Except that is one of the first thing everyone gripes about... it has to play DVDs because the mass market want that. Even if they won't actually use it they can say "wow, free dvd playback".
To tell another story, one of my friends actually has 3 xboxes in his house, one for each brother. My friend has a standalone DVD player and so bought the xbox for games, however the other two brothers got it for the DVD playback and games were a bonus. So out of the 5 people I know with xboxes, 2 of them got them for the playback - bad sample group I know, but they have to count for something.
I appreciate the joke, but in the book it was a very important chapter. Until that point Saruman was Gandalf's senior, and in this chapter you see Gandalf overtake him (although arguably he had done so before, but just not as openly). The fact that it established Gandalf's new power is very important I think - it shows how much he has changed since his death.
Although in the movies Jackson will prolly just do this by making Gandalf whack a few more orcs and shoot a few fireballs from his staff... sigh.
Why would making it fit the books perfectly ruin it for all but the die-hard fans? The books were popular enough in their own right that the movie sort of sold itself; and having read the books and seen the movies I cannot say that any change Jackson has made has been for the better.
He has just dumbed it down, and added some more action - pretty poor if you ask me.
Well I think if you sold the only jedi in the game they might cotton on to it...
I wonder if she actually knows how she unlocked the jedi? Like does it tell you what the successful steps were, or is it just "voila! you are now a jedi for completing an unknown series of steps"?
Who likes having the *option*. If you buy the extended edition, you should still be able to select to view it without the added scenes. It would seem that DVDs were made with that very thought in mind. Shame Peter Jackson is a money-grabbing whore.
Of course it is off-topic you dolt - where is the news post on stupid mods? I fully agree with the parent, half the mods these days are modding things in mad directions.
Sensible posts become trolls, trollish posts become insightful, off-topic posts become interesting, and depending on the topic (ie whether 'we' like the company or dislike it) fanboy responses get modded accordingly.
The quality of stories, and of modding on slashdot has fallen methinks.
It isn't a selling point for title owners, only developers. The end user couldn't care less how easy the development/porting was.
That said, the ease of porting was great for xbox 1 as it provided an incentive to develop for it, and therefore lots of games. However now that microsoft have a decent share of the console market, developers will continue support the system just as they do sony and nintendo, neither of whom have pc-compatable processors.
Fair enough - you make good sense. However my issue isn't that the guy didn't get modded down, but rather that he got modded to 5. In fact he was the first (and only?) post to make it that high.
It just bugs me that inflamatory, and ill-informed posts get modded up before others more deserving.
Sigh... Please list to me the other games that included those features?
Sure Halo was not the first FPS, nor was it the first console FPS, nor was it even the first good FPS. However it brought together a lot of elements and turned them into a really good game. The things I listed were unique to Halo, and though none of them revolutionary in themselves, they are all improvements over the norm.
At least in my ignorance I provided a basis for my views - where is your reasoning?
Is there any evidence at all that Bungie are being constrained? Conspiracy theories are fun and all, but before writing the article someone would need to find some facts supporting it...
Why isn't the parent modded troll? WTF is up with mods these days. Halo was a great game, and anyone who says otherwise is either a troll, or in the minority. Don't mod things merely because they complain about what is popular or successful, and certainly don't do it just because it is associated with Microsoft.
Apart from anything else the sales speak for themselves. The people have spoken and they don't agree with the parent. In fact apart from a record number of sales, Halo kept the xbox alive nearly single-handidly, and Halo 2 is currently one of the most anticipated games...
Have you actually played the game or own an xbox? Halo is still graphically one of the most impressive games on the system - so I am not entirely sure what your gripe with the graphics is. As to the framerate, it keeps around 30 most of the time - although it does dip a lot in co-op (a feature more games do not have).
Speaking of co-op, has any other game delivered it in such a full and fun manner? Co-op really is double the people, double the fun in Halo.
Lets see about the other innovations - oh maybe a regenerating shield which really does rock. No more searching for health packs, or shield kits or whatever. And no more stupidly esay enemies just so your health doesn't run out. Halo provides a challenging experience and has tough enemies that will thrash you unless you properlly manage your shield. It is a much more elegant solution to a myriad of health packs, and I think it provides substantially more fun in the gameplay - you actually feel that you are up against a decent foe.
The 2 weapon idea worked very well - especially as you can switch at any time. Halo really isn't a game like other FPSs where the bigger the weapon the more useful it is. In every situation there are especially well suited guns in Halo and you will select them for that purpose - rather than lug along whatever the newest thing you have unlocked as in other games.
Oh should we mention the AI? Yeah seems that it was nothing special... back-up marines that are actually a help not a hindrance (as in all other 'team' games). Enemies that actually duck for cover, outflank your, or react to changing situations. Half-life really shone there didn't it... bring on the Doom style enemies any day.
The controls are perfect - up until Halo no FPS on a console played quite right. Sure everyone raves about Goldeneye, but play it today and you feel constrained. Halo really shone in this regard - in fact if this was the only thing it did right, it would still be a game deserving respect. Nearly every console FPS has copied Halo's control style.
Another feature that doesn't get mentioned much is a button dedicated to grenades... It actually makes them a useable weapon, rather than something that will get you killed while you try to scroll to them in your inventory.
Finally the vehicles. Other games have put in cars etc... but they always feel out of place. They don't control well, they aren't resposnive and they get you killed. Halo demonstrated how to integrate vehicles into your game.
I won't bother mentioning the physics (which is amongst the best in any game), or the story - which you might whinge about, but which was delivered through a great use of cut-scenes, terrific voice-acting and provided a lot of suspense and enticement to continue playing.
You sir, are a troll. In fact I think you are a PC playing troll - because nobody who owned the game on the xbox would agree with you. And BTW it did release nearly 3 years ago... (well 2 but who is counting).
No on the PC when you plug it into another computer it brings up a message box saying "Readying iPod for use" by which it means "Formatting all your files". It is really just a misleading message, but I call that bad UI and my brother lost a lot of files to it (he had used it to back up some of his files before reformatting his computer).
My brother owns an iPod and I can tell you he isn't that fussed about it - it has issues, but I notice most of them are mentioned here already... shame is they aren't modded up. Nor are any posts that suggest the iPod is not the be all and end all.
On the other hand every post saying that the Dell model will suck and that the iPod is soooooooooooooo superior has been modded up.
I don't mind you guys having your own opinions or anything, but perhaps be a little less biased in your modding? Ugh I see this happen in so many threads I suppose it isn't worth bothering to point it out... in fact I have basically learnt the rough topics that have awful modding and I generally stay clear of the comments (anything with apple is fanbased; anything with microsoft is hate based; etc...).
Superior UI? Have you seen any app Apple has released for Windows in like, *ever*? They preach about standards and then go completely their own way - hell their Windows apps wouldn't even look standard on a Mac so that doesn't count.
Re the iPod, once again - lovely UI choices... lets see... oh plug it on a new computer and have it format itself - that is a sure fire winner.
I am not sure what point you were trying to make as you didn't actually state what the great UI choices the iPod made were. The iPod design is generally more evolutionary than revolutionary - I own an Intel Pocket Concert and I can tell you the iPod looks pretty damn similar... same shape, some position for the play etc... buttons, same position for the LCD. Similar interface for moving through songs, oh and a scroll wheel that clicks... (cept the Intel puts it on the side not the front).
I don't want to sound like a troll, but I don't understand why everyone slavers over the iPod. It is nice, it is small, and it looks kinda neat - but it wasn't anything new, and it isn't the standout product. Creative had harddrive players before apple, and the iPod design as I already mentioned is derivative. Now that nearly every mp3 player looks like an iPod but is cheaper, and more feature packed, the iPod is nothing special.
It all depends on the game, you really have three situations:
1) Crap game. Releasing a demo just lets people find out ahead of time how crap it is. Sales plummit.
2) Great game. Releasing a demo allows people to discover how great the game is. Sales increase.
3) Average game - in this case I am not sure what happens. Do people buy it because it doesn't suck? Or do they skip it because it doens't rock?
I would think that the choice is pretty easy. If you have a great game, you should always release a demo. If you have a good game that people aren't that convinced about, you should release a demo. But if you have a crap game, never, ever, ever release a demo...
Lol, I didn't mean to sound so antagonistic BTW, it is just that Halo is one of my favorite games, and kept my xbox in use for a fair while after launch.
I definately agree with you about ICO though, terrific game and beautifully exectued (the art and level design was magnificant) however it was extremely short and I doubt many people would play it twice.
Bad choice for an example - Halo had a much better story than the majority of current games (a really good story in fact) - and although the single player campaign wasn't as epic as many games, it wasn't short either. Replay value for that title was unbeleivably high as well.
You would be better choosing nearly any other game to make your point.
I wonder if it will impact on games in terms of timing. Some games are programmed without any timing enforced (still?), they just ran as fast as the console can pump them. I remember that back on the Nintendo 64 X-treme G (the super-fast bike racing game) ran much faster (and therefore played harder) on my brothers console, than on my friends - it seems that in the year between them each buying consoles Nintendo had improved the processor.
I really doubt it - gaming companies screw up all the time - hell most games release these days with patches already waiting for you before you open the box. And in any case, Half-life 2 doesn't need the good name of Valve to sell, just the fact that it is the sequel to 'everyone's' favorite FPS guarantees that.
Realistically, I doubt anyone expected it to ship on time - there have been hints of delays for a month or two now (denied I know) - and gamers are all talk - they bitch and bitch and bitch and continue to play and buy games anyway.
Buying a game developer doesn't instantly make it first party... Halo was mostly done before Microsoft got control of Bungie, a better game to judge will be Halo 2 which will presumable be shaped more by whatever management Microsoft decide to assert (though I think they will be sensible to leave well enough alone).
Slashdot Mirror
Except that is one of the first thing everyone gripes about... it has to play DVDs because the mass market want that. Even if they won't actually use it they can say "wow, free dvd playback".
To tell another story, one of my friends actually has 3 xboxes in his house, one for each brother. My friend has a standalone DVD player and so bought the xbox for games, however the other two brothers got it for the DVD playback and games were a bonus. So out of the 5 people I know with xboxes, 2 of them got them for the playback - bad sample group I know, but they have to count for something.
I appreciate the joke, but in the book it was a very important chapter. Until that point Saruman was Gandalf's senior, and in this chapter you see Gandalf overtake him (although arguably he had done so before, but just not as openly). The fact that it established Gandalf's new power is very important I think - it shows how much he has changed since his death.
Although in the movies Jackson will prolly just do this by making Gandalf whack a few more orcs and shoot a few fireballs from his staff... sigh.
Why would making it fit the books perfectly ruin it for all but the die-hard fans? The books were popular enough in their own right that the movie sort of sold itself; and having read the books and seen the movies I cannot say that any change Jackson has made has been for the better.
He has just dumbed it down, and added some more action - pretty poor if you ask me.
Well I think if you sold the only jedi in the game they might cotton on to it...
I wonder if she actually knows how she unlocked the jedi? Like does it tell you what the successful steps were, or is it just "voila! you are now a jedi for completing an unknown series of steps"?
Who likes having the *option*. If you buy the extended edition, you should still be able to select to view it without the added scenes. It would seem that DVDs were made with that very thought in mind. Shame Peter Jackson is a money-grabbing whore.
Of course it is off-topic you dolt - where is the news post on stupid mods? I fully agree with the parent, half the mods these days are modding things in mad directions.
Sensible posts become trolls, trollish posts become insightful, off-topic posts become interesting, and depending on the topic (ie whether 'we' like the company or dislike it) fanboy responses get modded accordingly.
The quality of stories, and of modding on slashdot has fallen methinks.
It isn't a selling point for title owners, only developers. The end user couldn't care less how easy the development/porting was.
That said, the ease of porting was great for xbox 1 as it provided an incentive to develop for it, and therefore lots of games. However now that microsoft have a decent share of the console market, developers will continue support the system just as they do sony and nintendo, neither of whom have pc-compatable processors.
Fair enough - you make good sense. However my issue isn't that the guy didn't get modded down, but rather that he got modded to 5. In fact he was the first (and only?) post to make it that high.
It just bugs me that inflamatory, and ill-informed posts get modded up before others more deserving.
Sigh... Please list to me the other games that included those features?
Sure Halo was not the first FPS, nor was it the first console FPS, nor was it even the first good FPS. However it brought together a lot of elements and turned them into a really good game. The things I listed were unique to Halo, and though none of them revolutionary in themselves, they are all improvements over the norm.
At least in my ignorance I provided a basis for my views - where is your reasoning?
Is there any evidence at all that Bungie are being constrained? Conspiracy theories are fun and all, but before writing the article someone would need to find some facts supporting it...
Why isn't the parent modded troll? WTF is up with mods these days. Halo was a great game, and anyone who says otherwise is either a troll, or in the minority. Don't mod things merely because they complain about what is popular or successful, and certainly don't do it just because it is associated with Microsoft.
Apart from anything else the sales speak for themselves. The people have spoken and they don't agree with the parent. In fact apart from a record number of sales, Halo kept the xbox alive nearly single-handidly, and Halo 2 is currently one of the most anticipated games...
Have you actually played the game or own an xbox? Halo is still graphically one of the most impressive games on the system - so I am not entirely sure what your gripe with the graphics is. As to the framerate, it keeps around 30 most of the time - although it does dip a lot in co-op (a feature more games do not have).
Speaking of co-op, has any other game delivered it in such a full and fun manner? Co-op really is double the people, double the fun in Halo.
Lets see about the other innovations - oh maybe a regenerating shield which really does rock. No more searching for health packs, or shield kits or whatever. And no more stupidly esay enemies just so your health doesn't run out. Halo provides a challenging experience and has tough enemies that will thrash you unless you properlly manage your shield. It is a much more elegant solution to a myriad of health packs, and I think it provides substantially more fun in the gameplay - you actually feel that you are up against a decent foe.
The 2 weapon idea worked very well - especially as you can switch at any time. Halo really isn't a game like other FPSs where the bigger the weapon the more useful it is. In every situation there are especially well suited guns in Halo and you will select them for that purpose - rather than lug along whatever the newest thing you have unlocked as in other games.
Oh should we mention the AI? Yeah seems that it was nothing special... back-up marines that are actually a help not a hindrance (as in all other 'team' games). Enemies that actually duck for cover, outflank your, or react to changing situations. Half-life really shone there didn't it... bring on the Doom style enemies any day.
The controls are perfect - up until Halo no FPS on a console played quite right. Sure everyone raves about Goldeneye, but play it today and you feel constrained. Halo really shone in this regard - in fact if this was the only thing it did right, it would still be a game deserving respect. Nearly every console FPS has copied Halo's control style.
Another feature that doesn't get mentioned much is a button dedicated to grenades... It actually makes them a useable weapon, rather than something that will get you killed while you try to scroll to them in your inventory.
Finally the vehicles. Other games have put in cars etc... but they always feel out of place. They don't control well, they aren't resposnive and they get you killed. Halo demonstrated how to integrate vehicles into your game.
I won't bother mentioning the physics (which is amongst the best in any game), or the story - which you might whinge about, but which was delivered through a great use of cut-scenes, terrific voice-acting and provided a lot of suspense and enticement to continue playing.
You sir, are a troll. In fact I think you are a PC playing troll - because nobody who owned the game on the xbox would agree with you. And BTW it did release nearly 3 years ago... (well 2 but who is counting).
TRICK OR TREAT!!!
?
Black & White was a great game, it just didn't live up to the hype.
Matrix sucked though.
No on the PC when you plug it into another computer it brings up a message box saying "Readying iPod for use" by which it means "Formatting all your files". It is really just a misleading message, but I call that bad UI and my brother lost a lot of files to it (he had used it to back up some of his files before reformatting his computer).
My brother owns an iPod and I can tell you he isn't that fussed about it - it has issues, but I notice most of them are mentioned here already... shame is they aren't modded up. Nor are any posts that suggest the iPod is not the be all and end all.
On the other hand every post saying that the Dell model will suck and that the iPod is soooooooooooooo superior has been modded up.
I don't mind you guys having your own opinions or anything, but perhaps be a little less biased in your modding? Ugh I see this happen in so many threads I suppose it isn't worth bothering to point it out... in fact I have basically learnt the rough topics that have awful modding and I generally stay clear of the comments (anything with apple is fanbased; anything with microsoft is hate based; etc...).
Superior UI? Have you seen any app Apple has released for Windows in like, *ever*? They preach about standards and then go completely their own way - hell their Windows apps wouldn't even look standard on a Mac so that doesn't count.
Re the iPod, once again - lovely UI choices... lets see... oh plug it on a new computer and have it format itself - that is a sure fire winner.
I am not sure what point you were trying to make as you didn't actually state what the great UI choices the iPod made were. The iPod design is generally more evolutionary than revolutionary - I own an Intel Pocket Concert and I can tell you the iPod looks pretty damn similar... same shape, some position for the play etc... buttons, same position for the LCD. Similar interface for moving through songs, oh and a scroll wheel that clicks... (cept the Intel puts it on the side not the front).
I don't want to sound like a troll, but I don't understand why everyone slavers over the iPod. It is nice, it is small, and it looks kinda neat - but it wasn't anything new, and it isn't the standout product. Creative had harddrive players before apple, and the iPod design as I already mentioned is derivative. Now that nearly every mp3 player looks like an iPod but is cheaper, and more feature packed, the iPod is nothing special.
Slashdot stories to be capped at 2 reposts.
Actually better make it 3, you never know...
It all depends on the game, you really have three situations:
1) Crap game. Releasing a demo just lets people find out ahead of time how crap it is. Sales plummit.
2) Great game. Releasing a demo allows people to discover how great the game is. Sales increase.
3) Average game - in this case I am not sure what happens. Do people buy it because it doesn't suck? Or do they skip it because it doens't rock?
I would think that the choice is pretty easy. If you have a great game, you should always release a demo. If you have a good game that people aren't that convinced about, you should release a demo. But if you have a crap game, never, ever, ever release a demo...
Lol, I didn't mean to sound so antagonistic BTW, it is just that Halo is one of my favorite games, and kept my xbox in use for a fair while after launch.
I definately agree with you about ICO though, terrific game and beautifully exectued (the art and level design was magnificant) however it was extremely short and I doubt many people would play it twice.
Bad choice for an example - Halo had a much better story than the majority of current games (a really good story in fact) - and although the single player campaign wasn't as epic as many games, it wasn't short either. Replay value for that title was unbeleivably high as well.
You would be better choosing nearly any other game to make your point.
My car is based on designs a few hundred thousand years old - good thing those pesky neanderthals didn't patent the wheel!
I think the parent was probably thinking of something a little more subtle than overlaying the serial on the image...
I wonder if it will impact on games in terms of timing. Some games are programmed without any timing enforced (still?), they just ran as fast as the console can pump them. I remember that back on the Nintendo 64 X-treme G (the super-fast bike racing game) ran much faster (and therefore played harder) on my brothers console, than on my friends - it seems that in the year between them each buying consoles Nintendo had improved the processor.
I really doubt it - gaming companies screw up all the time - hell most games release these days with patches already waiting for you before you open the box. And in any case, Half-life 2 doesn't need the good name of Valve to sell, just the fact that it is the sequel to 'everyone's' favorite FPS guarantees that.
Realistically, I doubt anyone expected it to ship on time - there have been hints of delays for a month or two now (denied I know) - and gamers are all talk - they bitch and bitch and bitch and continue to play and buy games anyway.
Buying a game developer doesn't instantly make it first party... Halo was mostly done before Microsoft got control of Bungie, a better game to judge will be Halo 2 which will presumable be shaped more by whatever management Microsoft decide to assert (though I think they will be sensible to leave well enough alone).