Slashdot Mirror
Halo 2 Sells 5 Million Units
A witty GameIndustry.biz writer: "Avid gamers clock up 28 million hours shooting each other in the face on Live". They have word that Halo 2 has surpassed 5 million units sold through. The sequel beat the record achieved by the original game, which took 2 years to achieve.
I'm not at all surprised. I don't know anyone who has an Xbox and wasn't psyched about getting this game. I was psyched as well, but now I can't stop playing World of Warcraft.
My blog
From what I've read previouslu, Halo 2 outsold the entire run of Halo 1 in the first day of sales.
28 million hours spent (that's just the online play). we are young and able-bodied and intelligent. what are our capabilities? this doesn't make sense. i was raised with video games; they are fun. but this just doesn't make sense. what could we accomplish?
I've had it since it came out and still haven't played it on Live yet. Then again, I haven't finished the campaign...
(Sponsored by cheeseSource for President 2012)
actually, yeah. one of my brothers lives with me, the other doesn't; they both have xboxs. all they ever played before halo2 was halo1. if they bought a new game, they would play it for like 2 days and go back to halo1...wowzers.
But how can anyone play a first person shooter on a gamepad? Absolute motion axis suck for aiming. Anyone who says otherwise is a console system apologist, and in denial.
EVERYONE sucks the same, though.
With PC FPS, you have the weenies who do nothing but play FPS games, and who can pick a pixel in the blink of an eye. They're simply not fun to play against -- nor fun to play as when your friends aren't.
Halo is great for multiplayer, because you sit there and game and no ammonut of practice with the game makes you wholly incapable of being beaten by you friend on the counch next to you.
"But how can anyone play a first person shooter on a gamepad? "
There are 5 million people out there that'd be happy to answer your question. Besides, the playing field is level. Everybody uses it because a mouse isn't available.
"Derp de derp."
Microsoft acquires license to print money.
http://www.kubuntu.org/
"It took the first one two years because it sucked."
Uh, I don't know about you, but I don't think Halo sucked at all. It added ton of features that influenced FPSes for years to come:
* First game to incorporate lifelike, accurate AI in open battle scenes. Half-Life accomplished this in tight spaces, but most routines involved paths with very tight corners. They've evolved it even further in Halo 2: watch as AI takes cover under the boxes you just blasted.
* First game to include a bevy of pixel shaders correctly. Yes, the corridors were repetitive, but they sure looked purty.
* First game to get console FPS controls perfectly. Goldeneye came in a close second, and would've worked if you weren't using button for moving the sight up and down. Every console FPS I've seen since Halo (besides Metroid) has its controls.
In addition to that I'd add that I find it EASIER to play with a game controller than with a keyboard and mouse. And I have used keyboards and mice for almost 20 years (since the Atari ST/Amiga days). Maybe if the grandparent poster would remove his clawed hand from his 2 button mouse (or cock as the case may be) and try something different for once he would see that there is more than one way to play a game or use a computer.
Halo is great for multiplayer, because you sit there and game and no ammonut of practice with the game makes you wholly incapable of being beaten by you friend on the counch next to you.
This is not true. While the perfect precision is not given to anyone, those with practice can actually get it within a decent amount. When my ex-roommate convinced me to play perfect dark with him, he could aim just fine, it took me 3 hours just to figure out how to point in the general direction.
With the mouse, most people can point it in the general direction. I guess you could chuck it up to everyone has a decent amount of practice with the mouse.
So as far as I can tell, it does not level the field at all, it just makes it equally frustrating for everyone.
Worse, it is less ergonomic, at least for me. My fingers and wrists hurt after only half an hour of (joystick based) gamepad use. I have to quit just as I am getting started.
badness 10000
That means there would be 5 million people a whole lot happier if the mouse were to become available.
These people play because this is the only way they can play the game.
To me it is a killer. I do not have dexterity to hold the controller, and be very precise with a thumb.
Controller -- good for certain things. Sucks for most. The day it is not the primary input on the console is the day I will consider buying one.
badness 10000
I'm no literary genius, but I'm pretty sure that pounding nails/dick thing might have been hyperbole. Just a bit. Tycho has said many times that he and his crew played the shit out of Halo multiplayer.
It's true that Halo sold a lot of copies simply because there wasn't much better, but that does not mean it wasn't a good game. No, it is not the greatest game of all time as some would have you believe, but it is a very solid shooter with a nice coop-mode single player and excellent multiplayer.
You admit you don't have the dexterity to hold a controller, but you wrongly assume that no one else does either. You assume that because your thumb is a worthless appendage only useful for stuffing in your ass, that everyone else has equally worthless thumbs.
Welcome to the real world: We're not all the same. It is proven that the youth of today have greater dexterity in their thumbs, specifically from cell phone SMS and video games. Watch them tap out messages furiously with their thumbs. Watch them run circles around and kill older generations of console gamers in FPS like Halo 2.
It took the first one two years because it sucked.
Your personal opinion is not the same as fact. Given that quite a few people don`t think that Halo sucked.
If you want repetition in gameplay maybe you want to take a look at Doom3. Ooh look another room.... ooh the lights have gone out... oooh zombies... rinse and repeat
CJC
World of Warcraft just sold a record number of units in their first day. Halo 2, Half-Life 2, and Doom 3 have all just hit the store shelves. With so many awesome games out there that people are buying so often I wonder if this is a sign of people being otherwise discomforted by life.
Is there any historical evidence showing leisure activities blossom when so much else in the world seems to be in disarray?
Direct away from face when opening.
The Halo 2 DVD has been the greatest game to rest my drink on since Halo 1.
Sure. But will bet that even a lower skilled person such as I can outtype anyone trying to type on their cellphone. That stands even if my thumb is only good enough to be stuck up my ass, or to press a single key (spacebar) on the keyboard. The crappy keyboard on cell phones is required for portability. No such requirement on the xbox, but they did it anyway.
So if you feel that what you use is always superior to what I use, please, by all means, replace your keyboard with something the size of a dollar bill. Maybe then you will not be able to make a post in time for me to care to read it.
Some technology is just plain inferior. I do not encourage it.
badness 10000
2 thoughts:
-a mouse becomes like a puppet, turn your wrist-head left, and your puppet turns left. HIGH potential for intuitiveness after an initial comfort-level is met. most people's problem with pc 1stp's are with using the KEYBOARD.
-an analog stick is bound in it's maximum rotation, creating a paradox between speed and precision. a mouse (esp optical) has no reasonable bounds on the distance or speed you move it.
you forget how easy it is to create an account on counter strike. On halo2 you need a whole new xbox live account which is paid for. AND counter strikes online play is a free service. All you have to do is buy the game, which runs about 20 bucks now anyway. But even at that, you can go to any internet cafe and set it up with such ease.
If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
I seem to remember games BEFORE Halo 1 that had those features, and not to mention better executed.
Come now, if Halo 1 was so influential, it would have made far more of an effect than being one of the few XBOX games worth playing.
BTW, the corridors weren't repetitve...they were the SAME. The game was never finished.
As for the controls, they aren't perfect. If they were, computer FPS makers would be scrambling to get rid of mice and keyboards and putting an XBOX like controller for computers to have those "perfect" controls.
Doom 3 had far more originality than Halo 1. And at least the rooms in the 2nd half weren't the same rooms in the half of the game due to a lack of finishing the game itself.
Attendance at the roman collusium was at its peak right before the fall of the empire.
Gotta disagree with that one. I live in a fraternity house, and we have 4 TVs hooked up with Halo/Halo II with multiplayer. There are three or four people that consistently are on top - just like any small group of PC gamers (I used to LAN party pretty often, too). I think it's just what you're used to - these people started FPSes on console, and they can get damned good at it. They think PC control sucks. Me, on the other hand, started gaming with Doom II and still can't get the hang of dual joysticks on modern consoles. The level of skill between the masters of the two platforms is the same, though; they can achieve the same amount of precision that any PC gamer can with a mouse/keyboard, from what I see (and I play them 10 hours a week or so).
I would suggest that whenever someone starts slinging the word "suck" around, they are probably talking about their opinion, not scientifically proven facts.
Indeed. And that why, despite being deeply tempted by the gorgeous graphics I don't own a copy of Doom 3; by all accounts it's repetitive, boring, and (ultimately) sucks.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
While lots of people buy games for features, features don't necessarily mean fun. Halo might be a noteworthy step forward in FPSers, but it doesn't mean it doesn't suck.
As to the specific features; the AI was interesting, but didn't do anything for me. I certainly felt more challenged by the grossly unbalanced power lavels ("let's empty multiple assault rifle clips into a single mid-grade bad-guy"), than super-clever AI. It may be an important milestone, but it didn't make the game fun for me.
The graphics were quite nice. The graphics are also quite nice in Doom 3, but similarlly repetative. Ultimately it's not the technology; it's how you use it. I find World of Warcraft way more fun to look at than EverQuest 2, but EQ2 has the technically superior graphics engine. Doom 3 has a stunning lighting model, but fails to be as creepy and compelling as parts of Half-Life 2.
As to the controls, they weren't some brand new thing. I'd been using identical or effectively identical controls in other console FPSes before the X-Box was released. What Halo got right was more subtle; I can't even put my finger on it. Halo felt right, while I was certainly slower than a mouse, I didn't feel gimpy like I do in every other console FPS. They balanced something about the inputs just right and they deserve recognition for that.
Mind you, I hold nothing against Halo 2; the game looks really good and has lots of cool ideas. It may be good enough to sell me my very own X-Box.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
Well put. Thanks.
badness 10000
Arent ALL games about repetition?
I'm sorry this is a tired argument to begin with. Games haven't ben repetitive since they were only 30 -45 minutes long.
"Controller -- good for certain things. Sucks for most. The day it is not the primary input on the console is the day I will consider buying one."
I never meant to say it was better. Simply that it wasn't as bad as he was making it sound.
You might consider a Nintendo DS. This may sound funny to hear, but its stylus actually is pretty good for FPS shooters. I was extremely skeptical about that until I played Metroid on it.
Maybe not your cup of tea, but Nintendo (and the company that made Metroid) really got that right.
"Derp de derp."
I'm no apologist, nor in denial. I couldn't care less which system "wins" these console wars. That said, I have a Logitech wireless controller for my Xbox and, after taking the time to learn it, actually prefer it to the mouse and keyboard. The word "controller" is apt; holding the controlling device in your hands offers a tactile sense of balance and physicality. It's an instrument and, once you learn to play it, has its own distinctive feel. IMO, the mouse and keyboard isn't better; it's just different. I've played Quake, Unreal, etc. on a PC for years and, although the mouse is great, a keyboard is often awkward and distinctly unergonomic. Unreal and Counter-Strike, etc. play better with mouse and keyboard, but Halo2 and Splinter Cell play better gripping an Xbox controller. It'll be interesting to see how Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 play on the Box. When I play the original Halo on my PC, using the mouse and keyboard, I find myself missing, not only the use of my thumbs, but the center of gravity of the controller.
FF7 was redeemed by its storying telling. It also had exceptional FMVs for the time. But FF7 took a long time to move millions of units because there were so many flaws. It only did as well as it did at first because there were no other real options. Later on the 'first time playing an RPG' feeling became popular.
Everytime a Slashdot story goes up about a console FPS, it's always the same control scheme thing. No, a pad isn't as precise as a mouse, but it doesn't really matter, since it's still possible to get a perfect headshot in Halo 2 with a sniper rifle when someone's jumping down off a tower at you. I've done it several times, and it's not at all hard.
Same thing does for Rainbow Six 3 on the Xbox, when even if you're running (which takes the auto-aim away, it's still possible to quickly turn and get a headshot halfway across the map if you're even halfway decent at the game. It's still analog control, and you get used to it to the point that you know exactly how much pressure to apply, and in what direction, in order to exactly hit your mark.
Some people aim just as well (or well enough, anyway) with their thumbs as other do with their whole forearm and wrist. Personally, I don't like the KB/M control scheme at all, whether it's technically better or not. But I know that's just my opinion.
Hmmm. Makes me wonder if I should try to use a Wacom tablet for UT2004.
*thinking*
Eraser for secondary fire, tap for shoot.
*shudder*
Maybe not.
badness 10000
I, for one, would refuse the option of KB/M if it was presented to me on a console. First of all, because I don't like playing that way, and second of all, because I'd have to create some ridiculous setup in order to be able to play while sitting on the couch, which is one of the major differences between consoles and pcs anyway. I had enough of that keyboard crap with the Sega Dreamcast's online system, thank you very much.
"Hmmm. Makes me wonder if I should try to use a Wacom tablet for UT2004."
Heh. You're talking to somebody who uses a Wacom tablet for a living. I promise, the DS isn't anything like that or a touchpad for a laptop. I'm not kidding, I had *serious* doubts about doing that with the DS. But they did it and it actually works. It's not quite up to mouse, but it's really pretty darned close.
Btw, I didn't use a stylus. Thumb was sufficient, and my aim was quite accurate.
"Derp de derp."
The thing that you don't really notice is cool and original about Halo 2 until it's pointed out to you: The fact that your teamate AI's actually have conversations with eachother, while you're playing, and even coordinate attacks with eachother.
*The level of skill between the masters of the two platforms is the same, though; they can achieve the same amount of precision that any PC gamer can with a mouse/keyboard, from what I see (and I play them 10 hours a week or so).*
that's not really true(that you would get on par with mouse performance with dual sticks), or do you see _ANYONE_ playing counter strike in tournaments with dualstick pads with any success vs. kb+mouse? head-to-head the dualstick loses.
maybe some analog wasd device + mouse would be the almost perfect controller(mouse is better for aiming / turning as you can make those big moves _fast_ and still have precision enough for single pixel sniping, the sticks don't have that kind of precision variance, and if they were really insanely precise so that you could turn on spot in an instant if you wanted, then your thumb certainly wouldn't have the precision).
besides, with most games it burns down to tactics pretty quick anyways(knowing the map and usual routes other people take getting more useful in gaining points than just pure trigger fingering). people pick up these tactics even without thinking about it if they just keep playing enough(and some of them apply to every game in the genre).
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
That was the default control setup. You can set it so the analog stick aims and the C buttons move forward/back/strafe. There were even double controller setups (one in each hand) to use. Works just fine for console FPS.
Of course the worst way to play a FPS is by using a Playstation controller. The analog sticks on those are too damn insensitive.
Worse, it is less ergonomic, at least for me. My fingers and wrists hurt after only half an hour of (joystick based) gamepad use. I have to quit just as I am getting started.
You must be doing something wrong here. Most people can play on pads for hours. Anyone playing FPSs on Keyb/Mouse for the same amount of time is doing himself a lot of damage, due to the less natural position.
Less precision in shooting is a good thing. I hate being fragged from a mile away. I love the gunshots and rocket launcher fights that involve tight spaces.
Also, it is a matter of numbers. 5 million of peoples are happy playing with dual sticks, in their couch in front of a (probably) very big TV.
How many people are playing CS, on a chair, in front of a small monitor with KB/M? less than that.
--
Wiki de Ciencia Ficcion y Fantasia
halo 2 and doom 3 were piles of ass, hl2 is where it's at.
For years, I played multiplayer Quake and Unreal. Yeah, Counter Strike, too. Those games are fast, addictive and exhilerating. But the original HALO has a pace and a feel all its own. The people at Bungie are good storytellers. As McKee, the author of "Story," might put it: they are the god of their universe. It is a uniquely powerful one. It took me two years to beat HALO on Legendary and I grew to love it. Still love it. HALO 2, glitches and all, is equally compelling. A great gaming experience is as much about ideas as it is about action. I want my FPS in a convincing world with an intelligent story, not just run and gun.
I also prefer pulling triggers over tapping keys. It's a more visceral experience that is better suited to the FPS.
stupid 1-button touchpad on apple laptops.....
It does get annoying sometimes, but for normal use, I right click about once every hundred to thousand left clicks. You can Ctrl-click to get the same effect as a right-click. And if you're playing games, you're better off getting a mouse; USB mice with a right button work well with the Mac.
But how can anyone play a first person shooter on a gamepad? Absolute motion axis suck for aiming. Anyone who says otherwise is a console system apologist, and in denial.
It is harder to hit a specific target. However, I'll offer these two counterarguments: 1) the screen, not the reticle changes as you move the mouse, so your brain works more like "keep scrolling...stop", as with a gamepad, than "move to there" as with a normal mouse cursor, and 2) derivative joysticks are a lot better for panning at a constant rate or quickly moving than carefully sliding your mouse or picking it up every time it runs past the edge of your desk.
Besides, how do you use keys for walking? It makes it hard to vary the rate at which you walk. Especially on Halo, there's a value to walking slowly such that you don't show up on the motion sensor, and changing walking speed can be useful for confusing people to snipe ahead.
And the buttons are better; dual-wielding is almost subconscious due to good use of the button layout, and having two joysticks of the same kind allow you to correlate your walking and your moving.
I've played using both, and I see them both as equal in strengths and weaknesses. Position controls have as many drawbacks as velocity controls.
I have 'trained' a fair number of people to play Halo. And anytime someone was completely lost, and couldn't control it at all, the problem was usually solved by inverting (or normalizing) the control scheme.
I play 'inverted' and whenever I am stuck playing 'normal', I get that lost feeling you mentioned, and I can't do anything. It is disorienting, and frustrating.
Switch to inverted, and it all suddenly makes sense to me.
The same happens with other people that come over- they may play two games using one setting, but if I see they are not doing too well (staring into the sky a lot is common) I switch them over, and 90% of the time the are instantly re-oriented, and ready to go.
I will say that there was ONE guy who I tried to teach how to play Halo, who just could NOT figure it out. It was quite laughable...then we switched to his other game- NFL2K5...and it took me 10 minutes to convince him that there ARE plays other than a quarter-back sneak. So quite possibly, he was just game challenged.
No reason to lie.
Besides, how do you use keys for walking? It makes it hard to vary the rate at which you walk. Especially on Halo, there's a value to walking slowly such that you don't show up on the motion sensor, and changing walking speed can be useful for confusing people to snipe ahead.
This is the best point I have seen yet. No rebuttal.
badness 10000
I don't know about the other million+ people on Live...but I just set up my Live account one time, about two years ago.
Now, anytime I buy a Live-enabled game, I can throw it in my Xbox, and my account is already set up. The system knows who I am...etc. etc. etc.
No reason to lie.
Makes sense. However, since I have played a lot of flight sims, I know what inversion feels like. It is not that. In fact I usually invert, due to my flight sim experience.
My problem is that I constantly bump the stick and do not return it to the middle completely.
badness 10000
For the record, at this particular moment in time, 12:15 EST on a Friday night, here are teh stats from both major contenders...
Number of people playing Halo 2: 91,837
(source: Bungie.net statistics)
Number of people playing Counter Strike: 77,405
(source: Steampowered.com statistucs)
I was actually quite surprised. I thought that CS players would outnumber Halo 2 players. However, if you take into account the other two versions of Counterstrike (CZ and Source), that adds about 30K extra players, putting it ahead of Halo 2.
Casual Halo 2 and Counter-strike player here. I take no sides.
I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
Halo 2's what, a month old, less? How old is CS?
I agree about the analog sticks being insensitive. They made an antisemetic joke and offended me greatly!
You just invalidated your point. The PA crew did play the shit out of multiplayer, but as the parent post stated, they didn't like the single player campaign. Hyperbole or not, they didn't even enjoy the co-op campaign (which is the point of the comic).
My biggest beef with all the fanboyism and rave reviews about Halo, and now Halo 2 is that they're almost always entirely based upon multiplayer. There are a few people now and again that claim to love the single player campaign, and that's fine, and there are also those people that openly admit they only play games for the multiplayer aspect, and that's fine as well, but all of the hype around the Halo series is WAY out of hand.
This game is hyped as being the best ever, but a title only deserves that moniker if all aspects of it's execution are pulled off flawlessly, and both Halos are not flawless.
On a side note, what about the other huge game release of the season: GTA:SA? I read that first WEEK sales were expected to top 5 million. Why do we hear constant updates on Halo's progress, but nothing about the competition. I find it odd that the Halo series, having sold 10 million copies in two years is somehow trumpeted as proof that videogames have come into their own, while the first two GTAs have sold more than twice that, with only one extra year, and no data on San Andreas's sales, and the only thing that series gets is shit from all sides about objectionable content.
I think theres a bit of a generation gap. Most experienced gamers have played the shit out of FPS on the PC, and the last 4-5 years thats pretty much the only Genre that keeps coming out with games frequently that are for the PC.
I think console gamers and newer less experienced gamers in general have played less games then hardcore gamers period (in the library of games they have previously played). And this is really why you have yuppies thinking Halo 2 is the greatest thing "evar!!" it's not. It simply copies what has existed since the Doom and quake days with slight refinements, it does not play "radically differently" then any other game, you can have just as much fun in Serious Sam or SS 2nd encounter then you can in halo. The AI may be good but even if the AI was dumb as shit Halo would still get glowing reviews and still have millions of drooling idiots claiming its the best thing ever.
The thing halo has is Master Chief and the fact that they nailed the feel of the universe and style of aliens well enough to make the game universe appealling.
If you replaced all the graphics in halo with placeholder art I doubt halo 2 would get such glowing reviews. The halo experience is really about the small things they layer to the game that adds up to an overall experience on top of the graphics. They got things like the cpu controlled team mates right and the fact you feel they aren't just mindless dolls. They keep the pacing of the game going by having the recharging shield so you dont have to run around to find health and theres usually always plenty of ammo because you can pick up alien weapons and use them against your enemy.
It's nothing revolutionary they just limit your guy and force you to make decisions. You can't carry 10 guns at once and pull them out of your ass you can only carry two.
I still think its because most console gamers this generation have never been exposed to a lot of great FPS and thats why you see Halo selling so well.
I'd just like to mention that Microsoft has just consumed the entire lives of approximately 45 people with this statistic.
We are doomed as a species.
Like a lot of your complaints, it seems like you don't know how to play Halo very well. No harm in that, but it does nullify some of your points.
The Assault Rifle is a piece of junk against targets like the Elite (though it is very useful against some later enemies) - the Covenant are most vulnerable to Covenant weapons, which is what you were 'supposed' to use. The power levels aren't unbalanced (though the odds are certainly against you) - you chose the wrong tool for that situation.
Because of this I assume you didn't play the Legendary difficulty level, which is where you really see the AI at work. It really almost turns into a different game as the difficulty ramps up.
That balance you are talking about is the control innovation the original poster was talking about. Among other subtle things, Halo slows down your aiming speed when the reticle is over an enemy. That is what modern console FPS games are copying now.
Through its refinement, Halo also showed the world the 'correct way' to set up the controls, so it became the standard even if it wasn't the first use of such controls. That counts as an innovation, too, IMO. (And I would argue some of its elements were new - not a lot of games had a dedicated grenade or melee button before Halo!)
Regardless of specifics, new features in a game usually aren't widely copied unless the game is fun enough to notice and show these off. That is the case with Halo1: imperfect as it may be, it doesn't suck. Not even remotely. The game was fun for a lot of people, and to insist otherwise is just nonsense. A game doesn't get to be as loved as Halo1 is by millions of people if it isn't fun to them. It just didn't click with you (maybe because you didn't know how to play well - but that could just be the result).
There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
No, I think there just haven't been any Big Hyped Games(TM) to get excited about in the past two years. Halo 2, Half-Life 2, Doom 3, and, to an extent, GTA:SA have been eagerly expected for years. Last holiday season we had some good games that came out, but these are not only Big Hyped Games(TM) but Sequels to Big Hyped Games(TM). And, believe it or not, gaming is still such an absolute microcosm, and gamers are generally so young that they're not really interested in politics (see: youth vote 2004), that I don't think that theory really holds water.
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
The XBox is a great system, but one reason Halo 2 has sold so many copies is because there is not any other good games out for the system. I can say this because I own an XBox along with every other system and I barely have 4 games for it. I've bought several multi platform games in the near past, but they never seem to make an XBox version. Unfortunatly, since I do own all the systems, Halo 2 doesn't have enough appeal for me to purchase it. Games like Ninja Gaiden and HL2 do, though.
I have one: crouch.
You walk slower, and are even harder to snipe.
However, the point is still valid in that it's a stop-slow-fast system, rather than truly analog...
I believe the Halo 2 stats are for the last 24 hours combined while the Steam statistics are for the exact time it was recorded. I might be wrong though.
Yeah, just last night I was playing one of the arbitier levels, and I was pinned down by a bunch of brutes with grenade launchers and jackals with sniper weapons.
There was another elite with me, and a grunt.
The grunt was pretty much hiding behind a box and doing nothing (as usual)... The other elite turned around to the grunt and said "Get out there and fight or I'll shoot you myself"
And he did!
Its the little touches like this that make Halo 2 the best FPS I've ever played.
I used to play a lot of FPS on the pc, and using mouse and kb definitely allows for more pinpoint accuracy, no doubt.
But once you get used to the controller, I think it makes for a much more immersive experience. When you're using a mouse/kb, you still have to think about what you're doing, but using the controller becomse completely automatic after a while.
And I've never had any complaints about the xbox controller, yes the first version was a little large but I've got two of the smaller ones and I find them far more comfortable than the pc2 controller.
I'm confused, how can you not have enough dexterity to use a controller, but be fine with a mouse/keyboard? In my experience, my fingers are more dextrous than my arms, though that may just be me...
First of all, when you use the controllers joysticks (which is all I am referring to) you only use your thumbs (at least in the controllers that I have used). My thumbs do not have much coordination.
It is much easier to hit a certain key with 4 fingers (all keys are within reach), then it is for me to move the joystick left a third of its complete motion. As for the mouse -- the motions are fairly large so precision is not as much of a requirement.
But as the other people have moved on to, this is really a debate of whether an FPS should be controlled via rate of movement, or the point here method.
badness 10000
Also to take into consideration the number of people playing H2 that are not on Live. I'd wager there are more, at any given moment, playing single player campaign than are on Live. How many are playing CS single player now?
"I certainly felt more challenged by the grossly unbalanced power lavels ("let's empty multiple assault rifle clips into a single mid-grade bad-guy"),"
So I guess it took you a while to figure out there were specific weapon combinations which required a bit more forethought when going into an area than "hey I need to make sure I've got my rifle full"? I know of no Halo1 enemy that takes more than 3 shots max to kill *on Heroic*, depending on weaponry. It's being able to know what you need for the situation that gives the game it's extreme balance.
I have Halo 2 and Metroid Prime 2: Echoes. IMO, Metroid Prime 2 is a far superior game.
It has excellent atmosphere, puzzles, level design, enemy AI, bosses, story, and an improved scanning system (color-coded now).
Don't get me wrong. Halo and Halo 2 are very good. However, Metroid belongs in the "masterpiece" category.
Well, there's me for a start. I was actually more psyched about Star Wars: Battlefront than Halo 2. Why? Because I'd played the original both in single and multiplayer, and been disappointed by the weak single player game that had you exploring the same room over and over again as of the Forerunner Complex levels. But I was actually pleasantly surprised by Halo 2's level design. It's a step up from the original in that the repetitive level design has gone out of the window, and while some areas look vaguely similar, there's none of the potato print levels seen in Halo. Where I did feel Halo 2 let me down was in the bait and switch pulled regards the game's location. The trailers seen so far, and the ads and so forth, all indicated the game would take place on Earth. Yet only the first few levels take place on Earth and then you're off to another world. Multiplayer in Halo 2 is fun if you have Live - but if you can only play on a single box you're not getting the most out of it. AI controlled bots would have been a blast, but for reasons as yet unknown Bungie left those out. So as it stands, Halo 2's a good game, but it's not the mind-blowing experience you'd think from the hype.
"(And I would argue some of its elements were new - not a lot of games had a dedicated grenade or melee button before Halo!)" Very true! I've played many FPS's(mostly PC) and I havent played one game besides Halo that grenades and Melee was actually useful.
#####Free and Open Source Game Directory#####