines jump on the bandwagon. It deserves to do well just not as well as it will do. Instad of your own money ask for it as a gift for christmas or thanksgiving. You wont feel so let down.

Re:Couldnt disagree more.

[SilentChris]

Um, out of curiousity, how can you give an accurate review if:

1.) You don't speak French (maybe you do -- can't tell).
2.) Have never played on Live (because it's impossible to do so with the current PAL pirate out there).

I mean, I can understand if the story does suck (not sure at this point -- I'll play the game and get back to you). :) But multiplayer a massive draw on this thing. I would wait to see how that turns out.

Re:Couldnt disagree more.

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing I agree on is that the ending leaves something to be desired. The cinematics are FUCKING AMAZING, and the gameplay is fun and much less repetitive than the first.

"Um, out of curiousity, how can you give an accurate review if:

1.) You don't speak French (maybe you do -- can't tell)."

There are subtitles, and you don't need to know French to understand the story.

"2.) Have never played on Live (because it's impossible to do so with the current PAL pirate out there)."

You don't need Live to play single/coop or play LAN multiplayer.

Anyway, some elements were underwhelming, but ultimately the game was incredible considering the Xbox's limitations.

Re:Boring?

[pluke]

The multiplayer sounds sucky, i'm just waiting for an update of perfect dark multiplayer (never been surpassed on a console IMHO). Are there bots? for us non live players even 7 player can feel a bit lonely let alone 4 player on those huge maps.

Again?

[cK-Gunslinger]

When did they do it the first time? I mean, did any of these people even play the first Halo? Cooperative play on the XBox was pretty cool, but other than that, it as a bland and boring game with bland and boring graphics, sounds, weapons, gameplay, etc.

Re:Again?

[badasscat]

When did they do it the first time? I mean, did any of these people even play the first Halo? Cooperative play on the XBox was pretty cool, but other than that, it as a bland and boring game with bland and boring graphics, sounds, weapons, gameplay, etc.

I normally consider posts like these trolls, but I have to agree in this case. Some of Halo was pretty nice, but it was balanced by all the backtracking, by all the bland interior levels, and by a complete lack of consistency. Overall I don't see what's all that different about it than a lot of other mediocre sci-fi shooters.

Standards for FPS's on consoles are different, and lower. I think Xbox owners were also just happy as hell to have an FPS that looked as good as Halo did (for a console FPS), and that was good for a launch game. It's definitely way, way overrated though, and if the first game had come out at this point in the system's lifespan I doubt it'd make the same sort of splash. Of course, now it's got almost this mythical quality to it, so of course you get reviewers giving it 9s and 10s because hell, it's practically the same game, so people are going to have to love it just as much, right?

Well, I own an Xbox, and Halo 2 is not at the top of my wish list. FPS's belong on PC's anyway, with proper controls and higher detail levels (required for recognizing and then sniping distant enemies). Nuts to Bungie.

Re:Again?

[Firehawke]

What really gets me is how the Gamespot review spends over half the review glossing over the flaws and then they still give it a near-perfect score.

I admit I actually liked the original Halo-- it had a different feel and the enemies had some character to them, but the review I just read makes Halo 2 sound like they didn't even bother to work on the biggest issues of the original at all and in fact came out a lot worse in a few areas while only improving mildly here or there.

I guess the reviewers really ARE taking payoffs these days...

Re:Again?

[Apreche]

I agree. I am the kind of person who doesn't pass judgement on a game until I've played it. I haven't played Halo 2 yet, but Halo one was crap poop. FPS games of that style were impressive when Goldeneye came out for the N64. Releasing the same crap with a different theme and shinier graphics isn't going to make it any fresher. The enhanced multiplayer of multiple X-Boxen adds a little bit to the experience, but most still do the four player split screen.

Games like Counter-Strike and Natural Selection DO exist. There's a reason that CS is still the #1 multiplayer fps, no matter what your stereotypes of the game may be it kicks the living snot out of every other multiplayer fps. Keep in mind I am judging the game on its own merits, and not taking into account the attitudes and mannerisms of its players, which may vary.

Oh, yeah, so Halo 1 couldn't hold a candle to CS or NS or even UT2k4 or Tribes 2. Based on that, I don't have high expecations of Halo 2, but I wont pass judgement until I play it. Maybe because my expecations are low, it will beat those expecations and make a good impression.

Oh, the reason people played Halo 1? My guess is they are mostly young kids who didn't already have the Goldeneye experience. Or they were people who didn't have fast Internet connections and didn't have the internet multiplayer fps experience to compare it to. So when a goldeneye with a new theme, better graphics and expanded multiplayer showed up they were wowed away because they had not yet experienced something which you and me have had for over 6 years.

Re:Again?

[Solder Fumes]

The original Halo would have been revolutionary, the graphics and gameplay would have been advanced well beyond what anyone else had, if it had been released back when it was supposed to. On the Macintosh. Way, way, WAY before Microsoft bought Bungie, came up with the X-box idea, made the X-box, and then forced Bungie to port Halo to the X-box. Microsoft merely saw something that would cause people to buy Macintoshes, and Mac OS, so it merely bought what might hurt it. It's not "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" it's "if you might have a tiny bit less of a monopoly because of 'em, absorb them."

Re:Again?

[nmb3000]

...and then forced Bungie to port Halo to the X-box.

Do you have any idea what you're even talking about? Halo went through so many changes that if it had been released on the Mac as originally planned it would have been yet another mediocre RTS game on a platform with a very small videogame market.

I'm not a Microsoft advocate, but because of Microsoft's purchase of Bungie, they were given an infusion of funds and resources to make what would have been an undersold and mediocre game into the best FPS on the Xbox, perhaps even the best FPS console game to date (yes I've played Goldeneye and Perfect Dark-- Niether game can is as good as Halo multiplayer, new technology notwithstanding).

For anyone interested, here's a look at the evolution of Halo. Get an idea of what it would have looked like had Microsoft not been involved. Trust me... nobody would have bought a Mac just because the RTS Halo-as-it-would-have-been was on it.

More mirrors

Re:Again?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Microsoft merely saw something that would cause people to buy Macintoshes, and Mac OS, so it merely bought what might hurt it.

Sorry to introduce reality into your Mac Zealot delusions, but:

A) Halo would have shipped for Windows just like Marathon Infinity, Myth, etc
B) Bungie needed money and willing sold themselves to MS, no conspiracy required.
C) Microsoft does not consider Apple any sort of real threat.

Re:Again?

[Quarem]

Perhaps it's because I have been a Bungie fanboy since the Marathon series, but even coming from a history filled with PC FPS games I found Halo to be totally awesome. The story of the game, and the game-play were enough to draw me in, and get me past the more repetitive levels, like the library.

To say that the graphics, sounds, weapons, and game-play were bland is a bit unfair I think. The game was one of the first to extensively use shaders, and the lighting was fairly well done for the time. The sound had support for Dolby 5.1, which made some of the levels more eerie as you could hear noises and ambience in all directions as you played. The weapons were cool I thought as well. There was your standard selection of human weapons, such as the shotgun, pistol and rocket launcher. But the plasma based weapons, and sticky grenades were a fun addition. The gameplay was far from bland. Halo was one of the first games to use vehicles extensively. How could you possibly think that driving the warthog around as the gunner on the back mows through Covenant hordes bland? I suppose riding a Scorpion tank into the heart of a fortified Covenant position, and taking out enemy artillery with your long-range canon is boring too? Of course having an aerial dog fight in a Banshee is pretty boring too right?

Maybe I'm just too easily pleased but I thought there was a lot of great innovative stuff in Halo. It's one of the few FPS that I'll still fire up and play even after beating the game several times through. I can't think of a single FPS game that I've played on PC that had a single-player experience captivating enough to keep me coming back, time and time again.

Re:Again?

[EulerX07]

I know what you mean. Halo does not even come close to being on the same level as Call of Duty (my personnal favorite of the last two years). I started playing Halo's single player campaign and it felt like one of the most hollow gaming experience of recent fps I've played.

Re:Again?

[Medgur]

Let's see... Why would I, a born-from-Wolf3D doom loving quake player, still play Halo on a consistent basis? This isn't a hypothetical question, becuase I do. It's also clearly not a matter of gaming experience, because frankly, if you can name the FPS, I've probably played it. Even those awful Wolf3D knock-offs (though Blake Stone was kind of cool).

No, Halo is awesome because it's a console game. It's not a pretentious PC shooter that requires me to spend upwards of an hour to gather my clan together for some multiplayer fun just so I can assure myself some half-decent gameplay. It also doesn't mean I have to get everyone to lug their computers to one central location for some social gaming. It's a great game that only requires me to turn the damned XBox on, and it doesn't require me to take gaming beyond the casual level!

Halo is the multiplay FPS for regular people. It may not be as sophisticated as hardcore gamers would like, but it's polished, easy to play, and fun. That's all that matters.

Re:Again?

[SilentChris]

Don't take this the wrong way, but you're clueless.

The reasons the original Halo took off had nothing to do with the single-player campaign (which is what you're griping about). Halo was the first accessible LAN-party game. By "accessible", I mean that you didn't need to carry 20-40 lbs of computer equipment on your back, know how to configure drivers, etc. This was the first game that you could have 16 people who wanted to play, didn't know a lick about technical stuff, hook up and get hours and hours of fun social gaming.

Let me put things in context: I'm a UT freak. I play competitively, put in hours and hours over the weekend, etc. I see where Halo had its place: it was damn fun for the average gamer. Same as GTA. Same as The Sims. Same as Myst. I could gripe about control issues or the "floaty" jumping, but why bother? Halo is pure-squeezed gameplay from the orange of gaming goodness.

Feel free to stay on a dwindling platform (the only games I'm really looking forward in the near future are Half Life 2 and World of Warcraft). The PC had its time in the sun. Now it's going to take a back seat to consoles.

Re:Again?

[arodland]

Yeah. I don't get how people can play a game on a little portion of screen that's only about 243 usable lines tall. Doesn't matter how big your TV is, how the hell do you _see_ anything in that?

Re:Again?

[SilentChris]

I freelanced for GameSpot a few times, and they're a very tricky pub to work for. Their guidelines are kind of skewed: they tell you to put all your weight into the "reviewer's tilt" type of score. That never happens though, because you have millions of gamers rely on that one number near the top of the page (the average).

They're one of the few publications I've seen that don't say "augment your score with a written argument in the review". You'd think that was a given, but they know people rely on those scores to make purchasing decisions. You're right, though: it leads to some awkward reviews ("Story sucks, graphics are ok... 9.4").

Re:Again?

[nfgaida]

I've played many PC based FPS. I played goldeneye and hated it. The controls seemed stupid. However, Halo was the first console based FPS that had controls that worked like I thought a console controller should work. Playing Halo co-op was the most fun experience I had with a console.

Even now, I still get together regularly with a group of guys and we drink some beer and play Halo. Bringing an Xbox over to someone's house is much easier than a PC. (plus it offers one a chance to get away from the wife and kids).

I don't claim that Halo single player was all that great. But I've had more fun playing Halo with friends at 1am than I have with CS.

Re:Again?

[Anonymous Coward]

B.S. you are a zealot of the other kind. A: Exactly. That is correct. No problem here but one could make argument that MS did not care too much for a cross-platform success. B: And that is why one may say that it was not a conspiracy but possibly not a way around your parents argument. They did force change on the game. The original inspiration was marathon. It was a continuation for the original series. Much was changed because MS did not like the fact that is was tied to marathon (Which in many ways is still tied to older gaming... the days before DirectX). It really depends on which side you try to take. Either way, the purchase HAD AN IMPACT on the company and thus the game. You may judge wether this was for better or worse. C: HAHA. That is B.S. again. MS is not dumb. They may say that kind of thing for PR but it is quite contrary for their business. They make money from their "platform". This would include their office products, internet products, operating system products, and hardware products (a few more but..). They port office and games to Apples stuff because it expands their reach. This is how they function. Here is where the danger of the whole scenario come in. MS knows that anyone can put a huge hole into the platform of their's. This means that if Apple where to make a good alternative office product they would have to fight back harder. If Apple would make any alternatives people are no longer stuck to standing on top of the MS platform. Proof of this is can be found in many places. Linux, for example, used to be shunned by MS as "not a threat". Now they go out of their way to say that they are better. Tell me that this is not the sign of competition? Apple is growig. Fast. Look at their profit margins and how big they are getting. Then look at their total sales figures. Apple is getting big. Not wintel big but a substantial big. I am not an Apple person (don't even own one). I am not am MS person either. I am not even a Linux person. I am stuck using Linux for the time being but it is just marginally better that the above for my current needs.

Re:Again?

[Jesselovesscripts]

don't take this the wrong way, but your response was almost as stupid as it sounded arrogant 243 interlaced video lines. Consoles are for little kids, like you. Any "UT freak" who isn't a die hard pc gamer, isn't a UT freak. go play mario kart.

Re:Again?

[The_Real_GooberMan]

I never got the whole "standards for FPS's on consoles are different" argument. Metroid Prime is possibly one of the best FPS's I've ever played (despite the fact that they'd tell you it's not an FPS but a First Person Adventure - it's the same kind of argument that Deus Ex is an FPS instead of a hardcore RPG when it's really both).

Re:Again?

[dmjossel]

Halo was originally announced as a crossplatform game for a simultaneous release on MacOS and Windows-- just like Bungie's prior release, Myth. (We won't mention Oni in the context of this discussion.)

As such, the assertion that Microsoft bought Bungie to prevent Halo on the Mac from threatening Windows market share makes no sense at all. Bungie hasn't been a Mac-only developer for a long time now.

Microsoft bought Bungie to sell Xboxes, not to protect Windows.

Re:Again?

[DavidBrown]

I don't buy that argument. Halo is a very good game. It's primary problem is one of level design, and that problem doesn't run through the whole game, only parts (the exteriors are excellent). Level design wasn't driven by Microsoft and the portion of Halo to the XBox.

But that's all in the past anyway. The question before us today is whether or not Halo2 is something that those of us who have an XBox will want to buy. I'll do it, if only because I enjoyed Halo, despite its flaws.

Re:Again?

[TrancePhreak]

Metroid Prime is the worst FPS I have ever seen. It doesn't have a control scheme that fits an FPS, but they make you do FPS puzzles and such.

Re:Again?

[TrancePhreak]

I have progressive scan you insensitive clod!

Re:Again?

[Drantin]

another conjecture: perhaps a bunch of 30 year olds that were playing doom back in the early nineties and hadn't played anything in the interim?

Re:Again?

[seann]

I will have to agree. I think the best part is the targeting system, you don't have to fiddle with your thumbs to lock on to enemys, but you can jump around and keep them in your sights.

It allows you to be free.

People will then say "But it takes the challenge out of hitting a moving target."

She's a fucking bionic woman, of course shes going to have some kind of automagic tracking.

Same thing for Master Surrder Chief.

Meh.

Re:Again?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can always tell the angry raving luntics from the normal raving lunatics when they type 2 pages worth of text in a single paragraph...

Re:Again?

[lmnfrs]

Counter-Strike is for newbies with misconceptions about sophistication and skill =)

Re:Again?

[Sentry21]

I'd like to respond to a lot of your points here, because you say a lot about a lot of sutff, and I disagree with pretty much everything.

As far as Counter-Strike goes, I can't stand the game. Not because the game is bad necessarily, but because I'm pretty sure everyone that plays it on public servers is functionally retarded, and LAN games are too much of a pain-in-the-ass to waste my time with. UT2k4 is uninspired, it's essentially UT + UT2k3 but trying to rip off Halo. If I wanted to play UT, I would. If I wanted to play Halo, I would. UT2k4 is interesting, but it doesn't have anything compelling about it as far as I've seen (not to mention I don't feel like sparing 8 gigs of space for the install and the maps you need to add to make it interesting.

And to be honest, I felt Goldeneye was a terrible game when I first played it, and I just couldn't get into it at all. I never did like it, I found the split-screen wasn't detailed enough to make out what the heck was going on, the controls were substandard, and the game wasn't interesting enough. Halo, I find, is the exact opposite.

As far as the types of people who play Halo, you're wrong on a lot of counts. While I'm sure that your description does match some players of Halo, I could say 'Halo players are all German-speaking transvestites' and I'd be as correct. There are people like that that do play those games, but there are a lot of people that are regular people.

A group of us play Halo (and are going to have a 16-player Halo 2 party on Thursday), and we don't fit into that category at all.

Shaun is in his late 20's, is the manager of one of the local EB Games stores. He's hosting. His wife, Sue, who works for one of Canada's largest banks, will be playing, and she's pretty fierce too. I, a 23-year-old call-centre employee who used to work at EB, will attend, even though I hated Goldeneye. Jeff is the assistant manager of the new EB Games store in town, and I know he'll be there with his X-Box. Joey is a film student at the local University, he and his roommates have pretty much every mainstream console ever made, and all the best games for all of them. Dan is taking a masters of biochemistry. Mark, a government employee and father of two, will be bringing his X-Box as well, and Jordan, a composer friend of mine, will be coming as well, though he's not as big a fan of the original Halo as the rest of us are, and Mike, a DJ and graphic artist, will probably come as well.

In short, none of these people are new gamers. We've all played Goldeneye, most people liked it, I didn't like it at all (I felt like I was playing a functionally retarded super-spy in a maze of identical rooms and corridors), but we've all played it. We've also all played FPS online and at LAN parties, we all have high-speed internet connections (I don't know anyone who doesn't anymore). Not a single one of us fit into your categories of Halo 1 players.

To give you an idea of why we like Halo 1 and have been playing it for several years, here are a few things that really make the game for me.

- Vehicles. Say what you want about Unreal 2004, but I hate their vehicles. They're mostly uninspired, they're a pain to drive, they're ugly as sin, and they seem tacked-on. In Halo, they're an integral part of the experience, and they work very well.

- Physics. The ability to send someone flying with a grenade, watching someone launch a Warthog up onto the Red Base with the tank, or seeing one of your just-thrown sticky grenades get blasted back at you by an unexpected rocket explosion (and having it stick onto you instead) makes the world that much more interesting.

- Weapons. The weapon designs are interesting and well-balanced, in that none of those of us who play are completely dominant with any one weapon. The sticky grenades make close-quarters combat much more amusing, the sniper rifle is one of the best I've ever used, the rocket launcher is powerful but limited, the alien weapons are strange but useful, and everything jus

Re:Again?

[arodland]

Which means that you have the same number of lines, only you get to see them at an almost-reasonable 60Hz, rather than a seizure-inducing 60Hz-interlaced. :)

Re:Again?

[The_Real_GooberMan]

I digress. The control system perfectly suits an FPS for a console. Movement is done with one stick instead of two, freeing up your right thumb for all the extra buttons that the shoulders of the controller just doesn't have. The lock on button makes things so much easier than screwing around with the very imprecise analog sticks that are just trying to be a mouse but just doesn't cross the line. On the odd occasion that you have to look around, the freelook button is there, but notice that when you actually do have to use it there's no enemies around, or the enemies are something weak like the bugs that infest the ruins. The control scheme cuts out a lot of crap and makes the experience a whole lot better. It will be interesting to see how it works in multiplayer with Echoes though...

Re:Again?

[TrancePhreak]

I don't think you are right. Many a time I would have to aim at flying creatures myself because the lock on wants to scan for info! Very annoying. Then the jumping puzzles, I believe they were the worst. Trying to jump and land precisely with that control layout was very frustrating. In Halo I can pull off wonderful maneuvers, but in Metroid Prime I struggle making basic jumps. Battling with the controls is not a key game feature one should be proud of.

Re:Again?

[mdarksbane]

I am so sick of this "console players have different standards" bullshit. I play FPS on pc, have been doing so since wolfenstein, and I *still* think Halo PC did some really great little innovations to play.

It's as simple as two things; the recharging shield and grenades. Those two articles give halo a completely different rhythm than any other fps I've played, and it's a rhythm that *works.*

Some of the levels suck. personally, I've found that nearly every fps kind of bogs down toward the middle (Unreal, every id games levels have blown through the entire game, even half-life kind of sucked once you got stuck in the alien areas). Halo was far from perfect, but I think that there's a huge desire to bring it down just because it's *so* huge on the console. The reason it wasn't a big deal on PC was because by the time it was released, it was YEARS out of date. We had Far Cry by then, which did some wonderful things (and had it's own crappy moments; aka, almost everyone after the major plot twist) which beat it in graphics and was at least as good in AI. And we had Battlefield, with the massive outdoor battles that halo was originally supposed to be.

I'm not saying OMG BEST GASME EVEH about Halo, but you have to appreciate the things any game does right. Doom 3, for all that its levels bored me after an hour, had some really cool uses of lighting (I've never before set ambushes around a lone light bulb, waiting desperately for the creeping things to step into where I could see them). QuakeIII is the best pure distillation of twitch gaming I've played, even though UT beat it for general fun, coolness, and prettiness. I've never really thought Half-life's story was more than adequate, but the atmosphere of its earlier levels kept me on edge for hours, and I'll never forget the first time I've had to use cover against an AI.

Halo was the first game that made me feel as though every Elite I faced was a worthy enemy, that bringing it down was an accomplishment not because it was a big nasty monster but because it was a crafty, powerful equal. Its shield system is also the first that made sense to me (sitting back from battle for a couple seconds to recharge works a lot better than searching for randomly scattered health packs), and it places a big emphasis on concentrated firepower rather than slowly scratching an enemy into oblivion. And the grenades... I still in every game I play keep hitting my second mouse button just hoping I could throw a grenade at something.

So, no, it's not the holy grail of games, but I'm definitely looking forward to playing it, along with Half-life 2 and GTA san andreas.

Re:Again?

[The_Real_GooberMan]

If the lock on button is trying to scan for info, you're in the wrong visor mode. There's normal, scan, thermal, and x-ray visor modes. The only mode you can scan objects in is the scan mode (as the name would indicate).

Bungie has done it again alright

[leperkuhn]

I'm disappointed and sick of it. Multiplayer got old real quick, and it didn't live up to it's expectations.

Ehh

[realmolo]

I have an Xbox, and Halo just isn't very great. It's well-done, but it has no personality, and very little new to add to the FPS genre.

That said, my Xbox-owning friends who had never(?!) played a multiplayer FPS game before think it's the greatest thing ever. And, if you've never played Unreal Tournament, I suppose it is. But for people who've been playing FPSs on the PC for years, Halo is only average. I imagine Halo 2 is more of the same, and the reviews seem reflect that.

Re:Ehh

[Anonymous Coward]

ok. I'm getting tired of people saying that halo is a game for the fps uninitiated. I have been playing fps' for years. I own UT2k4, Doom3, Half-Life, Quake (2 and 3 are shit), and lying in the depths of the cellar somewhere is a copy of wolfenstein 3d. I have a home lan across which my friends and i can play these games, and yet which game do we keep coming back to again and again? Thats right, Halo. You can't beat sheer playability and Halo has it by the bucket load. It's simply the most fun to play and beats the pants off any PC fps out there.

Re:Ehh

[Anonymous Coward]

Vehicles? Haven't you played the original UT (1999) where the proportions aren't fucked up? (UT2k4 is UT2k3 with slightly more UT99-like gameplay)

Penny Arcade said the same thing

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2001-11 -28&res=l

Halo level design was awful.

Re:Penny Arcade said the same thing

[thealmightyegg]

I trust Penny Arcade more than anyone else when it comes to anything game related. I'm just to bitter, cynical, and violent to listen to those "mainstream" video game reviewers.

(Note: None of that was sarcasm.)

Re:Penny Arcade said the same thing

[Nodatadj]

The irony being that its penny arcades formula too
1: Take image
2: Make 2 more identical copies of image and place together in strip
3: ???
4: Profit.

Re:Penny Arcade said the same thing

[Anonymous Coward]

HAHAHA THAT PROFIT THING IS FUNNY. Seriously, it's NOT funny. It was funny for 1 day, then it became old and tired. Stop doing it.

Re:Penny Arcade said the same thing

[SilentChris]

Actually, according to a post on Penny Arcade, Bungie came back to Tycho and Gabe and wanted to put an advertisement that said "Remember that game that sucked? Here's its sequel." :)

What is all the fuss about

[LiquidHAL]

I never played it on console, but when it was finally ported to PC, i played for a couple hours. Was that it? Maybe they took all the fun out of the PC version somehow, put in a boring mod. Uninstalled and went right back to UT2k4.

Re:What is all the fuss about

[isecore]

I played it for about 30 minutes. Then I got tired of the stupid FOV and the ugly textures and the framerate that insisted on dropping even though I kept dropping the graphics options. After awhile the game was jerking around like Kathryn Hepburn on bad acid.

So finally it looked like crap, played like crap and the only thing cool about it was the music in the menu (you know, the whole "ooohh aaaah" organ choir-thingy)

Re:What is all the fuss about

[Col. Bloodnok]

Same here. I played halo 2 on the PC and thought: this is a console game ported to the PC, and it feels like you're using an emulator - not just the speed, the controls too. Maybe it was my hardware (a lot better than an Xbox, thanks). I found that the framerate was crap (I didn't run it at 640x480 though, I ran it at my LCDs native resolution). The textures were, well Xboxy, the gameplay nothing special (I didn't think the vehicles were as much fun as everyone else seemed to). The controls were what did it for me, though. I've played a lot of FPS games on the PC (ever since wolf3d). I pretty much expect to able to configure my controls to suit my keyboard and habits. Halo seemed to basically provide the facility to remap Xbox controller buttons to keyboard keys and no more. I found that to be the real showstopper.

I've tried playing FPSs or games with FPS elements on various consoles before (Hitman, that old James Bond game, Metal Gear Solid), I can't get to grips with 'mouse look' using buttons or a thumb joystick. It's just not going to happen.

I had much the same reaction when I played GTA3 on the PC (without having played it on the PS2). I thought that the controls were too 'basic', but having played it on the PS2, it is a completely different game, and enormous fun. It's also great fun to watch someone else play - which is a first for me.

Re:What is all the fuss about

[cassidyc]

"I played halo 2 on the PC "

erm no I don`t think you did

Anyhoo this isn`t a PC release, it's on the xbox apples != oranges

CJC

Re:What is all the fuss about

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's clear from the context and the content that he meant Halo, not Halo 2.

Twat.

Re:What is all the fuss about

[Anonymous Coward]

what's /. if it's not a forum for correcting typos

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

I think what it was...

[Phluxed]

was that it was something anyone could pick up and play, and culture whores needed something to grasp to. All my friends who arent really gamers, love Halo, but everyone who is a gamer, realizes how lifeless it is, and that holds true with the second.

Re:I think what it was...

[VividU]

Wow..a classic specimen of Slashdot elitism.

culture whores needed something to grasp to
Culture Whores? WTF is that? Sounds like you coined it just to make yourself feel special.

but everyone who is a gamer, realizes how lifeless it is
The editors at Gamespot,IGN and GameSpy will be surprised to learn they're not "gamers".

and that holds true with the second
Somehow I doubt you've played it, yet, like a true elitist, you feel your free to pass judgement.

Allow me to come to some of my own conclusions: If Bungie had not been bought by MS and if Halo was released for the GC or PS2, you and the rest of your fellow haters would be...well, you get the point.

Re:I think what it was...

[SilentChris]

If by "lifeless" you meant "incredibly fun to play with 16 players", I'd agree with you. I'm a diehard gamer -- been that way for 20 years. I agree that Halo has its place along the Sims and Mysts of the world, but gameplay-wise it was also incredibly fun. The same reason GTA took off despite lackluster graphics and debatably "fun" missions. The same reason the Sims took off despite not having a clear way to "win".

Re:I think what it was...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you're mixing up "fun game" and "fun to play with other humans". Some of the dullest games in existence jump up two or three orders of fun magnitude when you add living players to the mix. I don't consider Halo a great game for bringing the Xbox a game that was basically Quake 1.

Re:I think what it was...

[TrancePhreak]

I don't think that word means what you think it dies. There's plenty of "life" in Halo. Just sit and listen to the chatter sometimes. Or watch how enemies react when you stick a plasma grenade on them. Then find out that all this changes dramatically depending on what skill level you choose. IE in easier modes enemies run away when hit with plasma, in harder modes they chase you!

Re:I think what it was...

[lmnfrs]

I dunno about Gamespot or IGN, but GameSpy is obviously in it as a business, not as gaming enthusiasts. If they were gaming enthusiasts, they wouldn't have screwed up QuakeSpy so bad and forced you to register with them to use fileplanet. GameSpy is an example of an organization that grew entirely from the support of a gaming community and then evolved in a way that made them more profit, and their users more frustrated.

Not as good as the oldies....

[darth_silliarse]

Compared to the awesome Unreal Tournament and Quake 3's I think Halo and it's console-friendly ilk are average to say the least.... I remember when Alien Trilogy on the Sega Saturn was just as hyped and when you finally got round to playing it you just thought "Ho Hum better load up Doom 2 on my PC". Hype DOES NOT mean good.... I thought most gamers would have learnt that by now

Re:Not as good as the oldies....

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, if Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 are oldies, then I must be REALLY old.

Re:Not as good as the oldies....

[caitsith01]

I thought most gamers would have learnt that by now

Oh, they have, they have. Most gamers I know would rather play Quake III than Doom III, for instance - and would probably STILL rather play Doom II than Halo.

IMHO Halo 1 was very, very average on both console and PC. It's one big drawcard, vehicles, was very soon overtaken by Tribes, UT2004, and about a jillion WWII games. It's enemies were boring and repetitive, it's main character characterless, and its storyline basically just a series of linear 'flip the switch' objectives. And in terms of pure gameplay, it was never even in the running, even compared to the original UT and Q3.

But we're not talking about gamers. We're talking about X-Box owners... :P

Re:Not as good as the oldies....

[Babbster]

Whilst I would have thought that the idiots out there had learned that opinions are just like assholes.

Re:Not as good as the oldies....

[ribond]

This sort of post always pisses me off.

"Nobody's made a better game than game X, which I learned to game on"...

Get over it. Even new games can be good, and some can be extraordinary.

I love Halo and I love Halo 2 (did some beta stuff) and you can't say that I just don't know better:
-I've had a CS addiction (ran a clan, had a server)
-I've played UT both PC and Xbox (here's a game that's got mechanics and lacks a soul)
-I've played through all the old stuff -- the Dooms, Wolfenstein etc.
-Goldeneye, for console gaming love... etc etc...

I am a gamer -- pc, console, handheld -- I'll kick your ass wherever I find you.

Halo (and it's successor) do something different and great...actually it does many things, all of them slightly better than anyone else. It's like the perfect-storm -- lots of littles and a few bigs come together to make it fantastic.

-Real competitive FPS gameplay on a console. With an excellent control scheme (go ahead and whine about how you can't game w/out a mouse & keyboard -- in Xbox land the playing field is level and you're a wuss who can't adapt).
-Beautiful graphics that don't get in the way of the story or the game -- they aid it. And they're tuned so even with 16 people on single screen (each xbox running 4 screen splits) there's not a bit of lag/distortion/etc.
-weapons scale from newb-cannon to nuanced sniping (pistol!) -- a moment to learn, a lifetime to master (halo1 tip -- you can shoot-melee-shoot with the shotty faster than you can shoot-shoot)
-A real, deep, interesting storyline.
-real, deep, thought-through enemies and AI with different attacks and skill levels.
-from loser to legendary. you can play through on Easy, then master the game on the harder levels. Co-op through legendary -- when you finally beat the game it feels like something you should put on your resume.
-The mechanics of the game only enhance the experience, they never detract. You're not worrying about saving (automatic checkpoints)... you don't think about load times (virtually nonexistent)... you don't worry about what you can't do (drive the car or jack it. Blow it up. Roll over bad people and smear them across the landscape). Everything feels natural. -Multiplayer action that never gets old. I've put hours and hours into playing the same old maps with the same 20-30 guys -- and we're still learning from each other, tuning our games. -In Halo 2 -- xbox Live. The best gaming network ever put together. This is MP gaming the way it should be. Play with anybody anywhere. Drunk canadians and hardened college kids with nothing better to do at 2 am? It'll find you the perfect match.

There are joys in gaming on a console. You aren't getting owned because someone with a $5000 video card can see the corners of your polys when he's still a pixel on the far side of your map. You don't have to go out every night before playing to download punkbuster + or the dozens of flavor-of-the-minute cheat breakers... you don't have to download a patch, a revision, or check steam, or cut off and burn your left big toe as a sacrifice to the gods of the internet to gain access to a lag-free game.

You can jump right in, anywhere, and get your own setup running without having to put a carry strap on your pc.

I was actually cruising this thread to mod up somebody who would mention the fantastic multiplayer experience that Halo delivers, but this has devolved into a bunch of unrelated "MS is bad" and "fear gaming industry" crap. To get this back on topic:

The reviews are in from me, god, and everyone. They love Halo2 and rightly so. If you have an XBox then get it, get on Live, and come find me. I'm BurlyBob.

Re:Not as good as the oldies....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yawn - another XBox fanboy, oh don't say anything bad about Halo or he'll frag your ass. Give me a break, if you have played as many games as you claim (and were honest to yourself) you would know Halo wasn't ground breaking or revolutionary in any way. It was of course the first decent FPS on the XBox, that was all it had going for it. At the time if you wanted to play an FPS on your XBox you had to play Halo.

Okay

[sammykrupa]

So this is why Microsoft is not getting anything ELSE done.

my short review.

[cipher uk]

its more of the same. so .... 1) you liked halo: combat evolved and played it through to the end. you'll like halo 2. 2) you liked halo: combat evolved but got bored halfway through due to repitition. you may aswell just play halo: combat evolved to the end. 3) you didn't like halo: combat evoled. halo 2 will be the same. 4) you haven't played halo: combat evolved. buy halo: combat evolved first as you'll be able to get it in a bargin bin. (thats if your thinking of getting halo 2) there really isn't much new at all. can use both hands at once... a few more vehicules.... new storyline... a few new weapons. all in all what you'd expect in a sequel. still has the repitition to it. i found the first two levels stunning then it started to get boring again. AI is great again though :).

Let the fanboys emerge..

[The Foo]

Can't wait for the:

"OMG Halu 2 iz s0 pwn u!!!!!lol!!!"

I'd really like to just wait for the PC version, but since that won't be for close to two years.....gonna have to get the Xbox.

Emphasis on AGAIN

[fsterman]

What most people don't understand is that Bungie has always been one of the most innovative game houses. Halo and Halo 2 have received quite a lot of attention since MS was able to do some real push with the game. But all of Bungies games are just as impressive, and more so when you realize what a variety of new thinking they put out.
Marathon, an FPS, to Myth, a team player RTS, to Oni a FPS/martial arts game, to Halo, possible the most creative FPS to date. If they had gotten with a big development team earlier I would love to see the games they would have produced!
So hats off to Bungie, I want to see the next non FPS!

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Phluxed]

Just curious as to how you found halo creative and innovative?

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[gl4ss]

halo1: uncreative and uninnovative.
and halo 2 is that - DONE AGAIN, but if possible, even shorter.

seriously: WHAT CREATIVE THERE WAS IN HALO 1?
weapons? no.
vehicles? seen before.
enemies? boring.
coop gameplay? hell, doom had that(but halo's pc port didn't).
graphics? just average.
outdoor sequences? non-revolutionary.
indoor sequences? flat walls reminding me of '97.

(oni was boring too after the start)

btw.. what of the old bungie is left besides the name? their next non-fps? dream on guy, like microsoft would have them do anything else than the big hit series.

or to put it on a different note.. have you played any games besides bungies games? because it doesn't really sound so.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

You have to remember that Halo was first demoed at the 1867 MacWorld, back when some ideas (like vehicles or large multiplayer maps) weren't very common.

Of course, the idea that Halo (as demoed) would run on a 19th century steam-powered Macintosh computer was a joke in a half.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Marathon, Myth and Oni where great, but Halo was a pile of shit. I remember posting on the Halo boards around 2000 when it was kinda new, it was a totally non-linear game with no 'levels', where you basically had the whole Halo to explore - that was innovative and impressive.

But then Bungie got bought by Microsoft, and alll the cool shit went out the window. It ended up as a completely soulless, repetitive, derivative horde of crap that used excessive GPU-destroying pixel/vertex shaders in place of clever programming. Most of Bungie have since left MS to start a new company that will hopefully have their original magic.

As for Halo 2, I really can't imagine its any beter than the first.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[curtlewis]

I think you've been jaded with time.

Halo 1 Creativity:

weapons - manly rockets, not those pussy quake type ones
alien weapons that can't be reloaded, and overheat

vehicles - first game I know of that you could DRIVE vehicles in an FPS game.

enemies - while only a few types existed, the AI was very good, unlike the 'huge hit games' like CoD.

Bungie didn't do the PC port, although they supervised it. And shame on them for shipping it with utter garbage for net code. Can you say milking the customer base?

outdoor sequences - first FPS with halfway decent outdoor levels and graphics in those levels. Sure, the graphics look dated now, but they were pretty hot back then.

Indoor sequences - walls tend to be flat, that's what walls are. The dark, moody ship levels were interesting early on, but the rubber stamp action of a rushed ship job became rather boring. Given enough time, I think they would have done it well.

Bungie invented dual wielding and weapons with more than one firing mode back in the mid 90s with Marathon. They also veered from the overly fast, unrealistic movement of the DooMs and Quakes and went for a slower, more realistic run speed. This forces you to think more and makes it a bit less of a twitch game. You can still twitch to take out a target that suddenly appeared, but escaping from danger isn't so easy.

No, I'm not a Bungie fan boi. But they have been historically innovative in game design, often a step ahead of the competition. But they fail to listen to fans just as much as the next game company and they ship a game too soon just like every other game company. People still buy the stuff anyways to feed their crack habit, so why put some quality into it? It's a disgusting trend in the industry, but there's no avoiding it now unless we stop thanking them for slop with the all mighty dollar.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Daleks]

Marathon, an FPS, to Myth, a team player RTS, to Oni a FPS/martial arts game, to Halo, possible the most creative FPS to date.

Marathon was an inventive FPS at the time. Marathon 2 and Marathon Infinity were not inventive. Granted Double Aught did Marathon Infinity, but DA had ex-Bungie employees at the helm (Greg Kirkpatrick has stinky feet--a terminal told me this). Oni had horrible execution. Even moreso than Halo. The levels were beige buildings that you walked around in and you kicked people. Bungie West made this game and was immediately closed afterwards. Fanboys love Halo, but it appears the level designers stayed true to cut & paste. Ah, the evils of cut & paste. Halo didn't show anyone anything they hadn't seen before, that is, unless their eyes were closed. Myth was inventive, but Myth 2 and Myth 3 were not. Granted, Bungie didn't do Myth 3. Bungie is a great company and I always await their next game, but they aren't Gods among men.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[oGMo]

WHAT CREATIVE THERE WAS IN HALO 1?

Someone made an XBOX game that didn't completely suck?

Seriously though, you're right on. Halo 1 might have been impressive if it hadn't been delayed for how many years because Bungie sold out. Might. As I said the other day, Doom 1 was revolutionary; everything in the FPS realm has been incremental improvements and regurgitation since.

XBOX fans are just excited because there's hype don't have much else to be excited about. (Funny, sad story: once back when all these consoles were new and sparkly, I talked to a kid in a game shop who had picked Saturn, N64, Dreamcast, and now XBOX. Ouch.)

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

> alien weapons that can't be reloaded, and overheat

This was in Marathon too.

I think that Bungie was trying to be faithful to the style and level-design of Marathon. The problem is that mid-90s maze-style levels just feel dated and unfun nowdays.

The other problem is that Marathon was massively over-rated by Mac Types because it was Mac Only. Sure the backstory and terminals were amazing. But the gameplay itself was nothing all that interesting or unique.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Mitchell Mebane]

Screw Halo 2, I want Oni 2. That game was awesome.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

What a sad little dork.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[curtlewis]

When compared to the PC equivalents of the day, Marathon owned them.

Better graphics.
Multi mode weapons
Better maps
Better net play
Net play modes other than Deathmatch (KotH and Kill the Guy with the Ball for example)
Ambient enviornment sounds

I used to work tradeshows during those days setting up computers for booths and meetings. The PC guys I worked with were always playing Doom. When I showed them Marathon, they were stunned because it was so much better.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

Except Marathon came out a year after Doom (except on the Mac). Perhaps Marathon was a better multiplayer game, however time has not been as kind to Marathon single player when compared to Doom and other shooters of that era

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[tftp]

weapons - manly rockets, not those pussy quake type ones

I don't know, a rocket is quite deadly in Quake, a salvo of three is even worse (not that Halo has this option.)

alien weapons that can't be reloaded, and overheat

In most|all FPSes all weapons run out of ammo, and there is no difference between picking up some ammo or a new weapon. Besides, I wonder how come the aliens drop their weapons barely used :-)

Overheating is not a new trick. RTCW has a silenced gun that overheats and stops shooting (it burns your hand.) This is a real bug of the real weapon.

first game I know of that you could DRIVE vehicles in an FPS game

That is probably so, though I am not an expert in all FPSes. Of course, we have to ignore machine-centric games such as HG; there you -are- a vehicle.

first FPS with halfway decent outdoor levels and graphics in those levels.

I respectfully refer you to RTCW. Not only they implemented atmospheric effects, on level 3 you can try to shoot through the fog to take out the guard before you get to the landing. In Halo the snowfall is just cosmetic and has no bearing on the game.

walls tend to be flat, that's what walls are

Haven't been playing Doom, are we? :-)

Bungie invented dual wielding and weapons with more than one firing mode back in the mid 90s with Marathon.

I haven't seen Marathon, but dual wielding is very much present in F.A.K.K.2 and quite a lot of games support multiple firing modes.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Justus]

vehicles - first game I know of that you could DRIVE vehicles in an FPS game.

Ah, yes, because, you know, silly games like Tribes 1 (and 2!) didn't have real vehicles, not like Halo.

</sarcasm>

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you mean Wolfenstein 3D?

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[SilentChris]

First off, your english needs work.

Secondly, I'm not sure how you could equate Halo 2 to the original Halo, because its not out yet. How can you say it's "boring" or "uninnovative" (not a word, by the way) when you haven't played it? When no one but reviewers have played it?

Third, Halo had its flaws, just like any other game out there. It was, however, ridiculously fun to play in multiplayer. Vehicles were "done before", but they hadn't been done WELL until Halo. The graphics were jaw-dropping in 2001 (they were using pixel shaders before anyone else had heard of them). Boring enemies? How does an enemy AI that adapts to cover, acts realistically (runs when its clearly outmatched) and has thousands of lines of dialog "boring"? What on earth are you comparing it too?

And yes, Bungie has stayed together. Unlike Rare, who had broken up quite a bit while at Nintendo, most of the original Bungie guys have been there for years. Their next game is NOT Halo. It's gone beyond rumor to truth at this point. I firmly believe you have a bug up your ass about Bungie, arguing (poorly) against it, and I'm not sure why.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[curtlewis]

Better multiplayer? Of course.

Is there any other mode worth playing? Not really. I've never maintained interest long enough to finish most single player and those that I did finish, no matter how good they were, I felt I had to force myself to finish the game. Somewhere in the middle, be it fairly early or fairly late, they always lose me.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[gl4ss]

vehicles were done well before halo, they just weren't done on a game that was touted as much(because hey, xbox didn't have that much games to write home about and ms pushed it heavily).

halo's ai IS boring(compare to descent 2 for example, coupled with more imaginative levels where ai actually has some room to work in) - any of those ai traits don't really do the enemies any good(and in most places you can just kill them one by one and backpedal to load up the health).

halo2 is not out yet, but that doesn't mean there isn't millions who have played it and been disappointed too.

halo is an OK game(pc versions bugs made the pc version awful though). but it's not an _Excellent_ game, it's not something that is deemed still worth playing 15 years from now.

but "ok" is damn far away from "excellent, best game to hit the shelves ever" the hyping up official reviews make it to be.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[dcam]

Doom 1 was revolutionary; everything in the FPS realm has been incremental improvements and regurgitation since.

But Doom 1 was just an incremental improvement on Wolfenstein.

That isn't totally true, but all games are incremental improvements. The question is just how large the improvement was.

I personally believe that there have been a few standout games in the FPS that are worth noting as milestones.

Wolfenstein
Doom 1
Quake
Half Life

I don't think we have had anything worthy to be called a milestone since Half Life. Maybe one of the UT series. I have some hopes that S.T.A.L.K.E.R might really introduce something new.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

Operation Flashpoint did vehicles extremely well and that was before Halo.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Keeper]

Technically, Halo came out a month before RTCW.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[TrancePhreak]

The AI in Halo was way above the average FPS. Just look at Quake 3 and you'll see that even an iD game has much inferior AI.

But to get on to my main point, the Saturn was a great system. Just ask Capcom or Team Ninja. The DreamCast is easily more likeable than the PS2, even though they both share their crop of problems.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[KAMiKAZOW]

Just look at Quake 3 and you'll see that even an iD game has much inferior AI.

ID has always been bad at AI. Just compare Q3 and UT. UT's bot AI was a lot better. OTOH ID makes great maps (unlike Bungie *g*).

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

The Saturn was a good system in Japan where all of those yummy Capcom and SNK games were released.

Sega of America was run by incompetents to the gaming industry (wrinkled old men who didn't play video games) and they were all fired afterwards.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

I personally believe that there have been a few standout games in the FPS that are worth noting as milestones. Wolfenstein
Doom 1
Quake
Half Life

You forgot a BIG one that everyone forgets.

Wolfenstein
Doom 1
Marathon
Quake
Half Life

Marathon was the first major game to allow the player to look around and had real physics. Quake's contributions, more or less, were merely the first major game to be done in OpenGL. I get the feeling that Marathon was what caused Carmack to say "oh, CRAP!" and jump into designing Quake.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[scot4875]

Vehicles: Umm, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark both had vehicles that you could drive.

Indoor/Outdoor: They both had outdoor sequences, too. Sure, their graphics look dated now, but they were pretty hot back then.

Enemies: they both had enemies, too.

Weapons: Perfect Dark had a gun that could shoot through walls and a scope that would automatically track targets through walls. What does this prove about the game?

I've played about 30 minutes of Halo. It didn't hook me at all. All I saw was "work your way to next level; blow shit up on the way." Now, I can understand if some people like it -- to each his own. But there are better games out there in the genre.

Hell, Metal Arms (3rd person shooter, only a marginal difference in gameplay) was a pretty derivative game as well (lots of weapons, enemies, vehicles, etc), but I found it much more fun and quirky than a typical FPS, even though the formula was basically the same.

Maybe I just don't like games that take themselves too seriously, but then seriously underdeliver.

--Jeremy

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[handslikesnakes]

vehicles - first game I know of that you could DRIVE vehicles in an FPS game.

Along with the other games people mentioned, Command & Conquer: Renegade (hella fun at LAN parties) let you drive vehicles. Halo was nothing special.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[drinkypoo]

You've been able to drive vehicles in FPS since tribes came out. Also I believe the original Terminator FPS had drivable vehicles, and that game is pre-3D-acceleration.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[drinkypoo]

Unreal was notable primarily for its high quality graphics (including very good lighting for the time) and for its ability to render wide open spaces that id's engines simply could not manage at the time.

Re:Emphasis on AGAIN

[mink]

I seem to remember an old Terminator Franchise PC game in the mid 90's had a point where you are driving a jeep.

WTF?

[thegoogler]

Can someone PLEASE explain why all the comments pointing out that this game doesnt nessecarily deserve all the hype it got.. Even the ones that aren't flaiming it, just pointing this out are moderated to 0 or less? What, did the ilovebees.com virus erase your minds?

Re:WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is Slashdot. Apparently, you're not allowed to like anything related to Microsoft. Or SCO. Or whatever the geek community has decided is evil...

sigh... - Really, how many of you guys have actually played it already?. Please proceed to try it before flaming it...

Re:WTF?

[Idarubicin]

Can someone PLEASE explain why all the comments pointing out that this game doesnt nessecarily deserve all the hype it got.. Even the ones that aren't flaiming it, just pointing this out are moderated to 0 or less?

It depends.

If all they point out is that the game doesn't necessarily deserve all the hype, then that makes for a relatively low-content post. I know this is Slashdot, and we set the bar pretty low in that respect...but still.

It's also a sentiment that I see quite a bit of at this point (in many posts earlier than the parent) while browsing at +3. I dare say the majority of comments are offering criticism of some sort. The viewpoint isn't being suppressed--we're just seeing an upmoderation of the comments that are the most detailed, expressive, or pithy. Oddly enough, I think the system might be working.

Re:WTF?

[thegoogler]

Ahhh, i see. so i insulted it intelligently Thats why mine was modded up, And i pointed out a stupid slashdot moderation thing... but thats another story..

"permitted"?

[mark-t]

Maybe I'm out of the loop here... why does anyone need "permission" to publish a review of something that has been publically released?

Re:"permitted"?

[CrackedButter]

NDA's. Besides, what would happen if somebody would diss the game, thre would be a lot of disheartened people who might cancel their pre-order. What better time to "allow" the reviews on the day it is released?

Bah, old news.

[Zangief]

Amazon has had "reviews" for Halo 2 since February 2003.

Slashdot editors, bring some new stories please.
--
Wiki de Ciencia Ficcion y Fantasia

Re:Bah, old news.

[Anonymous Coward]

your a moron and a half aint you.

What do you guys think?

[pmc255]

Do you think that people buy the Xbox just for Halo? Or do they buy Halo because it's on the Xbox? ;)

Re:What do you guys think?

[PhoenixFlare]

Do you think that people buy the Xbox just for Halo?

Hard to say. I do know that just about everyone who's tried to convince me to buy an XBox has done so by touting Halo as the best thing since sliced bread.

I don't own an XBox yet.

At any rate, i'd like the XBox a whole lot more if the "must-buy" list was bigger than just Halo and a small number of other games.

Re:What do you guys think?

[Nermal6693]

I bought Halo because it's on Mac :)

Re:What do you guys think?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was looking into what console to get. And in the end decided to get an xbox because of the controller look and feel, AND HALO.

Re:What do you guys think?

[hng_rval]

There are a lot of amazing games for Xbox. My favorites are Ninja Gaiden, Knights of the Old Republic, and Prince of Persia.

For a list of great games, check out Ign games with a 9+ rating

Re:What do you guys think?

[king-manic]

Ninja Gaiden, Knights of the Old Republic, and Prince of Persia.

Exactly one of these games are Xbox exclusive.

Re:What do you guys think?

[PhoenixFlare]

There are a lot of amazing games for Xbox. My favorites are Ninja Gaiden, Knights of the Old Republic, and Prince of Persia.

As someone has already pointed out, only Ninja Gaiden is an exclusive. KotOR is also available on the PC ( and I already own it, in fact ), and Prince of Persia is available on all 3 major systems, the GBA, AND a PC version.

For a list of great games, check out Ign games with a 9+ rating

Again, somewhat the same problem. The majority of the games on that list are not exclusive to the XBox at all. More specifically, the following games from that list are (to the best of my knowledge) only released on the XBox:

Halo
Halo 2
DoA 3
DoA Ultimate
DoA Volleyball
Deathrow
Fable
MechAssault
Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Tides of War
Panzer Dragoon Orta
RalliSport Challenge 2
Unreal Championship
Crimson Skies: High Road to Revenge
Jet Set Radio Future
GUNVALKYRIE
Amped 2

And even from that list, some of the games are simply remakes of or sequels to titles from other platforms.

This only reinforces the fact that with a GC, a PS2, and a PC, there's really no reason for me to buy an XBox.

MS is killing

[Canth7]

so many of the industry's best hopes. Halo was the most talked about game for a long time and then MS decided they HAD to have it for their console. I played it on the PC eventually and it was guilty of being so very average. I really doubt that it would have been so bland if Bungie had been left on their own. Another example: MS grabbed the Mechwarrior/Battletech license from FASA and now we have no more quality games coming the Battletech storyline. Look at MechAssault for the Xbox - it was just plain boring. I don't know if it's MS or the console itself that is the problem but these companies, FASA/Activision and Bungie, just made better products for the PC.

Friendly reminder

[Dan the Intern]

Remember to stress these points when making flamebait posts about Halo 2:

1. Same tired gameplay
2. Repetition
3. The console FPS ALWAYS sucks

Thank you.

Re:Friendly reminder

[adam31]

1. Same tired gameplay
2. Repetition
3. The console FPS ALWAYS sucks

4. ...
5. Profit?

Re:Friendly reminder

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, of course

4. profit!

Re:Yawn......

[LordNimon]

what the hell are you doing playing a FPS on a console?

My console is connected to my 80 inch projection TV. I laugh at your puny 21" monitor. Who cares if your resolution is 1600x1200 and you have a mouse? I guarantee that you FPS games are way more fun on my system than yours!

Release date isn't till Nov 9th

[JaseOne]

That's why...

Re:Release date isn't till Nov 9th

[mark-t]

ah... now you see, I wasn't aware of this. I had been hearing so much hype about the game that I thought it was already out.

Not being personally interested in the game, I didn't know it was just upcoming release hype.

excuse me...

[sinner0423]

Bungie has done it again!

Done what, exactly? Anybody who was reading the developer blog regarding the original Halo was completely disappointed by the time it hit the shelves. Bungie hyped it up to be something it wasn't, and by the time it got released, 95% of the "innovative, ground breaking" features were found in other pc/console games. The only thing that made it unique was that it was on the Xbox.

How long did we have to wait for a PC port for this one? 2 years?

I've played Halo 2, and controlling the game is like watching a monkey fuck a football. Sure, it's amusing, and interesting for the first minute, then it becomes frustrating and pointless. Although the graphics are awesome, and the gameplay is superb.

It's a good game, but really.. it should be on the PC where 99% of first person shooters belong. The controls really do detract from the experience. Bungie will get my money if I see a holiday release for a PC port.

Re:excuse me...

[Yolegoman]

The problem is, not everyone agrees with your controller remark. I absolutely love the Controller S. It kicks ass, and it feels like the Xbox Controllers were designed around Halo / 2, and not the other way around. As for Halo 2 being ported to PC, I'm sure it will be. My gut instinct tells m Fall of Next Year. We'll see though. FYI, I have yet to play Halo 2. But I can't fucking wait.

Never having played either myself....

[SkankinMonkey]

My friends that have played it all share the same opinion pretty much. Halo 2 is a rehash of the first one with improvements in the multiplayer area. So if you want to have a party, bring halo and you'll have some fun. Unless your friends are addicted to the fast paced nature of FPS' like UT. Don't forget, Halo is locked at 30fps and plays rather sluggishly compared to PC FPS'.

Re:Never having played either myself....

[curtlewis]

30fps is video speed. The 'sluggish' speed of movement in Halo isn't because of the frames per second.

The movement speed is intentionally coded to be slower than Quake. It's far more realistic a movement speed. Let's face it, you can't run 60 mph. But if you just play Quake and HL and UT, it takes some getting adjusted to. That and you have to think ahead about what you're doing instead of just reacting to everything.

Re:Never having played either myself....

[macphile84]

Uh... I'm not sure that you know this, but the human eye can't discern frames beyond 30 FPS. Even HD video runs at 29.97 FPS. There's no point in running something at 60 FPS when your eye can't tell the difference.

Re:Never having played either myself....

[TheLink]

Your eyes maybe. Not mine, and I doubt mine are that great.

Even if your eyes may not be able to discern individual frames, since eyes don't work by frames, you might still notice or perceive the difference in framerate.

I've watched LoTR and when the movie goes for those scenery pans, while the res is good, the "refresh rate" really sucks.

If you can tell the difference between the mouse pointer movement in Windows 95 and the mouse pointer movement in Windows NT/2000/XP then > 40 FPS makes a difference for you. I had to download a utility called ps2rate to set the mouse sampling to something decent for Win95 (100 to 200 are nice figures).

Go try it out - set your monitor refresh rate to as high as possible, then change the mouse sampling rate to 40, move the mouse pointer around and then try it at 100.

"But that's because the mouse pointer jumps", well whatever it is your eyes sure noticed the pointer jumped greater distances between samples didn't they?

BTW show me evidence that the average human eye can't discern frames beyond 30FPS.

Re:Never having played either myself....

[BenjyD]

Again, 3DFX's demo comparing 30fps to 60fps showed that there was a difference.

The point is that the built in motion blurring on TV/film makes the display appear smoother. A computer game with no motion-blur, high resolution and rapidly changing display does look better at a higher frame rate.

You can see the effect of 24/30fps on cinema screens - watch when the camera pans rapidly and it appears jerky. Of course, filmmakers work round this and most films don't involve rapid camera pans very often, but in first person games they're kind of unavaoidable.

Help me out here

[Anonymous Coward]

Done what, exactly? Anybody who was reading the developer blog regarding the original Halo was completely disappointed by the time it hit the shelves. Bungie hyped it up to be something it wasn't, and by the time it got released, 95% of the "innovative, ground breaking" features were found in other pc/console games.

I'm confused. When did Bungie hire Peter Molyneux and when did he start making FPS games?

Re:Help me out here

[sinner0423]

I'm confused. When did Bungie hire Peter Molyneux and when did he start making FPS games?

Haha.. great point. He's done the same shit bungie has, when they all talk about all the features. Advanced AI, Physics, Vehicles, etc.

It turns out, by the time it hit the PC (where, imo, you get these new innovative features that trickle down to the console) it was worthless!

Halo 2 = Dual wielding, New Textures, New maps. Nothing to see here folks.

Re:Help me out here

[Anonymous Coward]

For anyone interested, the original Halo Demo video from 1999.

The interesting thing is how close it looked to the final game. The "big lie" is that it was targetted towards a 200Mhz PowerMac 8600 with Rage Pro video.

The most likely reason...

[MaestroSartori]

...is that the vast amount of general opinion is vastly in disagreement - most people acknowledge that, while being fairly unoriginal, Halo is one of the best games of all time. High scores across the board, online and in magazines, from biased and relatively unbiased reviewers, sales figures in the zillions, etc. I know we're supposed to be fair when we moderate, but I suspect people who disagree with the disagreement about Halo's greatness are modding down.

Re:The most likely reason...

[thegoogler]

Ahhh, thanks for the explanation. See its not that i dont like halo, i think its fine. its a very well done game. its just all these room-temputure IQ idiots spouting "O hey look, this is so great and revolutionary" that annoy me.

but I suspect people who disagree with the disagreement about Halo's greatness are modding down.

I thought i came here to get away from that crap, i mean thats what plagues most online message boards... *sigh*

Re:The most likely reason...

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to Slashdot. Please don't feed the trolls :)

Re:The most likely reason...

[king-manic]

Errr. We can all agree it's a good game. I have heard very veyr few people call it "best games of all time". More like best Xbox FPS out or bests Xbox game...

Re:The most likely reason...

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to Slashdot

Moderation == Truth by Popularity

Posting Anonymously since I saw some science stuff modded down and some quackery moddeed up. I refuse to feed the machine!

Re:The most likely reason...

[Anonymous Coward]

"its just all these room-temputure IQ idiots spouting "O hey look, this is so great and revolutionary" that annoy me."

As opposed to "O I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW PEOPLE LIKE THIS GAME IT IS STUPID PC/PS2 IS BETTER SO THERE RAAR"

sad but true

[Man in Spandex]

There is wisdom behind your provocative vision.

The fact is, HALO/HALO2 is great for people who are console-addicts but is just "another game" for us pc gamers. FPS games on consoles are behind their time compared to on the pc platform.

Imagine if BattleField 1942 came out first on the console with the same multiplayer experience, then Halo next to it would appear as "just another game". Currently, is there a game on xbox that is same genre as halo? Exactly, none.

On PC, you have BF1942, UT2004, MODS for UT2004, HL, MODS for hl, q3, MODS for q3... This is why halo sucks for us. We have so many choices of fps action because of modifications. They make the game last and give us a wide choice of different gameplays.

On Console, you got HALO, it remains HALO and always will be HALO. If on console you had Half Life (and think there is if not mistakeN0, it would remain Half Life, Not Day of Defeat.

Re:sad but true

[Anonymous Coward]

Not having Day of Defeat would be a good thing. We can do without slop code written by bad developers with hearing problems.

While we're at it, we could do without the slop code in many recent games like UT2k4, HaloPC, Call of Duty and Joint Operations. Every one of them was a game that was conceptually a great game, but when it came down to the code, it fell short. Either you were lagged to hell or standing behind someone, 2ft away emtpying a clip into their non moving head and not getting a kill.

Re:Boring?

[secretsquirel]

There hasn't been anything new in FPS since online gameing.

Re:Boring?

[fresh27]

Halo PC is not the way people were meant to play Halo. It was released 3 years later with neglible changes. It was born on the console, and thats where the gameplay really belongs. If you start to compare it to PC games, you're just gonna complicate it and get a skewed vision of the whole thing.

HL and UT were shitty games on PS2, and Halo was a shitty game on PC. It's not often that a game makes a good trip cross platforms, and it definitely wasn't the case with Halo.

Arrggghhh....

[Psychotext]

I just found out that I'm across the other side of the country on business the day I'm supposed to be getting my pre-order. :(
I'm tempted to buy a copy from a store and hook my xbox up to the hotel TV. Stupid, stupid job. Stupid clients too. Planned on taking a well earned couple of days off for this but no, customer just has to arrange a meeting for that date. * sigh *

I've been trying really, really hard to avoid the reviews (Don't want even slight spoilers) but they are everywhere I seem to look. I hope you all enjoy playing the game, but think of me stuck talking to a tractor company about their products database whilst you're having fun. :(

Over at GE we have...

[ProudClod]

A more honest review, at least I think so. 9.8 is just bullshit - it's nowhere near as revolutionary as Halo 1.

As much as I hate to appear the karma whore, I think people need to see a more balanced review of the game. Remember, we're putting our bollocks on the line with Microsoft's PR by giving the game below 9/10 - we just felt we had to tell the truth.

See the review here. If you like it, pass it on

Re:Over at GE we have...

[SilentChris]

While I appreciate another opinion, I'm a little curious how you could give a final grade without playing on Live (as you say in your review). Apparently, that's a big deal of where the innovation comes in this time around. While you played multiplayer, it seems like you missed a huge chunk of the game. Maybe it should've been called a "preview" instead of a "review"?

Re:Over at GE we have...

[Alban]

9.8 on gamespot does make me raise an eyebrow, but your review of the game without having played xbox live at all is even worse. I'm sorry, but to review a game without _even_ trying one of the most major (if not the most major) feature of that game is unprofessionnal.

Re:Over at GE we have...

[lordperditor]

Uhhh Halo 1 wasn't revolutionary. It had all been done before. See this is where the XBox crowd lose credibility, they think it wasn't about before it happened on the XBox. lol

Re:Over at GE we have...

[Technician]

I think people need to see a more balanced review of the game.

The review doesn't even consider the chunk of change you have to leave behind to get it. I'm not spending $50 for a disk that I can't back-up. The family doesn't get originals, they get working copies. (that alone has killed console use in our home)

There should be a value rating in the reviews. Great game, but pricy.. bang for the buck, about average. You get what you pay for..

Re:Over at GE we have...

[Babbster]

You know why I've already decided your opinion is shit? Because, like the majority of the comments in this topic, you've decided that other opinions are shit. You're telling the "truth," huh? Is it the truth or your opinion? The answer, of course, is the latter.

People should mark these words carefully: Just because you believe something doesn't make it true. Having an opinion, whatever it is, doesn't make you unique or special. Playing video games for a long period of time doesn't differentiate you that much, either.

Me? I didn't enjoy Halo that much. Then again, I'm not a big FPS player. If I were to score it as a reviewer Halo would have received about a 7 - that wouldn't, however, be the "truth"...It would be my opinion.

Re:Boring?

[aweraw]

Thats what I think...

Halo is only thought of as 'superb' in the console arena. On PC, it was 'Just Another FPS', with nothing to distinguish it from more popular titles such as the BattelField's, FarCry, etc... the action was repetitive, the weapons bland, and the terrain was homogenous through out the entire game.

Halo 2 I believe will be more of the same, with the only real difference between the first and this sequel being the story line, and prettier graphics. It will be loved by people who own consoles, and have yet to properly experience what an FPS should really be like. I predict that gamers who are FPS purists, will have the same gripes with this games as they did with the first one.

IMO, the hype surrounding the first game was completely unwarranted... and thus I suspect the same will ring true when I bother getting around to play this.

What's a "Halo?"

[spankey51]

Everyone keeps talking about this thing... Do you bring it to bed with your girlfriend or something? Someone told me that it's a mod for Half-Life 2, But the reviews are so good... Naw! Nothing could be better than Half Life 2! You guys are silly!

LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you mixed up the Subject and Comment!

From what I can see...

[soulctcher]

...popular opinion lies out like this:

Either you:
A) Loved the first and will love the second.
B) Hated the first and will hate the second.
or C) Didn't play the first and will probably not play the second.

But the bottom line is this: Halo is beautifully executed on the xbox, and is great fun for those who've not seen anything like it before. It's solid as a FPS because it gets all the fundamentals right. The problem is that once you've gotten that taste of what a FPS is when it's well done, you begin to look elsewhere for something more.

From all accounts so far, Halo 2 doesn't bring that "something more" to the table. This is why it fails in the eyes of those who have experienced both.

Re:From what I can see...

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot this:

D) Trolled the first one, and will troll the second...

Re:From what I can see...

[ryanmfw]

So, you're a type A Halo Lover? :-)

Is Gamespot Hosed In Firefox For You Too?

[Anonymous Coward]

All of the review text appears way over to the right, off the green background. Is it looking okay for other Firefox users?

Re:Boring?

[ottothecow]

and the idea of teambased games where you dont respawn the instant you die

Warthog Jump

[Effugas]

Unfortunately, nobody can be told what Halo is...you have to see it, for yourself.

And for what it's worth, vehicles were really quite awful pre-Halo. This is long before Battlefield, after all.

Re:Warthog Jump

[megan_of_wutai]

Carmageddon 2 called, they want their credit back.

Re:Warthog Jump

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, some of the most entertaining use of vehicles is "Grand Theft Auto"'s use of them. Need a car? well, take one! Hey, take a cop car, fire truck or ambulance while you're at it. Want to be a real asshole? Well, snap-view to right (or left) while driving, and cap the driver next to you. "Move over, asshole" takes on a whole new fantastic meaning in "GTA3".

Sounds like a good game

[Dirtside]

Too bad I won't buy it. Not really into giving any more money to Microsoft.

Re:Sounds like a good game

[Anonymous Coward]

insightful????

Re:Sounds like a good game

[Gyles]

Wait a bit and but it used.

Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

I find the multiplayer to be completely unfriendly to system link lan play. If doing the regular 4 xbox, 16 player game, each players screen is about 75% clutter, and 25% viewable area. Text fully unrelated to your player scrolls by non stop, the giant radar circle STAYS ON THE SCREEN even when you tell it you do not want radar (completely stupid), the guns fill the screen up with (should have positioned the camera a little further ahead, just a tad).

The view itself seems blurred, its very hard to see objects which are in the distance, which I assume is Bungie conserving cpu to keep the game looking nice. Unfortunately all it accomplishes is a very crappy experience in multiplayer as it can be hard to see enemies at range unless zooming in all the time. It's also much harder to distinguish players from the environments overall as the player colors are less contrasting.

As for the single player, it felt like the game was rushed.
(possible spoiler)
Pushing the premise that the Covenant are attacking earth as the story in all the previews, and then only having ONE level where you are actually even trying to defend the earth, ya, good thinking there. The story itself is full of unanswered holes and events with no backing at all in the actual game. Sure it is nice to continue the story in the next game, but when the next game is needed in order to even comprehend what in the hell is going on at some points, gameover man, gameover. Maybe MS wanted bungie to just get the game out of the doors before building the hype machine for the next generation, or whoever participated in any form of public Halo 2 playtest put absolutely no effort in making recommendations to Bungie on things that needed to be fixed before release, either way the product feels incomplete and poorly executed. Sorry fanboys.

Maybe i'll just stick to Halo 1.

You guys need to get a clue.

[Yolegoman]

Every single fucking comment in this article is about how you guys think that Halo wasn't revolutionary, Console gaming sux, and the gameplay just repeats itself over and over.

You belittle those who find Halo fun, saying they "haven't experienced true FPS gaming".

Well, I have news for you. Halo is JUST PLAIN DAMN FUN. Since when does anything else matter?

Re:You guys need to get a clue.

[Anonymous Coward]

AMEN

actually give it a go for more then half an hour you fsckwits. AI is the best out of almost any game.

Re:You guys need to get a clue.

[Microlith]

Because people are giving extremely high scores to a game whose features are barely better than the first, which in and of itself is nothing special? The only people I know of that think its so insanely fun are people who have -never- played a PC FPS or the like. I'm playing through the Halo campaign with a friend right now, and while the story is interesting, I'm not seeing anything I haven't noticed in other FPS games. Nothing special in the multiplayer either. Capture the Flag, free for all, been there done that. Sniper rifle, rocket launcher, pistol, various energy weapons... all that and more in Unreal Tournament from what, 4 years ago? Never mind vehicles, which popped up back in the Tribes days.

As someone else said, this is the Quake of the console crowd. PC gamers won't find Halo or Halo 2 spectacular by any stretch of the imagination cause they've done this BEFORE, years ago.

The way this plays, makes me wish MS had never bought out Bungie. Halo was supposed to be the end-all FPS/RTS combo, like Battlezone/Battlezone II but better. Then MS bought them and all the RTS features had to go...

The minimum expected for a PC FPS game is along the level of DooM 3 or Half-Life 2. And I guarantee you that if either of those appear on the XBOX, they'll be there in a severly diminished graphical capacity.

Re:You guys need to get a clue.

[Quickfry]

I agree completely with you.
I've played FPS games since ROTT, and I find Halo to be a really fun game, especially with a few friends. It's almost good enough for me to buy an xbox to play it.

Some here have implied that it doesn't hold a match to the UT series, but I have to disagree. UT just doesn't cut it, and if you want to talk about new games feeling like mods on the old ones, we have UT2K3 and 4 to look at..

Re:You guys need to get a clue.

[Nate4D]

This is pointless, but I'll say it anyway -

I was born and bred on UT. Little bit of Quake. Some GoldenEye and PerfectDark on my friends' N64s.

Those were the first FPS's I played.

I'd been a bit of a Bungie fan until MS bought them out (mostly just Myth and Myth II), at which point I said to myself, "Well, that's over with."

I wound up trying Halo long after it hit the scene, and fell in love with it. The game is mind-numbingly easy on Normal, though, and granted, it takes maybe an hour to get decent with the Xbox controller if you're used to mousing.

The main thing is, play on Legendary. The rather stupid enemies become the most intelligent AI opponents I've ever played against on Legendary.

It's true that Halo brought little new to the table (good vehicles and good music), and I doubt Halo 2 brings much more (dual wielding and vehicle jacking, essentially, with of course more good music). What Halo did so well was present all the ideas that other FPS makers had had, streamlined and polished wonderfully. It wasn't about a brand new style of gameplay, it was about the little details, like the Grunts' pathetic screams of "Not again!!!" when you tagged them with a plasma grenade, or the Marines running up to enemy corpses and filling them with lead (accompanied by insults), or the joy of managing to sneak up behind a Gold Sword Elite and melee him off the edge of a cliff to his doom.

Just don't play on Easy.

Re:Boring?

[Anonymous Coward]

I play FPS' on both console and PC and the original Halo was by far the best FPS I have ever played. Simply better balanced and more fun.

Choose One.

[Askjeffro]

1) Halo 2 2) GTA:SA 3) Metroid Echos What game would you buy if you could only buy one?

Re:Choose One.

[Anonymous Coward]

none!

Bow to the all mighty bit torrent!

Re:Choose One.

[lowe0]

Whichever series you're the biggest fan of. San Andreas is a blast, I expect Halo2 will be as well, and I won't find out about Echoes until after Christmas (though I loved the first). There's also Half-Life 2 to think about....

If you've got all the consoles, think of it as when, not if, you'll play these games. It's a great time to be a gamer.

Also, if you've got an Xbox, it's possible that San Andreas will be released next year on that system. High-def graphics, surround sound... awww yeah. The PS2 version lacks 480p and DD/DTS.

Re:Choose One.

[Askjeffro]

Thanks for the reply, however it fails to answer the question, which is what IF you could only get ONE? :)

Re:Choose One.

[Anonymous Coward]

How does Echoes work being loaded over a 10Mbps network connection?

I have the GCN nic and PSO I/II, but I've never found it worth it to stream an image over that way...

Re:Choose One.

[Joel from Sydney]

San Andreas. I haven't played either of MP or H2, but I fail to see how either of them could be better than San Andreas. It has completely owned my spare time for the past two weeks, and I'm not even at 30% completion!

Re:Choose One.

[lowe0]

San Andreas. It'll give you the longest playtime.

Re:Yawn......

[Benw5483]

exactly, most people seem to miss the fact that social interaction is what makes halo so appealing.

It could be due to the fact that the audience here at slashdot doesn't really remember what social interaction is like and thinks it's overrated compared to all night multiplayer with random people you don't know. or maybe an all night programming session will get their blood pumping more...

Well then!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad that a major media outlet has justified those beliefs! If those guys hadn't verified the the same thing another million or so players had been saying months ahead of time, it might not have been true!

It's a damn good thing we have professional critics like these guys, because we all know that none of us are qualified to have opinions and you can't trust what just any-old gamer says, these days.

Re:Well then!

[Anonymous Coward]

Congrats, you've exposed the Penny Arcade Secret Formula:
1) Read messageboards to figure out what people are saying about games
2) Put the majority opinion into a comic strip
3) ITS TEH FUNNAY CUZ ITZ SOO TRUE.

Re:Well then!

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is they are actually funny.

Unlike you.

Re:Well then!

[Anonymous Coward]

Congrats, you've exposed the fact that you're super cool for not liking Penny Arcade! Way to go!!!

Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[kai.chan]

Looks like the Microsoft fanboys are marking the parent as troll even though he has his own valid opinion of the game.

Speaking of which, why are there so many people on Slashdot with XBoxes? Aren't people on here aware of Microsoft's business tactics and their inability to innovate? If so, why continue to support the company and give them more revenue to further deter innovation and slow-down technology?

Some of you say that your purchase won't matter. But to even have a collective on Slashdot giving Microsoft money, the fight for innovation is going to waste.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[Grey Ninja]

My thought regarding the parent and the general Slashdot situation was the same.

I'm sure someone will reply to you saying that it doesn't matter who makes it, if it's a good quality thing... blah blah blah.

My personal opinion regarding Halo is almost exactly the same as yours and the parent's. Halo to me seemed like more of the same, with boring uninspired gameplay that somehow became hugely popular based solely on hype. (And yes, I've played it on both PC and Xbox).

But honestly, regarding Slashdot's love of Xbox? I haven't the first idea. The hive mind around here dislikes Windows because of it's lack of innovation, the monopolistic business practices behind it, and the shoddy quality. The same holds true of Xbox. Microsoft's sole business strategy is to lose money like a sieve by buying up every big name in the gaming industry that they can get their hands on, until there's no more competition. Microsoft has created a machine that doesn't seem well fit to play games from an architectural point of view, and touts hugely overinflated specs that they used to convince people that Xbox was more powerful. (which is a highly inconclusive statement). And the gaming library on Xbox consists pretty much entirely of ports, be it from PC or other consoles. (but mostly from PC).

I personally haven't the slightest desire for an Xbox (speaking as a gamer), as its only claim to fame is Halo, which I honestly don't care a lick about. I don't have desire for an Xbox (speaking as a geek) because I highly disagree with the business practices behind the Xbox, and the future of the gaming industry if left unchecked.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[fimbulvetr]

I'm far from a Microsoft lover. I own 2 xboxes, one runs linux, the other is still a virgin to my screwdriver. I usually refer to ms as m$, I run linux on my desktops _and_ I'm a gentoo fan (zealot?).
Hopefully the sentences above lend credence to me saying, plain as day: You are severely misled, Microsoft _does_ innovate, at least where the xbox is concerned. Despite the original huge pos controller, they created a smaller s controller which is by far the easiest console controller I've ever dealt with. M$ 'innovated' by sticking with x86, some consider this a bad mistake, but it made the consoles considerably cheaper and easier to program on than their alternatives. M$ 'innovated' with an online subscription plan that simply blows its rivals out of the water. M$ innovated with detaching controller cables, something that has saved my boxes lives several times, considering I have a 4 year old daughter running around.

m$ has some incredibly smart people on it's staff, and it seems rather cruel for you to excuse their existence and ingenuity just because you dislike 'the man'.

I should be the last one saying this, because I almost feel hypocritical, but you should really take your blinders off and consider the xbox at it's real value.

Hopefully capitalism will reveal its head and many of these features and more will drive sony to create the best console yet.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[NonSequor]

It's probably just all of the people who bought Xboxes to try to bankrupt MS and then broke down and bought games anyway.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[rasafras]

Attack Microsoft for their business practices, their lack of support or security. I'll agree with you. But not innovation.

Microsoft makes a point of hiring the smartest people it can get its hands on, and often just releases them in small groups to create whatever they want or can. They actually dedicate money and people to research and exploring new ideas.

Either way, the whole MS-Bungie thing does piss me off. I could've been playing Halo 2 a few years ago.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[kai.chan]

Please read the first reply to my post, he raises valid issues and flaws to your reasoning. It is NOT about what console innovations they are providing now. It is NOT about what a great value XBox is right now. It is about their use of such devices to buy your loyalty right now.

Once they secure a place in the market, you can be assured that they will use any means possible to destroy competition. Once the competition is gone, you will not see any innovations, and your future XBox won't be a great value.

Here is an example of what is happening now:

Microsoft saw Sony and Nintendo as competitors, so they ate the loss per console to sell "powerful hardware" for a cheap price. What do you think would happen if there are no competitors? Microsoft would NOT eat the loss per console, they will simply introduce the technology a few years later when the technology is cheap. What does this all mean? It means that there is a deterant to innovation as technology which could be offered years ago is now being introduced years later. Instead of Microsoft eating up the cost of technology, the consumers are now using old technology which could have been introduced earlier.

Instead of me "taking [my] blinders off", perhaps you should really see past what the surface entails and understand what is truly happening.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[yerfatma]

you can be assured that they will use any means possible to destroy competition

And? Hate to break this to you Junior, but every corporation will do that. If I were a stockholder, I would accept nothing less. Now I'll give you that MS engaged in any number of illegal or questionable business practices that I would not approve of as a shareholder. But know what: none of that will stop me from enjoying the hell out of Halo 2.

What a complete and total yawn. Please keep this thread alive with all the reasons Halo 2 isn't news while the rest of us are having fun. If Sony and Microsoft trying to "destroy" each other means I have to make the hard choice of playing GTA: San Andreas vs. Halo 2 every day this month, thank you corporate behemoths.

You make it sound as though every purchase of Halo will inevtiably lead to a world without videogame evolution. Yet you offer no evidence except that MS takes a loss on each console, just like Sony and Nintendo. Show me someone who won two console wars in a row and I'll start to get concerned.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[fimbulvetr]

Uh, thanks yerfatma, you said exactly what I would have said, except much more succinct:)

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[Grey Ninja]

Nintendo makes a small profit on their hardware. Sony takes a breaks even (or a slight profit... it may have changed since I last checked). Microsoft still loses money on each console sold.

Nintendo won 2 console wars in a row. (NES, SNES).

Sony won 2 console wars in a war. (PSX, PS2)

Microsoft takes a HUGE loss on Xbox. As a shareholder, I would not approve of that. I don't have the slightest clue why anyone would. I suppose if it pays off for Microsoft, they have an anti-trust lawsuit to worry about, but we know how well the American legal system works.

Check your facts kiddo, and come back and try again.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[kai.chan]

It is not even about how great Halo is. It is about Microsoft's proven ability to take over a market and stop innovation. Every purchase of Halo and XBox does lead to a world without video game evolution. You want evidence of this? Think IE. Does the browser war ring a bell? Do you even read Slashdot and the numerous security exploits readily available on IE?

Also, it is common knowledge that Microsoft takes a huge loss on each console. It's been posted numerous times on Slashdot, as well as many other places. Do your own research instead of asking me to spoon-feed you such common information. But perhaps such a trait causes you to loyally following Microsoft without thinking.

If you are a consumer and not a stockholder, it is absurd for you to be cheering for Microsoft. You are thinking about your "fun" in the present, but fail to recognize the effects in the future. You call me a junior, but obviously, you are too senile to think ahead.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[AlexMax2742]

You hit the nail on the head with all but the last point. Without Microsoft, Halo, and therefore Halo 2 would not exist, as it was really close to being canned.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[stratjakt]

Speaking of which, why are there so many people on Slashdot with XBoxes?

I read right here on slashdot that MS loses money every time you buy an xbox and if I buy Halo 2 then Bill Gates spends a weekend in a Turkish jail, or something like that.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[yerfatma]

Every purchase of Halo and XBox does lead to a world without video game evolution. You want evidence of this? Think IE.

Good one. Want proof the Pontiac Aztec will be a success? Look at the Corvette. I can't even call that a logical error or say "correlation != causation." I don't know how IE proves that sales of X-Boxes lead to a "world without video game evolution." And you don't bother to extrapolate.

Do your own research instead of asking me to spoon-feed you such common information.

Do me a favor and read what I wrote before replying. What I said (effectively) was "you offer no evidence [that MS will kill game evolution] except to say they take a loss on each console." That's SOP in the videogame world. Sony and Nintendo may not be losing money on consoles now, but they did at the start of the run and it's only as the runs become more efficient that they start to break even. I remember reading an article in Wired before the X-Box ever came out where MS said they had outsourced the production to Teleflex in hopes of someday hitting a $99 price point. Hope they get there so more people can enjoy the death of fun.

it is absurd for you to be cheering for Microsoft

I'm not. Trust me. MS makes my life difficult every day thanks to IE. What I'm cheering is the current competitive environment that's provided me with multiple, quality choices.

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

I have the Microsoft implant in my cerebellum.

All hail Gates!

Penguin soup tonight!

Re:Looks like Slashdotters Loves Microsoft

[Zoshnell]

OT, but I think it should be said:
Not All who wander are lost,
And not all without money are poor.

Maybe by bleeding some red they are convincing the Fed that hey, we bleed too or something. I don't know, nor presume to know the thoughts of MS higher ups nor the shareholders who are still there. Please share your insight.
KTHNXPLZDRVTHRU!

Re:Boring?

[MoronGames]

Halo was not "born on the console". It was born on the Macintosh. Microsoft got hold of it and changed that, however.

Re:Boring?

[SilentChris]

9/10 of the original Halo experience was playing in a LAN-party with friends.

As I mentioned in another post, this was the first game to really break the barrier of who would attend a "LAN-party". It used to be a couple of techies with towers strapped to their backs, who knew the ins and outs of drivers and networking and would play Quake in their college dorm. Now, it's kids who bring a few Xboxes over to their friends house, hook up a couple of TVs and bam, instant social fun.

That was the main draw of Halo, anyway. Halo 2 seems to capitalize on it: creating "parties" of up to 16 players who could be anywhere (including on the same couch), that stick together on Live. It's essentially bringing the LAN-party social experience online. That's pretty impressive (not from so much a technical standpoint, but a design standpoint).

As for bots: while I admit it would've been nice, I've never been too pleased with bots in the past. Either they were too good (UT at the higher settings) or totally ignorant (Perfect Dark bots tended to get stuck on ladders and inclines). Give me massive multiplayer mayhem anyway. :)

Born on the console?

[Monx]

Halo PC is not the way people were meant to play Halo. It was released 3 years later with neglible changes. It was born on the console, and thats where the gameplay really belongs.

Halo was just the next version of Marathon, a long cherished Mac only game. Eventually a Windows 95 port was made, but it started as a Mac only game. Halo was announced for the Mac long before the X-Box. Microsoft bought Bungie to make it an X-Box game and intentionally delayed the release of the computer versions even though they were started first.

Re:Born on the console?

[Stormwatch]

Not exactelly. Marathon 2: Durandal was indeed ported to Windows95 - later open-sourced and ported to other systems; but the original Marathon remains Mac-only (the third game, Marathon Infinity, has basically the same code as Durandal, so maybe you can count that as open as well)

Re:Born on the console?

[hunterx11]

Actually, Halo was the next version of Myth.

Recycled mediocrity

[mojotooth]

Let's be honest. Halo 1 was only popular because it was the first exposure most non-computer geeks had to first-person shooters. Anybody who played Doom, Quake, Descent, Quake, Tribes, UT, or any other classic fps were left shouting "WHY are they expecting me to play an FPS with these two stupid sticks?"

Halo 2 is just a slight extension of the same thing. I can't understand why H2 is getting great reviews in the same way that I just can't fathom how Dubya got 58 million votes.

Therefore I blame the religious right wing for Halo 2's reviews.

Re:Recycled mediocrity

[RyoShin]

Despite the downfalls of the N64, it still has some of the best FPSs I have ever seen. Goldeneye (and semi-sequal Perfect Dark) are prime examples. I'm currently trying to beat Turok (the game is bloody hard, even on the easy setting.) Halo certaintly wasn't a first, in my opinion.

Halo was a big success because A) It was the only 'good' launch title for the XBox, B) multiplayer goodness without needing $1000 in computer upgrades, and C) Halo did your basic FPS, but bigger, badder, louder.

It was easily something you could pick up and just start playing, regardless of where you were. It's a similar appeal of many GameBoy games, but this time you have a lot more to do with it.

The large adrenaline rush from having a dozen Flood come out of the walls in a small, locked room was appealing as well.

Re:Recycled mediocrity

[FLAGGR]

Let's be honest. Halo 1 was only popular because it was the first exposure most non-computer geeks
No, but alot of its fanbase were those people, but Halo is a solid, great FPS even by PC standards (although the PC port was a little lacking

Anybody who played Doom, Quake, Descent, Quake, Tribes, UT, or any other classic fps were left shouting "WHY are they expecting me to play an FPS with these two stupid sticks?"
I'd rather play a game with two sticks, that had story, then play a game whose story could be summed up into 2 sentances (less in some cases) Sure, the sticks were annoying at first, but all ya had to do is turn the sensitivity up to 10 and it worked almost as good as a mouse/keyboard (if not better)

I can't understand why H2 is getting great reviews
Good game = Good review. Simple equation. Sure, you can use some cop-out like "The reviews were payed off!!1", but I know some people with leaked versions that love it.

in the same way that I just can't fathom how Dubya got 58 million votes.
He got 58 million votes because 58 million people wanted him as president. Unfortunantly, other people's opinions don't always conform to our own, just accept it.

Is it really that surprising?

[Megaphoneman]

I 'learned' french at school but I couldn't parlez today to save myself. I can't think of anything more painful than sitting through a french movie. It sounds like a bunch of people here have been inflicting this on themselves - and they didn't even get subtitles!

If you played the leaked version of Walo and everyone's speaking jibberish, of course you weren't going to enjoy yourself were you?

"Blu blie blu blah blah?"
"non! Fron thron shron!"

Ha ha! erm no.

Halo was born on the Mac

[fracai]

Actually, Halo was born on the Mac. Then Bungie was bought by Microsoft and it came out for the XBox. I'd say Halo WAS meant to be played on a computer.

Re:Halo was born on the Mac

[fresh27]

Well, I know it was a Mac game first, but the final version as we know it was released on the Xbox first, and the FPS gameplay we saw was drastically different from the original Mac vision.

Re:Of course!

[wilebill1381]

But even if they did pay the reviewers off, there are small comments in the reviews that do leak through. For instance: "A surprisingly disappointing story and a fairly short single-player portion are noticeable shortcomings ..." -- GameSpot Review of Halo 2 Just wait a bit until we get feedback from those who have spent their hard-earned money on it and I'll bet that the above quotation will get a lot of illumination!

Halo 2

[pawnIII]

I don't get the gamepot score. Graphics only got a 9 out of 10, yet from what I've seen of screens and the trailer, its the best looking console game on the market(in terms of realistic graphics).

Too many good games coming out this season. I mean the game industry could hold out on some of their big titles, like Rachet & Clank: Up Your Arsenal and Jak 3.

Hopefully, I'll get an Xbox+Halo2 for Christmas.

Re:Halo 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out Call of Duty.

mmmm... mismatched sequels.

[solios]

Quake 1 : Sliders versus Cthulhu! I still love the nailgun. Grenade launcher rocks.

Quake 2 : NO WAIT WAIT FORGET ABOUT THAT IT'S DOOM BUT WITH BIOMECHANOID THINGS NOT DEMONS! DOOM WEAPONS! BOUNCY GRENADE LAUNCHER! Likely where iD got its reputation as making great engines with the game thrown in as a tech demo.

Quake 3 : UNREAL TOURNAMENT! Only it, like, runs on reasonable hardware. With a really difficult grenade launcher. And Doom weapons. And Rangers and the Doom marine. Lots of fun but don't read too much into the "plot".

Quake 4 : Farmed out to another studio. Looks to pick up where Quake 2 left off. Better some continuity than none, I guess. :P

Quake feels kind of like the Final Fantasy of FPS- some elements cross between games but no two are alike.

I have to agree...

[rmdyer]

I was first gen on FPS, playing the original Doom series, Hexen(s), Heretic, ROT, Duke Nukem, Wheel-of-Time, all Quake series versions, Tribes series, Unreal/Tournament(s); with lots of mods and multiplayer experiences. My most enjoyable experiences are the memories of playing QuakeWorld, Threewave, Loki's Minions, mods. But I also have some really intense memories of great deathmatch games in Quake II and III. Ah, nostalgia.

I played Halo all the way through when the PC version came out. I have to say that Halo is a FPS for a new generation, somewhat like FPS for dummies, but it doesn't really compare to the older PC stuff. I was immediately shocked by the simplicities of the architecture and textures of the buildings, and how small the maps were. Some of them seemed like shoeboxes with teleporters. The only saving grace of the game were the vehicles.

Oddly, I happen to play Halo quite a bit these days online, but that is only because the older games are not where people are playing anymore. I'd rather be playing something better, but I'm sort'of out of time these days. I only get a few hours a week to play. Even if I wanted to play the older games, they are full of bots and cheating.

I'm waiting on Half-Life II and Tribes III. These games should really rock. I don't think I'll be buying Halo 2 since I'm not sure how much more they can squeeze out of the aging X-Box. And I'm sure when it arrives for the PC it will just be the same old boxed game it was when the first one came out for the PC.

Off soapbox.

+1

Re:I have to agree...

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh... DooM was third-gen PC FPS. Wolf3D was second-gen. Unless you played the first-gen game, Catacomb Abyss, you're just a n00b...

Re:I have to agree...

[1000StonedMonkeys]

Where to start...

Well, first of all, Halo for the PC completely misses out on the culteral phenomena that was Halo for the Xbox. People loved Halo because all you needed were a few TVs and a few Xboxes and you could have 16 players all going at it at once in the same room. That's roughly $1,600 worth of equipment, or the cost of a single PC capable of playing a modern 3D shooter. Just among myself and my roommate, we have enough to get 4v4 Halo games going. You can probably imagine how much easier it is to spontaneously get 6 other people over after work for some 4v4 Halo games that it would be to convince 6 people to haul their PCs over to play some PC fps (assuming we had room for 8 PCs in our apartment).

As for the graphics, play it on an xbox, they're great. For whatever reason, the PC version looks like ass. The bump mapped textures on the xbox are quite good.

As for the level size, are you sure you played it through? The outdoor levels are huge. Take, for example, the second stage right after the Autumn crashes into Halo. They pretty much have to give you vehicles for that stage because walking would take too long. There is a multiplayer map that's just shoeboxes and teleporters. There's also the CTF maps where are huge (blood gulch, and the one who's name I forget because I don't play it because it's too big for 4v4).

Re:I have to agree...

[Anonymous Coward]

Catacomb Abyss has nothing on Ken's Labyrinth.

Re:I have to agree...

[Blakey Rat]

Psst, Tribes 3 has been out for a week now. Maybe two.

Re:I have to agree...

[Slack3r78]

Uh... DooM was third-gen PC FPS. Wolf3D was second-gen. Unless you played the first-gen game, Catacomb Abyss, you're just a n00b...

Rockin it hardcore with CGA graphics, even. :)

Re:I have to agree...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think more than a few of us played such 0-gen games as the Wizardry series, the Ultima series, etc., and perhaps even the -1-gen games like Zork...

Or "Jet" on the C-64, "Elite", etc...

congrats

[Zareste]

Woohoo! I guess Microsoft has finally found something it's good at.

Ouch, my karma.

Re:congrats

[xgamer04]

What, buying game developers?

Re:congrats

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about that, they are not doing so well with Rare.

Re:congrats

[Zareste]

Bingo

You want an honest review?

[IGTeRR0r]

You want to see a freaking honest review of Halo 2? HERE Yes, we're pissed, and yes, SCREW MICROSOFT.

Re:You want an honest review?

[blether]

The GamerCentric website was launched just four days ago, so it's not surprising if the publishers are a little circumspect about sending them free review copies.

Re:You want an honest review?

[kylef]

Yes, we're pissed, and yes, SCREW MICROSOFT.

Oh, that attitude will certainly help your reputation of having an unbiased viewpoint, and give you a leg up in your pursuit of "journalistic integrity" as your site puts it.

Perhaps you might consider venting your frustration as an independent game reviewer at "the industry" rather than at Microsoft? Scapegoating Microsoft on Slashdot might be popular, and might win you moderation points, but it is the industry at large which you should be protesting.

Re:You want an honest review?

[IGTeRR0r]

It's not about the site, we're a network of sites (this being a satelliet essentially) including videogame.net, gamingheadlines.co.uk etc. in which our reviews get syndicated...they know this, which is why they are giving it to us in the first place.

And to the other, yes, it's not a good attitude, but take it anyway and their practice is unfair.

Microsoft is just one example, ask any game site and they'll tell you the same things, they just hide it because they don't want to not get games to review. I shall still review the game the same way whenever I get it.

Re:You want an honest review?

[SilentChris]

So, um, basically you're having a pissy fit because (as a small-time gaming site) you couldn't get your hands on a copy? Seems remarkably... childish.

Re:You want an honest review?

[IGTeRR0r]

Oh snap, the topic creator is here! In related news, yes, I'm in a pissy fit, yes, I'm childish, and yes, I want a damn review copy. I don't know what you define as small time, but in a combined network total we bring in a few million page views a month, around 80-90,000 uniques, plenty of PLENTY of audience for a game. We review the games for the good of the game and the gamers.

Re:You want an honest review?

[Anonymous Coward]

>You want to see a freaking honest review of Halo 2? >HERE Yes, we're pissed, and yes, SCREW MICROSOFT.

Your review sucks, and your site isn't part of the mainstream gaming media.

"Oh no, my college newspaper didn't get an interview with the presidential candidates, FUCK THEM ALL!!"

Re:Boring?

[Trogre]

Halo PC is not the way people were meant to play Halo. It was released 3 years later with neglible changes. It was born on the console, and thats where the gameplay really belongs.

Balderdash.

Halo is a PC game. It was designed to be a PC game and the original version always will be an unfinished PC game. Bungy made it, and they made it great.

Unforunately, not long before the game was ready, Microsoft bought Bungie studios and shelved Halo. They then ported whatever they could from the carcass to the then new XBox just in time for a Christmas release. Thus Halo/XBox was born.

A few months later, Microsoft were kind enough to grace us PC gamers with a port of Halo/XBox to the PC. But make no mistakes - this was not the original version by any means. Because it's a port of an XBox game, game play is severely retarded due to the pathetic 64MB memory of the XBox, textures are repetitive and performenace is dog slow. This is Halo/XBox/PC.

I doubt Halo/PC will ever see the light of day.

And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[dancingmad]

I'll admit I haven't played Halo 2 yet and I don't have an XBox. Most of my PS2 games are Japanese RPGs (Phantom Brave, Disgaea) and most of my Cube games are the AAA titles (Zelda, Metroid, etc.). I have played Halo 1 and I don't see what the big deal is.

Everything Halo does has been done before, especially in Quake. Maybe the kids playing Halo now missed Quake (didn't have PCs, too young, whatever). The graphics seem pretty lack luster (if that is even a legitmate game play issue) and the single player is awful. The game can be ok in multiplayer, but I'd have more fun in a 4 way Dr. Mario or Wario Ware.

I'm no fan of FPSes, but I was thoroughly engrossed by Metroid Prime. It perfectly translated the desperation and fear of being alone from the 2D classics into a 3D world. I have never played an FPS all the way through but I beat Prime several times. Maybe its the difference in PC gamers and console gamers (I count myself in the latter).

Personally, I think most of the fanbase for Halo and GTA are casual American gamers who haven't grown up worshipping Japanese games. That could mean there's a legitimate movement to "American style" games in the U.S., but to me it seems like casual gamers are just that, casual.

Re:Boring?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then your experience with FPS's is lacking... I feel sorry for you

be beware... halo 2 fever !!

[_Qiang_]

just today i was waiting for bus and a guy suddently started talking to me. He said he going to buy XBox for playing Halo 2. and he has a PS2 already.

wtf..

Totally agree about Marathon

[Anonymous Coward]

Bungie hit that one out of the park. It was an awesome game for its time.

"Bungie has done it again!"

[Ender Ryan]

Am I the only person on Earth who was absolutely and thoroughly underwhelmed by Halo? The gameplay was extremely repetitive, even for an FPS. The graphics were good, the weapons were so-so, the levels were repetitive as fuck all. The multiplayer levels left a LOT to be desired. It definately had its moments though. Vehicles were fun, some parts were challenging, and the story was there. All in all, it was a pretty good game, but not anywhere near deserving of the accolades it received.

From what I've seen of Halo 2, it looks like it's much improved. I'm playing some other games right now, so I'm not getting it on opening day, but I definately plan to get it. I'm even marginally excited about it(I don't get too excited about games, because you really have to play them before you know whether they're any good...) So, I hope "Bungie has done it again!" doesn't prove to be an accurate statement for myself, as after hearing so many goddamn gamer newbies tell me how great Halo was, I was terribly unimpressed with it.

Sorry for the interruption, let the hype machine continue.

Re:"Bungie has done it again!"

[Anonymous Coward]

There's definitely two camps: the people who've never played an FPS before, and the one's who've already cut their teeth on Half-Life and Deus Ex.

I agree with your assessment of the original Halo. It was very pretty, and the vehicles were fun. The weapons were boring, the enemies were boring. The level design was half-and-half. Some settings were pretty imaginative, but the sheer repetitiveness and backtracking negated that.

I for one have no plans to play Halo 2.

Re:"Bungie has done it again!"

[Anonymous Coward]

I've played half life and halo. I liked half life. I loved halo. Guess that shoots down your theory. Stop crying. Thanks for telling everyone that you won't be playing.

Cooperative save game?

[Anonymous Coward]

So one of the big failings of Halo 1 was that you couldn't save cooperative mode in the middle of a level.

Does anyone know if Halo 2 fixes this?

Re:Boring?

[Benw5483]

um, don't you listen to anything? Halo was intended to be a Mac game first and foremost but then Microsoft bought Bungie. The original game Bungie was making started out as a RTS, not even close to the FPS it became on the Xbox.

It's true that it was originally intended for Mac, not PC, but the version that was intended for it never saw the light of day.

Halo is good for an adrenaline rush...

[TyrranzzX]

You've got your shotgun, 108 pcs of ammo, level on hard. The area is dark, too dark, and something slithers out of the corner. You turn, finding nothing to within your reticle, but when you turn back, the wall begins crawling, crawling and falling in a browinish grey tide...

Hellsau, the master of puppets hits the hard spot (0:38) (or perhaps ministry, just one fix, at 0:22) maxed volume on a 5.1 surround sound system, drounding out blast after blast from the shotgun.

That's how halo is to be played. You get bored otherwise. It's a straight FPS shootem' up, like Serious Sam, but with vehicles, no smart remarks, and a sci-fi twist. You supply the smart remarks. The fun comes in when you add in violent, gory music to pure skill.

Re:Boring?

[Have Blue]

By the time you saw the "real" Halo at Macworld, it had already undergone massive changes from its original concept (it used to be an RTS, for one thing), and after MS bought Bungie it was virtually rebuilt from scratch for the Xbox.

Re:Boring?

[Trogre]

Okay, so it was originally developed for Mac. My mistake.

However the rest stands. There was a PC version started only shortly after the Mac version and it was truly stunning. This was long before Microsoft bought Bungie. It was only very briefly ever going to be a macintosh-only game.

I guess I should have just said "computer".

controls?

[Chuck Bucket]

Is it just me, or is playing a FPS on a console just lame compared to keyboard/mouse? Does Halo 2 address this, or is it better than keyboard/mouse? The only FPS I can remember playing on a console was Goldeneye on N64, and I couldn't stand it. Have things changed since then?

C$B

Re:controls?

[Anonymous Coward]

you sir are the biggest moron ever, goldeneye was a classic and so is halo.

Re:controls?

[geekoid]

No to start a console v. PC screaming mathch, But I agree with you.
I like the console for sports games, but FPS iwth those controlls is just damn difficult for me. and I have been playing deathmatch games since Pong.

Re:controls?

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer the controller over the keyboard mouse combo. I like playing in front of the tv vs in front of the computer monitor. I like my surround sound system over my crappy pc speakers. I like playing on xbox live with my headset over not playing online on my pc because its boring.

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[Anita Coney]

You know, I feel the same way about Jazz. I don't like it much or listen it much, other than Kenny G, but I have a strong desire to criticize it despite my complete ignorance.

Only 9hours 9minutes till 9th Nov for me :-)

[MarkTina]

Living in NZ has some advantages ;-)

Re:Only 9hours 9minutes till 9th Nov for me :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

10 hours 46 mins in aus now :]

Re:Only 9hours 9minutes till 9th Nov for me :-)

[MarkTina]

Do Australians know how to use an Xbox ? ;-) hehehe

Re:Only 9hours 9minutes till 9th Nov for me :-)

[geekoid]

yep, and it's getting games sooner.
It certianly isn't the weather, women, or a beauitifull coastline.

Re:Only 9hours 9minutes till 9th Nov for me :-)

[Cosmik]

Do you know the difference between Australia and New Zealand?

Re:Only 9hours 9minutes till 9th Nov for me :-)

[Cosmik]

My bad. Please excuse my first post. I didn't see the hidden anonymous post, and thought you were referring to the grandfather post. Here, have a dingo on me. Just add babies.

Critical reviews, not mindless droning.

[Anonymous Coward]

Gamespot is my place to go for reviews. As with any hotly anticipated game, it will always get perfect scores by a majority of review outlets, but GS is the only one I know of that actually will give critical review on any game, regardless of how good it's "supposed" to be.

Every game can't be perfect. GS only has 1, Zelda: OoT.

Re:Critical reviews, not mindless droning.

[whitlock]

That's why when I see a site that gives non-perfect scores I take their reviews more seriously than a site that pumps out all 10's on major/legacy games.

Most negative site ever...

[dfj225]

I don't care that I'm burning karma here...but it was on my mind so I figured I would post it anyway...

/. has to be one of the most negative sites I have ever read. No matter what the topic is, it seems like only the most negative comments get modded up (unless, of course, the topic is linux). I wonder, and I'm serious here, the people who don't enjoy halo and think that halo 2 is a dissapointment, what would you have changed?

Re:Most negative site ever...

[Anonymous Coward]

if they didnt enjoy halo then of course there not going to enjoy halo 2, the point being is they probly played halo for 10 mins and didnt give it a chance, the story is cool, the ai is awesome, and multiplayer is great fun.

Re:Most negative site ever...

[Anonymous Coward]

No matter what the topic is, it seems like only the most negative comments get modded up (unless, of course, the topic is linux).

Well, let's test the theory: "Halo sucked, Halo 2 sucks, and you suck."

Oh yeah, and Linux rulez.

Re:Most negative site ever...

[Anonymous Coward]

what would you have changed?

The platform.

Re:Most negative site ever...

[Anonymous Coward]

blah blah blah blah. You can hook up a keyboard and mouse to an xbox. blah blah blah. uhhh my enter key is stuck. I got a cheeto wedged in the space bar.

Re:Most negative site ever...

[Harald74]

Well, you posted a negative comment and got modded up, pretty much proving your own point... :)

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah there is a million and one of those people around atm, giving us there opinion when they have barely played the game.

Same Old Same Old

[knix]

After playing Halo 2 for about 2 weeks now, I have a few comments. Mainly, it's the same thing. Differences:

(1) You can hold 2 weapons
(2) You jump higher
(3) Multiplayer levels are much bigger (and too big in my opinion)
(4) Battle Creek is now named Beaver Creek
(5) A little better graphics
(6) The Energy Sword... ohh the energy sword

However, I don't think it's worth the money for those few things.

Re:Same Old Same Old

[DaveCBio]

Yeah, that whole new single player story just sort of slipped by your notice I guess?

Re:Same Old Same Old

[Anonymous Coward]

"Well, I have news for you. Halo is JUST PLAIN DAMN FUN. Since when does anything else matter?"

The "fun factor" is a mixture of all of the elements from the game. (Controls, game-play, story line, etc.)

With that said, factors of this equation can be lacking and the title itself still "fun" to the end user. (That being millions of people that enjoyed the first game) I'm definitely from the 8-bit Nintendo generation on up. I believe that my years sitting on a couch and investing hours upon hours in games of all kinds has refined my palette.

I've played Halo, and I was impressed - at first. That initial "wow" that comes over you when you play a new game quickly wore off when I was deep into the game within the first few days. Shoot, I was pretty darn close to completing the game when I gave up on the repetitive nature and started playing my copy of Project Gotham Racing. (I was, and still am, a huge fan of Metropolis Street Racing for Dreamcast.) This [Halo] wasn't the "killer-app" that I was hoping for.

I think about the games that I used to play with friends - Goldeneye, Perfect Dark (both for Nintendo 64) - and the fun that was had with both titles. I guess in retrospect as some have mentioned, Halo is to them what Goldeneye / Perfect Dark was to my friends and I. While by todays graphical and game play standards they are "old and busted", I for one would still be more than happy if those were my only gaming choices. For me, they still offer that "wow" feature and then some.

I guess at twenty-three I'm an old fart. I'd rather hook up an SNES and play through any number of titles before I'd even touch a copy of Halo 2, let alone Halo 1. I'd rather play through time-tested game play and mechanics and sit through someone's interpretation of cinematic-gaming art. Cut scenes in games today can be enthralling, and lend much detail to the story being told. I'd rather know that I'm not mindlessly running from the "blue" door to the "red" door shooting away at bad guys for nothing, you know.

When I purchased any system I've owned; Sony, Nintendo, Sega, and Microsoft - only MS's was the one that I regretted adopting so early. I was so incredibly disappointed with the system's launch that I debated selling the system after the first week. No one in my group of friends bought the system outside of myself, and that remained this way up until about a year ago. With the bundle deal, it was worth it in their eyes to finally adopt the console that had some good games to its credit.

Gaming companies today use the terms "revolutionary" and "ground-breaking" all too often. Halo 2, other than the hype generated by the internet, isn't anywhere near even the most evolutionary standards most games are held to. I'm sure many will compare the stylish Halo to invention of the wheel - and hence "if it isn't broke, don't fix it."

The wheel has gone flat my friends....

It's time to bring in a fresh replacement.

Signed,

Still playing Doom

Re:Same Old Same Old

[knix]

That would be the part that was in French.

No way!

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been a gamer for over 20 years, played FPSs since Wolf3D, loved the Dooms and Quakes and Half-Life, RtCW and Call of Duty; happily upgraded my PC every time a new generation came out, went to LAN parties, created maps.

I also loved Halo on the XBox, and consider it one of the best FPS ever along with HL and Doom2. I never thought it could work without a mouse but oh my was I wrong.

The times are a changin'

[The Munger]

Even though Halo didn't revolutionize the first-person shooter genre, its influences have already taken place -- it's two-weapon, one grenade system has had profound effects, just to name one -- and it's earned its place in the annals of gaming -- IGN review

Do you remember the time when developers (and reviewers) thought more weapons were always better? There were games that promoted themselves as having 30 different weapons, always accessible. There is such a thing as too much choice (especially when most of them were variations of other weapons).

Re:The times are a changin'

[Twanfox]

Hell, I remember playing System Shock 2. Weapons? Ya, there were a ton of weapons, but you could only wield a few effectively, and even then, you still had to find ammo for them all, since it didn't just spontanious appear in your hands. That made the game just a bit more interesting, though my preference for the shotgun was just a little too predictable (the mutants that carried shotguns had least one shell in them).

I'm guessing that was a joke.

[cbreaker]

While Halo was mildly entertaining for a little while, I've found many FPS games to be really good and lots of fun since Halo.

I mean, the game was okay and everything, but I'm still not sure what all the hype is about. It doesn't seem any different from any other FPS, and I've played the whole game. Just your normal Progress Quest stuff, with some decent graphics. Unfortunately, putting the game on the Xbox first really limits you to the capabilities of that machine - new games out now are significantly more advanced then what the Xbox can do for you.

I know a lot of Halo geeks are probably angry at my post but maybe instead of just bitching at me, someone could tell me perhaps what I've missed that makes the game into the incredible fantastic "mind blowing" game that it's claimed to be.

Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.

[harikiri]

It was the story in Halo that I loved.

About the only thing I disliked was the somewhat repetitive umm... levels where you had to get away from the zombie like thingies, whatever they were.

The final level where you have to get out of the exploding ship, with the pumping soundtrack psyching you on, just made it for me. I have to checkout Halo 2 just because of the memory that Halo left me with.

Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.

[mollymoo]

It was the story in Halo that I loved.

Me too. Those red and blue guys standing about making jokes cracked me up. Are they still in Halo 2?

Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.

[Anonymous Coward]

"It was the story in Halo that I loved."
"...zombie like thingies, whatever they were."

You must not have gotten the full of the story then. If you don't know the name of the "zombie like thingies", then you missed a HUGE part of the storyline. They are mentioned many times.

From the 343 Guilty Spark level forward, you get large doses (and their name is used frequently). In The Library alone, you probably hear their name 20 times, unless you were slobbering bored of that level (very monotonous).

If you liked the story, there are 3 books that are out. One is set before the game... the second IS the game, and the third is after the game. I think the 3rd book is BEFORE Halo 2.

I think this storyline borrowed heavily from Ringworld, which I have not read.

Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.

[Pope]

Hack & Slash? They were great.

I wonder what happened to Enzo?

Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.

[Anonymous Coward]

deutch, Halo is awseome because its a remake of Goldeneye the best game evr for n64. You take one games, revamp it make an assload better everyones gonna love. There weren't many first person shooters that people knew much or could relate to. Theres counterstrike on PC but there wasn't much for systems. Halo changed that. It fulfilled the needs of every xnox owning person from 10 to 45 (my dad plays it) and and fills that yearning for everyone to kick alien ass...

MOD -1 UNAMERICAN

[Canberra Bob]

I suppose next you will say Saddam wasnt behind Sept 11?

Re:MOD -1 UNAMERICAN

[Anonymous Coward]

Saddam was bad and I'm glad he doesn't run a country.

Re:MOD -1 UNAMERICAN

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad GWB still does...

Ugh!

Re:MOD -1 UNAMERICAN

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you suck, too, but I'm not going to bomb you for it, since you have done nothing to me, nor have any weapons to worry about.

Re:MOD -1 UNAMERICAN

[Anonymous Coward]

Geee that was sooooooo insightful

Re:Boring?

[strict3]

Halo was not "born on the console". It was born on the Macintosh. Microsoft got hold of it and changed that, however.

Sorry, but Halo was being developed on PCs for the Mac and PC. This has now come full circle with the early Xbox Next development kits consisting of high end custom Apple G5s.

Your wrong buddy

[Angry Black Man]

Perhaps it was "conceieved" on the Mac, but it was definitely born for the Xbox. Remember, birth is not the initial creation of something-- that is conception. Birth does not happen until the thing in question is ready and mature enough to face the public. In the case of humans, this takes 9 months. It took a bit longer in terms of Halo, but it was still born to the Xbox.

Using your definition, cancelling the development of any game would qualify as "murder" since the game in question had already been born. In reality, its more like an abortion since it was concieved yet not yet birthed.

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[DaveCBio]

Given the choice, I will take Halo of Metroid for the controls alone. MP had one of the worst FPS console controls schemes ever. It's not like they couldn't have done it better, but then it would have been similar to Halo and because it's the Big N it has to be different.

Maybe a Halo fan can help me out...

[Repiv]

I really don't understand what made Halo so big. I mean, most "Halo kiddies" seem to think Halo is the best thing since sliced cheese.

Here are my thoughts on Halo:

1) It couldn't be modded. This is a huge selling point in a FPS, I think.
2) It didn't have that great of a story.
3) Good graphics don't make a game good. (This seems to be the defense of most Halo fans I know.)
4) The multiplayer wasn't all that great. Any game can be fun when you play with others.

From reading those reviews, it seems like it's only going to be a rehash of Halo with better maps, graphics and another mediocre sci-fi story.

I'd just like to get into the head of a Halo fan and see what makes them tick.

(No flaming, please.)

Re:Maybe a Halo fan can help me out...

[Anonymous Coward]

>1) It couldn't be modded. This is a huge selling point in a FPS, I think.
Its not even a consideration for a console game. I pay for the game not for its modding capabilites.

>2) It didn't have that great of a story.
I enjoyed the story. I liked the suprise attack from the flood.

>3) Good graphics don't make a game good. (This seems to be the defense of most Halo fans I know.)
You are correct. It doesn't hurt to have good graphics though.

>4) The multiplayer wasn't all that great. Any game can be fun when you play with others.
That is just not true. Many multiplayer games just aren't fun. It doesn't matter who you play with.

The game is fun. The single player is fun. The multiplayer is fun. I had fun playing it. What more can I say. Does that make me a fan boy? I've enjoyed other fps's. I enjoyed half life. I enjoyed doom, doom2, quake, quake 2. I enjoyed halo.

I love the control scheme. I think it is close to perfect. I prefer it over the keyboard mouse.

I love the two weapon system. I love the needler. I loved the ai. I love it how they chuck grenades at you. how they jump away from your grenades. How they hide for cover to let their own shields regen. I love the sniper rifle. It feels better to me than any other I had played. I love how grenades on the ground explode when you throw a grenade in their area and chain react.

I loved driving the vehicles and how the marines jump in the gunner an passenger seat.

I love the pacing. I hate unreal's uber twitch super fast roids. I love the slower moving halo.

I don't care if all these things were done before in shooter a,b,c,d and e. They were all done very well in halo. That is why I like halo. Is it better than other games out there? who cares. I love it for what it is.

Re:Maybe a Halo fan can help me out...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh yeah. Right after you go up the gravity lift and get attacked by invisible dudes with light sabers. AHHHHHHHH that was awesome prefect gameplay.

And the rumble controller when you get hit or when you are in need of health. awesome. immersive. FUN

RE: Halo and levels

[King_TJ]

IMHO, the levels on the original Halo game were just fine. The only problem I had was the lack of variety of them! I enjoyed playing the game on the PC and on my Mac, but unlike the UT series, I find I'm getting pretty bored with it after only 30-45 minutes of gameplay at one time. It's nice to come back to it once in a while, and having good competitors in multiplayer helps quite a bit, but ultimately - it just feels like you're stuck playing the *demo* version of Quake 3 or something. You feel forced into playing the same battlefields over and over and over....

By that logic...

[MMaestro]

Counter-Strike is just another uncreative and uninnovative game that shouldn't have succeeded.

Weapons? Oh wow real world copies, real creative there.
Vehicles? None.
Enemies? Human players, not fair or fun considering theres no gauge or measurement of skill between them. (Not to mention cheaters)
Co-op gameplay? The only thing forcing people to even be near each other is the tight, few chokepoints.
Graphics? Modern day budgetware. (8 skins?)
Outdoor sequences? Boxed in areas with the horizon being a paper wall.
In door sequences? Quake 1 had more interesting layouts.

Obviously we all know CS is considered to be the 'god' of PC FPSs and it still reigns king, but we all know gameplay is what really counts. Its the same thing with Halo 1 (or 2), its all about gameplay. If CS was single-player ONLY with the AI from Half-Life, you'd say CS is as boring as Halo. Throw in human players and CS/Halo is a totally different game.

Creepy

[Troy]

When I went to Penny Arcade I got an SQL dump in small white text.

Apparently the Pious Flea gets around!

Re:Creepy

[Anonymous Coward]

Warning: mysql_connect(): Host '192.168.50.68' is blocked because of many connection errors. Unblock with 'mysqladmin flush-hosts' in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/php_admin_heade r.php3 on line 11 Host '192.168.50.68' is blocked because of many connection errors. Unblock with 'mysqladmin flush-hosts' Warning: mysql_select_db(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/php_admin_heade r.php3 on line 15 Warning: mysql_select_db(): A link to the server could not be established in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/php_admin_heade r.php3 on line 15 Warning: mysql_query(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/rotate.inc.php on line 22 Warning: mysql_query(): A link to the server could not be established in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/rotate.inc.php on line 22 Warning: mysql_fetch_object(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/rotate.inc.php on line 26 Warning: mysql_connect(): Host '192.168.50.68' is blocked because of many connection errors. Unblock with 'mysqladmin flush-hosts' in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/php_header.php3 on line 9 Host '192.168.50.68' is blocked because of many connection errors. Unblock with 'mysqladmin flush-hosts' Warning: mysql_select_db(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/php_header.php3 on line 13 Warning: mysql_select_db(): A link to the server could not be established in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/php_header.php3 on line 13 Warning: mysql_query(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 129 Warning: mysql_query(): A link to the server could not be established in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 129 Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 133 Warning: mysql_free_result(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 141 Warning: mysql_query(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 129 Warning: mysql_query(): A link to the server could not be established in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 129 Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 133 Warning: mysql_free_result(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 141 Warning: mysql_query(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 257 Warning: mysql_query(): A link to the server could not be established in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 257 Warning: mysql_num_rows(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 261 Warning: mysql_free_result(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /mnt/nfs-w1/users/penny-arcade/www/functions.php3 on line 277 Warning: mysql_query(): Can't connect to loca

Halo is like an iPod, everything just fits

[mliu]

You guys bashing Halo with your know-it-all snobbery remind me of how a certain demographic on /. bashes the iPod everytime there's a story on an mp3 player, saying the iPod is overpriced and lacks key features.

You guys just don't get it. You're part of the 5% minority that obsess about stuff normal people just don't give a damn about, but you strut around on Slashdot like your champions of reason. Maybe you think it sucks for estoeric reason X. Or maybe more truthfully you think it sucks out of elitist snobbery. But maybe, just maybe, when everyone else loves something, and you think it sucks, it reflects just as much on you as on the thing.

Re:Halo is like an iPod, everything just fits

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe the truth hurts, and you can't stand it when people complain about like something you like?

Who are you?

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering most people have never heard of you or your website, I'd say they had a right not to send you a copy.

Re:Who are you?

[IGTeRR0r]

I sound like a child, but "Just because you've never seen or heard about a website does not mean they are not valid." This is exactly the problem. You've probably heard of around 10-15 gaming websites, or maybe just 2 or 3, and that's because of the industry dominance. Give other game sites a chance - you might be surprised at the quality of content and the quality of the site.

Re:Boring?

[Grey Ninja]

ever play Timesplitters 2 on console? Or Battlefield Vietnam on PC?

Uh...no?

[Anonymous Coward]

"somehow these games that get rated badly never happen to be the ahead-of-time-big-name-exclusives."

Yeah, sure...

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/driver3/index .h tml?q=Driver+3

Totally agree - Halo is Quake "for the rest of us"

[SuperKendall]

I agree with this post. I know of a few groups of people that play Halo and they love it partly because to get eight people playing they use four TV's and four XBoxes.

It's so much easier for people to put together a few TV's and consoles than it is a whole LAN setup and multiple computers. I've played with a few LAN groups now and then. and you have to admit there is a LOT more fiddling that goes on when several computers get together than when you are hooking up consoles.

I did enjoy the few times I've tried multiplayer Halo, but I have to admit I still prefer UT2004 for my online FPS needs.

I do kind of yearn to play Halo 2 though, just to see the story unfold - I fell into listening to the whole set of audio on iLoveBees and am really curious where the story goes. But, I can wait until it comes to some other platforms next year.

I think Halo 2 will be big....

[Dr Reducto]

This may sound like trolling, but whenever /.ers think something sucks, and write long posts about how people won't like it, it will be a big hit.

I see a few really long rants about blandness/lack of originality, so I am going to bet Halo 2 will break sales records.

Slashdot is not good at figuring out what is going to be popular. What's cool thouh is that it is so reliably wrong, you can set your watch by it.

My favorite examples:
Linux
iPod/iPod Mini
Windows
and now, Halo 2

Re:I think Halo 2 will be big....

[EightMillion]

Don't forget John Kerry.

Re:I think Halo 2 will be big....

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course Halo 2 will be a success. Companies prey on teenagers to pitch their 'kewl' products, and lets face it, most teenagers are easily sucked in by hype. Hype a product enough and get it the COOL tag with teenagers and your in. XBox sells because Microsoft have managed to market it as the cool console to have. Of course they are not winning the console wars because Sony have been doing it longer and are better at this type of marketing.

Re:I think Halo 2 will be big....

[patonw]

I absolutely have to agree to this. The kneejerk reaction of the majority of slashdot posters is to trounce on anything that is popular with the masses, from microsoft and/or outside the realm of their own peculiar tastes like the codec of the day. I'm not sure why this is, but i suspect it has to do with the moderation system. Posters are trying to appear so much smarter and sophisticated than the "unwashed masses" and other posters are looking to appear so much smarter and more sophisticated than those posters. Posting this in the first place seems hypocritical but I have to come to Halos defense.

There are a lot of things going for the original Halo that Slashdotters tend to miss in looking for ways to be clever. People remark that the level design is repetitive and bland. I have to agree in the case of the Library. The original intent was to have the player see long arching hallways instead of having to wait at blast doors to move from one room to the next. The Assault on the Control Room and Two Betrayals used the same map to show the devastation to the environment of Halo caused by the Flood. Additionally, many of the rooms were just unnecessarily similar but this was offset by the differenct tactical scenarios provided in each situation.

All in all, the level design was thoroughly enjoyable even though many of the maps were similar. I can't call myself a "hardcore" gamer but I've certainly played my fair share of popular PC fps games and just thinking how repetitive and uninspired some of the levels were, but not every single moment of a good game has to be completely new. Halo isn't any worse than those games in that respect. The repetitive level fodder serves as a backdrop for the more epic battles.

As I mentioned earlier, Halo has a lot going for it but one of the thing that makes Halo stand out from the crowd is how polished and restrained it is. The weapons are powerful but you can't carry the firepower of an entire infantry division. On the easier levels, it is simple to just blast your way through the entire game, but on Legendary the game takes on a completely different nature requiring you to think tactically. I think a lot of the complaints against Halo come from people who never played it on Legendary because it was too hard or having to backtrack because they ran out of ammo from just spraying rounds in every which direction.

Maybe Halo just isn't your cup of tea. Maybe you just automatically hate anything because it's popular. Maybe you've only played Halo on Easy on a PC. Whatever it is, you people are missing out on a truly great game.

Re:I think Halo 2 will be big....

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo 2 isn't aimed at teenages. It is being aimed at the college crowd (20-25). Hence the M rating and the lack of advertising in teenybopper tv programs.

Re:I think Halo 2 will be big....

[WuphonsReach]

iPod/iPod Mini

One of the rules of being a geek is that you diss anything that you lust after but can't afford.

The hope is that by dissing the item in question that all of your friends are able to purchase but that you can't because your life sucks - is that your life will magically become less sucky and people will bow down and worship your ascerbic wisdom.

Slashdot was a neat idea, but it's basically abadonware as a technology / news site. Editors who can't be bothered to fact check, dupe-check, or do *any* editing at all. Programmers who have sat on their hands for as long as I've been here, leaving scads of bugs unfixed and improvements left hanging in the wind.

Re:Boring?

[SilentChris]

"Microsoft got hold of it and changed that, however."

You say that as if it were for the worse. If Halo had stayed on Mac, how many would've played it? Even if it went to PC, would it reach the critical mass it did on Xbox. There are STILL people bringing Xboxes over their friends' house; still major tournaments being held by the PGL. Bungie made an incredibly accessible shooter and MS brought it to an accessible audience. I see no harm in that.

Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Alright, first off I've been a PC game player from way back in the day. I played Doom before any PC fan boy did, on networked NeXT computers where it was first released/developed. I've played tons on the PC and I couldn't stand console gaming, and then came Halo and everything changed. But most PC guys don't get a few things, and when they slam Halo, their PC bias shows.

Ok here are some (4) dirty little secrets/myths that explain why there is a disconnect.

1) The PC version of Halo is worse than the Xbox version. Why you say? The PC version has multiplayer while the Xbox version doesn't. Well for starters, Halo plays slower and looks worse on all but the absolutely highest end PCs. I'm talking you better have at least a 3GHZ P4 and ATI 9800+ level card, or the damn game just looks worse. I can't explain why. It might have something to do with the "fuzzing" on the TV set. But water looks better, smoother. It's more pixilated on the PC somehow. Also, it just runs choppier on the PC with all but the best hardware.

2) This one will upset a bunch of PC gamers, but playing on a console is better. Now I'm not talking better in that you can move around 3 ms faster with analogue controllers. You probably cannot. But it's more enjoyable. There is an entire added level of emersion that Halo balances in just right with the rumble/feedback on the controllers (that just "gets in the way" for hard-core PC enthusiasts that just want the highest kill counts). These are the same guys that turn off every bell/whistle graphic addon/detail to eek out frame rate. Well that may be good for kill counts, but it sucks for telling a story. The PC lacks that visceral element that is brought to bear better with analogue controllers for our analogue wet wear. This is the single thing that PC gamers don't get, because sitting in front of the PC, psychologically (and controller wise) loses an extreme level of immersion. Your home theatre system is designed to suck you into the movie, and it does a way better job than the PC at getting you "in the game."

3) Next myth is that the levels were all repetitive, hallway lamers. Some were. No doubt. But there were super out door, open-ended terrains where you could take any of a million paths. Where you could sniper banshee pilots before they take off to get a plane you shouldn't have been able to get. Take a tank. Take in a team. Sneak in. Kill everyone. The outdoor battles were epic.

Repetitive levels dont suck totally. Not every damn battle has to be some outside completely open ended thing. That's not to say Bungie should be forgiven for endless repetition, but there is an immersive "sh*t I'm lost" factor when you're going through a maze. I find that realistic. Heck, you get into some alien base, you know nothing about it, it looks all the same, youre panicy, that's not necessarily a bad thing. You shouldn't always know where you're going. That's part of the panic/fun of going through it the first time. For the same reasons backtracking through the same level at a different time of day is kind of a cool idea. The open air battle scene in Halo, when you come back at night was very cool. Again, that's not to say I want to go through (now) boring Doom/Quake mazes ad nausium, but there is something to varying the environments and keeping you off balance, that adds to the balance of the game.

4) That people that like Halo are all console lamers that have no clue about PC games. True for some, not for others. The console is a different kind of experience. And in a way it's akin to switching operating systems. What stops you from switching and saying one platform sucks while another doesn't is often a function of muscle memory and habit. Let's face it, we don't like to change (particularly when we're good in one environment), and so getting proficient using the analog controller and starting as square 1 for PC gamers is a downer. I know I hated playing FPS on a console after having gotten good on the keyboard/mouse. But

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Woops, and I forgot Myth #5.

5) Most PC gamers never played Halo all the way through. Anyone that says the story sucks or wasn't that great is probably a good candidate for this. Now I'm not saying Halo's story was on par for the Godfather or anything like that, but for an FPS, there really was no cohesive equal. The Flood twist in the middle was suspensful, surprising, creepy stuff. This myth kind of falls back to myths 1, 2 and 3.

Because Halo was worse on the PC, and because the PC is not as immersive, and because the first level of Halo is one of those boring hallway levels and really a training level, a lot of PC gamers never played through it. And even if they played through it on the Xbox, they drop out at some point in one of the hallway levels before they got to those golden open air levels.

Which is not to say that everyone that plays Halo must like it. It's not a freak'n cult, although the fan base devotion seems that way at times. Just that there is a decent probability that people didn't give it a fair chance when they say the "story sucked."

Heck, when I watched the first 2-3 episodes of Farscape, I thought it sucked. After I watched the 7th I realized it was the best television program to ever air, period. (Well except that freak'n lame miniseries the put out that tried to cram 22 episodes into 2.5hours). Sometimes you have to let yourself get into the game a bit before you really appreciate it fully.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

You said it dude. I agree 100%. I am a convert from the pc fps to console. I don't even play on the pc anymore. I just like playing on the console that much better.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[lordperditor]

Yes sure Halo on XBox was better than Halo on PC, but it was engineered that way. Lets take Halo 2 (the best FPS on XBox) and compare it to the best FPS on the PC. Yes exactly the XBox game would lose in every single comparison - graphics, sound, multiplayer options, controller options, etc... because it is an unfair comparison. Of course Gameplay is an individual thing, you either like the clunky XBox controller or you hate it. Sure Halo 2 will be the best FPS on XBox, the windup is when the XBox fanboys say its the best game on any platform, because anyone who has played the latest PC FPS games know full well they have bought into the hype and are deluding themselves.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Gudlyf]

"The reality is that games are a lot like movies. They fall down to personal likes and dislikes. Just because the critics or others say it's great, doesn't mean it is to you, or vice versa."

I suppose that's true, unless someone tells me this is the Gigli of games, which in case I'd stay away from it like...well...Gigli.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Now I'm not talking better in that you can move around 3 ms faster with analogue controllers. You probably cannot. But it's more enjoyable. There is an entire added level of emersion that Halo balances in just right with the rumble/feedback on the controllers (that just "gets in the way" for hard-core PC enthusiasts that just want the highest kill counts). These are the same guys that turn off every bell/whistle graphic addon/detail to eek out frame rate. Well that may be good for kill counts, but it sucks for telling a story.

So first you generalize all PC gamers as frag and fps whores, then you try to argue that Halo offers more 'emersion' because of the rumble controller? Please.

The PC lacks that visceral element that is brought to bear better with analogue controllers for our analogue wet wear. This is the single thing that PC gamers don't get, because sitting in front of the PC, psychologically (and controller wise) loses an extreme level of immersion. Your home theatre system is designed to suck you into the movie, and it does a way better job than the PC at getting you "in the game."

And now since you can't come up with anything tangible your argument boils down to 'well tv's are better then monitors'. Sure, if you're playing halo in a cubicle that's designed for programming, perhaps the game's immersiveness will suffer. But who says that you have to play PC games on a crappy 15 inch workstation monitor? CounterStrike-Source is very immersive when I'm playing on my 50inch rear-projection HDTV home theatre system, thanks to shuttle and wireless mouse/keyboards. Environmental immersiveness is not a function of the platform, it's a function of the environment.

Halo's a well-polished FPS game that ties together some elements of other FPS games nicely in one package with good graphics and solid gameplay. The controls are about as good as they can get for a FPS on a controller, but they're definately worse then keyboard/mouse. The game, when compared to the genre of FPS was overrated. When compared to other console FPS's it shines. Bungie succesfully brought PC FPS gaming to the console, and that's about it. (Although many would argue Goldeneye deserves the real credit there)

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

""""CounterStrike-Source is very immersive when I'm playing on my 50inch rear-projection HDTV home theatre system, thanks to shuttle and wireless mouse/keyboards. Environmental immersiveness is not a function of the platform, it's a function of the environment."""""

First, that makes you and 3 other guys that have bothered/managed to hook your computer up to your home entertainment system. Great way to spend $3,000 while console buyers spend $150 for not the commensurate drop in performance.

Anyway, so because you say so, the keyboard is better? Way to miss the point of the post. You're in good company to someone else that talked about the rumble feature of the controller with his "please" comment. Which is also a non-substantive reply/argument that we should take on faith from your proferred arrogance/elitism.

The rumble feature, when done well, and choreographed to the play is a huge immersive factor. You "feel" things happening. When certain monsters are walking buy, you feel them coming, and even direction. That's freak'n visceral. The music, the lighting and the feel coming through your controller add to this level of intuition that manifests itself because you're using an entire added sense--feel/touch.

Let me put this in a context that you might understand better. You might be able to ejaculate more quickly and "efficently" if you were to digitally wire some electrodes into you d*ck to stimulate the release. Which is nice for what it is. But some of us actually like the whole process of "feeling" as much as we can before during (and hell after) the act. Ideally this would be with a woman. And then we start downgrading our options from there. Now as nice as a digital cum switch might be, the feeling of a woman's skin combined with the ejaculation is even better. If you haven't tried this yourself, you'll have to take my word on it.

Many would argue that it's a lot more fun to feel as much as you can for as long as you can before you go blowing your load. The rumble feature when done well, gets you that bit much more into the game. It may not be as efficient, but it sure as hell is a lot more fun.

Now you might be able to shoot your load faster with your keyboard, but that's not something to be proud of; quite honestly it sounds like youre going off half-cocked with your comments. :)

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[tankefugl]

The number one reason to dislike FPS on consoles is the lack of a mouse. Add it, and I'm all up for playing it on any console.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Drantin]

I take it you missed the news about the Lik Sang SmartJoy Frag? keyboard and mouse for PS2 and xBox

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Belsical]

"there is an immersive 'sh*t I'm lost' factor when you're going through a maze. I find that realistic. Heck, you get into some alien base, you know nothing about it, it looks all the same, youre panicy, that's not necessarily a bad thing. You shouldn't always know where you're going. That's part of the panic/fun of going through it the first time."

Uhhh, I guess you missed the giant flashing arrows on the floor?

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. There were times when you had the big flashing arrow, and times when you didn't. A bunch of places and times when you had to feel your way out until you got to an arrow or tracking beacon. So without a doubt, there were times when you would get lost.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[uunh haun]

Halo was alright, but it wasn't that great. In terms of environment, metroid prime was very similar but the gameplay was far better. In terms of story, there were some good, memorable parts, but it was chopped up by, yes, repetitive levels. Halo feels more like an arcade game than a really immersive environment. Plus, after years of the GTA series it's really difficult to think of Halo as open and filled with options.

Not to mention how much it sucked that there were no bots for deathmatch. How am I supposed to play against a friend?!?!

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to say I wish I hadn't just use up my last mod point. I started playing text adventures during 8086s era. I only bought a PS2 five years ago. Then I bought an Xbox, about 2 years ago. And I wholeheardetly agree with you. PC games have their place and so do console games. Personally, I have found that I hardly ever play PC games any more. I just don't have the time. But then I find an hour and feel like shooting stuff, it's just so much easier to fire up my four year console system, pop in a four year old game and still have fun. That way, I don't actually have to spend $2k+ a year just to keep my system "cutting edge". I'm not in it for some ranking on some clan's list. I just want to have fun.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[HeghmoH]

Now I'm not saying Halo's story was on par for the Godfather or anything like that, but for an FPS, there really was no cohesive equal.

You, sir, have obviously never played Marathon. Now there was a story that got you involved, that sucked you in, chewed you up, and spit you out. Halo's story is but the barest shadow of Marathon's. (Almost literally, since they were both done by the same people.) Marathon is full of hope, struggle, mystery, betrayal, revenge, and ambiguity, and all of this was achieved without a single cutscene or line of recorded dialog more complex than, "Thank god it's you!"

Ahh, Bungie, how the mighty have fallen. Not to say that Halo isn't good, I enjoy it quite a bit, but I wonder if Bungie will ever manage to match their achievement in Marathon.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[danila]

Unless a PS2 game is designed to be used with mouse, this is just a useless accessory. Games on consoles have autoaim and other crap. The controls are not designed for instant 180 degree turns and precise control. Using a mouse on PS2 with most games would feel like using a gamepad to control the cursor in Windows.

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[danila]

I tend to agree. Compared with other PC sci-fi shooters like AvP 2, Halo felt like an arcade game. This was its advantage however - the gameplay was very simple, smooth and fun. Despite not being very advanced graphically or story-wise, the game was very enjoyable (except for the copy-pasted levels and running back). But in the end I would rather pick a PC FPS. Similarly, GTA3 was a very easy to play game, but it was definitely very "consolish" compared with Mafia, and simplistic in many respects (most of all, its feel and storywise).

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

The bottomline here is - if all you have ever eaten is toast then you will think toast is the best food in the world. nuff said

Re:Halo Myths: What PC Users Don't Get about Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like you console gamers never heard of force feedback, much more advanced then some lame motor with an off balance weight.

Re:Yawn......

[Frogbert]

Yeah, a large pixilated mass is much better then ultra fine graphics on a screen this is roughly the same size anyway due to you being much closer to the monitor. And at that resolution you would be able to actually see things that are more then 10 metres away.

For me, Echoes.

[sbszine]

I have a PS2 and a GCN, and I'd go with Echoes, for sure. I enjoyed Metroid Prime way more than GTA3 or Halo, though they were all good games. But they're all different types of game, really. Metroid looks like an FPS from the screenshots, but it's really more of a puzzle / exploration game. Halo is an FPS geared towards multiplayer. GTA3 is, uh, an open-ended crime sim?

I suppose it comes down to whether you prefer single player or multiplayer (if multiplayer, choose Halo 2), and then whether your prefer a slow thoughful game (Metroid) or a fast action game (GTA).

Obligatory South Park Reference

[Matarick]

OMIGOD! Slashdot killed DIVX!

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[kencurry]

"Everything Halo does has been done before, especially in Quake"

Halo was based upon marathon, a mac original that primiered in '94.

Quake didn't show up until a couple of years later.

Doom may have been concurrent, but could'nt have preceeded Marathon by much.

So, let's give Halo it's due; it has legitimate claim to the FPS genre.

Re:Boring?

[accelleron]

I've read on /. before [in a post] that the current progress of A.I. is somewhere on the level of a cockroach, in terms of actual intelligence.

Whilst I think that many modern games do a better immitation of intelligence than the skills of a roach, and I mostly join MP games for action, not discussion [MMORPG's excluded], I generally agree on the point that a human opponent is better equipped to provide a challenge [and some entertainment].

On the other hand, a console can't kick you back....

Re:Boring?

[Anonymous Coward]

The G5 (PPC 970) is an IBM processor. Apple calls it the G5 because they can call it whatever they want.

of course there near perfect.

[geekoid]

"The verdict: near perfect scores. "
because ther want to review Halo 3.

COme on, can we trust a review site that has to agree to all kinds of stipulations before posting what they think?
Not me.
I'll wait 2 weeks, gert the report from the early adopters and get it for 15 bucks less then every one else. Assuming the reviews I get are favorable.

Now, I'm not saying Halo 2 isn't the perfect game, hell I jope it is I like good games, just pointing out the these reviews aren't the most unbiased in the world.
I am also of the opinion that if what ever you are reviewing, whether its games, cars, or Krypton Lasers, you should not regularly give a 8 or higher to everything. If you do, you need to change your rating system.

Re:of course there near perfect.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't you read their reviews for the games from the last 2 weeks. They all have been reviewing a bunch of so so games and gave them so so scores. So so what is your problem? That they actually like this game?

Re:of course there near perfect.

[Keeper]

You must be new here. Anything related to Microsoft MUST be a rehash of someone else's old idea and can never be implemented well. It doesn't matter if that perception defies reality. :p

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[geekoid]

dude Slashdot is about giving ones opinion on a subject. Thats why we can post. G'ah

Plus, he gave some examples on why he feels the way he does.

Slashdot has always, always, always been like that. To beable to hear other opinions is one of the things that make the internet such a powerfull social tool.

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[Anonymous Coward]

The Metroid Prime control scheme is perfect for both the GC controller and the type of game. MP and Halo are NOT THE SAME type of game. They're not even vaguely similar. It stands to reason they would have different control schemes.

MP was an almost flawless conversion of a 2D game into a 3D world. Nintendo wasn't just trying to be different, and the fact you think they were tells me you haven't even played MP for more than a few minutes.

FPS on consols

[Legato895]

im reading allot of people saying things such as "first person shooters should never be on consoles" and are just generally griping about the controllers etc. on the other hand i also read lots of forum posts where console gamers are wanting pc controls on their consoles. here are my thoughts on the matter. i have had long winded conversations along the lines of mac vs pc so i get allot of sides to it. basically when it comes down to it, i love the console experience. its like using a mac... it may not necessarily be the best at everything, but it does have very good moments. do i mind playing with outdated graphics on a joypad? no, i play because i want to sit on my couch and play a game. theres just something different about it. i even dislike putting a kb on my lap to talk in lobbies, for me its just the headset and joysticks. when i started off on my first real console fps (timesplitters) i was a drunken monkey using both sticks to control movement and aiming, but after what has it been...? 2 years+ its just another seamless interface im not bashing anybody i just feel that if time is spent with a console control people wouldn't hate it nearly as much. its the difference between using a graphic tablet stylus and a mouse for digital painting. you just gotta get used to it.

ur a uber geek?

[Man in Spandex]

Nobody is bitching about performance in DOD or UT2004 afaik.

Halo for PC is really unoptimized, Call of Duty yields the usual 100ish fps on the pc's of today with a decent system and joint operations is lagless on some servers of 80ish players.

It's great to see people thinking a game is good because it has been written for a console using low-level programming. Get a life nerd, if a game runs well, what do you care how a coder has written it?

Re:Boring?

[heptapod]

If you think Halo's boring with poor controls, perhaps Lego Halo is more your speed.
http://www.saber-scorpion.com/lego_halo.htm
http://www.saber-scorpion.com/lego_halo1.htm
nothing much here, just a lego master chief

Loooove

[Mulletproof]

"M$ 'innovated' with an online subscription plan that simply blows its rivals out of the water."

How much do you pay to play games online with your PC again? And what rivals are we talking about? No other major console has been built with internet connectivity from the ground up. The PS2 had to add it on. And even then, it's free* I mean, what are you paying for with Live? The dubious value of hack protection that's more a funtion of the hardware, not the service? Voice chat, which also a function of the local hardware and software?? 16 player games that play closer to 4-8 reliably across Live if you're honest with yourself? And that aside, JUST 16???

From a technical harware aspect, the XBox shits innovation compared to other consoles. That innovation, however, doesn't come anywhere close to applying to Live as a service. If that's the definition of innovation, I'll be happy to take a step backwards.

*free, aside from MMOOMOMRRPG games

Re:Loooove

[fimbulvetr]

I started with muds in the early 90s, played eq for a while, still a q3 nut.

You say no other console has online play.

*THATS MY POINT!!!* It flew right over your head!

Sure, sony has a bandaided POS online service, but I'd MUCH rather pay ~$5/month to have a reliable service with reliable downloads and actual functionality. Yeah, it's free! WHOOP-DE-FUCKING-DO. Look what you get for free.

I paid $70 for a 12 month subscription to live. Now outside of that breaking down to $5.83 a month, I got an awesome game that my entire family loves (Crimson Skies), as well as a headset. Personally, I don't use the headset. It's just a bunch of kids. I'd rather listen to the game.

Hack protection? Not interested. I don't care if my xbox gets hacked. 4-8? Are you nuts? I play crimson skies without lag on a normal cable modem with 12+ people every day. I'm consistently in the top 3, with no lag whatsoever. Just 16, yeah. Have you seen what it takes to run a decent 64 player ut server? 2+ghz amds, 1gb ram, oc3? Nope, Ill stick with *only* 16 players.

Bitch about the hardware if you want, I don't care. As far as I'm concerned, it runs linux and all my games. It's a damn fine media player with XBMC, and it's friggen cheap.

Having Actually played Halo: Combat Evolved

[ChozCunningham]

A few have asked why Halo was as acclaimed as it was.

Halo was not only in a good spot for exposure, being the only polished FPS on the Xbox, but filled expectations well. I was originally unimpressed by the screenshots and even a few minutes of deathmatching at a friend's house. But I kept reading of the the awards it received, long after the inital reviews. Almost always, the write-ups would mention the exhilartion of playing on the highest difficulty, single player. So I borrowed the game from the same friend.

And my eyes were opened. Not only was what appeared to be yet another FPS suddenly exciting, but during the tense, chalenging moments, I was attuned to the subtlties of sound effects and level layouts. The AI was superb, feinting and flanking as well as some of the best online FPS clans (marksmanship not as good). When you are paying attention to every detail to survie and progress, you learn the levels very well, and the feeling is almost more "Survival Horror" than some Doom-style adventure.

The game has been compared, derivatively, to GoldenEye/PD, UT series, and Quake series. I've played all of those, some on multiple formats. These are pillar games, but Halo stands alongside them. Unfortunately, untile you devote a few hours on Legendary, it's really difficult to understand why.

Now it appears that Halo 2 isn't up to snuff, but every series I mentioned has it's better and worse titles. Im not surprised here, but I am still looking forward getting the game alone at 12:01am's single player fun and the following Halo2 party, where i imagine both seasoned and noobs will have fun drinking eating and shooting the crap outa stuff! And it should smell better and have lest tantrums than LAN parties Ive attended...

Re:Hardware: What PC Users Don't Get...

[eufreka]

Excuse me. Let's compare a $150 console with a $2000-plus Leet gamerz rig, huh...oh, and for an additional $50, I get a year of unlimited broadband multiplayer fun...

Hmmmm. Throw in $50 for Halo 2, and boom, for $250, all the lamers (me included, that's for sure) will be playing our fingers off--in my case up on a 60-inch rear projection monitor.

Oh, feel like driving for a while, or a little sports, swap the disc and keep on going...

Man oh man, this is the same discussion as TiVo versus a homebrew PVR...

All I can say is: To all of you out there that like doing your own dental work...I've got a teeth-cleaning appointment at my dentist's tomorrow.

The better for you to see my pearly whites come midnight...

Re:Boring?

[AngryUndead]

The first I heard of it, Halo was going to be a ground-breaking squad-tactics game that would take you inside and outside of bases and across large terrain. When I first played it... I was dissapointed. I realized that all the rumblings in the "community" were not blown out of proportion at all. The game got nerfed, period. Bungie should have been left with their creative vision to produce it on the PC. I think everyone can admit that a controller is not made for FPS games. Every FPS game that is released cannot be viewed simply in terms of the console it was released for; rather it must be viewed in the light of every game released before it. I hope you do not movies according to their venue. While that is not quite the same... the gameplay of Halo on the PC was horrible. The gameplay of Halo on the Xbox is only good when you have other people that are fun to play with. I'd rather play Counter-Strike and I think that about sums it up.

I agree

[LighthouseJ]

This is not a flame so please don't punish me if you disagree. I agree with the parent very much and here's why...

I recently got the play Halo for the first time ever (I live in PS2 land mainly thanks to Grand Theft Auto games and Gran Tourismo) recently, I was interested to see what the fuss is about but became disappointed because of the aforementioned reasons.

Maybe it's my newcoming to FPS on the Xbox console but I've always had a hard time accurately and quickly aiming with my thumb on any console. Take Goldeneye for Nintendo 64, you got to use the analog joystick which made aiming tolerable but still slow. The cursor would dance from side to side if you're in a hurry and would take forever for the cursor to walk over to the target if you decided to take it slow.

I am a frequent player of Day of Defeat though. Coming off of 6 months of intense Day of Defeat and getting pretty proficient at the game, I can aim faster than the aim cursor focuses for an accurate shot. If you don't know, most if not all rifles expand the crosshairs while you walk indicating your shot has a huge chance of not making the target. Once you stop moving, the crosshairs focus down and stop to indicate the most accurate aim you can manage with the gun. Back in the game, if I run around a corner and spot an enemy, I am used to where the center of my screen is and put it on the target, I wait for the crosshairs to converge and then fire, all done in under a second. Sure, I could crouch and inch around the corner but that's no good if I'm expected by the enemy. If the target is a sniper or minigunner, this works especially well because the sniper has tunnelvision and the minigunner might not be able to react quick enough. If the target uses any other weapon, crouching or not will suffice because I only need one shot. A couple other guns, if aimed extremely well for a headshot, only need one shot too but the chances for a luck-of-the-draw headshot without any moment to aim is highly unlikely.

Re:Boring?

[falcon5768]

Um no... Halo was develped on the Mac years before it was on the xBox... Microsoft bought Bungie and made it a xBox exclusive and trashed the original development team... it was originally a Mac only title before that.

Halo 2 Vs. Half-Life 2

[pagal_paanda]

Alright, looks like I'll have to do the honors of bringing a few polls regarding Halo 2 Vs. Half-Life 2

Mister Poll.

GameSpy.

proof right here we need xbox and pc cooperative

[Jesselovesscripts]

THIS GUY is the reaon we need xbox and pc cooperative play. So he will realize the difference between playing with a real set of controls after 20,000 pc users rage his face. it's like making a car with half a steering wheel, and saying, WELL YOU CAN STILL DRIVE STUPID, JUST USE THE OTHER HALF. OR like having sex with two condoms. no where near the sensation go ahead. have fun.

Re:Boring?

[foxfyre]

More myths again. For shame. Halo was not originally a Mac game nor was it born on the Mac. Christ, people, stop distorting the truth.

Why can one only use the mouse?

[UncleJam]

Why are some of the comments here so negative? People saying, oh I can't play this with these two little sticks... Why is the mouse and keyboard the only way to go? So what if you can't get a headshot in .2 seconds 90% of the time with the Xbox controller? A game isn't all about being l33t, but about having fun. My friend and I play Co-op Halo all the time, because we can scheme together, plan and all that stuff while sitting next to each other. It really quite fun flanking pockets of resistance (as we call it ;)) and coming out hardly scratched. It's also fun when one of us runs into the battle, and the other one doesn't notice and pitches a grenade in and sticks it on the other's head. Also it's a game where you can become pretty good at it quickly. He is as good as me, even though I play PC fps from time to time. On the PC I usually break even on kill-death ratio, some days I get way higher than that for some unknown reason. If he played PC FPS online, I would guarentee he would get totally smoked. Plus he doesn't even have a computer so it wouldn't be worth it to set it up just so we can play some l33t fest online.

Re:Why can one only use the mouse?

[Drantin]

sometimes.... leet is fun...

Deus Ex

[thealmightyegg]

What we need, is another game following in the lines of Deus Ex. I personally like games where I sometimes have to think. Holding down the "Fire" button for 3 hours straight and strafing back and forth is not my idea of a satisfying gaming experience.

Bungie.net is worth checking out...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thought it would be worth noting that stats and rankings are insanely deep and well thought out. This is all I could have hoped for...

http://bungie.net/Help/page.aspx?section=Pages&sub section=Main&Page=6

GameEurope

[Anonymous Coward]

Bollocks on the line, my ass.

Re:Boring?

[sqrt(2)]

Come on mods, this is ridiculous! I've seen 3 post modded down because the person said something unfavorable about this game, what the fuck is the matter with you retards? Under no definition was he trolling.

Too many damn MS fan boys with mod points these days.

celebration!

[Flunitrazepam]

I'd like to celebrate the release of these reviews with a song. I'm sure a lot of you will recognize it as the Halo theme music so sing along!

Ohhh Ohhh OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ahhh ohhh OHHH ohhhhhh.... AHHHHH AHHH AAAAAAA! AAA AHHHH AHHHHHHHHH!

Re:Yawn......

[Anonymous Coward]

For single-player I'm sure that kicks ass; for multiplayer I'm sure you'd get your ass kicked.

Uh...no?

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI, Gamespot gave it a 9.4, not a 9.8.

http://www.gamespot.com/reviews.html?type=byscor e& platform=all&order=desc&time=alltime

Still a high score, but they've given plenty of other games higher marks...

not as good as Halo 1

[UncleScrooge]

I have played Halo 1 since it came about back in the day. I have played it at the world cyber games. (Nationals). Halo 1 was for people with skill, Halo 2 is for people who like to waste 6 million bullets in a single game. It just doesn't quite cut it. I have played Halo 2 and I really do not like it. It's a bloody kiddy game. I asked several of my buddies who also play Halo 1 alot and none of them think Halo 2 is an improvement. Long story short, I hate it and I won't play it. Halo 1 still is FAR better.

Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

It sucks

Re:Halo

[Anonymous Coward]

big time hehe

Nope. It's sluggish.

[TheLink]

30fps IS sluggish.

And it's nothing to do with movement speed.

I've played the same game (quakeworld) through the years at 15fps, 30fps, at 60fps etc. And believe me 30fps is way far from "as good as it gets". I even resorted to 320x240 to get decent frame rates on my P166.

30fps is not terrible, but nowadays it's sluggish. For games like GTA3, 30fps is OK (it's default is locked to 30fps). But it still feels sluggish.

Compare GTA3 3rd person with Jedi Knight II 3rd person (with saber) on a decent system and you'll see the diff between 30fps and whatever it is your machine can actually go up to.

If you don't see the diff then either you don't have a decent system, or you can save a fair bit of money - you shouldn't bother upgrading for the next few years.

Of course there's another thing - FPS isn't the only thing that affects "sluggishness". Latency is another. Even if your video updates are 300FPS, it's still sluggish if you press a key and the game only acts on it 0.2 seconds later (though rendering it at 300FPS). It's not sluggish if the game renders at 100fps and acts on your inputs on the very next frame.

Still, the two are interlinked in practice. While a game could act on your inputs before drawing the next frame, you only see it in the next frame- so the feedback isn't instantaneous. At 30fps, 33ms is still a noticeable delay when you are controlling something, while that's not that bad (cause I'm a HPB used to delays of 300ms), it's not great. Plus it's 33ms on top of network delays if you're playing online.

Re:Nope. It's sluggish.

[curtlewis]

30fps is sluggish if you have no headroom in cpu/gpu processing power. That's because the moment you get into heavy combat your fps drops considerably.

30fps handles smooth motion for video and corresponds to about 33ms of time per frame. So in severe twitch situations it wouldn't cut the mustard, but 60fps would have a time of 16.6ms per frame which is more than adequate for any human being's reaction time in any situation.

All of that is, however, irrelevant to the fact that you move slower in Halo than in Quake, Doom or Unreal. If Halo were allowed to run at 200 fps and you had the horsepower to do so, you wouldn't move any faster.

Yep, your friend is right

[Anonymous Coward]

"..from what a friend of mine tells me they pretty much stuck to similar designs with Halo 2, though they tried to disguise it a bit better this time around."

That's a pretty good description. I think the levels are better, but there is still a huge amount of sameness to many of the levels.

Oh no I went against the crowd on /.

[talaphid]

Sorry, no. My first FPS chops were on (and yes, I'm going to misspell it) Wolvenstein. I, like everyone else with a pulse, went ape over DooM. Descent is, in my mind, the best FPS ever (although I forgive your inferior brain for being unable to reach the same conclusion). I've played and loved GoldenEye. Took me a little while to come around on Perfect Dark.

I love Halo. I love it solo, I love it multiplayer. I've cleared it on Legendary. I've cleared it on Heroic without using anything other than melee (excepting in cases where it is literally impossible to progress otherwise, ie., the reactor room - but not believedly possible, the tanks can be destroyed with sufficent melee attacks). I love the story.

And I'll tell you the best selling point. It didn't cost $4000 to have a machine and require all kinds of fiddling under the hood to play it passably. I could - and this is the crazy part - go to a friend's house, and bam, right there, they have a box that plays the game passably. Instant LAN fun without the LAN or the carting of PC - I can yell at him and call him a noob camper in the same room with the maximum amount of additional effort over normal single player funness of... buying an additional controller...

instead of buying a hub, buying cat 5, carting them over to everyone's house every time we go somewhere... setting up a local DHCP... which yes, is barely breaking a sweat, but that still takes more than PLUG IN CONTROLLER TWO.

Quoting gamespot.. "For another, the Master Chief, Halo's cybernetic protagonist, made a great hero. A fearless, enigmatic man, the Chief could succeed where pure flesh-and-blood humans could not,"

Squads of marines couldn't do it, but in Doom, hey, you're Teh Ubar Marine!11. All it amounted to in most FPSs is that your character, who has throwaway background information ("You are teh ubar spy!!1"), has the most psychopathic aim skills of the human race. At least here, you're the last in a complicated and failure prone supersoldier project (caveat, caveat, caveat...)

Re:Oh no I went against the crowd on /.

[Yer Mom]

Destroying tanks with melee attacks? Wow. I thought you could only do stuff like that in Civ :)

As far as multiplayer goes, I agree. I've never been particularly bothered about multiplayer on PC - too much hassle to set up - but I'll be playing this one on Live...

Before we all start getting too enthusiastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

...just remember that every X-Box and every copy of Halo 2 sold just serves to further the Microsoft cause of owning everything.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Well this should destroy some Karma...

[Nexum]

I don't know about anyone else, but I have to say that I was very much underwhelmed by the first Halo.

I simply don't think it deserves the huge scores it got, and I can't understand why it got them. I mean, the part when you fight through stage after stage after stage after stage of those plague things really is some of the most repetitive worst level design since the original wolfenstein.

Put that together with the sections after that which have you going through corridors and occasionally coming across a long bridge - again, so boringingly repetitive.

And the save system is horrendous, absolutely awful - I got stuck in one place having to save with very little health, and the next section just happened to be super-difficult, took me an absolute age to finish.

For what it's worth, I think the enemy design, although quite nice in places was not wide ranging enough - there are what, three different types of bad guy?? Look at the great stuff coming out in terms of enemies in Half Life 2 (Strider anyone?) and the nice assorted mix in Doom 3. Halo's really pale next to these. And what's with the cutesy-ness of those little alien things? Making cute sounds, I'm not watching a cartoon! I want to feel like these are serious assailants I'm facing, not some bastard offspring of Barney.

Now of course, there were some very good points to the game as we all know, the vehicles were great fun, and graphically I was very impressed. The storyline - well meh, I wasn't blown away, but I love the idea of the Halo in the first-place.

So I'm puzzled by all the crazed fanboi-ism over Halo, it was an OK game as far as I'm concerned, but people giving it crazy 10/10 scores? Did we play the same game?

But this is about Halo2... which I haven't played, but am not too buzzed up on it due to the disappointing original. Hopefully Bungie hasn't used the cut & paste method of world building this time round. - Nex

Re:Well this should destroy some Karma...

[pandrijeczko]

I agree.

I played it for several hours with an X-Box owning friend of mine - it was okay but IMHO not a patch on the single-player experience of Half-Life or the multi-player experience of Unreal Tournament on my PC.

I accept that in the world of console users, it was probably one of the best FPS games of the time - however, having said that, Metroid Prime on the Gamecube was far superior.

In the PC world, we have been spoilt for good FPSes and even if Halo 2 makes it to the PC, I doubt that few people are going to rush to buy it before Half-Life 2 or Quake 4.

Re:Well this should destroy some Karma...

[Anonymous Coward]

"For what it's worth, I think the enemy design, although quite nice in places was not wide ranging enough - there are what, three different types of bad guy?? Look at the great stuff coming out in terms of enemies in Half Life 2 (Strider anyone?) and the nice assorted mix in Doom 3. Halo's really pale next to these."

Don't compare halo 1 to games released years later, don't compare halo 2 to *anything* because it's pretty obvious that you haven't played it from your claims.

Re:Boring?

[DrXym]

GTA 3 / VC / SA were born on the console too, but I think you'd have to be insane to play them there. In fact I think you'd have to be insane to play any FPS or free view game on a console. It's impossible to play on a joystick unless the game has some kind of aid / cheat to lock in on a target.

GTA on the PC was incredible. It certainly had flaws (pedestrian / car dematerialization showed it's PS2 roots), but the mouse control and the glorious high res graphics more than made up for it. So the console is not always the best place way to see a game, even one that started off there.

Catch all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Congratulations. You've offered into evidence Halo is popular across the spectrum. And? I mean since that was what he was saying, I'm just curious what else you've got.

Little bitches talking about the purity of the genre... They weren't even playing on NTshadow.net, and if they were, I would have nailed them too.

Halo did what could not be done. It made an FPS for the consol not just playable, but occasionaly frenetic, and occasionally, highly orchestrated. With better driving controls than half the driving games out there, and a far better than par squad AI.

Uh and for level repetition.
1) Been in a building recently? Structures? They're repetative unless designed by acid dropping architects of the late 60's, and those suck sack, crack and ask.

2) Fight your way in, fight your way out. If you don't like that kind of story. Well there just isn't much hope for you.

Why X-Box Halo Rocks.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been a PC gamer since the early days, and like many other posters have grown up with Doom, Unreal etc... I don't even have an X-box. However my 2 brothers do, and Halo on the X-box was so many times better than the rather Lame PC version - "why" I hear you ask.

2 reasons:

(1) Co-operative play on the same screen. Sure I have played multiplayer FPS, but co-operative play through the single player game is rare (ok orginal Doom had it and so did the Serious Sam series). However, being in the same room, with a fridge of beers, and a stack of take-out pizza, and co-operative Halo, backing up my brother was one of the best gaming experances in a long time (I really didn't mind that the level design was so lame).

(2) The X-box controller, rumbiling away as the warthog accelerates away, or bouncing in your had as you get shot, far more satisfying than absolutely no feedback at all through a PC keyboard & mouse.

So I have arranged to meet up with my 2 brother's this weekend (leaving wifes & girlfriends at home), for a Halo 2 - X-box mega session (probably interupted with Poker sessions & Pub visits!)

(p.s. best PC FPS ever - got to be FarCry)

Complete review of Halo 2 and this topic

[lmnfrs]

Halo 2 is fun as was Halo. Because it's very similar. Not a challenging game in any way, not very creative despite what some people claim were innovations. But fun.
All arguments about the game come down to preference. There are plenty of valid arguments about why Halo(2) is fun/exciting and easy/crappy but they all depend on what YOU like in a game.

So shutup.

If you want some fun with less than the maximum amount of action possible in an FPS to make for a small learning curve, this is your game.

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[Babbster]

Actually, it's what makes the internet able to show so many people AS social tools.

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[Anita Coney]

Oh, I'll give some examples. I think Kenny G is the best jazz artist ever because I like his music more than that noisy jazz they play on public radio.

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, this AC's post sounds oddly like the parent's...

For what it's worth, I've been a big fan of Metroid since the original, but I still thought the control scheme sucked ass.

Re:Boring?

[davidbailey]

Halo was intended to be a Mac game first and foremost

It was NEVER slated to be a Mac-only game. Steve Jobs begged the Bungie guys to intro it at the Mac World conference to boost the idea that the Mac was a gamer's platform.

Also Bungies' efforts to make a RTS game was short-lived. They quickly realized that it was going to be a FPS along the lines of the Marathon series.

Their original platforms for Halo, the FPS, were Mac, PC, and Playstation2.

When Microsoft bought Bungie, Bungie scrapped a lot of their engine work and rebuilt it to meet the XBox technical requirements. What was (much) later brought to the PC was a port of the XBox game and what was brought to the Mac was a port of the XBox game ported to the PC. In a word, it was pretty bad. However, if you ignored the pathetic nature of the port itself, the game rocked.

We can excuse Bungie because they didn't make either the PC or Mac ports, they made the XBox game... and it was as good as any FPS can be on a console.

I can only hope they work themselves on the PC/Mac port of Halo 2 so it will meet their high standards.

Lacking Campaign Mode

[jeks]

I have a problem with the single player campaign in Halo 2.

The game has so little to offer compared to other titles in the same genre. Compared to Halo 1 the improvements in every aspect are minimal. Take Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay for instance, it has superb voiceover acting and a story that does not seem as statically linear as Halo and Halo 2. The NPC:s are interesting and have a contribution even in the action.

A lot has changed since 2001 but Halo has not evolved much in comparison.

Playing the game at normal difficulty (I would not know about the others because I refuse to see it through again) follows a simple scheme, since checkpoints are everywhere and the rewards for actually playing the game are minimal. Completing the game in just a few hours is as simple as:
1. Run through and past enemies as far as you can until you reach the next checkpoint (works at around 25%)
2. Use the energy sword, run to the middle of the room and kill all the enemies
3. The enemies are strictly bound to certain zones. If you attract the enemies to a zone boundary (which they do not cross, seemingly) you can run away and make them lose track of you to attack them again, sometimes with their back facing you (i.e. after restoring your shield)

Actually, the most difficult part of the game is to find your way through the landscapes since there is no map - any other problem you are faced with requires no imagination.

Unfortunately this game lacks in both initiative and fantasy. Halo 2 employs melee weapons, or weapon - since there is only one available, the energy sword which is by far the most usable weapon. Any other interesting weapon is useless due to its very limited charge or maximum ammunition level. Why not take the time and make other interesting melee weapons when the functionality is already in place?

The story overall is very dull - if not hard to follow and engage in. Lots of Halo-rings suddenly. It ruins the intensity present in Halo 1 just as Star Wars would have been ruined by lots of Deathstars. Playing through and having to watch the cut-scenes are a painful experience. It is hard to care for any of the other characters since they are not involved in the game in any other significant way except perhaps for the final battle.

Open Source Halo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not in your lifetime. It is precisely with multi-million dollar productions such as Halo that OSS hits a brick wall. Nobody--with the possible exception of an eccentric, generous billionaire--will ever create an Open Source equivalent of Halo, or any other cutting-edge franchise.

OSS will permanently lag the true innovators who exist at crest of the capitalist wave.

Re:Boring?

[aBlooMoon]

The only decent FPS for a console system is Metroid Prime. Unfortunately, even that suffered from console controller syndrome.

Big Mutha San Andreas

[el_benito]

Oddly enough, GTA:SA isn't the same kind of crap as Big Mutha Trucka, and yet it includes a trucking minigame that's probably more fun than BMT! ;D

Sharp Knees!

[warnerve]

Anyone else reminded of a nerd that sees a beautiful lady and proclaims he would not talk to her because of her sharp knees?

Here is what all the hype was about.

[El Camino SS]

I mean, the game was okay and everything, but I'm still not sure what all the hype is about.

The hype was that a whole new generation of people who never played a competetive FPS online got the chance. Anyone that screams Halo is the best game ever just hasn't been around the block, and used to be a non-gamer or a very casual gamer.

Face it, the guys that scream "HALO!" at the top of their lungs are just not PC players. If they were, their buffet plate would be very full.

"Halo, seriously dude, the best ever."
"Ever played Starcraft?"
"No."
"Ever played Tribes?"
"No."
"Quake?"
"No."
"Pong?"
"No."
"Goldeneye?"
"Had a friend that had it, it rocked. Played it once."
"How about Uneal Tournament?"
"Never heard of it."

It's nothing bad.
These people are the same ones that buy The Day After Tommorrow and Van Helsing on DVD the day it comes out.

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[elchuppa]

not so. I was a hardcore pc fps gamer before Halo came out and I was very impressed with it. I did not think that the single-player game was the best fps ever, but it certainly was up there. In fact I think that it's the people who have played a lot of fps's who are most able to recognize what makes Halo great. Halo gets the feel right. The story is window dressing, but what makes an fps IMO (especially when taken into the multiplayer realm), is feel. Halo nails this. Playing Halo multiplayer has been as fun for me as any PC game I've played.

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[PeelBoy]

No doubt. I'd rather play Halo than Doom 3 or many of the other FPS's out there.

I guess if all you like to do is online multiplayer deathmatch I can see why you wouldn't like Halo very much, but for entertaining single player / coop play Halo ranks up at the top if you ask me. Pretty close to Half-Life if not better.

Is it the best game ever? NO freakin way. But that's just my opinion.

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[cbreaker]

I've been playing FPS's since Wolf3D. And I still just don't see the big hype.

However, I do see lots of value in Co-operative play that I keep hoping more and more to see in more FPS's. Games like Far Cry, Doom 3, and other new titles could have been a blast in co-op mode.

I am not a big fan of Deathmatch.

So if Co-op play is the big thing, well, I dunno, it's not enough to "blow my mind" like some of the kids are saying.

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[cbreaker]

Yea, I think you're right.

I mean, the first time I played UT online I couldn't believe it. It was amazingly fun. It was more then that, it was revolutionary.

It was so easy to join games, download new maps automatically, and play for hours on end. In the early times, there were no aimbots, no cheating. Pure online fun at it's greatest.

I'll always have a soft spot for Unreal. I enjoyed the original Unreal immensely, it was a really awesome game with amazing graphics for the time. UT was a perfect online game.

So I guess the same thing is happening with Halo, and since it's a console game it has hit a very large audience.

Don't get me wrong, it's a fun game. But I don't see anything masterful about it, except the fact that you don't need a $1500 computer to play it.

And I like to aim with a mouse dammit! =)

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[Damvan]

I totally agree. The kids running around claiming Halo is the best game ever just never played all the PC FPS out there. Sure it is probably the best Console FPS out there, but best game ever?

And yes, I have played the whole thing, even though I wanted to throw the damn controller out the window half the time. Keyboard/mouse is the only way to play FPS.

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[Pleione]

Halo just seems to be hype since I haven't seen anything unique or interesting from it so far. On the other hand, I still play UT (which "pwns" IMHO)and even games of Duke Nukem 3D every now and then. -Wren

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have played a lot of PC games... Halo I think is the most fun because I plug it in, plug in 4 controllers and I can play.

I never have to worry about updated drivers, patches, fixes.

I have little desire to sit around a computer desk, use the keyboard and play with 3 other guys. Unless of course I am on drugs and looking at 3D backgrounds or something.

Sure you can play over the internet, but sitting on couches with controllers is much more comfortable and there is less to do.

Halo is simple and fun. You don't have to worry about keyboard mappings and 30 different possibilities that don't necessarily add to the fun factor.

Setting up two xboxes networked at a house is easy.

Who the hell wants to setup 8 computers in someones house for a few hours of gameplay? I have beer to drink and woman to harrass!

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[oingoboingo]

Face it, the guys that scream "HALO!" at the top of their lungs are just not PC players. If they were, their buffet plate would be very full.

Rubbish. I've been playing games on the PC since 1988, and Halo on the Xbox is still one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences I've had. Great story, balls to the wall action, and an incredibly entertaining co-op multiplayer mode perfectly suited to a beers, pizza and throwing-the-controller-at-each-other-swearing environment. Sure, there are games on the PC which do as good a job. But there are thousands that don't.

Credit where credit is due, without the elitist PC vs. console player bullshit.

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[Nintendork]

I agree completely. Warcraft 2, Starcraft, Quake, Quake 2, a few Unreal games, Counter Strike, etc. I really like Warcraft 2 and most of the FPS games on the computer, but I've spent way more time playing Halo online via Xbox Connect. Hell, I actually prefer console games over computer games. With a computer, there's so much crap to worry about like frames per second, your audio card, patches, etc. With a console game, you just pop it in and play. No upgrades or anything else required. I can have a few friends sitting on the same couch looking at the same TV or two with minimal amount of effort and setup time. Yes, bleeding edge computer games are going to be prettier, but pretty graphics are only a factor the first time you play through or maybe for a short time in multiplayer. After that, it's all about the gameplay mechanics and level design. It all comes down to the programmers. In that aspect, I haven't really seen much of a difference in quality between computer games and console games, so I choose to be a lazy bastard and use a console. In the end, I have some $ left in the bank to put towards something other than a video card/motherboard/cpu every year or two (Consoles have a 4-5 year life cycle). A Pentium 2 350 with 512MB of RAM, 7200RPM drive with 8MB buffer, and a $70 video card works great as my home computer and the latest console or two of my choice works great as my gaming system(s).

-Lucas

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[AlexMax2742]

I have a great repituare of FPS's, begining with Wolf3D, through Tribes 2 and Unreal 2004. Hell, I still play Doom 2 over the internet.

I am now anxiously waiting to pick up my preorder of Halo 2. Beyond anxious. This is seriously the most anxious I've been for a games release, EVER.

Please don't generalize me.

And by the way, the port of Halo to the PC had so much potential, but Gearbox fucking blew it. Probably is the reason why Bungie does not have an interest in porting Halo 2 to the PC or Mac

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[blahplusplus]

What are you talking about? The PC version of Halo had massive framerate and other outstanding gameplay issues. So much so they made Halo custom edition, if thats not bad development, what is??

Halo is far from original in any way, it was all about the execution. We've had better FPS games for a long time now. I think people just easily forget how good half-life was for the time it was released. Halo was your standard "we're fighting the aliens, they found a superweapon of another alien race that can kick are ass, we got to control it / destroy it." My god when the captain said the "covenenant would learn everything, troup, weapon deployments, etc..." and then he said "EARTH" I was like "puh-leeeze!!".

The best thing about halo was the gameplay and even that was not original lots of the levels sucked ass hardcore and were extremely repetitive towards the end. Legendary difficulty was a joke they just upped the hitpoints of the enemies.

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, I've been playing FPS for a long time now. Half-Life, which you forgot to mention, all the Unreals, counter-strike, Doom, Quake, Hexen, Heretic, golden eye, and they all suck compared to halo. It's fun being in 3 different rooms selling out your friends. The movements are fluid, and the things you can do if you understand the physics are superior to any other game out there. It's not too fast(unreal) and the fact that where you shoot has a lot to do with how fast a man dies(pistol) is great. I"m disappointed at the fact they took the explosive rounds out of the pistol, but oh well. It's still a great game

Re:Here is what all the hype was about.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow - how does it feel to live your life as such a snob?

Having that 10-foot stick up your butt really helps you to look down on us mere mortals huh?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but when it comes to opinions and tastes, life is incredibly subjective. For everything you criticise or dismiss, please realise there are thousands of people who are smarter, more experienced and more qualified than you who enjoyed it.

I'd hope this post might make you think a little, and encourage you to stop and reconsider before you post, but as this is /. I fear I am wasting my time. (Yet I still post my rant - go paradox!)

Seattle Times Article - LAN Party Story

[HideEverFree]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/artsentertai nment/2002083375_halo08.html

Just a question...

[El Camino SS]

I noticed in the commercial, that the enemy is attacking Earth and blowing up a city bus in the attack. So here is my question:
Why the hell is there a city bus that looks like it should have Keanu Reeves in it in a future where the Master Chief's ship can fly light years away into space?
Just a *&%$ question.
I mean, cmon people, you can fly from planet to planet, but you are attacking people in a Toyota Tacoma with a WW2 macninegun on the back.

Anyone? ANYONE?!?

It's all about the multiplayer

[Anonymous Coward]

Why my friends liked Halo: They could learn to play it, decently, inside of an hour or two. Then we could all link our xboxes and kill each other. Having all the players in the same location makes the competition and game play much more fun. Because of this, the multiplayer experience on Halo is one of the best ever. Most of my friends were prior Goldeneye or Quake* players and the only reason they play FPS is for multiplayer. To them the campaign was just a trainer so they could become better at multiplayer.

Why I love Halo: The campaign was dull, but forced you to learn most of the weapons. For the time, the graphics were good (not bleeding edge tech, but still nice to look at), the weapons, vehicles, and enemies were fairly standard. But once a week my friends would come over and I could shoot them all many times in multiplayer.

Much like Goldeneye, Halo could be played for hours by a group of people on the same couch taunting and laughing at each other. It's an easy to do lan party where everyone is on the same hardware and everything just works the first time you plug it in. Playing on Xbox live or battle.net or random quake/cs servers is dull compared to this.

Re:Boring?

[Deliveranc3]

Quake 3 on Dreamcast wasn't too bad.

I'm pretty hardcore about PC gaming but it's fun to whip out four controllers and just go at it without lugging boxes around.

Quake 1 for dreamcast was pathetic though :( No Multiplayer wtf!

5 words:

[Anonymous Coward]

jazz is better than sex.

if you non't beleive it, you have been having jazz with the wrong people...

XBOX vs PC???

[DarthVain]

OK, I have to point this out that there are an awful lot of people flaming about how halo multiplayer sucks, how the game sucks, and how only PC's and PC gamers rule.. or something to that effect.

First let me tell you that I (was) an AVID PC online gamer. Second the basic premis of this post is that: XBOX IS NOT A PC. That said why are people comparing them? My favorite online shooter of all time would have to be Wolfenstien: ET, but I go way back to Doom, Nukem, Quake et al. The reason why I play more xbox than PC these days is very simple. My last computer I bought was 3000$. Within 3 years it was essientally useless as a gaming platform. My xbox cost me 300$. These days you can buy an xbox, several games, an extra controller, the DVD thingy and it would still cost less than the video card that would go into a PC. That said the shear fact that people are comparing the two says to me that it must be damn good. I would say that I did enjoy PC online gaming better, however as a subsitute xbox isn't bad for what it is. If this game (HALO 2!) is even half as good as some of these reviews say I am sure I will enjoy it. The one thing that I am also impressed with is the 4 player and 4 tag support on xbox live... Too many games need that and don't have it.. The one concern I have is the game length which does seem short... however if the multiplayer is really good it matters not. The orginal wolfenstein I rememeber for the PC, once I beat it, and tried the multiplayer I never ever played the single player again.

Another point of concern about posts here is the topic is the new game halo 2... 2! not the first halo.

Anyway thats my rant...

Re:Boring?

[DeathByDuke]

Actually Halo was already a FPS for the PC before Microsoft bought it. It was a top down view RTS for Mac, then Bungie decided to go PC and FPS. Practically the entire graphics, vehicles, models etc were in place by the time of E3 2000. The E3 video of it running on ironically a GeForce 3 equipped PC is still floating around. Warthog, Master Chief, Dropship, Covenent etc all there, and of course the famous physics engine. It's that same video that made Microsoft go 'right, we want that for Xbox'. Cue the screams of a million hopeful souls in the PC Force as Microsoft bought Bungie and slapped 'Xbox Only' on Halo.

Pre-columbine

[phorm]

I liked how you mentioned that. As a tech in schools, I find it sad how much focus is given to games as being promoters of violence, etc.

As somebody who enjoyed playing doom in the school labs, quake in college, and many other FPS's otherwise - I'd still consider myself much a pacifist. Cocking the virtual shotgun doesn't necessarily give one an urge to grab a real one...

Of course, nowadays there are alternatives such as perhaps worms (although it still has guns) and others that - while fun - are less violent. Even they seem to suffer from the black reputation that schools seem to give PC gaming.

Re:Pre-columbine

[vhold]

What's especially retarded is that when you elevate something to the status of "oooh scary evil!" you actually imbue it with the properties you are so worried about through the message "We are authority, we don't want you to see that, because it will make you do X."

Of course a kid is going to become more likely to go "oooh I have to see that, and X sounds interesting too," when exposed to a situation like that.

The unfortunate reality though of course is that if any kid in the entire school had done some whacko with a gun, media would be all over the computer lab with the violent video games.

The ironic twist is that the computer lab running the arcade brought quite a few people together where normally their cliques or their loner status kept them totally apart. If there were any pyscho loner types in the school wanting to go on a shooting rampage, they probably ended up hanging out and being accepted in the computer lab, thus making a murderous rampage less likely.

Original Duke3d?

[phorm]

Dude, I'd have to throw the original duke 3d in between Doom 1 and Quake. For a sprite game, it was still a very big breath of fresh air over previous FPS's, notibly due to Duke's dialog, the ability to jump/duck/mouselook (other games I believe had mouselook but missed other winning features). Moving sectors, doors, and other things made duke very memorable, and multiplay was probably amongst the best FPS'ing moment I can remember from any game.

Descent belongs on that list

[Anonymous Coward]

Descent belongs either next to or in place of quake1, since it brought full 3D to the table first out of all the shooters out there (doom was still doing 2.5D at the time).

Re:Descent belongs on that list

[dcam]

Excellent point.

Descent was a real innovator. It was also the first game that made me want to throw up from motion sickness.

Re:Yawn......

[LordNimon]

Wrong again, sorry! Xbox multiplayer uses Xbox Live, which is not compatible with PCs, so I'll only be playing against other Xbox players.

Actually MS did buy it.

[gumpish]

Nitpick: it's Bungie, not Bungee.

Secondly, Microsoft DID buy it. Because they bought Bungie. Or more specifically, Alex Seropian and Jason Jones sold Bungie out, and now as a result we have lackluster PC ports of XBox games instead of what Could Have Been.

Way to feed the 800-lb gorilla, Bungie.

Re:Actually MS did buy it.

[cgenman]

now as a result we have lackluster PC ports of XBox games instead of what Could Have Been.

You mean, moderate success at selling Mac games with no PC ports? That's What Was (tm).

Wait, where's the GTA Bashing?

[Anonymous Coward]

GTA San Andreas got better reviews than Halo, and the control is terrible.

Even great games have issues. But since Halo 2 is associated with Microsoft, the /.ers fixate on whatever negatives there are and jump on the MS-bashing bandwagon.

In the meantime, 99% of the poeple who buy Halo tonight will play it and say the phrase "that's awesome" at least a dozen times in the first 10 minutes.

And then they'll go online, and pretty much everyone will love it, and there will instantly be one of the simplist, largest online FPS communities ever created.

Woah, wait, it's Microsoft. Sorry, it sucks... Go back to bashing it...

the end

[Sv-Manowar]

The end is a shame, leaving you hanging on the though of how the covenant manipulated the first and second games. Hopefully halo 3 will be a xenon launch game

Halo Fanboy Commandments

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Thou shalt have no games before Halo.

2. Thou shalt not utter the name of Halo in vain.

3. Thou shalt not compare Halo games to other FPSes, or even to other Halo games.

---
more to come.....

Halo AI was one of the big factors for me

[madmaxmedia]

Halo is one of the few video games I have actually finished, mainly due to the AI. Granted I don't have that much FPS experience, but Halo is one of the few games where I actually felt like I was fighting a squad of enemies. Each battle feels different and unique. And yes, the game doesn't really shine until you play on the hardest or second-hardest difficulty level. Lower than that, and the enemies feel more like your basic FPS target practice.

Obviously you can play multi-player if you want tough opponents, but multi-player is simply a much different experience than a single-player campaign, you lose most if not all of the immersion and story.

Besides that, it was a very well-polished game with great graphics for a XBox launch title. The game was certainly rushed, but the finished product was very complete considering the circumstances. When Halo was shown for the first time at E3, that demo level (Silent Cartographer?) was in fact the ONLY level they had completed up to that point. And that was a scant 6 months before the game was released! Although I can see how some are a bit jaded with the game (or just flat-out didn't like it), I think to claim that Halo is ALL hype is completely overblown.

Re:Halo AI was one of the big factors for me

[lordperditor]

The AI wasn't that hot dude, for a start the aliens rarely bothered to pursue you if you went through a door! huh!!!

Re:Boring?

[strict3]

perhaps I wasn't clear:
Microsoft is buying Apple computers that contain G5s and customizing them.

I know IBM/Motorlla is the producer/developer of these chips.

Re:Boring?

[strict3]

No, this is not correct.

Halo was originally being developed for Macs and PCs with the Mac version scheduled to be released first.

Development for both was being done on Windows PCs. Sorry if you believe otherwise, but you're incorrect. The coding was being done on PCs.
The art/media, however, was being created on Macs.

If you don't believe me, you can read it directly from Bungie.

You'll be pleased to know that Halo's development originally commenced on the PC because the 3D stuff on the Mac wasn't up to par at the time.

Then MS threw tons of cash at Bungie and they sold out and Halo became a Xbox game (and laster a PC game). I feel it was a smart move on Bungie's part, even though I did send an email to bungie at the time chastising them for selling out.

Ehh

[slasher guy]

I have played quite a bit of Half-life and Unreal tournament, and I still like Halo best. Half life single player is decent, but the enemy's are stupid, and I don't think multiplayer is generely counted as a big part of it (if it is, it sucks). Unreal tournement I have also played, and although there are vehicles, and more players, and tons of other stuff, it's just not as fun as halo is.
That's just my opinion, and some may prefer PC gaming.

Isn't it funny how sometimes you read half of the comments, than someone comes up with something, than the next 20 people say exacly the same thing (while it's not been mentioned before? I suppose all slashdotters think alike, at the same time.

Re:And? The real console FPS is coming out later

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, this AC's post sounds oddly like the parent's...

Not that I can see. Did you have a point, or were you just enjoying the look of your own words?

I still thought the control scheme sucked ass.

For what reason(s)?

Two words...

[dstyle5]

Blood Gulch!

I've played maybe 5 minutes of Halo's single player missions, but I've played many, many hours of the multiplayer mode with friends. The most popular map with our group was Blood Gulch, playing CTF. Yes, I play PC shooters and prefer them to console shooters (damn console auto aim: someone shooting you will a pistol from 100 ft away gets annoying fast), but Halo's multiplayer is alot of fun.

Playing Halo with a group of friends is what sold millions of copys of Halo, and since Halo 2 is online in addition to the 4-16 multiplayer lan possibilities, it will probably sell more copies than Halo.

Re:Boring?

[PhoenixFlare]

The only decent FPS for a console system is Metroid Prime. Unfortunately, even that suffered from console controller syndrome.

Metroid Prime is not and never was meant to be an FPS. If you tried to play it as a twitchy run-and-gun shooter, then you missed the point entirely.

The focus is much more on exploring and gathering information than on simply blasting everything in sight, much like the other games in the series.

Re:Boring?

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

You know what I want to see?

Halo's story and multiplayer as a d20 (D&D-style) game, maybe something like KOTOR except with just one character.

Re:Boring?

[falcon5768]

I would be warry to trust stuff from Microsoft when a lot of magazines from that time period say otherwise.

"loop-de-loops"?

[griff199]

The Banshee, the Covenant's hang-glider-style flying vehicle, can now perform barrel rolls and loop-de-loops, and it also has an afterburner-style boost.

It also has the ability to make a professional game reviewer sound totally fucking gay!

Some people like more of the same...

[blahplusplus]

Just remember how easily entertained you were when you were younger, lots of games that we treasured in our youth look like (and play like) utter crap today. Lets not get myopic.

Some people are easily entertained especially young people and people who like more of the same.

Halo 2 doesn't work, despite other games working

[Stochio]

All of my other games work on my x box. Halo 2 does not. Great. Fucking great.

xgamerslounge.com been playing since Saturday

[SilkBD]

XGamersLounge.com has had Halo 2 since Saturday. God damn it's fun.

www.xgamerslounge.com

bf1942 sucked?

[Laetor]

Wow, you'll have to explain that one to me. That game bit into my LAN crew and would not let go for over a year. We had more LAN parties dedicated to that specific game than any other game before or since...

Bungie has done it again, allight

[Intrinsic]

Again? What have they dont again? delivered a completely different gamming experince that was expected after microsoft bought bungie?

To me its just another borning consle arcade shooter with no innovation beyond looks.

Re:Bungie has done it again, allight

[Intrinsic]

Ack, sorry for the spelling errors.

Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.NOT!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok Seriously I totally agree with the fact that Halo does get boring after the first 3 or 4 missions but i usually just play halo with my friends because it has a much better multiplayer layout then the actuall missions. So You are actually just over looking the awesome multiplayer combat, Or did you Forget that?

For Comments or discussion E-mail me at ZachTrump18@hotmail.com.

Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.NOT!!!!!

[cbreaker]

Multiplayer in Halo is okay. I've played many 16 player games - and I've been fortunate to sit at the 63" TV for a lot of it.

It's fun, for sure. But it's not more fun then UT. Bombing run is awesome.

It's a different kind of Multiplayer - you have two or more friends sitting next to each other or near each other (with multiple xboxes) and there's no computer problems, TCP/IP problems, lockups, etc..

In a "lan party" you have all these computers that take a long time to set up, there's always at least one dude with technical problems, etc.

Besides the inherent ease of setup, I still don't see how it's any better then any other game. It's a good game, there's no doubt about that, but that's all it is - good.

Re:Boring?

[aBlooMoon]

Agreed. It isn't a standard FPS. But it's still a First Person game where you shoot a lot, albiet not quite as much in something like Halo. It's uniqueness in the genre is what makes it great.

Re:Boring?

[strict3]

That's bungie.net - a site that always has been, to this very day, controlled by internal Bungie employees.

The fact remains: when they were developing Halo originally, the current Mac 3D hardware available was absolute crap. They started on PCs with that knowledge that Apple would (hopefully) catch up.