Bungie Vs. Miyamoto - Fight!

Last week Gamehead's Geoff Keighley interviewed Shigeru Miyamoto, and the well-known designer tossed off a mildly controversial comment. Keighley asked him if he felt as though he was losing touch with the American audience as a result of the popularity of games like Halo. GameDaily reports on Miyamoto's response: "I could make Halo. It's not that I couldn't design that game. It's just that I choose not to. One thing about my game design is that I never try to look for what people want and then try to make that game design. I always try to create new experiences that are fun to play." Bungie took exception to that, and Frank Connor retorted in his interview with Joystiq: "Yeah, well. I just want to go on the record and say that Bungie is hard at work on a side-scrolling platform game featuring some plumbers -- I'm not going to say what their ethnicity is, it's none of anyone's business -- but we took that as a gauntlet, a sort of glove slap, and we're going to respond in 2D scrolling style. That's all I'm saying." We discussed that article, along with several other pieces of Halo 3 coverage, this past Saturday.

Comments

Well...

[j0nkatz]

This this story is about trolling let me be the first to say HI!

Re:Well...

[Detaer]

Good thing Square wasn't mentioned, with their tight dev schedule it would be a shame for them to make anything but over inflated graphics demos you sort of "lead" through combat. /troll

Re:Well...

[teflaime]

This this story is about trolling let me be the first to say HI!

It's Hai!

Re:Well...

[ranjix]

ok, since we are trolling here, let me tell you that the translation was a poor one. He originally said "I could make Duke Nukem Forever" but for some reason things here always get a microsoft spin..

Re:Well...

[nacturation]

And let me jump right in the middle of this and just say that Miyamoto wins.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

mmm...

not really...
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&wo rd1=Halo&word2=Miyamoto

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

again.. Compare apples to fucking apples.

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&wo rd1=Halo&word2=Zelda

Or would you rather see Master Chief vs Link?

The thing is that it's true

[drinkypoo]

Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination. One could have had the same result trivially by starting with any of the common first person shooter engines, and working from there. The fact that the same is true of Super Mario Brothers, a game made years and years ago (an eternity in video game land) is not even interesting.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo isn't really even new. It's very much a lot like the game Marathon, only with better graphics and physics. In fact if you look at the design of the Master Chief, he bears a striking resemblance to the cy borg you play in Marathon. They even left the words SPNKR on the side of the rocket launcher, another Marathon weapon.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say that Pikmin was pretty original (a modern Miyamoto creation). Not to mention that SMB, much like Donkey Kong, Zelda, and a lot of other Nintendo properties were original when they were created.

Speaking ill of a legend like Miyamoto is not something I would do, and I think the guy at Bungie comes off a little arrogant for doing so.

Disclaimer: The last Nintendo console I bought was an SNES, so I don't think I could be counted as a Nintendo fanboy.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aichpvee]

Halo isn't even particularly good. The multiplayer is rather uninspired, filled with tiny levels, uninteresting weapons, a pitiful player cap, and run-of-the-mill game modes. The single player is simply horrid with some of the most lazy, pedestrian level design ever put in a game that lasted more than a week outside the bargain bin.

The fact that Miyamoto, clearly one of the most inspired game designers to ever live, even bothered to compare his work to theirs should be more than they could ever want. From their game designs they clearly don't deserve that much respect.

Maybe Miyamoto should start up a "hardcore" FPS game, though. Because even if it were the worst game he'd ever designed it'd still mop the floor with anything Bungie has put out this century.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[spocksbrain]

It's true, and the reason Halo has become so widely popular is because it's x-box platform release and simple controls/interface has made it more easily accessable to a larger and more diverse audience than superior (or regarded by critics as such) PC FPS games.

It's a similar situation to the Final Fantasy franchise, more specifically FF 7. While everybody and their sister who grew up in the 90's will swear that FF 7 was the greatest RPG ever made, they probably never even heard of Baulders Gate, Fallout, or NETHACK.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Das Modell]

FF7 is a terrific game, no matter what you compare it to. But yeah, it's not much of an RPG, if you want to compare it with games like BG and Fallout.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[jma05]

OK! Obligatory question. Was Donkey Kong revolutionary?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[arodland]

Actually I suspect that most people who care about RPGs not only have heard of Baldur's Gate, but can actually spell it.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aichpvee]

They never heard of FF6, Chrono Trigger, or just about every other game made by Squaresoft either. The popularity of FF7 is very similar to that of Halo though. Most people who love FF7 had never really played a console RPG (or any RPG for that matter) and for most who love Halo it was similarly their first FPS. Of course there's probably the same argument out there ready to be made about all of us who don't think that highly of those games, but obviously I'm going to disagree.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[OECD]

They even left the words SPNKR on the side of the rocket launcher...

Added them, actually. The graphics weren't good enough to show it in the original Marathon. It was shown in the accompanying booklet, IIRC.

That said, I would totally love to see a Halo done side-scrolling style. That could be a hoot.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[C0rinthian]

*cough* Metroid? *cough*

But seriously, Bungie does make very good games. The Marathon series is proof, and laid the groundwork for the likes of Half-Life.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[vertinox]

Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination.

True. Halo isn't a bad game per se, but it isn't very imaginative compared to the FPS coming out these days. When it came out a few years ago, it was quite interesting to a game that used a vehicle system not seen since Tribes.

But these days, we've got games out the wazoo with vehicles and lots of fire power.

However, games like Crysis make me actually want to go out and buy a new computer just to play it while Halo 3 just looks like it is just an upgrade to the prior games.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aichpvee]

Of course not, have you never played it? Mario goes UP in it, not around!

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

Different genre. There are really two different RPG genres out there and they have almost COMPLETELY different fanbases. Trying to compare the two is really absurred. I'm not particularly defending FF7 here (I think it's highly overrated, myself... although I am a fan of the rest of the series).

Where you might say, "Think FF7 is a real RPG? Try playing Baulder's Gate or Nethack", I might say, "Think FF7 is a real RPG? Try playing Tales of the Abyss or Ar Tonelico". Seriously, we're talking apple's and oranges here.

East vs. West, Console vs. PC, RPG vs. jRPG... each side takes a different spin on tabletop gaming... jRPGs concentrate on the story element, western RPGs capitalize on non-linearity. Whichever you think works better is up to the audience.

I personally would fall asleep 10 minutes into Baulder's gate. Ar Tonelico might make you do the same.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Aldur42]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_Zero/ Halo zero

Re:The thing is that it's true

[theStorminMormon]

Disclaimer: The last Nintendo console I bought was an SNES, so I don't think I could be counted as a Nintendo fanboy.

Well you could just be looking at the question through the lens of nostalgia.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

Miyamoto has never had any dealings with Metroid... original series or Prime.

And seriously, MP is NOT a first person shooter. It may technically fit the bill, but that's only a technicality. The types of skills it requires and the fanbase are nothing like Halo or Counterstrike. It's basically a sci-fi Zelda where the camera happens to be first person... One look at the tastes of its fanbase will cue you in.

Here's a clue, if something's commonly called "the first-person shooter for people who hate first-person shooters". And people who love FPSs hate the game... then maybe it really ain't a first person shooter at all, it just looks like one.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Bob-taro]

Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination.

Not the graphics, or story, or control scheme, but as I understand it the physics engine was pretty advanced. I was following Halo 1 development and one of their mottos was "better gaming through physics". I was very disappointed when Bungie was bought by MS. I didn't play Halo until it came out for the PC and by then it was definitely nothing new. I just can't bring myself to play a FPS with a gamepad. I mean, that's just WRONG!

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aichpvee]

Yeah, I liked Marathon. Not the most original game either, but it had some neat things going on (first with dual wielding, if I'm not mistaken) and was fun. And the first two Myth games (the ones made by Bungie if I'm not mistaken) actually were pretty innovative at the time and were fun to play.

But both of those were made a long time ago, definitely not this century. Now all Bungie makes as Halo, which I don't find to be a particularly good game. It's decent, maybe even a whole half-step up from mediocre, but that's about it. I'd say 5.4, tops. As a purely co-op game it does a lot better, though, since there is sadly just about no competition on that level.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[revlayle]

Wrong: Miyamoto was a design consultant and sort of a long distance project director on behalf of Nintendo to monitor the design and development of Metroid Prime (at least the first game). In fact is, I think Miyamoto was the one that told retro to make the game first-person instead of third-person which caused some amount of the development, up to that time, to be scrapped.

A couple other Nintendo people helped with the game design also, not just Miyamoto, including the original designer, Yoshio Sakamoto.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[theStorminMormon]

East vs. West, Console vs. PC, RPG vs. jRPG... each side takes a different spin on tabletop gaming... jRPGs concentrate on the story element, western RPGs capitalize on non-linearity. Whichever you think works better is up to the audience.

Excellent observation.

And for what it's worth, I'd like to point out that popularity is a pretty complex issue. We seem to operate under the assumption that it's some kind of direct relationship to quality or some other simplistic explanation (e.g. like how good the controls are). The modern narrative about popularity when it comes to art is that blockbusters are kind of mundane and inoffensive with enough explosions/sex/(pick your easily reproduced element to look down on) while the *real* talent shows up in indie/niche creations that you have to be intelligent/free-thinking/(pick your vaguely cool counter-cultural trait) enough to really get.

And while I'll agree that Creed and Nickelback basically suck, the Beatles and Pink Floyd were really good. So sometimes the popular stuff really is good, and sometimes the niche stuff really isn't (no example here: not looking for a flamewar).

FWIW, Halo is my favorite game of all time on any system. From NES, Sega, SNES, PS, XBOX, GC, Wii, 360 (consoles I've played) and over a decade of PCs, I prefer Halo. Why? The story. Just visit ILoveBees.com and you'll get a glimpse of the thought and talent that goes into the world creation. Does this have anything to do with how popular the game is? There's no way to know. Did they get the gameplay just right? Hit the market at just the right time? Was the story good enough to develop an initial core of fans who pushed the game to the frat boys that made it a blockbuster? We'll never know, in my opinion, and the only lesson is that oversimplifying popularity is for fanbois and trolls.

Now go listen to "Indier than Thou."

Re:The thing is that it's true

[xenocide2]

I love FPSs. Counter-Strike, Battlefield, Day of Defeat, Unreal Tournament, they're all fine games.

I also like Metroid. Should I be worried about spontaneous explosion at any moment?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[iocat]

Halo wasn't revolutionary in any area, except having best in class controls, graphics, story, multiplayer, VO, weapons, level design, physics, etc.

No ONE element of Halo stands out against the competition, but Halo taken as a whole is a masterpiece, especially compared to what was available when it first shipped. Once that first game is the sweetness, people are into the franchise, and that's why we're talking about it still.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[ePhil_One]

Halo isn't really even new. It's very much a lot like the game Marathon, only with better graphics and physics.

It is by and large Marathon 4/5/6, there's plenty of evidence it takes place in the same Universe, etc, and is only separated by a large amount of time. Since they also created Marathon, this isn't a huge shock. Marathon was groundbreaking mostly in that it brought an interesting storyline to a FPS game, other than that it was really Mac;s answer to Doom. Of course, Doom was just a revampled Castle Wolfenstien 3-D, which was a 3-D version of an old Apple II game, which probably traced its roots back to the old Bezerker game (which never bothered to explain why you were in a maze running from deadly robots), which probably draws inspiration from an old movie, which was inspired by an old story, which was...

Re:The thing is that it's true

[CastrTroy]

Final fantasy 7 was terrible. First of all, it was extremely linear. You couldn't venture off on many side quests, and you couldn't even get lost of make bad decisions on the main quest. Not only that, it required that you sit through a 2 minute cut scene every time you attack your opponent. It wasn't even as good as the original final fantasy. The graphics were better, but that's about it.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[omeomi]

Speaking ill of a legend like Miyamoto is not something I would do, and I think the guy at Bungie comes off a little arrogant for doing so.

It's not like this is a startling comment from Miyamoto. He's said similar things in the past, although perhaps not about a specific game. He's always been more of a proponent of "games the whole family can enjoy", and not a big fan of first person shooters. He's welcome to his opinions, as far as I'm concerned...they've served him well enough in the past.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[flyingsquid]

I'm sure the X box is part of it, but Halo is just a great game, whatever platform we're talking about- I played it on the PC. No, Halo isn't original. The one man army against an overwhelming force has been done hundreds of times in video games, alien invasion is one of the most clichéd scenarios out there, the alien force is ripped off from Bungie's own Marathon series, the ring structure is ripped off from Ringworld, and the Flood are basically just space zombies. So it's a walking cliché... but it does a good job of setting up a believable world, telling a story, the gameplay is just fantastic, and the main character is cool. Multiplayer for the original Halo was just a blast, the weapons were really well balanced. It's not as good as Half-Life, but it's a damn fine game. It didn't set out to be a revolutionary game, just a fun first-person shooter, and it did that about as perfectly as you could ask.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[danbert8]

I think HALO beats Donkey Kong... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Kg-lA4R6E

Re:The thing is that it's true

[BeansBaxter]

Speaking ill of a legend like Miyamoto is not something I would do, and I think the guy at Bungie comes off a little arrogant for doing so. Here is his job title.

I lead a small writing department that does game script, combat dialog, some of the Marvel graphic novel, the comic book series, the books, the marketing, whatever. Anything that involves writing. So who cares if a writer from Bungie pokes fun at making a side scrolling game involving unknown ethnicity plumbers? I think it is freek'n hilarious and I only buy Nintendo systems so I'm a fan boy.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[FGizzard]

True.

See this article in The Escapist for more info.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/39/11

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

Best Graphics?? Story?? LEVEL DESIGN??? Dude.. no. Just. No. Maybe compared to other non PC platforms, but compared to PC, games on their beat it hands down that came out at the same time.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Chosen Reject]

What are you even talking about? I played Halo before I had even heard of any hype for it. I did it solo, and co-op. The ONLY thing I liked about it better than any other game I had played was the co-op. It wasn't that spectacular, it still isn't that spectacular. There is ONLY one thing that make it so big, and that is the hype. I know people who will prattle on about it forever like it was God's gift to mankind. They can never tell me what's good about it. Every time they try I tell them about lots of other games that have what they are talking about. You want story, go to Half-Life, you want multi-player, see Counter-Strike. You might say that Halo combined those two, but I would say that when you are playing Halo for story, you are not playing multi-player and vice versa, so that point is irrelevant.

The graphics on Halo suck. At the time Halo 1 was getting really popular I got into a discussion about the graphics with a roommate. He was comparing Jedi Outcast at 1600x1200 with Halo at 640x480 and saying that Halo was better. This is the kind of mentality that most Halo fans have. To them, Halo is "Just Better(TM)." I had to just ignore him, as I've had to do with everyone else who says anything about Halo's graphics being good at all. Jedi Outcast was not even trying to be a graphics power house, it was running off an old engine and it still looked better with a Radeon 7200.

Level Design? My goodness, man, what are you smoking. Have you even played the library level? After about two minutes you don't even know which direction you're going, which direction you came from, and you can't even count how many times you've seen the exact same stuff over and over again and again. The maps on the ships aren't much better. Sure there are big areas outdoors, but those are repetitive as well, they just don't feel like it when compared to the monotony you just sustained from every indoor environment.

I don't know how the control scheme compares with other console FPS, but I didn't think it was all that great. It was fine, but the only thing I thought even worth mentioning about it was that you could throw a grenade without having to switch to that weapon. I won't get into a comparison between control schemes for PC-based and console-based games, because that's been done, and is somewhat irrelevant to why Halo was popular on a console, but there wasn't anything special about the controls.

Multi-player is kind of hard to judge. There are lots of games that have better. Comparing time played, as of right now, Counter-Strike has over 5 billion minutes of play logged each month. Adding in CS:S and CS:CZ nets closer to 7.5 billion minutes each month. Since it's inception, Xbox live has logged a total of 2.3 billion hours, or to put it in similar units, 138 billion minutes. Let's be generous and pretend that Halo 2 accounted for every last minute (Halo 1 wasn't on Xbox Live so we can't include it). It would take Counter-Strike 18 months to equal that. IOW, one game does in 18 months what an entire service does in 72. Yet we don't have Counter-strike in the headlines every couple of days do we?

That's somewhat off-topic however. The thing Halo has going for it, I conjecture, might be that it has no bots. People are forced to play with others if they are going to do it at all. But then you'd be crazy to play it on the same box. You get 640x480 divided by 4. A whopping 320x240 in all of its interlaced glory. I did that once, every one talked about how cool it was. I was too busy trying to adjust my eyes to being able to see what I was even looking at. I must say that I enjoyed my time despite the screen size, but that's called a party. It wasn't because of Halo. I would have had a much more enjoyable experience playing UT, Trackmania, or any other game where we each have our own screen, or where the screen is shared more efficiently, such as Wii sports or something. I hate to be a poor sport, but the reason we have Halo stories all the time is beca

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

Bingo. Sometimes things are popular because they appeal to the lowest common denominator, and sometimes things are popular because they're good. But many times, the popular things that are good are NOT popular because they're good... they're popular because of something else, but they just happen to be good, too. Beattles or Radiohead for instance (take your pick, they both follow similar paths), both started out as pretty generic brit pop bands, that got popular simply because they gave the audience exactly what they wanted. But then they grew with their audience in a way that few other bands did. Had Sgnt. Pepper been the Beattles' first, or had Kid A been Radiohead's first, no one would have ever listened.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[rjung2k]

"Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination... The fact that the same is true of Super Mario Brothers, a game made years and years ago (an eternity in video game land) is not even interesting."

True, but the difference is that Super Mario Bros. was revolutionary when it was first introduced, as evident by the numerous SMB clones that followed in its wake. I'm hard-pressed to think of a popular game that played like SMB before SMB was introduced.

Halo, on the other hand, was just the latest iteration of a long line of FPS inspired by Doom and Wolfenstein 3D.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

Interesting, I was unaware of that. I was a real skeptic about Metroid Prime when I heard it was first person. Now, I'm incredibly glad it's not 2nd person (we need to stop calling it 3rd person). The fact is, 2nd person would have TOTALLY distroyed the atmosphere. Think about it, you have a moody, natural surrounding, and then you have a giant, orange & yellow robot suit standing in the middle of it at all times. It wasn't so bad in the side-scrolling days because the sprite didn't need to be very big, and it didn't interfere very much.

The thing is, I found that the reason I previously didn't like first person games wasn't because of the camera viewpoint, it was because I didn't like shooters. When applied to an action/adventure like Metroid, it was just as good as Zelda. When I think back on it, I wasn't big into Contra and the other side-scrolling shooters back in the day, either.

I'd like to hear Miyamoto's reasoning for suggesting a first-person viewpoint. He may have had some gameplay specific reasons as well, but my reason for liking first-person is mainly aesthetic.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Das Modell]

Final fantasy 7 was terrible. First of all, it was extremely linear. You couldn't venture off on many side quests, and you couldn't even get lost of make bad decisions on the main quest.

Like I said, it's not much of an RPG, so there's no point in judging it as if it were.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[fimbulvetr]

Sorry, the Simpsons already did that.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[MBraynard]

most who love Halo it was similarly their first FPS

I really doubt that assertion. MAybe some, but hardly all. They have either played other on PC or another console.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo wasn't revolutionary in any area, except having best in class controls, graphics, story, multiplayer, VO, weapons, level design, physics, etc

Admittedly the class in question is "XBox FPSes", which means there wasn't much competition.

(Seriously, graphics? Level design? Multiplayer? Halo has a decent story, the vehicles and physics were cool, and it was the first FPS ever to be halfway playable with a gamepad, but the rest was decidedly ordinary. Good, but by no means outstanding.)

Re:The thing is that it's true

[JebusIsLord]

Actually, 2nd person would be if the camera was held by those you're shooting at. That would be fairly disorienting.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aichpvee]

I never said all, I said most. I think it's more than reasonable to say that most people who love Halo have had limited or no experience playing FPS games previous to playing Halo. Of course there are exceptions, but they are in a severe minority. It's pretty obvious from talking to people who like Halo that their love of the game almost without exception increases with their ignorance of the genre. I believe an objective study would back this up and I'm prepared to undertake it if someone wants to fund the project.

It's also a possibility that they just have no experience playing FPS on a PC, where basically all good FPS games are released. Either way, it's a lack of perspective on the history of the genre that allows them to make the ridiculous claim that Halo is good, let alone great or groundbreaking or any of the other absurdities they use.

This phenomenon is almost identical to that surrounding the FF7 fanaticism. At least in the US, and probably Europe as well. I'm not sure what can account for the Japanese obsession with it, since they clearly should know better (and do given their preference for Dragon Quest), but I'm not sure anyone is really supposed to understand Japanese tastes even some of the time, to say nothing of all the time.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[ebingo]

Well, people can love FF7 if only for the entertainment they got from it and still have heard/played/loved FF6, Chrono Trigger and other games from Squaresoft (and any RPG for that matter). It's not exclusive. In fact, nothing is exclusive when considering tastes. I'm a huge fan of FPS on PCs, but still I loved MP and MP Echoes.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[rm999]

"True, but the difference is that Super Mario Bros. was revolutionary when it was first introduced, as evident by the numerous SMB clones that followed in its wake. "

That was true 20 years ago, but is almost irrelevant today. Nintendo cannot use it as an example of them being innovative *today*

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Omestes]

Thank you. I think the only reason Halo is such a phenomena is because its the first decent FPS on console (since Golden Eye, which was also crap compared to other FPSs of the time). It let non-"hardcore" gamers kill each other in dorm rooms without having to worry about network settings, which I think was the only draw. It was the new generation of games first contact with FPSs (again, like Goldeneye), so they make a big deal of it.

I did enjoy its story, granted, but it never stood up, in terms of game play and graphics, to PC FPSs released at the same time (Doom3, Halflife 2, UT2kx, etc...)

Re:The thing is that it's true

[RealmRPGer]

As far as games are concerned, if 2nd person would be defined at all, it would be defined as a camera that is constantly directly behind the character (eg, Oblivion), which is an absolutely horrid method. Third person would refer to a natural camera that moves and rotates on its own, but just tends to focus on the player (exactly like how a third person novel focuses on the main character(s)).

Re:The thing is that it's true

[JLennox]

I'm glad some one with more literary talent decided to take the time to say that, because all I could come up with was "What? The game is crap."

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Overly Critical Guy]

Not only was Miyamoto instrumental in moving the series to first-person, he was the one who insisted on all the wonderful details like when you see Samus' reflection in her visor when something explodes in front of you.

Metroid Prime 3 is poised to be Nintendo's own Halo. The Wii is already on track to outsell the 360, and it's already crushed it in Japan. If Nintendo does the multiplayer right, they'll have a huge hit (remember that Nintendo's online play is free, unlike Xbox Live).

I heard Halo 2 wasn't that great. I never played it, so I don't know, but I'm not sure Halo 3 is going to be as successful as it's being hyped. The 360 seems to get nothing but first-person shooters now, and the genre risks burnout on that console. Especially if Metroid Prime 3's remote-pointing control scheme turns out to be a huge hit.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aliquis]

Isn't metroid rather good already? I guess from your comment it's not made by Miyamoto thought. How would you say Halo and Metroid compare then? I have only played Metroid.

I _HATE_ split screen multiplayer on PAL, to bad the Wii doesn't have HD, or a good multiplayer-over-Internet-setup, I _HATE_ the friendcodes on my DS, I have no friendcodes added, I just wanna play, with someone, let me!

Re:The thing is that it's true

[operagost]

How many is "many"? There were at least four.

couldn't even get lost

I guess you like non-fun and frustration in your gaming.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Mattintosh]

If you like Halo's story, go read the previous installment.

Marathon.

A warning, though... Halo is a bit "hollow" after reading all of that.

And if you want to go further back...

Pathways Into Darkness.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[StarvingSE]

What was a revolutionary game done by Bungie was Myth. For it's time, the gameplay and graphics were truly unique and extremely addicting. Add to that a great backstory and interesting universe... god I miss that game. I still play Myth 2; the first game won't play under XP.

I think it would be awsome if Bungie would release another Myth rts, or even a nice rpg set in the universe.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Chris Burke]

Nor can it be used as an example of a lack of innovation (both because it is old, and because at that time it was truly innovative), which if you've been paying any attention, you'd know was the intended slight of the Bungie dev who brought it up.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Donut Zeke]

I'm going to have to agree with you about Halo. I love the game, it just doesn't live up to Bungie's former name, in my opinion. I loved Marathon. I'm one of those guys who read every single terminal and wrote down all of the text so that I could reference back on the story at any moment. The multiplayer was fantastic back when you had to hook up those huge Apples in a LAN. At my old Navy job, we would do that on our lunch breaks. Then we moved on to Starcraft. Good times.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember SMB when it was known as Pitfall.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Blakey Rat]

Halo, on the other hand, was just the latest iteration of a long line of FPS inspired by Doom and Wolfenstein 3D.

But that's not to say it's not very, very influential. Look at how many post-Halo games restrict you to a realistic amount of weapons? Look at how many post-Halo games have a 'recharging' HP mechanism of some sort. Not to mention, Halo was the first game to really, really, truly nail down vehicle physics.

Halo isn't a revolutionary game in the ecosystem of "all videogames." In the ecosystem of "first-person shooter games" I think it counts as revolutionary.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[spirit of reason]

You have a very limited view of what constitutes an RPG. The games that came out of Squaresoft did not fall into the open-ended breed and should not even be compared to them. Their purpose was to provide you with well-developed characters in a solid plot, which isn't typically done well in more open-ended RPGs. In open-ended RPGs, you almost necessarily have to skimp on interactions and relationships between characters, so it really just depends what you want out of an RPG. It's probably a misleading name for that side of the genre, since you don't get to choose much of anything about your character's personality; you're more or less reading a novel or watching a movie, with (boring and easy, lol) random encounters in between important story elements.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Donut Zeke]

If Nintendo does the multiplayer right, If is the operative word there. If Nintendo fucks around and does the friend code only system like they did with Pokemon, it will suck. If they fuck around and implement a shitty matchmaking like they did in Mario Kart DS, it will suck. They need to get a good matchmaking system in and keep friend codes, but let you play with non-friends.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[savuporo]

Er , System Shock brought the storyline, spookyness and all the quirks to FPS genre and almost fused it with RPG. System Shock 2 did more of that and dropped in massive audio kick in the bowels and scared the living bejeezus out of the people. People liked it, and shortly after, Looking Glass Studios, the developer, went bankrupt. No hype was involved.

thank you for using ValueRep ...

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Queer Boy]

but as I understand it the physics engine was pretty advanced.

Bungie has a history in physics engine focus. Marathon was the first FPS to actually HAVE a physics engine and it was pretty damn advanced. Marathon editors let you tweak your own physics. So actually, for Bungie, the physics engine was not so great coming from what they'd done before.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[tieTYT]

I heard Halo 2 wasn't that great

Something interesting about Halo 2 was that they took the game Halo, which was not that innovative, and BARELY barely added to it. I think Halo 2 should have been an expansion pack to Halo. It had like 2 new weapons and 2 new enemies. Sheesh.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aichpvee]

Isn't there a survival horror game that employs such a mechanic? I guess, from descriptions since I've never gotten around to tracking down a copy and playing it, the perspective switches to that of your attacker or something like that. I forget what it's called though.

I think it'd also be safe to say that if you were playing a game with a party or squad of some sort and the camera were being held by someone in the party that isn't under your direct control that this would be 2nd person. Like if you had a Vietnam shooter game where the camera was being held by a war photographer or something. Now that I'm writing it, that'd be kind of cool. Especially when something explodes nearby and he turns to look at it just as you come under fire!

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

You're completely right. A friend of mine and I got into a huge arguement over this a few months back. He was arguing about the narrative defenitions of viewpoint. But what I see, now, is that he was confusing Second Person with Third Person Limited. He argued that Warcraft and The Sims were Third Person, and that Mario 64 was Second Person. Warcraft is Third Person Omnicient, where Mario 64 is Third Person Limited. In Mario 64, the camera is actually a character, but this can be extended into any "follow shot" viewpoint.

Second Person narrative can never be described by any camera angle.

Damn, if I'd looked this up before, I could have spared myself months of grief.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Donut Zeke]

Okay, let me first state that I agree with the first part of your statement. Now let me say that Halo did a few revolutionary things that many didn't notice. Halo was the first popular FPS to have non rail-driven vehicles. Now, I know Tribes had them, but it wasn't nearly as popular. Also, your statement about the graphics is false. Halo 2 came out around the time of Half-Life 2 and Doom 3, not Halo 1.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

Sorta like Marathon Infinity was to Marathon 2.

I couldn't believe it. Back in the day, Marathon 2 was a huge breakthrough: weapons with two triggers, whole new lighting effects, holding two weapons at once, huge advancements in gameplay. And then Marathon Infinity came out... and what did it have? A new gun (which was only worthwhile underwater), and ONE NEW WALL TEXTURE! I mean, I saw people posting jpgs of the texture on message boards, and ooohing and ahhhing over it. I couldn't believe they were serious. Now, to their credit, Bungie did say that Marathon Infinity was basically an expansion pack on Marathon 2, and built on the same engine... but still!

Re:The thing is that it's true

[rm999]

"which if you've been paying any attention, you'd know was the intended slight of the Bungie dev who brought it up."

Nope, this whole thread has been a misunderstanding of what he said. He responded to the interviewer saying "Nintendo claims that they can make Halo". He was joking that they could make super mario brothers.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[edwdig]

I'd like to hear Miyamoto's reasoning for suggesting a first-person viewpoint. He may have had some gameplay specific reasons as well, but my reason for liking first-person is mainly aesthetic.

The reasoning given at the time came down to every time you entered a new room, the first thing you'd do was switch to the first person view point and look around. You'd keep going back to that view as you looked for things of interest in the room. You ended up spending a lot of time in the first person view, so it made sense to make it all first person.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Petrushka]

A few parts of Psychonauts work that way.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Trendkill_84]

the multiplayer may be free, but it is not or will never be good as xbox live. i'm a wii owner, but i've also had an original xbox and the multiplayer was unsurpassed. yes, you payed for a connection to it, but they provided centralized servers for the games to be played on.

if the online play is anything like the ds (where you wait in a waiting room for randoms to show up until a game starts) then i'll be giving it a miss.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[macshit]

Their purpose was to provide you with well-developed characters in a solid plot, which isn't typically done well in more open-ended RPGs. In open-ended RPGs, you almost necessarily have to skimp on interactions and relationships between characters,

In theory I love the idea of plot/character-driven games, if they actually have good plots and appealing characters, but man, the characters in a typical JRPG (and Square is a major offender here) are so insanely stereotypical,, and the plots so painfully melodramatic and cheesy... (Subtlety, thy name isn't Square!)

They are typically kind of fun to start out playing, but there always seems to be a point where I think "my god, how much time have I just sunk into this mediocre retread?!?" I find that after playing for a while, it's the basic gameplay mechanics, not the story (given the story is inevitably crap with a pretty wrapper) that end up saving the game or damning it.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

They're supposed to be using GameSpy's middleware to implement matchmaking for Wii games. It remains to be seen how that will turn out.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

There are a couple of levels in Psychonauts like that - the Den Mother and the Lungfish.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[GaryPatterson]

What about all the other platform games before SMB? I'm thinking of Manic Miner, Chuckie Egg, etc. They ran on the 8-bit computers of the eary '80s, and predated SMB by a few years at least.

SMB is a good game, but not revolutionary even for its day.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[sam_paris]

Halo was a revolutionary FPS:

Physics system was fun in a way never seen before in an FPS. (http://halo.bungie.org/misc/warthogjumpmirrors.ht ml)

Split Screen COOP

Max two weapons.

All weapons having a time and a place to use them.

A good single player story. (best story writers in the business - see marathon)

A sense of randomness and replayability never seen before in an fps.

The best FPS multiplayer console experience ever. (Yes better than goldeneye. Look at the numbers playing halo 2 online still)

Simply put, I cannot think of any FPS's from Halo's generation that came anyone near to being as good. Half-Life 2 was crap in comparison. I played it for a few hours before becoming bored with the gameplay/storyline. Farcry's story was feeble.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

Physics system
UT + Quake crushed it years before it was released. The Halo physics systems is: stuff can move when shot with rox! All serious PC ones are far beyond this...

Split Screen COOP
Split Screen = 240i = junk

Max two weapons.
Not a feature.

All weapons having a time and a place to use them.
Every good, hell, even DECENT, FPS exhibits this. And they have for a long time.

A sense of randomness and replayability never seen before in an fps.
If there is randomness, I never encountered it. Each enemy is spawned in the same spot. They all take more or less the same actions.

Where you fall into a trap is in believing that console FPSs are somehow in another universe compared to PC FPSs. They aren't. It is not trivial to code or do the level creation for a console FPS, but it *IS* trivial to 'design' a console FPS such as Halo that doesn't bring anything particularly new to the genre. Halo's only saving grace is that the game has a decent storyline/VO that most FPSs simply punt on.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

I sincerely hope they drop multiplayer in Metroid Prime 3. IMO, Metroid is best experienced as an immersive, moody, single-player experience. The lackluster multiplayer they crammed into Metroid Prime: Echos only sucked away development time from the main game.

If they want to make a multiplayer FPS, focus on a multiplayer FPS. I was thinking lately that a multiplayer-only game with the pick-up-and-playability of Counter-Strike would be killer on the Wii.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[theStorminMormon]

I have tried Marathon before, but it's a pain to track down the files and try to get it to run. I will give it another go.

Before you say anything about Halo's story ringing hollow, however, I have to ask if you've actually listened to the audio story over at ILoveBees. That was the real masterpiece of the Halo universe that took me from "best executed video game story" to "truly amazing universe".

I have a lot of faith in Bungie from Myth and what I hear of Marathon. I don't think they'll let me down in Halo 3 - and the fat boys and pre-pubescent teens will get their kicks too.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[MBraynard]

You have no proof. Just because you think it's lacking as an FPS doesn't mean you haven't ever played a PC FPS.

I can break your rule here: I have been playing FPSes since Wolfenstien and actually the first one I played extensively was Rise of the Triad. I've played and owned pretty much all the big ones and mostly have been enjoying Battlefield 2142. I've actually placed in a big lan tourny playing FPSes (though I am not the bees knees, so to speak - just pretty decent and lucky).

You're also forgetting that the controller method actually levels the playing field since the skill level for people who are EXPERT twitchers don't have the same level of domination over those who are not.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[MBraynard]

Er, first sentence should be 'just because you like it doesn't mean you aren't familiar with other FPSes.'

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Chris Burke]

This whole thread has been a misunderstanding? On /.?! Unpossible!

Re:The thing is that it's true

[DragonWriter]

I think it'd also be safe to say that if you were playing a game with a party or squad of some sort and the camera were being held by someone in the party that isn't under your direct control that this would be 2nd person.

I think its still third person: 1st is the actor, 2nd the recipient of the action, 3rd is anybody else.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Junior J. Junior III]

I'm hard-pressed to think of a popular game that played like SMB before SMB was introduced.

Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros added scrolling and power-ups. The platform jumping action was there from Donkey Kong on.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[masterzora]

All Halo did was take good elements from previously existing games and put them together into one game. No piece was revolutionary, but altogether it made an experience that a lot of people found to be extremely enjoyable. Halo wasn't loved because it was revolutionary; it was loved for the exact opposite reason.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

Man, I wish Miyamoto had gotten to Kojima before doing the MGS games. Those games had serious viewpoint issues. In a game that should have been first person or 3rd person with a free-rotating camera, Kojima specifically picked the camera setting (3rd person fixed), that made the games the most obnoxious. My first outting was MGS3: Subsistance, which has a player controlled camera, and I wasn't aware of the fact that the others didn't have this... going back and playing the others is just brutal.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[catch23]

I think the real innovation of Marathon was that it was available for the Mac...

I had Marathon 1 running on my Mac LCII. It was slow and choppy, but it was better than Doom right?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[WilliamSChips]

Radiohead had a lot of trouble getting OK Computer through the record company as an already-signed band. There is no way Radiohead would have even been able to start with Kid A(except maybe through the Internet). But you're right that had it somehow been their first Radiohead's popularity would probably be much lower than it is now.

As for Halo, that ILoveBees thing doesn't seem that great. Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't seem to advance the universe or anything.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[flink]

Rise of the Triad also had dual wielding. It came out around the same time as Marathon, I think. I have no idea if one copied the other or if they thought of it independently. Give the existence of John Woo movies, I would say that it was inevitable.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[aweraw]

"they provided centralized servers for the games to be played on."

That's not true. Xbox live is simply a paid matching service - games are P2P, with the server being run from one of the players xbox itself - the kind Nintendo will be doing for free.

Why do you think PC gamers laugh so heartily at Live for PC? Does Microsoft truly expect them to start paying for something they've had since before the original xbox ever came out?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[maztuhblastah]

Halo, on the other hand, was just the latest iteration of a long line of FPS inspired by Doom and Wolfenstein 3D.

The difference is, it did it well. Halo was popular because it was a master of its genre -- the weapons were perfectly balanced, the AI was good (grunts flocking, when scared, cowering behind Elites), and the levels were expansive and real-feeling (remember the amazing size of the first Halo level? How expansive it felt, and how you felt like you could roam around for ever?) It wasn't so much that Halo pioneered anything, just that it had a good plot, and that everything it tried, it did well (with the sole exception of high-speed collision detection.)

Re:The thing is that it's true

[adona1]

Speaking ill of a legend like Miyamoto is not something I would do, and I think the guy at Bungie comes off a little arrogant for doing so

It might just be my reading of the interview, but it seemed more like him making a joke than having a go at Miyamoto...most of his other answers had a lighter touch to them, and his response to the last question was nothing like the summary made it out to be.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[BlueHands]

damn it - the more i hear about the game, the more i think i have to do something to play it....

Re:The thing is that it's true

[iamblades]

Well we don't officially know if MP3 will even have online multiplayer. Seems like thats the only reason it could have been delayed a full year or more from launch, when it was originally slated to come out.

Even if it does have online multiplayer, I'm not sure I trust Nintendo to make the online experience anywhere near as good as xbox live, what with friend codes.

Now I think MP is a better game than Halo (which I find kind of boring, having been spoiled by years of UT and Quake on the PC), but I don't know it will ever manage the popularity Halo has simply because the gameplay is so different.

I mean on the outside, MP3 looks like your average FPS, but then you play it and realize its more of an adventure/mystery game than a shooter. So maybe shooter fans might buy it and not like it, and the people who might like it ignore it because they think it's just a shooter.

With the success the Wii is having though, if they manage to get the controls just right, and the game lives up to the previous two, and they manage to market it just right, it could be really successful.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[macshome]

Well the current DS online system uses GameSpy for matchmaking too. The only real difference I've seen so far in the Wii plans is that I have one code per system rather than one per game on my DS.

Reference: http://ds.ign.com/articles/611/611384p1.html

Re:The thing is that it's true

[geminidomino]

Battletoads did that on one boss. And yeah, it was disorienting as hell.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[umbrellasd]

He comes of like a typical Microsoft employee. Halo was well-executed and enjoyable, but it was derivative. His retort doesn't even make sense to me. It's basically, "How dare you call us derivative and catering to the masses, bitch? We'll pwn you with our highly original side-scrolling game that involves a plumber and flowers and shit!"

Ya. You just supported Miyamoto's point pretty much better than anything other than making that game you describe, pal.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[sunami88]

Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination. One could have had the same result trivially by starting with any of the common first person shooter engines, and working from there. so basically what your saying is they took your every day boring fps, and worked on it and improved it? what the hell? IMHO, the difference with Halo was it was the first really really fun fps for "that gen".

Re:The thing is that it's true

[MemoryDragon]

Pitfall instantly comes to my mind, it should have gotten probably equally the regards SMB got, first it was the first side running jump and run, secondly it was the first game doing multi color non flickering sprites on the atari 2600, thirdly it was the most sophisticated game on this system at that time. Myiamoto deserves a lot of credig for SMB, less for Zelda (which has its roots in Temple of Asphai) and all for Donkey Kong being the first jump and run game. But the first side running J&R clearly is pitfall. Same goes for the first graphical action rpg which is Temple of Asphai.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[MemoryDragon]

SMB was revolutionary due to the fact that it added side scrolling
the first vertical jump and run was clearly pitfall. The first
Jump and run with a power up system donkey kong (the hammers are power ups)
One game I would not call revolutionary although Myiamoto probably really
did not know the before hims, is Zelda, there are clearly older games tapping into
the first zeldas gameplay mechanics, instantly to my mind comes, Temple of Asphai
and the first Atari indiana jones game.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[bryan1945]

I think the word you want is "evolutionary". Refining things like how many weapons you can carry (say Resident Evil with it's 6 item inventory bag) is not revolutionary. Don't know about the HP charging, so this may be revolutionary. Changing aspects of a genre is not revolutionary, normally. If the new aspect completely reworks how you approach and play the game, then yes, but for the most part the improvement just evolve how the genre works.

Disclaimer- I have not played Halo a lot.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[donaldm]

I have played Metroid on the Gamecube and Halo on the PC (much better graphics). My conclusion is Metroid Prime is a much more fun game but then again I have always liked action/adventure and RPG's so I am biased.

To be fair Halo was an adrenaline rush for the first hour but I kind of lost interest after that since it was like many FPS games. Metroid Prime on the other hand was an adrenaline rush but not as intense, however it is a huge game with lots of exploration which I really like. I know you had land vehicles in Halo but they were IMHO not that much fun to drive.

Since my son has moved back in with us and brought his Gamecube I am have fun playing Metroid Prime again on my 37in LCD TV and even though the game is not in high res graphics the graphics still look good on my HDTV and the game is still fun to play. Halo on the other hand has been consigned to collecting dust.

Of course for people who live for FPS games what I have said is sacrilegious but this is my opinion and as far as I am concerned if you like FPS games then good for you.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[mako1138]

I endorse this summary. The only thing I liked about Halo was the vehicles.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

Still... what?

The first FPS I ever played was Doom (I missed out on Castle Wolfenstein until a month later). I've played dozens upon dozens of FPSes on PC. I've played GoldenEye on N64. AND I AM NOT UNORDINARY FOR A HALO PLAYER.

I don't like PC FPSes. Yeah, I'm more accurate with a mouse. So what? The keyboard is my problem with the Keyboard-mouse combo. It just gets too complicated. wasd+qe for movement (forward, backward, left, right, strafe left, strafe right) is fine, but then everything else is a bear. Jump? Okay, f. Crouch? okay, r. The weapon hotkeys are generally the number keys. But weapons with numbers >5 mean that after you switch... oops, I didn't mean to jump! I meant to strafe right! Frag! Okay, so swap weapons is now the scroll on my mouse... shit! I'm on the machine gun (5), I want the rocket launcher (9)! Frag!

FPSes on the PC tend to go for complexity. Because they can. It works. And I don't like that. Halo went the other route... simplify.

They keep adding stuff into the game, but simplifying the commands associated with it. THAT is the key to its success. And yes, it's a good game. Phenominal. I've heard it described, many places, as "Tribes without Jetpacks". And that's close. It's Tribes done right... without jetpacks. Tribes main problem was its complexity, and Halo fixed that...

Re:The thing is that it's true

[stinkbomb]

Halo is a decent game, it could have been a much better game, but MS bought Bungie and they have been forced to limit it ever since. Eh, I don't know if Microsoft is to blame for Halo's failings. Bungie fans back to the Marathon games have been making excuses for the crap games that Bungie puts out. I remember playing the Marathon demo after playing Doom and Duke Nukem, and thinking what I giant pile of crap it was.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Phisbut]

I think its still third person: 1st is the actor, 2nd the recipient of the action, 3rd is anybody else.

So in a second-person shooter, you're the one being shot at? Wow. All that time I thought I sucked at FPS, but I was in fact playing SPS...

Re:The thing is that it's true

[OverlordQ]

Look at how many post-Halo games have a 'recharging' HP mechanism of some sort.

You mean like Half-Life? '98 vs '01 for those who're counting.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[LupusCanis]

Technically, both Radiohead and the Beatles started before britpop did. (it started around 1994)

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that one big thing with Halo is that it did the FPS thing well on the console. I'm not saying that Halo is a spectacular game, but I enjoyed playing it in Iraq because it is more accesible being on a console. At college, I enjoyed playing counter-strike on the LAN, but that was on the PC.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[DinZy]

http://bluebuddies.com/Smurfs_ColecoVision_Smurf_R escue_In_Gargamel_Castle.htm
Smurfs on colecovision was a sidescroller simmilar to SMB and one could argue that the game was just Pitfall with structured levels. SMB was just a much more varied platformer that took the up down style of DK and DKJr and combined it with side scrolling.

Don't get me wrong it was the greatest thing ever at the time, but it was something that used bits and pieces of games already out there. The thing it changed was the level design, intuitive and varied controls, fun powerups and the excellent music.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

What's your point? Both System Shock and Marathon came out in 1994. System Shock received far more hype than Marathon ever did.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Blakey Rat]

I don't recall Half-Life having a recharging mechanism. It's been awhile, but I recall you had to use machines on the wall to recharge your shield pack and health bar.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Mattintosh]

Don't bother with the Marathon game. It won't run on reasonable hardware anymore. Just read the story.

BTW...

Sargeant Eddings => the player ("Destiny"?) => Master Chief

Eddings is in 1994. The player in Marathon is in the 2400's. Master Chief is in the next universe. They're all the same guy. That makes "Halo 3" really "Pathways Into Darkness 7".

Re:The thing is that it's true

[DragonWriter]

So in a second-person shooter, you're the one being shot at? Wow. All that time I thought I sucked at FPS, but I was in fact playing SPS...

:)

Not quite, unless you are still controlling the shooter while viewing from the perspective of the target.

A second-person camera would be the "view from target" camera views that seem to have been pretty common on combat flight-simulator (tank, etc.) games (I suppose they likely still are, but the detail combat flight sims seem a lot less popular than they used to be.)

But, yeah, usually a game wouldn't be oriented around a second-person view, only first or third as the main view. Second-person view as the main view would be quite odd.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[IpalindromeI]

Key layouts can get tricky, but it sounds like you artificially limited yourself. For example, WASD is a horrible place to keep your hand. Look at how many keys are too far to the right to use. Move over and put your index finger on G. Now you have these keys in easy reach: QWERTY ASDFGH ZXCVBN. That's 18 keys!

Now your basic movement becomes: R (forward), F (backward), D (strafe left), G (strafe right). Never map keys for turning; the mouse does that faster and more accurately. V can be crouch (although I never played games that needed it). Jump should probably be space, since it's used so often. Use-item can be S. That still leaves 12 keys unused, for weapons or whatever else. Actually in Quake, I never used the weapon specific hotkeys. I mapped the next-weapon, previous-weapon keys and just scrolled through. It was a bit slower, though.

Let me tell you, FPSs are much easier to control than EverQuest2. They use key-assignable "hotbars" for spell and item hotkeys. There are so many, you need to use SHIFTed and CTRLed letters as well. But I had 30 spells within easy reach. Great fun.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[arodland]

1) Yeah, it's fairly linear, but FF7 actually had a respectable number of sidequests and easter eggs. Did you get Vincent? Did you know that you don't get a certain scene with Lucrezia unless you take the submarine through a hidden passage and have Vincent in your party? Did you do the Godo quest? Beat the WEAPONs? Beat the snot out of Battle Square? No?

2) You can make bad decisions all you want -- the game just won't let you continue, because the characters won't make those decisions. This is a matter of the game designer's vision (and a contentious one), and I support Square on it.

3) There are only a few really long animations. The average attack took under two seconds. The average limit break took under ten. Only the Really Big Guns were annoyingly long.

4) Only the graphics were better? Heh. The graphics in VII were worse than any of IV-VI. Chunky to the max. Only in VIII did they even start to get the hang of the 3D thing. That wasn't what made it worthwhile. Must have been something else. Like, say, characters, or gameplay.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[theStorminMormon]

Have you listened to all the clips? The ARG (alternat reality game) was pretty cool, but it's the sound clips that are amazing. They tell a story that is at once true sci-fi, well-executed, and emotionally rich. Download all the .wavs and give 'em a listen. I think it's easily over an hour, so do it when you have time.

Then let me know what you think.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo isn't a revolutionary game in the ecosystem of "all videogames." In the ecosystem of "first-person shooter games" I think it counts as revolutionary.

Putting health packs on walls and making you choose 2 or 3 out of 7-10 weapons is not revolutionary. It was also not the first to have vehicles (Tribes anyone?).

Halo was nothing very new or original, it simply took a few different ideas from separate games and put them into one. The only reason it got so big was Microsoft buying the Studio and pumping it up as THE game for Xbox owners.

Honestly, i'd hate to be a dev at Bungie. Thanks to Microsoft, they have been doing nothing but Halo for nearly 10 years.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Jesterboy]

Actually, I remember running original Marathon in Windows XP with no problems. You can even download all of the Marathon content for free; just have a look here and here. It is not a very difficult process, just takes a little bit of reading and moving things around.

I never actually finished the first game. The story seemed to be primarily dolled out through text communications between the various characters, and you could quite easily ignore it and just shoot things. If you've played Halo first like I have, everything will be eerily familiar, and some things are just plain cool. Dual wielded shotguns anyone?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Blakey Rat]

How about a response from somebody who's played Halo?

Putting health packs on walls

Halo doesn't have health packs on walls.

It was also not the first to have vehicles (Tribes anyone?).

Duh. But it was the first FPS game to really nail down vehicle physics, and I think that's significant. Tribes 2 tried it and failed; they had to convert the tank to a hovercraft instead of a wheeled vehicle, and the one wheeled vehicle they did leave in barely worked. (It traveled super-slow and often got stuck. And the controls sucked.)

Honestly, i'd hate to be a dev at Bungie. Thanks to Microsoft, they have been doing nothing but Halo for nearly 10 years.

And how long has Bethestha been doing Elder Scrolls? How long has Valve been doing Half-Life? That's just the nature of the beast, tons of games companies operate that way. Besides, Bungie did Marathon for years and years before Halo was even a concept.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Blakey Rat]

Marathon was groundbreaking mostly in that it brought an interesting storyline to a FPS game, other than that it was really Mac;s answer to Doom.

I think you're underselling a great game. It's a lot more than "Mac's answer to Doom." (Pathways To Darkness would fit that description better, although IMO Pathways is also a better game than Doom.)

Marathon also had the ability to look up/down, which I think was an FPS first (unless you could Descent.) It had a few different multiplayer modes over a LAN and, get this, even voice chat! (If you had a Mac with a microphone.) It also had friendly creatures that helped you out, which might be another first. It also had levels without oxygen. Oh, and the rocket launcher didn't extend out from your chest, your character actually held it on his shoulder.

Marathon II was one of the first games to add environmental sounds instead of music.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Mr2001]

But that's not to say it's not very, very influential. Look at how many post-Halo games restrict you to a realistic amount of weapons? You mean like Rise of the Triad (1995) and Rainbow Six (1998)?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[atomicstrawberry]

It was Halo's multiplayer which created the hype, and from the sounds of things you haven't played that. Judged just off single player and co-op it's reasonably average.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[mcmaddog]

It's inconceivable!

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

now *that* would make an original game, doesn't even have to be a shooter...

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Mortanius]

Take a look at Marathon: Aleph One. A modernized version of the Marathon engine, just insert data files from the original games and go. Or it looks like there's some new maps and such available now, too.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[mink]

Ever play Metal Gear Solid or Psychonauts?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[mink]

There is a way to play the Myth 1 missions using the Myth 2 engine.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[untaken_name]

--
Stop Global Warming!
Just say no to irreversible processes!

How? If a process is irreversible, then you can't say no to it once it's started. That's sort of the definition of irreversible. So, either we shouldn't say no to global warming, or it isn't irreversible. Either way, your sig is wrong. Not trying to make you mad, just pointing it out.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Anonymous Coward]

mostly have been enjoying Battlefield 2142

So what you're saying is that you liked Halo because you have terrible taste in FPSers. Congrats, dude. You're the winner.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Chosen Reject]

There are other definitions of reversible.

Also, you can say no to something before you are doing it. Do you have to be doing drugs to say no to it?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[MrCopilot]

I'm hard-pressed to think of a popular game that played like SMB before SMB was introduced.

Alex Kidd?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[untaken_name]

A process that is not reversible is termed irreversible. In an irreversible process, finite changes are made; therefore the system is not at equilibrium throughout the process.

OK. So...how does this conflict with the post I made? You're the one who said it was irreversible, not me.

Also, you can say no to something before you are doing it. Do you have to be doing drugs to say no to it?

Does my saying no to drugs impact their existence? Also, how would one have personal global warming? I mean, drug use is a personal choice. Whether global warming is human-caused or not, it certainly would impact everyone, no matter their individual actions. Drug use is not a good analogy. Global warming isn't a choice. It's a process that we can affect only minimally, if at all. It's a natural cycle. That doesn't excuse bad behaviour, but it also means that good behaviour may not have any noticable effect upon the eventual outcome. Good luck trying to stop global cycles. Remember, back in the '70s, it was supposed to be global COOLING that was the problem. If humans caused global warming, maybe it was in response to the fear-mongers of the '70s. Be careful that you don't cause a similar overreaction, causing our children to face global cooling again. Then, every 20 years or so, we'll have to start up another giant scare to frighten people into overreacting in the opposite direction, just to keep overall balance. That could get quite tiresome.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[Chosen Reject]

Ok, something got lost in translation somewhere. Just to make sure we are on the same page, a reversible process in thermodynamics is 100% efficient. No energy is lost to heat. There are no reversible processes. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Which means that ALL processes are irreversible. Therefore if I say "Just say no to $TOTALLY_UBIQUITOUS_THING" and I know that $TOTALLY_UBIQUITOUS_THING's opposite does not exist, then it is called a joke. Indeed if we could say no to irreversible processes, this entire Universe would be very different than it is today in probably every aspect.

The drug analogy was only because I thought you were saying you can't say no to something until it occurs. I thought you were saying we can't say "I will not start this process" until after you had already started the process and thus reverse your action.

Furthermore, the intent of my sig is not to get into a discussion of any variety about global warming. The intent is for people to say "Haha, there's no such thing as a reversible process." Just to be clear, here are my views: The Earth's climate can change and has done so many times. Humans put a lot of crap into the environment and we should reduce that for lots of reasons. Whether those two things are connected in either direction is rather a moot point in my opinion.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[untaken_name]

Sorry. I just thought you were being dumb about it. If there's an excuse, it's that so many people on both sides of that particular debate ARE dumb about it. Apologies.

Just to be clear, here are my views: The Earth's climate can change and has done so many times. Humans put a lot of crap into the environment and we should reduce that for lots of reasons. Whether those two things are connected in either direction is rather a moot point in my opinion.

I think we're on the same page.

Re:The thing is that it's true

[MBraynard]

How come when I read your post I heard it in this guy's voice?

Re:The thing is that it's true

[7Prime]

Britpop / J-Pop / A-pop / Europop = "pop music of the region, of the time"

Re:The thing is that it's true

[LupusCanis]

No.

Britpop is a specific genre, formed as a reaction against grunge music and American musical dominance in the early 1990s (grunge being, of course, a very American thing). It lasted roughly 1994-1999, although some indie bands are to some extent reviving it at present, and you know what, you can tell immediately what britpop is compared to other British pop music just by listening to it. British pop music could be said to be what you think britpop is, but britpop is most definitely a specific genre, covering a specific style of music over a specific period and does NOT mean "pop music of the region, of the time". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britpop)

The others you listed are much closer to what you said they were, aside from A-pop which is a term I've never seen used by anyone, ever. Presumably it means American pop, and I think that as I live in Britain rather than America, I would have heard that term if anyone used it. JPop is a specific genre again, but as it covers a large chunk of all of Japan's music since the 70s, and there'd only been around 20 years of pop music before then, I think it's a close enough approximation. Europop is also a specific genre, but what it is depends on what time period you're talking about and where you're from.

Quite frankly, I don't really think I should have to spend this long justifying my correcting a tiny, inconsequential mistake.

Not news

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Stuff like this belongs in drivel like "Hello" and over celebrity gossip magazines, NOT Slashdot.

It has no merit what so ever.

Re:Not news

[RingDev]

Oh come on now, it was funny in that 'look at the retards fighting on the internet' way. That counts for something, right?

-Rick

Re:Not news

[Turn-X Alphonse]

No. Not at all.

Re:Not news

[Shadow Wrought]

So, since you don't like it, it doesn't belong here? Since its already got a couple hundred comments, I think others would disagree. If you don't like it, why bother reading it and commenting on it? Just move on next time.

Lost in transaltion

[HappySqurriel]

This story is "old" (as in a couple of days) and from what I have seen the general consensus is that what Miyamoto said was poorly translated and taken out of context.

Essentially, when Miyamoto said he could "make Halo" what he meant was "He could make a game like Halo" ...

I could be wrong but I think Miyamoto was saying he makes the games he does because they're the kinds of games he wants to make; he is not influenced by the popularity of a genre or series to attempt to make games like them.

Re:Lost in transaltion

[MorpheousMarty]

Thank you for some common sense. I didn't think he said he could make THE Halo, but the article was abiguous.

Frank Connor Missed the Point

[Swordsmanus]

If Miyamoto has heard Connor's "retort", I'm sure he laughed. Connor could be taken seriously if he said he was coming up with something new and fun that will sell just as well as Halo. Instead he said he intends to make something that he already knows people want, by implying he's going to copy Miyamoto's years-old idea, Super Mario Bros. Given the sales of New Super Mario Bros., I don't blame him. But he reaffirmed Miaymoto's comment, not countered it.

Re:Frank Connor Missed the Point

[Anonymous Coward]

> implying he's going to copy Miyamoto's years-old idea, Super Mario Bros

That's okay, it seems to work for Miyamoto too.

Re:Frank Connor Missed the Point

[Swordsmanus]

Who doesn't make sequels? Even Katamari Damacy has a sequel. The difference is that Miyamoto takes chances here and there. Sometimes his new stuff is successful. Sometimes it isn't. He doesn't only reiterate game designs to make $$.

Re:Frank Connor Missed the Point

[Kelbear]

What's more interesting is that you referenced Katamari Damacy, created by Keita Takahashi.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid= 12233

He's against the idea of sequels and admits shame(more like regret) at having created a sequel for his game. He wants more creativity in the industry but did a sequel anyway because there was a market for it.

This is irrelevant...

[__aaclcg7560]

Bungie was compromised after Microsoft bought it out. Microsoft's design theory is to copy everyone else, re-package it as something brand new, and get it right in version three.

Re:This is irrelevant...

[j00r0m4nc3r]

I guess they've never really mastered that third tenet of their design theory...

Re:This is irrelevant...

[Ant P.]

They have, but nowhere inside inside their main division.

Re:This is irrelevant...

[douceur]

Oh wtf? This is what gets modded insightful?

The popularity of Halo and Halo 2 shows just the opposite. Microsoft didn't copy anybody with Halo (though they did buy Bungie), they didn't "re-package it as something brand new", and they got it right in version one.

Re:This is irrelevant...

[bryan1945]

"Microsoft's design theory is to copy everyone else"

Bungie's Marathon series with new hardware, anyone?

Is Halo really that great?

[Anarchysoft]

I played Halo and Halo 2 to completion and I don't understand why they are held up as excellent FPS games. They were good, but I don't recall a single innovation and even where they were good, they were not great. The original Half-life, FarCry, Deus Ex and several others were much better. That's totally just an opinion and it doesn't mean much, but I'd like to know why Halo is considered by a fairly large population to be a great game. Perhaps more useful: would they have been considered great games if they were released on the PC but not the XBox?

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[revlayle]

I played them also, good games, but not breakthrough games, What I find MORE interesting about Halo is the whole back story and universe continuity that has been created for Halo. While the games are OK to play, I find reading about the fictional universe even more interesting.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Anarchysoft]

What I find MORE interesting about Halo is the whole back story and universe continuity that has been created for Halo. While the games are OK to play, I find reading about the fictional universe even more interesting. Is there a book/comic/fan fiction series related to this or do you mean the in game storyline?

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Canthros]

Halo, at least, is very polished. The interface is a bit stripped down and the controls simplified to facilitate playing on a console, but the gameplay is very smooth and well-refined, at least in the single player portion. The story was nice (not great, but nice), the graphics were very good for the day, and the gameplay, as I said, very polished and refined. Because it was designed for a console, the interface and interaction are simpler, and the depth of gameplay doesn't stack up well in my memory to, say, Unreal Tournament, which preceded it by about two years. Still, very well polished.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[wilgibson]

IMHO there are 2 reasons I think Halo became as big as it is today...

1. Microsoft hyped it beyond any and all imagination when the first one was coming out.
2. Before Halo there wasn't a single decent FPS on a console, just a whole bunch of shitty ports of PC FPS games.

I honestly couldn't give a rats ass about Halo or Bungie for that matter. I never found Halo to be interesting, and I've always had a decent PC to play my FPS games on. I played Halo on PC and it was tolerable. I still play the original Call of Duty and would much rather play that over Halo any day.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[moderatorrater]

One of the big reasons that I love Halo 2 is that it's simple and, imho, has the best co-op campaign among FPS's. When I play with my friends or girlfriend, none of us want to do a deathmatch, we want to work together, and Halo does that very well.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Notquitecajun]

For me, it's the multiplayer. It's easier to get some of your boys and their XBox's together on 2-3 tv's than a LAN party where you have to tote around a PC or worry over a laptop. Setup and takedown are faster on a console.

Gameplay is relatively easy, cheating is minimal, and there are TONS of customizable options to set up whatever competition you want to do easily (the BIGGEST bonus).

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[SetupWeasel]

2. Before Halo there wasn't a single decent FPS on a console, just a whole bunch of shitty ports of PC FPS games.

Except, of course, for Goldeneye.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're forgetting goldeneye, but i still agree with the main points you're making.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[toleraen]

Because it was designed for a console

Halo was designed for the PC. It was dumbed down to console level when MS purchased Bungie.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[revlayle]

Both.... but there are, IIRC, three books and a graphic novel (a series of short stories by different writes/artists, published by Marvel, again IIRC). A lot of information online has been gathered around Halo's "mythos" (a lot can be found on Wikipedia as a quick example, and is rather interesting to read, official or not). Thee may be more, but I am just getting into it myself, so I am not the best authority on this (yet).

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Knuckles]

but I'd like to know why Halo is considered by a fairly large population to be a great game

It came out for the Xbox and found a large population of teens that never had played another FPS.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[C0rinthian]

Bungie is known for generating a significant amount of backstory to their games, and if you pay attention while playing Halo there are a lot of details hinting at that backstory. There are novels and such that explore the setting more than the games do, and are considered 'canon'.

For in-depth story analysis and speculation, check out halo.bungie.org

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[C0rinthian]

re-designed, not dumbed down. Halo started out as a RTS/3rd person shooter for the mac. It was fundamentally changed at least twice in it's twisted development cycle. (From 3rd to 1st person, then from desktop to console)

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[FerociousFerret]

And if you like the Halo story, you might also like the Marathon story as well. Although I believe Bungie said that Halo was in a different universe than Marathon, it was originally believed that Halo was a prequel to Marathon that happened during a hole in the timeline between "Pathways into Darkness" and "Marathon".

Marathon's Story
Marathon Trilogy
Marathon / Halo link

Of course, there are those that don't think the games are tied together at all

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[grumbel]

Halo added the automatic recharging shild to the FPS genre, so no more collecting health packs, it also added a realistic limit on how many weapons you can carry, vehicles and separate buttons for melee attacks and grenades, thus making them actually usable instead of rotting in your inventory as in so many games before. It also was also a very important title for console network gaming and had a nice original setting (no WWII, no hell with monster). You might not like Halo and I am not a big fan of it either, but it did add plenty to the FPS genre, some of which are considered standard elements today, which they however weren't back then when Halo was released.

Compared to HalfLife2 I found Halo pretty original and innovative, compared to the likes of DeusEx, OperationFlashpoint, Riddick or HalfLife1 not so much, but its still far from the shovelware WWII shooter.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[CastrTroy]

An still, to this day, I don't understand why people like playing Goldeneye or any other console FPS. The control you get with the gamepad is about 1000 times worse then what you get with a keyboard and mouse to the point where I find it completely frustrating and, and am unable to play almost all console FPS games. The only exception is Metroid. This is because although it is a FPS, it isn't about twitch reflexes, and being able to aim perfectly. My only real complaint about Metroid is that there's too much jumping. Which is really hard in a game where you can't see your feet.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[cowscows]

You're right on that. Besides being one of the first console FPS that was comfortably playable, it was one of the first console games with a really well designed and integrated online play. That aspect was mostly old news to much of the PC gaming crowd, but it was definitely a big step for consoles.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[7Prime]

I knew somone was going to say that. But in the PC world, Goldeneye doesn't count because it doesn't use double input style control (keyboard/mouse or dual analog), which allows for similtaneous movement and aiming. Basically, anything, after Quake, which uses the older control scheme is regarded as highly inferior and not able to accomidate more advanced styles of play.

Basically, GoldenEye, while extremely popular among console gamers, was very frowned upon by hardcore PC gamers. As a console gamer myself, this is my biased perspective, but that's the impression that I've gotten, and I can kinda understand it, a bit.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[p4rri11iz3r]

Compared to HalfLife2 I found Halo pretty original and innovative

Are you kidding me? Lets take a look at the facts:

Level Design:
Halo - make one room, repeat 500 times (e.g. Library) or Go all the way into some building, then have to come back out the same way, with new, re-spawned enemies.
Half Life 2 - Each level is unique, differant, and has its own feel. Even though the game was fairly linear, techniques were used so it didn't feel like it.

Weapons:
Halo - Same old boring pistol, generic machine gun, rocket laucner, plasma gun formula thats been done 1,000,000 times before.
Half Life 2 - New and unique weapons like the crowbar, gravity gun, crossbow, laser-guided rocket launcher (first time this was ever done).

Graphics:
Half-Life 2 > Halo 2 > Halo

Story:
Halo - Aliens invade earth, its up to one man to save earth. Yeah, that's original.
Half-Life 2 - Aliens invade earth, actually win, and you are now held up as the leader of the resistance. A nice twist on an old classic.

Storytelling:
Halo - cinematics
Half-Life 2 - In game dialogue and active storytelling

I've played Halo, Half-Life, and Half-Life2 all the way through on the PC. Halo doesn't even hold a candle to the Half-Life series. Not. Even. Close. Halo is just to bland and generic. I feel like I've played this game before... Half-Life 2 innovated and brought some cool new toys to the table and made some awesome levels.

And as for multiplayer, using the gravity gun to kill someone with a crap-stained toilet is single-handedly the most l33t way to hand someone their ass.

It's sad that you think Halo is "original." There are some truly great FPS games out there, and you won't find them on the X-Box. Half-Life 2 and Far Cry both rocked my world. And when it comes to Balls-to-the-walls action, throw as many enemies at you as your processor can handle, screw-the-storyline, snappy one-liners games, Serious Sam: The Second Encounter delivers and then some. One of the most underrated games of all time.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[morari]

They weren't that great. It's just an example of some watered down console FPS pleasing all the buzzed frat-boys playing Xbox. They've never played any of those innovative (or even any of the older, must-tries) of the genre, so the stale animations, fuzzy textures, cliche story and annoying enemies just impressed them all so much.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Zarxrax]

Actually, Goldeneye had a number of different control schemes you could choose from. There was one where you could use the C-buttons for movement and the analog stick for aiming, the same scheme that had been done before in Turok. It worked extremely well for me, and honestly I think its probably the best controlling FPS I have ever played on a console. When you get into halo and such, you are dealing with having to work 2 analog sticks which I guess might work for some, but I just cant do it. It's kinda like trying to pat your head and rub your stomach at the same time. But basically what I'm saying is I don't feel like Halo revolutionized console FPS controls in any way, because the same basic schemes were around before, just having to use buttons instead of a second stick.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[mdarksbane]

Graphics

Yes, compare the graphics of a game designed for the newest PC hardware available (albeit in a very scalable engine) with something running on a three year old console. Right.

Level Design:
And comparing the worst level design in Halo to the best in Half life is fair how? I love half life 1, but you have to admit the game sucked once you made it to the alien world. Even hardcore fans loathe the library. Some of the outdoor fights, however, the ones that people remember, are epic in a way I hadn't played in an FPS before.

Story:
Let's call it a tie. The Arbiter in Halo 2 was definitely a unique story twist.

Weapons
I can't think of a single FPS that used halo's style of shields versus health, where it is advantageous to switch your type of weapon mid fight, before.

I'm not really a halo fanboy - I played it through once, thought some of the levels rocked and some sucked - but it seems like people just love to hate on it because it is popular.

Most of the innovations were not large scales, but small tweaks to gameplay that just worked really, really well.

Some games had melee... but not in a way that was actually useful, and constantly available.
Some games had grenades... but not so that they were core to the gameplay.
Even half life made you run around to stations filling up your suit's health. Rechargeable shields (especially since the enemies have them to) changes the rhythm of gameplay to a sort of burst and wait flow that is significantly different previous fps.
Vehicles were integrated (with extremely enjoyable physics) in ways that were not common at the time.
And the AI was for the most part impressively good. Half life 1 was more of an amazing jump over its predecessors here, but Halo's Ai is still darn good compared to most competition.

Any game can add some weird crazy weapons... but that doesn't innovate in gameplay. The gravity gun is a big gameplay innovation. A crossbow or crowbar isn't so much.

Just saying that while Halo probably isn't the best shooter of all time... it isn't just marketing hype that made it as big as it is.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[LandoCalrizzian]

The greatness of Halo is equivalent to the greatness of a summer movie blockbuster. It's designed to get your $50, entertain you for 10+ hours then leave you waiting for the sequel.

Halo is not a great game, it's a great console game because it was the first console FPS to come close to the quality and presention of a PC FPS. Anyone who's played Quake/Unreal Tournament knows what true FPS action but anyone who's only played console games, Halo is the best you'll ever get.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[epistemiclife]

In addition to that, I don't see why the fact that the console FPE's were ports is at all relevant They're the same games. The Dreamcast had Unreal Tournament, Quake III, and the more arcade-oriented Outtrigger, all of which had online and split-screen play options. Halo is not revolutionary, even if it is a great game. Xbox users latched onto it because it was the most impressive game at the time, and its sequel apparently lived up to expectations.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[xenocide2]

And Time splitters. And Turok. But Goldeneye was fucking huge. The game was popular enough that up until three years ago a 200 player tournament was held yearly on campus. Then the guy graduated and Halo's been the order of the day. The way I figure, Halo took off in part because Rare couldn't hold the Bond license.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Mortanius]

There's four books so far

The Fall of Reach, going into the history of the SPARTANs, ending just before the beginning of the first game
The Flood, basically a straight novelization of the first game, a little bland if you've played the game, though they do throw in a few little extras you don't get from the game.
First Strike which I haven't read yet, though judging from the amazon.com description sounds like it may bridge the gap between Halo and Halo 2. Someone who has read it could certainly flesh this out a bit more.
Ghosts of Onyx which again I haven't read, though it sounds as though it takes place alongside either Halo 2 or Halo 3, and I believe wikipedia will tell you it deals with the SPARTAN III project.

Additionally, as you noted, there's the graphic novel, a collection of four stories taking place at varying points in time throughout the Halo universe, published by Marvel. Though I'm not much of a graphic novel / manga enthusiast, I recall a friend saying the names involved with this were relatively big.

There are also three soundtracks out, one for Halo and two for Halo 2 (and a single so far for Halo 3 available on the iTunes Music Store), though these don't necessarily expand the Halo universe; it is interesting to note though that on the first Halo 2 soundtrack there's some additional music not in the game, kind of a 'music inspired by' album, with four selections from Incubus, an opening track by Breaking Benjamin (though no longer available via iTMS) and a closing track by Hoobastank.

On a personal note, if anyone could point me to a source for near-lifesize (i.e. 8ft is too big, but 4-5ft would be good) cardboard standups of Master Chief, I would be eternally grateful. Don't ask.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Anonymous Coward]

I distinctly remember some game (Duke Nukem 3d?) having a seperate key for "The boot" that let you attack but keep your ranged weapon selected.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[FreeKill]

2. Before Halo there wasn't a single decent FPS on a console, just a whole bunch of shitty ports of PC FPS games. Why does being a decent FPS on a console count as something of merit? That's like saying that the first channel broadcast live in HDTV suddenly makes it unique and special. There were dozens of excellent FPS games for the PC long before Halo. Quake, Quake 2, Doom, The Rainbow Six Series, Unreal Tournament, Battlefield, etc etc... Just because Halo was the first one that made use of the new system successfully doesn't make it any kind of pioneer...

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[n__0]

There was an option to use two controllers and use the analogue stick on each to control it I believe. It meant reaching A and B was a bit of a problem but the extra control was there. Plus it used an amount of auto-aiming to stop it being too fiddly. I admit I prefer using analogue sticks to mice because with a mouse its all too easy to hit something by clicking on it. It might matter if you're trying to be competitive though.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Ant P.]

The reason Goldeneye was popular at the time was that it had a level of realism nothing else had. That includes the "limited" analogue stick. If you doubt that, go outside and try spinning around at 10RPM yourself for three seconds.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[jonnythan]

Spinning at 10 RPM for three seconds means you've taken 3 seconds to turn around 180 degrees.

I'm pretty sure I could do it in less than half that time and still feel just fine.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[grumbel]

### Are you kidding me? Lets take a look at the facts:

The fact is that HalfLife1 was a big jump, while HalfLife2 was the same thing with prettier graphics and a stupid physic engine powered toy gun. Beside you completly ignore that Halos way of handling shields, grenades and weapons (can only carry two) changed the actual fighting quite a bit, while HalfLife2 was the same stupid run and gun that already got boring in Quake1.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Canthros]

Vehicles? Separate buttons for ... seriously, what-in-the-heck?

Have you never heard of Tribes or Tribes 2, you philistine? I'm not sure even the shield was a new invention, but vehicles were done in Tribes, and so were limited inventories. The Tribes control scheme included a mapping for throwing grenades. And I'm fairly certain that Duke Nukem and Doom both had 'melee attacks'. I think Duke's was even a separate keymapping, but I'm not sure.

Halo had a limited inventory because flipping through many weapons is _tedious_, and can be a real inconvenience even on a PC with a scroll wheel.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[cbreaker]

I guess you've never played Half Life 2, because there's absolutely nothing "run and gun" about the game. Each area presents a new set of puzzles and challenges that must be played out. You can't kill everything and run, because you'll get owned. But you CAN be creative about it; you can run people over, you can pick up and throw almost ANYTHING... HL2 is an amazing game with really impressive post-war ambiance that must have taken a lot of artists to create. It's too bad you've never played it.

I guess a massive horde of the same two aliens running at you from over the hill is much less run and gun..

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[level99]

I'm a fairly accomplished FPS-gamer. I have participated on a high level in professional tournaments and placed in the top10 at major international tournaments a few times. Played with a Counter-Strike team that was considered top dog in my small European country for a long time, and before that competeted (for honor) in the Quake-series.

And I consider GoldenEye to be the best FPS game I have ever played.. When I have discussed the game with the competitive gamers I know, no one has ever even mentioned the N64 joypad in the conversations - but almost everyone agreed the GoldenEye was either up there or hands down superior.

I would say your observation about PC FPS-gamers as a whole is wrong.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[AdmiralWeirdbeard]

I'm gonna go ahead and call shenannigans on that one.

What made you a very good goldeneye player was exactly the ability to aim and move at the same time.
if you dont believe me, you can challenge my college roommate to a game of pistols in the level of your choosing.
we banned him because he was too good at aiming and moving.
It was just that movement was analog and aiming digital, instead of vice-versa in pc gaming (unless there's bizarre analog ASDW keys out there I've not been exposed to)

Goldeneye was a great game, if you couldnt deal with the controlls, well, you missed out.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[C0rinthian]

You havn't played halo I think. Or if you did, you didn't pay much attention.

Level Design: Yes, the library sucked. Most of the game was quite good, but lets ignore that because 2-3 levels were repetitive. It's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. Halo and Half-Life are both on a rail, and both fairly obvious about it.

Weapons: The only innovation is the gravity gun. Crowbar? Melee weapon. Crossbow? Functionally a sniper rifle. However, Halo let you use a weapon, melee, and grenades without inventory switching. The weapons themselves were stock, (And HL2 has the generic pistol, rifle, etc too) but the usage was fundamentally different in a way noone else had done before. Also, Halo rockets were guided against vehicles, just not real-time. (Lock on, fire)

Story: None of Halo, and only 10% of Halo 2 take place on Earth. Halo = Running like hell from Aliens 'A', crashing on unknown object, releasing Aliens 'B', then dealing with A and B (and A gets to deal with B too) while trying to prevent Mysterious Race 'C' from blowing up the galaxy to clean up your mess. At some points you have 4 factions going at it in Halo. Humans, Covenant, Flood, Forerunner. It's alot more complex than you pretend it is.

Half Life = Aliens take over world, resistance fights back. Cliche. (To give it the same treatment you gave Halo)

Storytelling: Both are advanced with ingame cutscenes. Half Life gives you camera control for some of them, Halo gives you camera control for some of them. Halo had some cinematic breaks in the action. Thats called 'different' not 'better'.

Multiplayer: I won't disagree with using the gravity gun + heavy objects. But a plasma grenade to the face is incredibly satisfying. And I didn't have to put away my gun to do it.

Both great games, both brought new stuff to the table. It's sad that your fanboyism blinded you. One thing I will give Halo, it didn't interrupt my gameplay for obvious physics puzzles.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Hubbell]

You cry about how hard it is to use console gamepads to play FPS's, something all of us Halo players have NO problem with doing, I can bounce a nade off the wall and make it explode in someone's face on the other side of the corner in a hallway with a drag throw, also says they can't jump in an FPS without seeing your feet, something all of us who play console FPS's, once again, are able to do with ease.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[C0rinthian]

Some of the puzzles in HL2 did a great job of breaking the flow of the game. Take the airboat section:

High speed chase with helicopters, SWAT, etc. Then STOP! You need to raise a ramp with floating barrels. baddies somehow can't reach the magical ramp area, so you have time to work it out. Even the music dies down, completely removing the sense of urgency as you leisurly push shit in the water, and take a swim. Then once your ramp is raised, and you've gotten a little tan, hop back into your airboat for HIGHSPEEDCHASE part dos!!!

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[grumbel]

I did play it and yeah, it has a lot of polish to it in terms of graphics, the core gameplay however was terrible uninteresting, a tiny puzzle here and there doesn't change that and the gravity gun was *heavily* overused, felt more like a physic engine tech-demo then anything else. You can find my in-depth look at the game in my Blog, a little not-so-positve review of Halo1 is in there as well, liked Halo2 much more, but haven't written anything about that yet.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Nim82]

As a pcgamer who regularly shunned (and still does shun) any console game that isn't Bomberman or Mario, Golden-Eye was the *one* game that had me *jealous* over the console owners. It didn't just port the concept over - it improved upon it! I remember shooting through doors, playing with cameras and doing all kinds of cool stuff. All of which until that point hadn't been seen on the PC. It looked better than nearly every PC game of the time as well. Halo is a piece of shit in comparison, 'most unimaginative level design evah' - is what springs to mind when I think of Halo... that and the horrendously dull and unimaginative gameplay/story. If Halo had been released purely as a pc game, it would be dead and buried long ago. Kinda like what happened with the pc port really. Give me simple & fun Mario type games (that I can just pick up and play at will, when bored), over the waste of space that is HALO. Duke3D/Quake2 were far more enjoyable as both FPS' and as MP games. Likewise 1942, UT2004, HL2 all shit from a great height on the Halo series and similarly half assed console shooters.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[cbreaker]

I didn't really notice anything quite as absurd as you make it out to be. I found that the lulls in the action gave much needed breaks from the in-your-face action and can be explained by having lost the pursuit behind you by hiding, dodging into a new area, etc.

The game isn't perfect, but it's damned good. Calling it a "gun and run" tells me he's never played it.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[cbreaker]

What are you talking about? You don't even HAVE the damned gravity gun for the majority of the game, and it was only useful when it was the "super gravity gun" in a couple short sections of game.

Each area of the game was different from one another, with new enemies and new situations to find your way through. Neither Halo nor Half Life are role playing games, but HL2 was a fun game to the end. I don't know how you could find it boring, unless all you could think of was "Dammit, this isn't Halo!!!!"

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[analog_line]

2. There isn't a single decent FPS on a console, just a whole bunch of shitty ports of PC FPS games.

There, fixed it for you.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[C0rinthian]

I exaggerate, slightly. That's just the first example that comes to mind of a 'OMG look at our physics engine!!1!' moment. There were several throughout the game, some more heavy handed than others. I agree it's a damn good game. They just beat the physics engine over our heads a bit much for my tastes.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Blakey Rat]

Tribes had hovercraft, and Tribes 2 had one wheeled vehicle that moved slow often got stuck in the ground. It also didn't help that Tribes 2 sucked beans compared to the original. Halo was the first game to get wheeled vehicle physics right, and that's pretty significant.

The Halo self-recharging shield was a new invention for Halo, and now it's in practically every action game now. Crackdown has it, as does Rainbow 6: Vegas, for instance.

Duke Nukem and Doom had melee attacks, but they were part of your weapon inventory and clunky to use. You couldn't smack people WITH your weapon, like you could in Halo. I'm not sure if Halo invented that particular mechanic, but I can't recall seeing it before Halo and I've played a lot of FPS games.

Halo had a limited inventory because it doesn't many sense for a single person to be carrying a dozen weapons. Where would he keep them? Bungie has a habit of taking cliches in FPS games and re-examining them. When Marathon came out, one of the big innovations was a rocket launcher that your character actually carried on his shoulder, instead of the Doom rocket launcher somehow extended from the middle of your character's chest. It sounds stupid now, but at the time that was pretty neat.

I don't think Halo is the greatest game ever made, but I do think it's in the top 10% of FPS games.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew somone was going to say that. But in the PC world, Goldeneye doesn't count because it doesn't use double input style control (keyboard/mouse or dual analog), which allows for similtaneous movement and aiming. Basically, anything, after Quake, which uses the older control scheme is regarded as highly inferior and not able to accomidate more advanced styles of play.

This is just a lie.

Not only can you move and aim, at the same time, in Goldeneye, but you can also use two analogue sticks at the same time.

The previous poster was simply lying with his assertions about Goldeneye...

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[grumbel]

### Each area of the game was different from one another,

Each involves shooting stupid bad guys or throwing stuff at them with the gravity gun. That the wall textures are different doesn't really change much of the core gameplay at all.

### but HL2 was a fun game to the end. I don't know how you could find it boring, unless all you could think of was "Dammit, this isn't Halo!!!!"

I am not much of a Halo fan, read my Blog as mentioned in the previous post. Halo however does a lot of things gameplay things right, which HalfLife2 just didn't do half as good (energie/shield, weapons, vehicles, squad-AI, etc.). In terms of pure gameplay I simply consider Halo vastly superior over HalfLife2 and the only thing I really enjoyed in Half Life 2 where the first 20min, the rest was just totally standard FPS stuff, technically well done, but totally uninteresting. The story also left a lot to be desired, while nicely presented, it just was filled with so many holes and unexplained things that it just wasn't fun anymore, it also lacked purpose and logic.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[7Prime]

Actually, I loved GoldenEye myself. I'm just speaking on behalf of the criticisms I've seen from PC FPS fans (of which I am not), and the tendancy I've notice (in person and online) was to bash GoldenEye for not being a "real FPS" due to its control scheme. I'll agree, I think this is bogus, it's just what I've witnessed firsthand.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most skilled players of GoldenEye turned off the autoaim. Much easier to headshot without it.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Canthros]

If you check out the othe post I made under this thread, you'll find that I don't think Halo is a bad game, per se.

I would submit, however, that it's strength is not in innovation so much as refinement.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[edwdig]

An still, to this day, I don't understand why people like playing Goldeneye or any other console FPS. The control you get with the gamepad is about 1000 times worse then what you get with a keyboard and mouse to the point where I find it completely frustrating and, and am unable to play almost all console FPS games.

Keyboard and mouse offers great control when you master it. But it's a rather steep learning curve. WASD isn't intuitive at all - they aren't seperated at all from the rest of the keyboard and are positioned under the weak fingers of your weak hand. At least with a gamepad, your directional controls were actually intended for directional control.

The only exception is Metroid. This is because although it is a FPS, it isn't about twitch reflexes, and being able to aim perfectly. My only real complaint about Metroid is that there's too much jumping. Which is really hard in a game where you can't see your feet.

Metroid is an exploration game that happens to involve shooting stuff, and the controls are designed around that. The jumping is pretty easy in the game as they tended to leave a comfortable margin of error on the jumps. The camera also tilts down as you jump, which helps a little too. You tend to learn the jumping pretty quickly though and only really have to think about it on the jumps that approach the limits of your jumping distance, which isn't often.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[tepples]

It's easier to get some of your boys and their XBox's together on 2-3 tv's than a LAN party where you have to tote around a PC or worry over a laptop. Why don't more PC games support multiplayer with gamepads, a USB hub, and a video card that supports TV output? Why are so many major development studios and major publishers of PC games locked into the one PC per player mentality?

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Anonymous Coward]

Weapons
I can't think of a single FPS that used halo's style of shields versus health, where it is advantageous to switch your type of weapon mid fight, before.

In the good FPS games switching weapons mid fight gets you killed.
The assault rifle in Halo 1 is a total joke, you can get a full clip from a decent shooter at medium range and not go down. 3 hits from the god pistol and you're down from 1/2 a map away. People love the weapons in Halo but that's either fanboism or inexperience. With the exception of extreme range, where the sniper rifle is better, the standard human pistol has a pretty big advantage over every other weapon.

How did humanity lose Reach when the soldiers all had pistols? Is the cryogenically frozen head of George W. Bush running the war effort?

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[MemoryDragon]

I would not call Metroid Prime 1 a lousy fps... I am currently playing it and it is very good, not a Deus Ex but close in its league!

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[CastrTroy]

Which is why I prefer the computer games for FPS games. I don't like WASD either, so I switch the controls to use the numpad. With console games, you usually can't customize the controls. Sometimes you can pick from up to 4 options, but you can't customize all the controls. And I wasn't really being serious about metroid. I got used to the jumps pretty quickly, but it's just a joke based off some metroid review I read on the internet.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[Emetophobe]

Basically, GoldenEye, while extremely popular among console gamers, was very frowned upon by hardcore PC gamers. As a console gamer myself, this is my biased perspective, but that's the impression that I've gotten, and I can kinda understand it, a bit.

As a hardcore PC gamer, I still have to give goldeneye the props it deserves. It was one of the best first person shooters for consoles at the time and even to this day. I was heavy into wolfenstein, then doom 1 & 2, quake 1, 2 & 3 before I moved onto UT2004. The original 3 quakes were still my favourite though (never liked or got into Quake4 and Doom3 was mostly disapointing). I've played other shooters on consoles like Halo and SOCOM, but I never thought they were even half as good as Golden Eye was..

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[D4MO]

And to this day, many years after Halo 2 was released, nobody else has even come to getting *close* to how well designed the matchmaking is. Gears? Rainbox 6? Ghost Recon? CoD? Nope.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[wilgibson]

I've never really consider Metroid Prime to be an FPS. It was always just Metroid with a first-person view. It never had the feel of an FPS to me. Metroid makes or breaks if I buy a Nintendo console anymore. I stood out in the cold last October to pre-order a Wii just because MP3 was supposed to released soon after launch, it's unfortunate that it didn't but I think I can wait for it.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[wilgibson]

Yes, Goldeneye for the N64 kicked ass. I will admit I played way to much of the game when my friends and I still had N64s. It was one of the few games that I actually had to buy another controller because of over using that analog stick and killing it. The others being Perfect Dark for the N64 and Smash Bros. Melee.

Re:Is Halo really that great?

[7Prime]

There's a difference between "lying" and being unaware, get you're terms correct, fucker. I LOVE GOLDENEYE. My assessment was just based on the things I've heard from people online and friends I've met who are FPS gamers. Why does everyone act as if I'm trying to bash GoldenEye, myself? I can't post anything contrary to the most popular of opinions, without people going off. It's goddamn annoying and a reason why people get driven away from web communities like this one.

What's the big deal?

[mjbinon]

What did he say that's supposedly so controversial? He spoke the truth, nothing more.

All but the most diehard fanboys will admit that Halo was never anything truly revolutionary, but rather just a so-so generic sci-fi FPS that just happened to come out for hotly hyped up-and-coming new console. The first game suffered from HORRIBLE interior design and bland gameplay, and the second had a nearly-universally decried terrible ending.

If not for the fact that the Halo series succeeded so well in making the first enjoyable console FPS multiplayer experience since Goldeneye, complete with fairly (compared to some games) balanced multiplay, and the fortunate happenstance of colliding with the excellent idea that was XboxLive!, the games would have been destined to be little more than a footnote in gaming history, rather than the sales juggernaut into which obscenity-screaming 12-year old gamers have turned it.

Personally, I'd rather play Half-Life 2 or its multiplayer components on my PC, but that's just me, and I don't begrudge Halo for the successful niche it has carved for itself.

Re:What's the big deal?

[MorpheousMarty]

I have to suggest you give some credit where it is due. They make a Console FPS that was perfectly tuned to the controls. If you ever played the game on the PC you can tell how they made certain it possible for a console gamer get the most out of an FPS without a mouse. Getting the controls right is usually 95% of what makes me love a game, and although I prefer using a mouse for FPS, any company who can get the controls as polished as Bungie can deserves a good amount of success.

abuse?

[gEvil (beta)]

Interesting comments from Bungie, considering one of their early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse to the Mac...

Re:abuse?

[GeekDork]

one of [Bungie's] early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse to the Mac...

Now that would make for one badass Mario!

Re:abuse?

[gEvil (beta)]

The game's been opensourced for awhile, so a Mario mod shouldn't be that hard to do...

Re:abuse?

[nomadic]

Interesting comments from Bungie, considering one of their early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse [wikipedia.org] to the Mac...

Lord knows why. I found Abuse to be the most mindnumbingly boring game I've ever played. And I had an Atari 2600.

Re:abuse?

[Stormwatch]

Interesting comments from Bungie, considering one of their early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse to the Mac...

Bungie published Abuse, but the porting was done by Crack dot Com themselves.

Re:abuse?

[Pfhorrest]

Interesting comments from Bungie, considering one of their early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse to the Mac... Bungie published Abuse, but the porting was done by Crack dot Com themselves. Correct.

Also, Abuse was not an early Bungie project by any stretch of the imagination. Gnop, O:DS, Minotaur, and Pathways were early Bungie games. By the time the Marathon series was through and they started expanding operations (publishing others' games, like Abuse; porting their titles to Windows; and opening a second studio in San Jose), they were already a mainstream company with a large fanbase.

The Myth era was Bungie's heyday, and though I'm fond of the Halo games, I don't consider the current Microsoft subsidiary to be the same company as published the aforementioned games.

Argument That Will Never End

[_bug_]

Halo is like the Porsche 911. The next incarnation will feature a few new tricks to give the die-hards something to talk about, but to the average Joe they just look like the same thing over and over. If you've played one Halo you know what the experience is going to be like for all the others. It's just being tweaked a bit here and there to improve the performance.

Bungie is the Porsche of the gaming world.

Miyamoto seems to look for something new with each game. Trying to find new ways to engage the user. He comes at each one with a flair and a passion. He's not doing the same thing over and over. Some games work. Some don't. But you do have a wide variety of games to choose from that caters to your particular interests.

Miyamoto (Nintendo) is the Ferrari of the gaming world.

Rounding out the analogy Blizzard is the TVR of the gaming world. Love-it or hate-it design, completely insane and riddled with problems, yet you can't help but keep playing.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[Xtravar]

Did we really need a car analogy in this discussion?

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[illegalcortex]

I think you have a very poor analogy on your hands. Cars are as different from video games as they are from movies and books.

It's even less appropriate considering we've been producing cars, books and movies a lot longer than video games. Repetition with slight variation is not enough to make a "great" game this stage.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[moderatorrater]

Miyamoto is Da Vinci to Bungie's Bob Ross - both do excellent work, and while Bungie has much better hair, Miyamoto's work is more varied.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[Sciros]

Nah bro TEAM NINJA (Ninja Gaiden, DOA) is the TVR of the gaming world. Blizzard is so popular, it's more like Toyota.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[aichpvee]

Bungie is more like a guy doing paint-by-numbers on cable access. I'd say either a valve or an Epic are the Bob Ross of the industry. They both do pretty damn nice work within established bounds but show the watchers at home how to do it themselves, at least enough to make a mess in the living room.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[C0rinthian]

Learn some history. Marathon did first on Mac what Half-Life did on PC, (Story driven FPS) and did it very well.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[aichpvee]

A) We're talking modern Bungie. That being "microsoft presents Bungie." I would have thought anyone who had played Marathon or Myth and then Halo would have realized that the Bungie of old is long gone.

B) I was referring to the Bob Ross analogy. You would know this if you...

C) Learn to read.

Who said you can't like Marathon and respect Bungie's history but hate what they've become? Read just about any of my comments on the topic of Bungie and you'll see a healthy respect for their previous work, even if it wasn't always the most revolutionary it was still pretty good and introduced new ideas where it could.

For what it's worth I don't particularly like half-life either, and I hate valve as a company. Their coding quality is shit (there's a reason their games get hacked so much), their company ethic (getting owned for running beta outlook is ridiculous, as is putting out a game every 7 years and living off the poorly compensated work of volunteers), and Gabe Newell is a fucking idiot.

That being said, and boring story aside, half-life provided an excellent platform for modding, the Worldcraft editor valve bought was also excellent in the pre-Unreal2 world, the vanilla deathmatch was well balanced one-on-one (as in I'm 2-0 life time at it, so it must be awesome!), and TFC owned.

And I realize that you can read and just jumped to a conclusion.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[C0rinthian]

Personally, I like Halo. I think there is just as much potential story depth to Halo as there was in Marathon, it's just not as obvious in the games as it was in Marathon with it's extensive terminal text.

Halo wasn't the game it could have been. I think everyone recognizes that, including Bungie. They got stuck with limited dev time to bring the project over to xbox. The same thing happened to a lesser extent with Halo 2. They just didn't have the time they wanted on the game. (I've read quotes of Bungie staff who refuse to play Halo2 Multi because they know how good it SHOULD have been)

I don't think Bungie has lost it's quality, they've just been hampered by Microsoft. Hopefully, Halo 3 is where Bungie finally gets to do things their way, and we'll have an amazing game to show for it.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[10Neon]

The car analogy wasn't needed, but it is people going above-and-beyond to give us these car analogies that makes Slashdot the wonderful place that it is!

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm amazed no one has blasted you for blasting the 911 yet! There have GOT to be a few 911'ers around here that were foaming at the mouth on that one, trying to make out some sound regarding the differences between the 964, 993, 996, and 997!

Me? I love my 928. Yes, the sound you heard was the screaming and foaming of a million 911 owners. :-)

And how appropriate, the human-confirming image to this post was "blasted". I'm tickled silly!

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello friends, today I want to show you have to render a lovley little 3d scrolling landscape..and to start I want to render just a happy little phased plasma rifle with a 40 watt range...right here behind a happy little tree.

Re:Argument That Will Never End

[Sibko]

If you've played one Halo you know what the experience is going to be like for all the others. I think you should actually try playing Halo, before you go on about how each of the 3 games plays exactly the same.

hrm..

[vga_init]

It sounds like that he's really trying to say is that he doesn't want to change his style just to please a particular audience. It doesn't sound to me like he's saying Halo is poorly made or easy to pull off, but that he won't make games like that because it's not his thing.

They all have good points

[orclevegam]

All the game companies are good at certain things, it's just that the markets are reflective of what each company is basing their priorities on.

Microsoft was intialy trying to make the X-Box into a platform to try to force the convergence of console and PC gaming. Later when it became clear that they were really on to something with X-Box Live, they switched tactics and focused on providing top shelf online content (although the latest half hearted attempt to bring Live to Vista bodes poorly for Microsofts learning abilities).

Sony on the other hand has always been focused primarily on graphics performance. Yes they had some good games, but nothing ever revolutionary, but pretty and often fun. The primary hallmark of the Playstation platform is a shotgun approach to game development. They make as many games as they can, throw them out there and see what sticks. This approach can lead to some very good games, but also leads to some very very bad games. The primary failing of Sony is in not providing any new innovation in the latest generation of consoles. The Playstation 3 was positioned to be a multimedia convergence device, but so far the market for said devices has proved to be rather poor, and what little there is is primarily dominated by inexpensive PCs. The good news for Sony is that historically the Playstation consoles really only hit their stride after a year or two on the market, so it has the potential to outperform the competition in terms of raw power. There is also some rumbling of Sony taking online content more seriously, although whether or not they can provide a credible challenge to Live remains to be seen.

The last player on the market, and the most relevant to this article is Nintendo. Nintendo realized a long time ago that fun games, and innovative systems will out sell fancy graphics. A clear cut example of this is the origional Gameboy versus the graphically superior Gamegear. The Gamegear had a color screen and more processing power, but was more expensive, slightly bulkier, and was much more demanding on power (which resulted in it eating batteries left and right, I should know, I had one). Nintendo has always been middle of the road in terms of graphics and processing power, but what has set them aside has traditionally been their willingness to try new and innovative controls and games. Sometimes this has hurt them, and they have made more than a few products that failed spectactularly (Virtualboy anyone?), but on the other hand they have released a number of products that show some genuine innovation. I think the relative failure of the Gamecube served as a wakeup call to Nintendo, they realized that they weren't able to compete on graphics and if they were going to survive they needed to embrace the creative aspects of their game and console design more fully (prior to the DS and Wii most Nintendo products were less daring in departure from the norm of console gaming). It will be interesting to see if Nintendo can pull off the online portion of the gaming puzzle (which will be critical for all three consoles) sufficiently to keep Wii ahead of X-Box 360 and Playstation 3, of if they will fumble it and have to settle for second place.

Re:They all have good points

[mjbinon]

The last player on the market, and the most relevant to this article is Nintendo. "The last player on the market"?

In what crazy Bizarro-world do you "no live"? Seriously though, I get what you meant there, but your wording could easily be taken another way.

What really kept the Game Gear (I had one too) back, though, was less the battery consumption and weight than it was the fact that with the exception of Defenders of Oasis and Sonic(not a fan myself, but I acknowledge its popularity) there were no good games for it, a problem the Game Boy NEVER suffered from.

Re:They all have good points

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy shit are you dumb.

Re:They all have good points

[LWATCDR]

Actually from what I heard the GC had better graphics performance than the PS2. I could be wrong but the GC, PS2, and the Dreamcast all look close to me in graphics performance.
I think that the GC suffered more from that fact that the N64 ended up loosing to the PS1 then anything having to do with performance. That and the infatuation with "adult" content games. When you think of Games for the PS2 people in the US tend to think of things like GTA. When people think of Games for the GC people think of Mario.

Where the Wii stepped up was offering true innovation with a new controller. Graphics are nice but we are really at the point of diminishing returns. The game play on the PS3 isn't four times better than on the PS2. The added graphics just don't add that much value for the player. The Wii is more than twice the fun than the GC because the controller does add that much to the game play.

Re:They all have good points

[SilentChris]

Just for reference, the Wii is not currently in 1st place. It's in 2nd behind Xbox 360. It'll likely stay that way once Halo 3 comes out.

Re:They all have good points

[orclevegam]

Just for reference, the Wii is not currently in 1st place. It's in 2nd behind Xbox 360.

Depends a lot on the metric you use and who's data you believe. I'm not going to argue who is in first place as of right now, although I'm thinking a couple years down the road Wii will probably be in first or second place. Of course, even with the last generation of consoles it was hard to call a winner. Most would say the PS2 had the lead, although there is some argument for the X-Box, particularly given that it's the new kid on the block and was facing entrenched competition.

In the end it's not just about total units sold (and that's sold at retail, not sold to retailers, MS tried that trick with the Zune to try an inflate the numbers) but about demand, and perceived success. If the public believes a system to be successful and there's enough demand to convince developers to make games for it, then it's a win for the manufacturer and will help sales when the next system comes out. I think, had Nintendo seen better sales of the Gamecube, the demand for the Wii would have been even greater, and by the same token, had they not gone such a radically different direction with the controllers the Wii would have tanked. Also, had the PS2 not done as well, the demand for the PS3 (at launch) would have been less.

In the interest of disclosure let me just say that I own a Wii and rather enjoy it (although I also have a gaming PC), and I've been considering picking up a 360 Elite when the price comes down a bit, but unless Sony either smartens up and drops the PS3 price drastically, or comes out with some game that I can not live without, I probably won't be buying one. This actually saddens me quite a bit, as the PS2 was my favorite console from the previous generation (with the GC placing second).

Re:They all have good points

[dannydawg5]

GameCube wasn't a failure. It was a profitable system for Nintendo, and as far as I know, everybody that bought one doesn't regret their purchase either.

If Nintendo wanted to be #1, then it failed. If Nintendo's goal was to make a profit, then it was more successful than MS's Xbox.

Re:They all have good points

[filterban]

I loved the Game Gear, and that's a great analogy. However, one of the key reasons the Gameboy has crushed every other portable gaming device since the dawn of time (surpassed only by a deck of cards, perhaps) is that they have a ridiculous amount of games.

That's the same reason the Playstation beat the Saturn/N64/3DO, the PS2 beat GCN and Xbox, the NES beat the Master System, ad nauseam.

Re:They all have good points

[orclevegam]

I think the relative failure of the Gamecube

GameCube wasn't a failure. It was a profitable system for Nintendo, and as far as I know, everybody that bought one doesn't regret their purchase either.

The GC was only a failure relative to the PS2. I actually own a GC I was quite happy with it, but it didn't have anywhere near the sales figures the other systems did, and as a result was very lacking in terms of third party games. Now, as usual the games on offer from Nintendo were great for the most part, but very few of the third party titles were worth owning.

Re:They all have good points

[grumbel]

### The primary failing of Sony is in not providing any new innovation in the latest generation of consoles.

Except things like Ico or Shadow of the Colossus, eToy, Singstar and a heap load of other games.

### I think the relative failure of the Gamecube served as a wakeup call to Nintendo, they realized that they weren't able to compete on graphics

The Gamecube was quite a bit better then the PS2 and very close to the XBox, while being cheaper then both of them. What the Gamecube lacked where games, not graphic power.

### and if they were going to survive they needed to embrace the creative aspects of their game and console design more fully

I think the realized two things: a) there is a market for casual gamer games b) you can make a hell of a lot more money with old hardware then with bleeding edge stuff

### It will be interesting to see if Nintendo can pull off the online portion of the gaming puzzle

Giving how they still don't have any online games on the Wii, very few on the DS and how they try to make life extra hard with friend codes, I don't think so. When they continue their current strategy online play will never be much interesting on Nintendo consoles.

### sufficiently to keep Wii ahead of X-Box 360 and Playstation 3, of if they will fumble it and have to settle for second place.

XBox360 is still #1.

Re:They all have good points

[orclevegam]

Except things like Ico or Shadow of the Colossus, eToy, Singstar and a heap load of other games. Those are all last generation games. The games themselves are not particularly innovative by any stretch of the imagination with the possible exception of the eToy, although that was very under-utilized. Also, anything third party can not count towards the merits of the actual Console, seeing as that was a decision made outside the control of the manufacturing company. I believe Sony did make the eToy, so they get credit for that one, but something like Guitar Hero was third party all the way, so no credit there.

The Gamecube was quite a bit better then the PS2 and very close to the XBox, while being cheaper then both of them. What the Gamecube lacked where games, not graphic power. That may be from a technical perspective, I don't know, I haven't looked at the raw hardware specs. What I do know is, that games on PS2 had a lot more eye candy than on Gamecube. I could be that that was a choice by the developers to put that horsepower to use in other ways than graphics, but that's pure speculation.

I think the realized two things: a) there is a market for casual gamer games b) you can make a hell of a lot more money with old hardware then with bleeding edge stuff Yes, I'm sure they did realize that, but they also realized the best way to bring in casual gamers was to embrace new and creative controls and game designs. Traditionally the primary target of console makers has been the hardcore gamer crowd that prefers a certain amount of depth or skill requirement in a game. Nintendo on the other hand has embraced a lighter less demanding skill set that often turns off more traditional gamers. In many ways the Gamecube was an experiment that Nintendo was using to try and fine tune the game experience to satisfy the largest quantity of both hardcore and casual gamers.

Giving how they still don't have any online games on the Wii, very few on the DS and how they try to make life extra hard with friend codes, I don't think so. When they continue their current strategy online play will never be much interesting on Nintendo consoles. The latest consoles are still very young and Nintendo is a new player to the online gaming market. The fact that they have the store and web browser shows they are at least cognizant of the demand for online content, and they have made statements concerning online play in upcoming games. I'm not going to judge one way or the other on those games based on the previous offerings for the DS. The DS was a very different platform from the Wii, and the DS was also serving as a test bed for online play. It is true that if Nintendo goes with a roll your own architecture ala PS2 it will fail, and also if they insist on friend codes for any online play it will also fail. What would work most likely while preserving some of the features Nintendo seems to like would be lobby style random battles, while relying on the already existing Wii codes to allow people to find and play with specific friends.

XBox360 is still #1 In terms of raw sales atm yes. However two things to bear in mind are that they had a significant lead on both the Wii and PS3, and that supply for the Wii is still lagging behind demand. After everyone who wants a Wii has purchased one, and everyone that wants a 360 has purchased one, say in a years time, then we can see who has come out on top, until then, it's really anybodies game.

Re:They all have good points

[Anonymous Coward]

Nintendo realized a long time ago that fun games, and innovative systems will out sell fancy graphics.

What? Is this the same Nintendo that trumpeted the graphical superiority of the Super NES and Nintendo 64? (and to a lesser extent the Gamecube)

Nintendo's only "innovative" leaps have been the Nintendo DS and Wii. Everything before has been graphics upgrades and control tweaks.

Re:They all have good points

[Dwedit]

Game Boy (4.194MHz "GB-Z80") actually had more processing power than the Game Gear (3.58MHz Z80). This is true even after factoring in that Game Boy instruction timings are rounded up to the nearest 4 cycles.

lol bungie

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's make a third person shooter which has shitty maps, lame weapons but lots of fluff.
At least Miyamoto makes no bones about the games he creates and the fact that his games are fun. Bungie's just beating a dead horse that passed away back in nineties. Plus id did it better than Bungie.

"Rather touchy aren't they"

[u-bend]

Wow, he really comes off as downright peevish, no? I mean, even if Miyamoto's comment wasn't out of context, and he meant exactly what he said, the response turns out feeling really childish. Get a grip, dude. Your game's *really* popular. Just because somebody else says he wouldn't make it, doesn't mean you need to get your panties in a twist. And then, as a previous poster says, he basically affirms Miyamoto by saying he's going to copy an old design. Huh. I guess his PR fluffer didn't have him ready.

Re:"Rather touchy aren't they"

[nomadic]

Wow, he really comes off as downright peevish, no?

Not really. If you read the response in the context of the entire interview it's not really that big a deal. Furthermore it's not like he came out with it on his own, he was specifically asked for his response to Miyamoto's words.

Re:"Rather touchy aren't they"

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude's probably touchy about being stuck making Halo sequels and spin-offs for as long as he works for Microsoft.

Re:"Rather touchy aren't they"

[Osty]

Wow, he really comes off as downright peevish, no? I mean, even if Miyamoto's comment wasn't out of context, and he meant exactly what he said, the response turns out feeling really childish.

Holy crap! It was a joke, people. A joke! He was essentially saying that they don't care, and was having a little bit of fun with it, having a little bit of fun with people like you who take this crap so seriously.

Frankie is the guy who draws Mister Chief as a parody of Master Chief. He's the guy who usually does the weekly updates at Bungie.net, in which he takes sarcastic potshots at Bungie, community members, etc. along with providing serious news about what's going on at Bungie.

In short, if you're complaining that Frankie came off as "childish" in this interview, you totally missed the point. Moreover, you probably ought to take a close look at yourself, if your reaction to a little fun poke at Potatamoto is to think the guy making the joke is childish and peevish.

Re:"Rather touchy aren't they"

[Anonymous Coward]

NO, fuck you, I'm going to overreact and post about it on the Internet!

Different strokes for different folks

[aztektum]

I would imagine Miyamoto's games do appeal to a more broad audience. I have a hard time imagining my parents playing Halo for any period of time. However, they did sit and take a stab at Mario back when I got my NES (which I still have).

Bungie's response sounds like, "Oh yeah well... You're a poopy head!" Given cultural differences and the possibility of a hokey translation, I wouldn't take this as a slam. Just another persons opinion.

Sounds like Bungie has been an MS company for too long. If it's not the MS way, it's wrong, you suck. Look out, flying chair!

Re:Different strokes for different folks

[Tatisimo]

If it's not the MS way, it's wrong, you suck. Look out, flying chair!

Don't forget that if MS could, they'd have bought Nintendo a long time ago, and Miyamoto would be working with Bungie's designers to come up with an uber-game about Alien Plumbers shooting psychedelic bunnies.

Re:Different strokes for different folks

[MS-06FZ]

Bungie's response sounds like, "Oh yeah well... You're a poopy head!" Given cultural differences and the possibility of a hokey translation, I wouldn't take this as a slam. Just another persons opinion. Well, to Bungie, Halo isn't just some 3-D FPS out there, a game that happens to sell quite well. They made it - and it's done damn well. Design decisions that may seem unimportant to outsiders are issues that must have been the subject of a lot of careful consideration within the development group. For someone to write all that off as pandering to the audience is a bit of an insult.

Personally, I think Miyamoto was just saying that he's not out to specifically create popular games - games that sell large numbers. ("I mean, Led Zeppelin didn't write tunes everybody liked. They left that to the Bee Gees.") He's interested, I guess, in making games that interest him. The bit where he says "I could make Halo" is a bit confusing in a way - why the need to assert that? I think that might be a translation issue - something that just reads differently in English I'm guessing.

As for Bungie's challenge - I think it's a funny idea. I think to outsiders something like that could look like a bitter rivalry - and that could be unfortunate - but if the people involved look at it from a more light-hearted perspective something like that can be a lot of fun. Kind of like pro wrestling - the wrestlers probably don't really hate each other, but it's a bit more fun for everyone involved if they act as if they do - generates a lot of excitement, you know?

Re:Different strokes for different folks

[KlomDark]

Funny thing is, 30 years later, there's a LOT more people that like Led Zeppelin than the Bee Gees.

And for the record, the Times sucked... (Randal said it, but Kevin Smith wrote it, so who's record are we talking about?)

Re:Different strokes for different folks

[Mia'cova]

To me, the Bungie response seems more like wit. They're mocking him for calling out their game, pointing out a lack of maturity rather than being immature about it. They're just playing it out to make us see how ridiculous it is. I think, based on the amount of casual posts I've read from Bungie foaks, that mockery is just part of their culture/humour.

Miyamoto just chose Halo because it happens to be MS's flagship title, without being something entirely new. Bungie is just saying that there's nothing wrong with making a great FPS and sticking with it. It's not like Mario and Zelda haven't gone through a few iterations themselves. Bungie will move on sooner or later, this isn't their first successful IP after all.

bias

[Gogo0]

Im sure that with all the rabid halo/anti-nintendo kids on the net, the bungie mario bros clone will be better than any mario game.
Mario is for kids, bungie games arent -and all that.

It also seems kind of unbalanced.
Miyamoto claiming he can make something like a complicated "next-gen" fps, and bungie guy claiming he can make something like an uncomplicated-by-design sidescroller that could be just as easily done on an NES.
yeah, i would take that challenge too.

Re:bias

[nomadic]

Im sure that with all the rabid halo/anti-nintendo kids on the net,

Uhhh...huh? The pro-Nintendo crowd vastly outnumbers the anti-nintendo crowd on the net right now.

Re:bias

[king-manic]

Mario is for all gamers.
Halo is for male gamer kids.

Target audience is teens and tweens. It does not target "Adults". IT's target demo is squarly in the frat boy/teen boys markets for "mature" games. Bungie games have always been aimed at this market. Mario games have abroader audience.

FPS aren't complicated game mechanic wise, they are often complicated graphics wise.gameplay wise there has been little significant innovation on that front in ages. not since the true 3d and multiplayer in quake. MArio games have branched out significantly. For instance Mario tennis.

Re:bias

[Omestes]

Shhhh... Some people haven't realized that playing M rated games, and going to R rated movies don't make that actually mature.

Re:bias

[Mia'cova]

Let's see Miyamoto do it in 720p on his hardware while we're at it ;)

Re:bias

[WilliamSChips]

Super Mario Brothers is easy to create but hard to think up in the first place. Halo is the opposite: hard to create but easy to think up.

The More Visually Appealing Faceoff

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/04/18/battle-of-the-fp s-titans-samus-vs-master-chief/ Old news and somewhat less than relevant, but heretical fun nonetheless. Ending might not be safe for work!

Wait a minute...

[Anonymous Coward]

So Bungie jokingly takes Miyamoto's comment as being a shot at them, and then in joking response they imply they're going to make a Mario game? Isn't that just working against them? As in, Miyamoto's "too good" to make a Halo clone but Bungie's not "too good" to make a Mario clone?

So bungie owned themselves...

[Rakishi]

I mean how else can you take that comment except that Bungie owned themselves. They essentially admitted that the best they could do as a response is to remake a 20 (?) year old game that's been remade more time than I could even count. I mean who in god's name responds to being called unoriginal by saying they will do something unoriginal.

I mean it's like watching some idiot try to debate online.

Re:So bungie owned themselves...

[penp]

like how we're all contributing to this argument ourselves? oh wait... shit.

Re:So bungie owned themselves...

[Siguy]

"I mean who in god's name responds to being called unoriginal by saying they will do something unoriginal."

Maybe someone who's trying to be funny? Why does everyone think that Bungie was insulting Miyamoto? All this guy did was make some little off-hand joke in response to Miyamoto's quote; there's no story here; there's no fight here.

Miyamoto you wuss

[Sciros]

Psh! *I* can make Halo. I can probably make Halo with an added-in gatling gun that fires ninja bees.

Miyamoto is talking small potatoes here with his "I can make Halo" boast. Miyamoto can probably make Ocarina of Time if he tries hard enough.

Re:Miyamoto you wuss

[lennier]

"I can probably make Halo with an added-in gatling gun that fires ninja bees."

In other words, Half-Life 1.

Christ.

[Pojut]

I'm no fanboy (owned consoles from multiple companies each generation) but I think the Bungie team is getting their panties in a bunch over nothing.

Miyamoto never said Halo was bad, nor did he ever say that it wasn't a great game. He simply said that he could have made it, but chose not to. He wasn't necessarily refering to Halo SPECIFICALLY, what (IMHO) he meant was he makes his games the way that he thinks they should be made, which is not always based on what the public wants or thinks they want. He was merely using the Halo franchise as an example due to the fact that Halo 3 could be a steamy pile of crap and people will still buy it simply because of the name, if for nothing else.

I read this as..

[JustNiz]

I read this as.. Bungle vs Miamoto.

I hope Zippy and George get to kick some ass too.

Any Brits will know what I'm talking about.

Re:I read this as..

[Smauler]

Hehe - I read it as that too - woul be a fun fight to watch.

This just in!

[Trent Hawkins]

This Just in: George Lucas calls Spider Man 3 "Silly"!

Can anyone really make Halo?

[MaWeiTao]

I completely understand both Nintendo and Bungie's position. They're in the business of selling games and they need to come off as confident about what they do. Some of these guys have too big an ego and deserve to be taken down a few notches, but the fact remains that they do need to convey a certain level of confidence.

I'll start by pointing out that I'd choose almost any game Nintendo has produced over Halo or anything else Bungie has developed. That said, I don't think Nintendo is the pinnacle of innovation like some incessantly claim. I like Nintendo's games not because they're innovative but because they're fun as hell. Nintendo knows what's fun almost better than anyone else. They know how to make a game that's balanced and engaging.

But to call their games innovative is a stretch. The DS and Wii both have unique control devices, and I agree that some level of innovation was involved. However, I see both more as evolutions of the mouse and I think many of the games available for those platforms reflect that. Many of these feel like glorified Flash games.

In fact, one of the reasons I like Nintendo is because of a sense of familiarity. Super Mario Bros, Mario Kart, Pokemon, etc don't really provide any innovation over past games, but I like that. I know what to expect and I know it's going to be good. If we're going to start looking at innovative games I think the best console to look at is the PS2. That system has countless innovative games some of which have even spurred the development of new genres.

I think this is an important point because ultimately the implication behind Miyamoto's comment is that Halo is not innovative; it's a game anyone could make if they felt like it. Well, anyone could make that argument about anything Nintendo has made. Developing a good FPS isn't something that can just be cobbled together on a whim. Hell, Nintendo didn't even develop their own FPS, Metroid Prime. They had Retro Studios develop that game. So apparently, for one reason or another, they couldn't do it themselves even if they wanted to.

I myself don't think Halo is anything special, in terms of gameplay anyway. But I will give them credit where it's due. One thing they did well is presentation. The game is well-paced and presents a story that's involving. And it provides a pleasant contrast to most other FPSs which are mono-chromatic and bland, at least visually. Bungie offered an FPS that didn't involve blasting demons, gang members or nazis.

Perhaps anyone could make Halo, but the fact is that nobody else did. Just like anyone could make a Wiimote but nobody else did.

Re:Can anyone really make Halo?

[geminidomino]

That said, I don't think Nintendo is the pinnacle of innovation like some incessantly claim. I like Nintendo's games not because they're innovative but because they're fun as hell. Nintendo knows what's fun almost better than anyone else. They know how to make a game that's balanced and engaging. "Fun over flash" is pretty innovative itself, given the current gaming market.

Um,but Halo isn't popular...

[kabocox]

I've never been into FPS. I've played Doom, Quake, and a few others, and I came to the conclusion that I suck at them. Halo may be popular with some people, but that crowd isn't the target market for main course of Wii games. Um, is Halo popluar compared to any game played with a deck of cards? Not really. I like video games as much as the next person, but really I have to admit that games like Halo aren't popular. Games like Tetris are popular. My mom, my wife and my kids will all happily play tetris and actually like it. Will they all play Halo? Not really.

What's the next slashdot headline? Xbox losing the Japanese audience because it doesn't have Legend of Zelda, Final Fanstay or Dragon Quest?

Woosh.

[mdarksbane]

So... how can you read the bungie response and not take it as a joke? They said they were working on a Mario clone! They are picking on Miyamoto, yeah, but I don't see how you can take it as a serious response.

Re:Woosh.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think mostly because it isn't really funny. The joke he's making is "Yeah, well, I could make a 20 year old video game. So there." Doesn't really pop, you know?

Er, that was a joke

[benwaggoner]

Did people miss that Connor was just making a goofball joke back about the comment :)?

C'mon, the bit about the ethnicity of the plumber being a secret is just a dead giveaway.

hai2u

[tepples]

This this story is about trolling let me be the first to say HI! It's Hai! To you?

Re:hai2u

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks didn't know this one.

Not a Slight

[epistemiclife]

Despite how hyped up this story would seem to be, as others have noted, it does not appear that Miyamoto was, in fact, attempting to insult Bungie or suggest that Halo is easy to design; he was simply saying that he could make something similar, but he chooses not to do so. Different game developers have different styles: As Miyamoto has shown with titles like Pikmin and others, he likes to experiment with new ideas, when he has inspiration. Sega, while it was once more so like this, during its more quirky Saturn-Dreamcast era, also tends to take this hit-or-miss approach. The result is, like with most basic, original research, ingenious ideas with a sometimes flawed, immature result. Take Mario Sunshine, for example, on the Nintendo end, or Shenmue, on the Sega end. Every once in awhile, one will strike gold, with a Pikmin, a Zelda, a Panzer Dragoon, or a Rez. While following convention may result in a less flawed game, it will not be anything revolutionary. For better or for worse, the innovators in the game industry are often lambasted because of their "flawed" games, when their less creative counterparts later take the concept, refine it, and receive heaps of praise. I think that Miyamoto, fortunately, has the credibility to be given the benefit of the doubt, unlike less-known experimentalists. Even if he weren't so disposed, it would seem that he would rather be creative and true to his own artistic sensibilities than pander to game reviewers who pounce on anything which is not completely mature.

To Break a Butterfly on a Wheel

[SimHacker]

Bungie wins big in this fight, because they're lucky for Miyamoto to even acknowledge their existence.

In the same way, The World's Greatest Creationist Scientists win big whenever a real respected scientist agrees to debate them, not because the Creationists can possibly win the debate, but because they score points and gain undeserved legitimacy by having a real scientist take them seriously enough to waste the time debating with them.

It's as unfair a fight as Richard Dawkins debating A. E. Wilder-Smith, where the creationists totally lose the argument, but score propaganda points by being taken much more seriously than they deserve.

-Don

another slow news day I see

[Ryunosuke]

So we're picking on who? I can't tell an fps that caters to the lowest common demononator that is being ghetto ported to the pc? or a guy who's seen better days and made one of the games I spent my allowence on when I was a kid? i'm not too fond of either one. I'd like to mod myself confused

Lost in translation

[johncadengo]

I lot of people are pointing out that Frank mistook Miyamoto's comment.

I think a lot of people are mistaking Frank's comment. It doesn't seem like he's retorting, as people put it, but instead making a sly-sarcastic remark. He not affirming Miyamoto's point (that he just finds what people like and makes that), he's replying to Miyamoto's remark (I can make Halo, but choose not to) with his own remark: I could('ve) made Mario, but choose not to.

Yes, he states, "We are hard at work on a side-scrolling platform game..." But we know he's not. It's obviously a joke. He could be hard at work on that side-scroller, but he chooses not to. He's hard at work on Halo. And that's that.

Re:Lost in translation

[Anonymous Coward]

TITCR

Not Popular?

[Gotung]

Gamestop alone has taken something like 400,000 pre-orders for Halo 3. That just one chain of stores. And thats just pre-order. And the game won't even be out for a few months.

Re:Not Popular?

[Anonymous Coward]

1.61% of the world is pre-ordering Halo3

I would love

[jameseyjamesey]

I would love to see Miyamoto make an FPS that takes advantage of the Wii! He of all people could breathe some new life into the genre.

How the source code of the industry looks...

[Fortyseven]

// Step off, bitch.
bool isMoreBaddassThanShiggy(Developer *dev)
{
    return false;
}

Ironic

[Kratisto]

I'm not saying that a 20 year old game about a plumber being rehashed every couple years is still original, but isn't Bungie only confirming Miyamoto's accusations by saying that they will response in side-scrolling style?

Re:Ironic

[RearNakedChoke]

Indeed. It shows that Bungie does not innovate. A Bungie side-scroller is yet another copy of an innovation, just like Halo is of the FPS. Its not just Bungie. Most American game companies churn out games much like Hollywood does with movies - formulas and sequels.

Well, duh.

[mattgreen]

What should they have played? Doom? Quake? Your favorite FPS game? But what difference would it have made? What happened is gaming went mainstream, and Halo is one of the titles that did it. It was lucky, but it is a solid title on its own. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out, but somehow, this discussion comes up every time Halo is discussed here. I don't think people really want to discuss it, but rather complain to an audience that is likely to identify with their gaming angst. It is as if there is this unspoken dislike of something that hit the mainstream that you personally didn't approve of.

Me, I haven't found a FPS game that I like as much as Tribes 1, which is quite old. I can still have some fun in other FPS games, though. Video games are so meaningless, however, that I find it hard to be engrossed in them, and really have to wonder why people get so worked up over how good they are, or which game is popular.

Re:Well, duh.

[Knuckles]

That's all well and good, but doesn't change the fact that Halo is considered great mostly by those who don't know anything else.

Re:Well, duh.

[mattgreen]

OK, so what is the problem here?

Re:Well, duh.

[Knuckles]

You tell me -- you were the one who got all worked up about it. I just answered the guy who asked "i wonder why people think Halo is so great".

Re:Well, duh.

[ben there...]

It's like telling a bunch of South Park fans that Mickey Mouse is the funniest cartoon ever.

Bungie missed the point

[Touvan]

Miyamato said he tries to make new experiences fun. Bungies says they can copy Miyamato any day. I think we know who missed the point.

Re:Bungie missed the point

[^_^x]

You just summed it up better than anyone here. If they wanted to move in on his territory, they wouldn't try to copy a >20 year old game. Then again - they'd make a truly innovative console game. I don't think they're taking it so seriously either though.

Pimps at Sea

[scrain]

Maybe, just maybe.. if we're VERY lucky. We might end up with Bungie's legendary vapor-game PIMPS AT SEA!!

What? Berzerk totally had a storyline!

[JoshDM]

You're this human with a lazer gun and you've intruded into a robot stronghold. Your goal is to make it through the thousands of rooms avoid robots and Evil Otto in order to get to the other side!

Just like the chicken!

Maybe not a diss at Halo

[Goldrush]

Maybe a more accurate translation would be "Stop suggesting that Nintendo make a traditional FPS." Lord knows I hear it too often on message boards.

Halo's popularity

[Overly Critical Guy]

...the popularity of games like Halo.

I've said this in a previous comment, but Halo wasn't some universally popular hit. For some reason, it was very heavily hyped by the gaming press to give that impression, but the original Xbox tied with the Gamecube at only 15% of the market, so not that many have played it. Probably as many who have played Metroid Prime.

Maybe Halo 3 will be different, but if there's a relatively small fanbase waiting for it (compared to, say, Grand Theft Auto), how big could the third one be?

Off-topic question--has anyone asked Bungie if they're out of touch with Japanese audiences? The 360 is essentially dead there.

Re:Halo's popularity

[twistedsymphony]

Halo 1 for the Xbox ranks 25th for lifetime sales in the US since with 4.91million units sold
Halo 2 for the Xbox ranks 16th with 6.11million units sold
Metroid Prime ranks 147th with 1.92 units sold
http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=&console= &publisher=&sort=America

Keep in mind this is all platforms for all time, competing against greats like Mario Bros on the NES, Tetris on the Gameboy, The Sims on the PC, and Grand Theft Auto on the PS2. Ranking 16 and 25th for all time is no small feat.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Anonymous Coward]

Keep in mind this is all platforms for all time, competing against greats like Mario Bros on the NES, Tetris on the Gameboy, The Sims on the PC, and Grand Theft Auto on the PS2. Ranking 16 and 25th for all time is no small feat.

Ah yes, back in the day when video gaming was a small enough narket that selling a million copies was a Big Deal....

Re:Halo's popularity

[mrwiz]

now now... let's not let facts get in the way of a good fan boi-izm.

Re:Halo's popularity

[cheater512]

I agree with you. I've never played it and I've only seen it once and it was a real meh game.

Re:Halo's popularity

[twistedsymphony]

oh I agree completely, I never really liked halo personally, despite owning a few Xbox consoles I never owned Halo 1 and only owned Halo 2 because I received it as a gift. I was simply stating that contrary to the GGP it WAS a wildly popular game despite it mediocrity.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Luke Psywalker]

I think the really telling statistic is that globally Halo 2 is the 31st best selling game in history with 7.89 million units shipped, a long way off Super Mario Brothers' 40.24 million.

Re:Halo's popularity

[PhoenixAtlantios]

I don't believe comparing a game that was released in a different sized market with one released today is a fair comparison at all; the gaming market has increased substantially since the days of the Super Nintendo Entertainment System and the original Mario Brothers. Mario 64 sold more copies than Super Mario Kart, but does that mean it was better or that the market was simply larger? There's more people going to see movies in cinemas these days than there was thirty years ago but does that mean movie quality has increased or just the number of cinema goers?

I'd like to see a comparison between the games based on the time in which they were released, not just raw numbers.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Anonymous Coward]

Miyamoto has at least 53 games on that list. I don't know how many Bungie has on the list (at least 2), but my guess is that it's less than 53. Was it petty for Miyamoto to make those comments about Halo? Sure. Is anyone in the gaming industry in a better position to judge the merit of a game's design? Probably not.

-Lee

Re:Halo's popularity

[Rebelgecko]

Metroid Prime ranks 147th with 1.92 units sold...
Wow, it must REALLY suck to be ranked #148th!
Hypothetically, how would one go about selling the other .92 copies? Reselling the first copy that was sold used for 92% the original price?

Re:Halo's popularity

[Kooshman]

I love how the whole context of the comment has been lost. This chain of comments gives the perfect example.

First off, it's cute, using the statistics only for America. How about we re-run those numbers on a global market? Custom-designing your game to appeal much more to a narrower demographic is always going to give you more spectacular results. Try this one instead*:
http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php

Note how the Halos now have their asses kicked. Sure, they're still big sellers... but note how *most* of the games coming before Halo 2 are Miyamoto games. (this is where I'm getting back to the point)

What Miyamoto's saying is that by concentrating on making really awesome, original games he keeps pumping out great games. Sure, he has the skill to make Yet Another Game, but so does every other game developer out there with two and a half brain cells to rub together. The top of the line pop studios (id, Bungie, etc.) do have better success rates, but they still have to compete with other plain-jane studios. He's saying that he's not aiming for the cheeseburger market. Sure, it provides a big hit or two... but note how most of the big hits are those revolutionary games. Even on a strictly numerical game, he's winning hands-down. Why don't more studios do that? They can't or they won't. He never actually insulted Halo-- only that Bungie was pursuing a saturated market.

(*Also, how did Metroid Prime only ship 120K units in Japan? That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. How accurate are these numbers?)

Re:Halo's popularity

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know if he is right or not. But all I know is that I played Halo 1 & 2 for hours/days/months. I just completed Halo 1 last week for the third or fourth time. I have never enjoyed any of his game that much.

I really don't care if a game is "revolutionnary" or not. It has to be fun/entertaining.

It looks like somes in the video industry take their job a bit too seriously.

And Frankly his tone insults the programmers/designers/etc. who dedicated years of their life to release Halo. I rarely sympathize with such pretentious people.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Anonymous Coward]

Miyamoto has a point. Games like Halo are based on appeal and hype mainly. The Super Mario Bros. series started the gaming revolution. How can you compare something that started the gaming revolution to something that is piggy backing its success?
No respect at all from Bungie. Miyamoto deservers way more admiration and has every right to judge games with gusto.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Rycross]

Metroid is very much a game for the American audiences. It doesn't have very much appeal in Japan. 120k units makes sense.

Re:Halo's popularity

[stonecypher]

When looking at those numbers, please remember that there are ten times as many gamers today as there were in the Metroid era. Also, if you sum Shigeru's games, he outsells Bungie single-handedly, all the way back to marathon.

It may also be instructive to know that those console statistics sites like vgcharts and vgchartz are estimate numbers. Whereas in these two particular cases they're pretty accurate, please be aware that their numbers are frequently extremely different than the numbers held by the publishers of those games. For example, take a look at the statistics for Spongebob games. I am contractually obligated not to give correct numbers, but I can tell you those American numbers are off by more than 100%, and that sales for those five games in Japan were not zero.

Those sites get their numbers by scumming a local retailer and multiplying. There are bizarre errors in their data. I know, there really aren't other data sources to go by, and those sites are fine for discussion, but a word of advice: don't use their numbers if the numbers matter. Find sales rates on your own.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Cornflake917]

If you bothered clicking on the link, you would have seen that "Super Mario Brothers" on the NES sold over 40 million copies, the most any game has ever sold.

Why someone would mod you insightful is beyond me.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Anonymous Coward]

Sad that Half-Life 1 is tied with The Incredibles for total sales.

Re:Halo's popularity

[chazbot]

I love how the whole context of the comment has been lost.chain of comments gives the perfect example.

First off, it's cute, using the statistics only for America.

From the article: Entertainment Weekly's Geoff Keighley asks the video game legend if he feels he's losing touch with American gamers because games like Halo often sell more copies.

Emphasis added.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Anonymous Coward]

... 40.24 million is not that hard when you have literally no competition because you've bullied the biggest retailers and developers into not supporting the other guys... 7 million with two major competitors and a limiting market(rated T game, FPS on a console) is nothing to scoff at.

Re:Halo's popularity

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF are you talking about? Mario started the gaming revolution? BULLSHIT. The Atari 2600 started the gaming revolution and there were no fucking plumbers in it. For the sake of argument, lets say there were though. Mario (in any or all of its flavors) does not compare in the slightest way to what is in Halo. Halo is such a vastly superior achievement that this guy is not even in the same league. Mario has slightly more complexity than Asteroids. It's not that they aren't good games but they don't exactly take a rocket scientist to work out. It's like pop music, just we're talkin' about games. I have yet to hear of Miyamoto making any game of any real substance. All of his stuff is for little kids (not that adults can't enjoy them but little kids are the focus).

If I was stuck on a deserted island with the choice of Miyamoto's 53 games or Bungie's 2, I would take Bungie's without the slightest hesitation.

Halo's Oldness

[Alboin]

During the Middle Ages, artists strove to make extremely life like paintings and such. Yet, when they did achieve this they could only continue to make more life-like paintings. They just got boring. The same thing over and over.

The creators of Halo are all the way back in this era. Trying to make 'pretty' games. Shigeru knows that fancy graphics and sounds don't make a game. He's been there, and created so many pretty games that he got board. He's the same as an artist of modern art. They don't strive to make things look life like, and they don't care what people think of their work. Instead, they strive to create art at a higher level than most.

It's only a matter of time before the creators of Halo reach Shigeru's state of mind. (If at all.) Quite frankly, I think it Shigeru made Halo the creators of Halo would be in awe.

I'm curious

[Tarlus]

From the article:

Miyamoto: "I always try to create new experiences that are fun to play." And then:

Earlier in the interview Miyamoto also talks briefly about possibly making games [...] such as respecting the elderly or paying one's taxes. Does not compute.

Re:I'm curious

[mink]

I think if anyone could make those subjects into games that are fun to play it would be him, he helped with Chibi-Robo.

Chibi-robo made cleaning, dealing with vermin, cooking dinner, domestic trouble, irresponsible spending, traumatized children and shattered dreams fun.

Frankie wasn't being serious...

[Anonymous Coward]

The /. community never has had much of a sense of humor. Find and read the original interview where Frankie made that comment (or read one of his Weekly Updates on bungie.net) and you'll realize that he was just joking. Though, a Halo version on Metal Slug might be kinda cool. And by the way I own and xbox and a GCN.

Pikmin

[Krater76]

Miyamoto gains tons of respect from me for creating Pikmin which is light-years ahead of Halo. All his games have been unique, genre-creating blockbusters.

Besides, wasn't the genius of Halo the real-time IK (inverse kinematics) on the models? I thought I remembered hearing that this was their big addition to the FPS genre. Otherwise, I don't really know what's so great about Halo - it had a convoluted storyline with boring level design and bad voice acting.

Re:Pikmin

[grumbel]

### All his games have been unique, genre-creating blockbusters.

Some for sure, but definitively not all, especially not in the last years. Zelda has been basically the same game for far to long, StarFox just got worse and worse with every release, MarioSunshine was pretty awful and a bunch of other haven't really been very interesting either. Overall I would say that Pikmin was the only game he was involved in the last years that actually did something new and interesting, it was however terrible executed with the 8h time limit, a far to small world and such. Pikmin2 sadly failed to fix most of the issues, but instead added some new ones (horrible underground levels).

I do admire Miyamoto for what he has done in the past, but today I don't really care so much about his games any more, they simply don't offer much innovation any more and even lack things considered standard by many others such as online play, voice acting and such.

That said, with Wii Sports and Nintendogs he certainly still has some influence left, but that just isn't the type of game I would want to play.

Re:Pikmin

[mink]

Voice acting?

Have you heard any of the recent dubbed games. it sounds like they asked the cleaning staff to come in an hour early. Most games developed and acted in their native tongue (Prince of Persia for instance) tend to be much better acted then what we see in the overdubs (AR Tonelico only has english dub cutscenes, the pain!). This excludes the "it will be cool to talk in english" titles like Biohazard/Resident Evil "I hope this isnt chrises blood". I do note they have gotten better with that.

I think it's funny Bungie responded back...

[Anonymous Coward]

with that comment as Miyamoto was making a point about creating innovation and Bungie responds back stating that they can copy another game...

Failure to comprehend and failure to make a valid response on Bungie's part.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:What? Berzerk totally had a storyline!

[Anonymous Coward]

*ahem* the plot of Berzerk is that you're a pilot who's crash landed on a planet of killer robots. Your ship is toast, all you've got is a laser pistol, so you're screwed. How long can you stay alive?
  Frenzy expanded on it a little with the central computer that controls the robots and the factory that puts them out.

Bungie Already made a Side Scroller

[acomj]

Bungie made/ported a side scroller already for the mac (back when Bungie was a mac developer)
I remember Jobs demoing halo at a key note.

I've played it. It was only OK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse_(computer_game)

If he made an FPS

[Captain Spam]

Well, of course Miyamoto could make Halo. It's an FPS. Follow them back to History. getMisterIKnowMoreOldGamesThanYou(). getOldestFPSInMemory() and trace them forward through Wolfenstein, Doom, Quake, Unreal, and Halo, and you can pick out a fairly predictable evolutionary pattern. More graphics, "cooler" weapons, advance the engine a bit, make it more badass, good, print it, you've got a new FPS. That's not how Miyamoto does things.

Of course, if he were to make an FPS, it'd probably wind up with an engine that supported jumping puzzles in a non-intrusive way (somehow he would; I'm not the design god here). And have a quirky sense of design, not the normal "I R SPACE MERC I KILL U" layout. And the weapons would be strange and unconventional, requiring more strategy than "get the biggest gun and kill things fasterer". And...

Hang on a sec. That might rock. Miyamoto, please do design an FPS! That might be interesting!

Re:If he made an FPS

[Dwedit]

Miyamoto was involved with Metroid Prime.

What's special about Halo?

[jgoemat]

It's basically a 3D shooter. You have weapons, health, shields, vehicles, aliens and cut scenes. There's was never anything revolutionary about it. Bungee took a genre that was already successful and gave it a decent story and designed it well.

Suppose...

[Unreliable]

I'm just curious as to whether the reaction might be different if moto had attacked a different game than Halo. Is he just critical of Halo, or is he claiming that he could make games equivalent to his top levels of competition. (For example: suppose he had said Half Life 2, or Starcraft instead of Halo) Just food for thought.

Halo = Overrated

[Rev Jim (AKA Metal F]

...well, I just started playing it for the first time this weekend and am about 5 hours into it or so. So far it's a solid FPS, but I don't get the hype to be honest - unless you're a x-box fanboy anyways, there's been dozens of better FPS titles to precede Halo as well as suceed it. I think the industry overhyped it as well...I could rattle off fifty games from the last decade plus without much effort that school Halo, among then SMB 1,2,3,4. It's very good, but I was expecting more: probably much so from avidly playing PC FPS titles since Wolfenstein was released ages ago. so far Halo is about a 7.5-8 out of 10. Supermario World or SMB3 are both around 9-9.5 easily

my favorite part...

[thegnu]

Now that I'm writing it, that'd be kind of cool. Especially when something explodes nearby and he turns to look at it just as you come under fire!

my favorite part is when you shoot the stupid photographer in the face, and you get to hang the fucking camera around your neck so you can see what you're shooting at.

sheesh

[brkello]

The guy is kidding. How can you not pick up on that? It is getting harder and harder for me to read anything on Slashdot games (or even in general). The stuff that gets modded up is all pro-Nintendo/Mac/Linux without any sanity. Slashdot is just going to alienate all of the intelligent, unbiased individuals until it is 100% groupthink instead of the 85% it is now. I'm just wondering if there is anyone else that feels this way and how to combat it? I like Slashdot...I don't want to see it ruined by the zealots (any more than it already is).

PC FPS, Turok, and GoldenEye

[tepples]

in the PC world, Goldeneye doesn't count because it doesn't use double input style control (keyboard/mouse or dual analog), which allows for similtaneous movement and aiming. Say what? PC first-person shooters have four digital keys (We Suck At Deathmatch) for moving and an analog input (mouse) for turn/aim. Likewise, Turok: Dinosaur Hunter used four digital keys (the C buttons) for moving and an analog input (the Control Stick) for turn/aim. GoldenEye 007 control style 1.2 ("Solitaire") was the same, except it added another button to toggle between turn/aim and precision aim. If moving and turning were both on the Control Stick, then you weren't using Solitaire.

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark

[Thyrteen]

Perfect dark was also waaay awesome. possible better than halo with the option of multiplayer bots! Same creators as goldeneye.

Correction:

[SvnLyrBrto]

Bungie USED TO MAKE very good games.

I'm sorry, buy as much as I liked Myth and Marathon, they're both... what... over ten years old now? You really can't harken back to those old days and honestly say they have any bearing on what bungie's become NOW. Oni was a withered shell compared to what was promised. And Halo? If you remember the MacWorld demos of what Halo was going to be like before before they sold out to the gates and gutted it for the xbox, and compare to what was finally actually released.... you'd happily feed the entire bungie team through a wood-chipper.

Being bought out by microsoft, for a game studio, appears to have pretty much the same consequences as being bought out by EA.

cya,
john

Cultural Misinterpretations

[Bones3D_mac]

Knowing the type person Miyamoto is, combined the harsh realities of failure within a company like Nintendo, where making a bad decision can land you into a "window seat" position, effectively locking you out of any future projects within the company (like what happened to the creator of the original Gameboy, following the massive failure of his VirtualBoy project), I believe the point intended was that he needs to be innovative for Nintendo to survive within the company. If Miyamoto ever gets to the point of only rehashing the same crap over and over, without including some highly innovative twist in each new version of (insert game title here), Nintendo wouldn't think twice about putting him out to pasture.

Nintendo is over a century old, and operates in an almost mafia-like context. If you can't serve the family well, you may as well just be dead to them. No American game developer could understand this concept, since our culture doesn't follow the idea that we should strive to bring honor to our employers (outside of honoring the almighty dollar).

GBM: Bungie Vs. Miyamoto... FIGHT!

[Schmendric]

And the winner is...
http://thesurrealist.co.uk/monster.cgi?att=Bungie& def=Miyamoto&a=S

Someone please mod parent up!

[Draconix]

I've been reading through this thread, and this is the most insightful post I've seen in it. Unfortunately, I'm out of mod points. :(

I'll bite the bullet.

[MMInterface]

I really enjoyed Halo 1 and 2's multiplayer experience. Factor in XBox Live and most great games don't have the same online multiplayer experience. When my buddies came over friday or sat it was what we did before we went out. I'm into RPGs and RTSs while most of my friends like sports games. Halo was our common ground. There were a million other fps with multiplayer capability but we just didn't find them as enjoyable when you had a crowd, not to mention the likelyhood that everyone knew how to play any of the other games was very slim. It had good balance, not too tactical, not too simplistic and it had the right attitude. To those who say it wasn't that popular I have to disagree. Its one of those games many people know how to play even if they don't own the game. Over half the guys I played with didn't even have their own xbox, they didn't need too. I'm not talking about techies and gamers here. Just guys who drink beer and play Madden. Most of them haven't touched an RPG, and until Wii sports they hadn't touched anything from Nintendo since the Super NES days. I think Miyamoto and many people here are totally missing what Halo's apeal is and that apealing aspect is something he isn't the greatest at. You can't make something if your only understing of it is overley simplistic because its not your style. His comment was cocky disrespectfull. I often do the same. Make a smart comment and pretend it wasn't supposed to be something condescending. To that I have heard many describe his games in the same fashion which is what Bungie did.

vs. PC fps?

[Doppler00]

I don't know, I tried playing Halo and Halo 2 multiplayer and couldn't get into it. I guess it didn't help that I was playing it on old CRT television with 4 way split screen. The controls are just not as intuitive as a mouse (relative vs. absolute positioning). One thing for certain is Halo brought FPS's to the masses. I'm more exciting about Unreal Tournament 3.... maybe they can make the PC and XBOX360 versions compatible. Would be great to see how well the XBOX controls do against PC players.

This is ridiculous

[Dave Parrish]

This whole story is insane. Miyamoto's comment has been taken entirely out of context, in most cases.

It's quite obvious that he was simply trying to say that what he does is makes games HE thinks are fun; he doesn't look at what the population is finding fun at the time and copy that. Halo was used as an example purely because that's what the reporter said.

He wasn't trying to slam Bungie in any way. I mean, come on. Has he EVER slammed ANYONE?

It's not that Miyamoto was being mean, it's that Bungie was being oversensitive.

Re:This is ridiculous

[hal2k]

Slow news day. Legendary Video Game designer talks about his philosophy of game design, and uses a game that is quite different than anything he has done as an example. Bloggers and Reporters all want to justify their existence, so they throw a few scraps to the little fishies, who bite. Instant Controversy, and just in time for Lunch!

I hope that all Halo 3 fanboys get their shiny new game, and it smells like poo, and requires multiple updates before they can play it, and many more before it doesn't crash frequently. And that they have to call Microsoft tech support at least twice to find out *why* their 360 is crashing, to which they are told that it must be their problem, and they should take their console to the nearest EB GameWorld to confirm that it is crashing.

--hal2k

Bungie officially sucks.

[Tokerat]

First, Bungie strives to bring gaming to the Mac platform. Mac has had the potential for years, but no one saw profit in that market.

Then, just as it was about to all come together, they sold out to Microsoft and pulled the plug on that.

Now, one of the most famous people in ALL of electronic gaming history says "Well, Halo style games aren't my thing, I try to make interesting new experiences with games" (which, by the way, Halo is NOT), and they have the goddamn gal to snap off a comment like that?

Bungie, you're fucking dead to me. And for the record, Unreal Tournament has it all over you.

Re:Bungie officially sucks.

[JonathanBoyd]

Ah, the irony of your sig, in the light of your comment. It's hardly Bungie who are being oversensitive; it's guys like you who can't take a joke.

Re:Bungie officially sucks.

[Tokerat]

...or is it? The irony of my sig indeed.

Is physics really that important?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Weapons: The only innovation is the gravity gun. Crowbar? Melee weapon. Crossbow? Functionally a sniper rifle."

Oh, I didn't mind that much. Yes HL2 was a physics exercise, but then a lot of games are like that. e.g. Doom 3, bouncing grenades off the walls, FarCry, grenade launcher arc, and ricochet. The gravity gun was the first weapon to push (more like launch), and pull.

Re:Is physics really that important?

[C0rinthian]

Don't get me wrong, HL2 is a great game. I just think the GP was exaggerating the differences between the two games. The gravity gun was fun as hell to play with.

I love Slashdot

[goldcd]

Nintendo designers are arguing with Xbox designers like children in a playground
And Slashdot manages to brings Macs into it :)

Is WASD really that great?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Keyboard and mouse offers great control when you master it. But it's a rather steep learning curve. WASD isn't intuitive at all - they aren't seperated at all from the rest of the keyboard and are positioned under the weak fingers of your weak hand. At least with a gamepad, your directional controls were actually intended for directional control."

Well I've done both and the problem with the WASD keys is that one can get "WASD fingeritus". In other words jumping around rapidly on the keyboard is very hard on the fingers. Sometimes to the point of cramps on some games. I've also found that vehicle control can be a pain. e.g FarCry versus Halo were the keyboard gives you forward and backward, while the mouse gives you direction.

Deep sigh

[Dr.Boje]

Yet again, another "controversy" where the comment that starts it all is taken completely out of context. Here's the question Miyamoto was asked taken from the original article (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20037961,00.html) :

You mentioned social issues in Japan. But games are a global business -- and the youth of America have a host of unique issues in front of them. The reason I mention this is that one criticism of Nintendo's games is that they are very Japanese-centric. American gamers have bought more copies of Halo than they did of Metroid, for instance. Do you ever worry that you're losing touch with what young American players might want to play?

Obviously, looking at that question, it's no wonder he replied the way he did. He wasn't putting down Halo, he was trying to explain why he designs games the way he does. The very next question he's asked:

Some game companies in America don't think like that. They are mostly risk- averse, producing sequels and franchise extensions, rather than exploring new ideas. There is a lot of emphasis on market research and focus groups. Does that hurt the games business?

Miyamoto's response?

With rising budgets, I understand why game companies have a great deal of concern if they don't design games in this way. But you need to create what you want to create! In that sense, I would really like to see people develop games like I do...

So you can see that Miyamoto's intentions weren't bad; rather than following the American flow, he creates what he wants to create. Let's look at O'Connor's side of the story! What was O'Connor asked?

One final question: last week, Shigeru Miyamoto said in an interview with Geoff Keighley in Entertainment Weekly that he could make Halo.

Hmm.. that sure seemed to leave out a lot of information! O'Connor's sitting there thinking that Miyamoto was challenging his game-creating abilities, downplaying the difficulty of creating Halo, or something else stupid like that, when in reality it's just some brown-nosed interviewer trying to get a good response for his story. Sickening, I know. I just get pissed when the media tries to create controversy where there really is none.

Re:Deep sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

And YOU seemed to misinterpret the response. Frankie isn't a game-creator. He's in charge of the story. And it's a very, very good story (Read the novels, the games are only a small part of it). He's also in charge of the weekly update on bungie.net. And he's well known for his sense of humor. He regularly posts about how much he sucks at Halo (He's not the world's best player or anything, but... well, he kicks my ass, and I'm no slouch). His statement was a joke. Basically that "Miyamoto chooses not to make Halo. We choose not to make Mario. No hard feelings." Except his way is funnier.

Unless you don't get the joke, which apparently most of the people in this thread didn't. But I suppose the fact that they didn't RTFA helps that...

Re:Deep sigh

[Cowardly Anonymity]

Nicely put, mostly. Although the last replier did bring up a decent point about how O'Connor was trying to add a bit of humor in. Mostly, Miyamoto's statement in summary was: "Hey, I make whatever I want to make, because I think that's cool and creative. I don't want to make another FPS." O'Connor's response was: "We don't want to make a plumber platformer." Quite legitimate comments on both sides, although out of context, they may seem a bit harsh and petty. And, really, Nintendo does extend their franchise. How many Mario games/sequels are there? Not that that's bad: that's just business. And all those copies-sold comparisons: How do you expect Halo (which has been on the market for only about 6 years) to compete with Mario, who has existed since 1981? That's just a silly comparison. They're both excellent franchises in their own rights, and they don't really NEED to compete.

How droll....

[MrChom]

I reall do find it very amusing that the entire gaming world has nothing better to do than jump onto a mistranslated out of context comment followed by a slightly sarcastic retort by the man who regularly draws the Mister Chief stuff!

It's a slow day on the internet when people turn this kind of rubbish into a fight...I mean come on people, get a grip, this is like watching two people sit and eat lunch quietly while everyone else circles them shouting "FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT" over and over again.

Evolutionary vs Revolutionary is a Red Herring.

[Vermifax]

Nobody really gives a flying crap if the game was 'revolutionary' or 'evolutionary' except fanbois and anti-fanbois.

We want games that are fun.

Is halo fun? Check!
Are miya's games fun? Check!

The rest is crap.

Re:Evolutionary vs Revolutionary is a Red Herring.

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh. But Halo isnt fun!

Re:Evolutionary vs Revolutionary is a Red Herring.

[mink]

Halo was fun for me (PC version) until I hit the areas with multiple copies of the same room in a row. I actually got turned around and backtracked a bunch before I figured out that happened. Another point where it became not fun was the library level. I can see what they wanted, but they drug it out too long and it just got annoying. It also suffered from the same problem as the earlier area I got turned around in, and at that point in the game that kind of mix-up could get you a game over. That means starting the damn level over again.

I'm not saying the level design was Oni bad, but it could have used a little less repetition/mirroring/genericism.

I hope someday more level designers will say to themselves "What does this room get used for and what will it look like after it has been used for a while" and work towards that. The only thing that sould end up cookie cutter are large warehouse compleses (contents better varry enough to make some mental map) and houses from Poltergeist.

Halflife 1 while not perfect it did seem to have an eye towards that concept in a lot of areas.

I have to say this....

[DiEx-15]

Lets get ready to rumble!!!!!!


Ok. I know that was stupid, but it had to be said.

It's a joke!

[PhoenixOne]

This is the problems with text communication. I'm guessing when Frank said this he had a big smile on his face and laughed afterwards.

I could be wrong, but I think its far more likely that he was being funny rather than arrogant. And the internet is trying to add drama where there isn't any. ;)

Halo got pwned by puppies...

[trdrstv]

Halo 1 for the Xbox ranks 25th for lifetime sales in the US since with 4.91million units sold
Halo 2 for the Xbox ranks 16th with 6.11million units sold
Metroid Prime ranks 147th with 1.92 units sold
http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=&console= &publisher=&sort=America

Great example, wrong game, wrong totals. Check VGChartz again.

Halo 1 = Sales of 6.43 million units worldwide.

Halo 2 = Sales of 7.89 million units worldwide.

Nintendogs = Sales of 13.58 million units worldwide.

Yes, Nintendogs is less than 1 million units away from outselling both games combined.