That's a bunch of bull.... The Xbox is perfectly capable of running Doom 3, and even Farcry is being developed for it. Why not Half-Life? Sure, the Xbox version of Doom3 will look like 640X480 at medium detail, but that's still good for a console game. Same thing would probably be true of Half-Life 2.
The RTCW content was a lie. That crap was already on the disc, and all you downloaded was a key to unlock it. Sure, it seemed like new content, but it was really just giving you something you'd already paid for.
I hate this. Way to try to un-level the playing field you bastards. Fortunately, I think that most people both won't know about this, and won't bother to pick one up because you can't just grab it at the store, like you could with the Dreamcast, for example. I also have the feeling that this will totally suck for those who try to use it anyway. It's not as if the games are programmed to handle the precision movement of a mouse, so it'll probably end up being somewhat awkward. Fortunately, I don't know anyone on Xbox Live that would even care about using a KB/M, seeing as most console-FPS gamers actually prefer using a controller anyway, or at the very least have gotten used to it. If not, they'd probably be playing them on the PC. I can see the usual Live A-holes doing this because they care so much about stats, but the average population, probably not.
I don't really see any need whatsoever for either next generation console to support the new high-definition formats. There's just not a technical need, unless you want to argue storage space, which hasn't been an issue this generation. Thats being said, I'd actually like them to go with Blue-Ray, in agreement with Sony. First, because it makes it a non-issue, and secondly, because it takes a decent sized step in making one format the standard, which is good for everyone in terms of deciding one for widespread acceptance. Having a few million Blue-Ray players and HD-DVD players in houses might help bring down prices, but having multiple millions of a single format in homes helps bring on things like large movie catalogs in high-definition as well.
If standard HD resolution support wasn't on the next Xbox, I'd be shocked as hell. It's pretty much a given. Especially considering there's a decent handful of games on this generation's Xbox that already support HD resolutions, Amped 2 and WSB2K3 being two of the best looking ones. While widescreen 480p on the Xbox does look great, I can't wait for all games to support 720p or 1080i. My guess is that all games will be required to support both.
As far as the concept of $5 expansion packs go, this is only news insomuch as a 3rd party company is doing it.
Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow charged 4.99 for two maps a few months ago, so this isn't even the first time a third party developer has charged. The only news is that is costs five bucks here, really.
I don't have a problem with paying for additional content, as long as it's worth the price. So far, most of the pay content has actually been pretty good, examples being car/track downloads for Project Gotham Racing 2, two new maps for Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow, and new licensed courses for Links 2004. All of them worth five bucks, IMO. That being said, I don't think I'd want to pay for say, a single map for Rainbow Six, which wouldn't be worth five bucks, although a whole pack of maps would be.
And there's been plenty of patches released for Xbox games. Off the top of my head.... MotoGP2, Splinter Cell: PT, Star Wars Battlefront, ESPN 2K5, Rallisport Challenge 2, and an upcoming one for Rainbow Six: Black Arrow.
So, none of this paying or patching is anything new at all. If a developer has a bug or exploit that needs to be fixed, they need to patch it, and if they work extra to give us content, I have no problem paying for it it it's worth the extra cost.
I thought they'd already stated a Looooong time ago that Halo 2 was the last game in the series. Props though to Bungie that they've been so tight lipped about it, that even now, just a month before the game comes out, even a new screenshot is a big deal.
Yes. All Xbox Live games come with that two-month trial that includes a subscription code you can use to activate an Xbox Live account. You can also (if you wanted) purchase a Halo 2/Live bundle from Ebgames.com, or just buy the Live kit seperately. Whichever way you do it though, make sure to buy the headset either seperately, on get the Live kit, which includes one. Xbox Live just isn't the same without it, and if you don't have one, you'll probably find yourself getting kicked from a lot of games for not communicating with your teammates.
My understanding is that the health bar is only visibly gone, in order to save screen real-estate when playing split-screen. You'll still have health after your sheilds are depleted, you just won't know how much, since actually being able to see whether you have three or five bars doesn't really alter how you play anyway. I know the health bar is missing from multiplayer, but I'm not sure about single-player, where it can affect your strategy. It would make sense not to have in in multiplayer, but still keep it in single-player.
I believe the most technically correct answer may have been either the Playstation, which never came with a game, as far as I know. Before that, both the Genesis and SNES were available as bundles, since I definitely remember buying the SNES with Super Mario World packed in. So, it would've been in the 32/64 bit era that it stopped alltogether. That being said, there's a pretty good reason they stopped packing in a game; number of launch titles. While the 64 and PS1 only launched with two games (if I recall correctly), Pilotwings/Mario 64 and Ridge Racer/Toshinden, all the systems after that have launched with somewhere near a minimum of 15, the focus on having a great selection available from the get-go. And, while it would have seemed obvious to pack-in Halo with the Xbox, you've got to remember that it's an M-rated game, and would've alienated a pretty large market segment. Plus, they wouldn't be able to continue selling Halo for 30 bucks like it still does today. That being said, if I had gotten some lame pack-in like Oddword: Munch's Oddessy, (which would've been the logical choice) that crap would've been tossed right in the trash.
The thing that made Halo so good, in part, was the fact that it got FPS controls more right on a console pad than any other game ever had. Yes, even the great Goldeneye's controls blew in comparison, not to mention how nearly impossible it was to play Quake 3 on a Dreamcast controller, which didn't have enough buttons to allow you to aim and zoom at the same time. This is thanks in part to the Xbox controller's design, but also because of the very subtle auto-aim that is a more like a sticky cursor than your typical Unreal auto-aim. While I agree you get much more control on FPS' with a KB/M, it simply doesn't apply to Halo, when a KB/M wouldn't help at all, except in terms of preference. Other shooters, yes, just not Halo.
I'm willing to wager that only a very small percentage of Xbox owners own a GBA, and those that do probably don't give a crap about linking them. I personally know about 15 people with Xbox's, and not a one of them owns a Gameboy. The Xbox currently has something though, that Nintendo systems probably won't ever have again for the adult market, which is the 'coolness' factor. The fact is, that Nintendo and Microsoft only really get along because they target totally different age groups, and it's likely to stay that way. If you're going to buy a console for a child, get a gamecube. But for your kid in college, get an Xbox.
Yes, Halo is not only developed by the same people that did the Marathon series, but also shares many plot devices in common, particulary in relation to the AI. This is why many people believe that Cortana will go 'rampant' in Halo 2, and also why the ilovebees site has a lot of references to an AI. Technically, I believe it's even possible that the Halo plot could be directly related to the Marathon games, and not just similar.
I love charging at someone, firing until my clip runs out, then butting them in the face with my gun (something I wish other FPS' had) and then desecrating their fallen corpses while they look on, waiting to spawn again. But yeah, I guess the shield/health system has something to do with that.
Bungie is actually still quite intact. The orginal founder you mentioned did leave and start his own game company, which will be using and licensing a modified version of the original Halo engine, but the rest of them, for the most part, are still there. Heck, they started working on Halo 2 immediately after they finished the first game. Bungie is still very much it's own development studio, and not just a name. You might want to check out bungie.net.
That would be the Library, which most people agree is the worst level. It's also one of the hardest on Elite.
Re:Halo, over rated to the extreme.
on
Halo 2 Ready to Ship
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Even Bungie will agree with you on the repeating levels, since they had to re-use some environments in order to meet the Xbox launch date. But if you think the AI is bad, you're just plain wrong. Halo is universally regarded as having some of the best FPS AI, possibly even the best ever. Try playing on something other than easy.
I ended up having completely no interest in the game. Is it better than a Zelda, a KOTOR, a Shadowrun, or even a Final Fantasy game? Nope, not according to most people. And yet, PM, who had claimed so many great things about Black and White, which came out to be a disappointment, had the nerve to say that this was "the greatest RPG ever". He did the exact same thing, and yet somehow even reviewers were tricked into giving the game suck great scores, even admitting that it was so short, missing so many of the innovative features, and in no way differentiates itself from things that have been done before, and better, in game like KOTOR (which had much better light/dark paths). Besides being able to fart and get married (which you can do in the Sims even), there's just nothing original about the game that makes it stand out, at all. And yet he has the nerve to now apologize about features that were left out, when it was he who brought them all up in the first place, and claimed the game as a second coming? Sorry PM, but the apology just doesn't cut it. Don't apologize for missing features, apologize for the fact that you were talking out of your ass about a game that's only decent, and nowhere near greatness. That, and anyone in software development knows that you never promise users features unless you know for sure that you can deliver them.
See, this is what you get when you don't standardize your online network. Ports getting opened all over the damn place. I'm not surprised at all that they've got these problems, given the total lack of structure in Sony's online service (or lack thereof). In comparison, Xbox Live uses three ports: UDP 88, UDP 3074, and TCP 3074.
What happens, I wonder, to people playing Final Fantasy online through a router that are also running a webserver? If your standard port 80 is being forwarded to the webserver, then it'll be totally screwed up, and some people wouldn't know why without sniffing it out.
Of course, it has to be a prequel, about how Rick Moranis becomes Darth Helmet, possibly revealing more backstory about his father's sister's uncle's brother's cousin's roomate.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a bunch of bull.... The Xbox is perfectly capable of running Doom 3, and even Farcry is being developed for it. Why not Half-Life? Sure, the Xbox version of Doom3 will look like 640X480 at medium detail, but that's still good for a console game. Same thing would probably be true of Half-Life 2.
The RTCW content was a lie. That crap was already on the disc, and all you downloaded was a key to unlock it. Sure, it seemed like new content, but it was really just giving you something you'd already paid for.
I hate this. Way to try to un-level the playing field you bastards. Fortunately, I think that most people both won't know about this, and won't bother to pick one up because you can't just grab it at the store, like you could with the Dreamcast, for example. I also have the feeling that this will totally suck for those who try to use it anyway. It's not as if the games are programmed to handle the precision movement of a mouse, so it'll probably end up being somewhat awkward. Fortunately, I don't know anyone on Xbox Live that would even care about using a KB/M, seeing as most console-FPS gamers actually prefer using a controller anyway, or at the very least have gotten used to it. If not, they'd probably be playing them on the PC. I can see the usual Live A-holes doing this because they care so much about stats, but the average population, probably not.
Now can I get some freakin' news on the Xbox version?
I don't really see any need whatsoever for either next generation console to support the new high-definition formats. There's just not a technical need, unless you want to argue storage space, which hasn't been an issue this generation. Thats being said, I'd actually like them to go with Blue-Ray, in agreement with Sony. First, because it makes it a non-issue, and secondly, because it takes a decent sized step in making one format the standard, which is good for everyone in terms of deciding one for widespread acceptance. Having a few million Blue-Ray players and HD-DVD players in houses might help bring down prices, but having multiple millions of a single format in homes helps bring on things like large movie catalogs in high-definition as well.
If standard HD resolution support wasn't on the next Xbox, I'd be shocked as hell. It's pretty much a given. Especially considering there's a decent handful of games on this generation's Xbox that already support HD resolutions, Amped 2 and WSB2K3 being two of the best looking ones. While widescreen 480p on the Xbox does look great, I can't wait for all games to support 720p or 1080i. My guess is that all games will be required to support both.
As far as the concept of $5 expansion packs go, this is only news insomuch as a 3rd party company is doing it.
Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow charged 4.99 for two maps a few months ago, so this isn't even the first time a third party developer has charged. The only news is that is costs five bucks here, really.
I don't have a problem with paying for additional content, as long as it's worth the price. So far, most of the pay content has actually been pretty good, examples being car/track downloads for Project Gotham Racing 2, two new maps for Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow, and new licensed courses for Links 2004. All of them worth five bucks, IMO. That being said, I don't think I'd want to pay for say, a single map for Rainbow Six, which wouldn't be worth five bucks, although a whole pack of maps would be.
And there's been plenty of patches released for Xbox games. Off the top of my head.... MotoGP2, Splinter Cell: PT, Star Wars Battlefront, ESPN 2K5, Rallisport Challenge 2, and an upcoming one for Rainbow Six: Black Arrow.
So, none of this paying or patching is anything new at all. If a developer has a bug or exploit that needs to be fixed, they need to patch it, and if they work extra to give us content, I have no problem paying for it it it's worth the extra cost.
I thought they'd already stated a Looooong time ago that Halo 2 was the last game in the series. Props though to Bungie that they've been so tight lipped about it, that even now, just a month before the game comes out, even a new screenshot is a big deal.
Yes. All Xbox Live games come with that two-month trial that includes a subscription code you can use to activate an Xbox Live account. You can also (if you wanted) purchase a Halo 2/Live bundle from Ebgames.com, or just buy the Live kit seperately. Whichever way you do it though, make sure to buy the headset either seperately, on get the Live kit, which includes one. Xbox Live just isn't the same without it, and if you don't have one, you'll probably find yourself getting kicked from a lot of games for not communicating with your teammates.
Yes, because all the millions of people who loved the first game, and subsequently pre-ordered the second game were wrong.
My understanding is that the health bar is only visibly gone, in order to save screen real-estate when playing split-screen. You'll still have health after your sheilds are depleted, you just won't know how much, since actually being able to see whether you have three or five bars doesn't really alter how you play anyway. I know the health bar is missing from multiplayer, but I'm not sure about single-player, where it can affect your strategy. It would make sense not to have in in multiplayer, but still keep it in single-player.
I believe the most technically correct answer may have been either the Playstation, which never came with a game, as far as I know. Before that, both the Genesis and SNES were available as bundles, since I definitely remember buying the SNES with Super Mario World packed in. So, it would've been in the 32/64 bit era that it stopped alltogether. That being said, there's a pretty good reason they stopped packing in a game; number of launch titles. While the 64 and PS1 only launched with two games (if I recall correctly), Pilotwings/Mario 64 and Ridge Racer/Toshinden, all the systems after that have launched with somewhere near a minimum of 15, the focus on having a great selection available from the get-go. And, while it would have seemed obvious to pack-in Halo with the Xbox, you've got to remember that it's an M-rated game, and would've alienated a pretty large market segment. Plus, they wouldn't be able to continue selling Halo for 30 bucks like it still does today. That being said, if I had gotten some lame pack-in like Oddword: Munch's Oddessy, (which would've been the logical choice) that crap would've been tossed right in the trash.
The thing that made Halo so good, in part, was the fact that it got FPS controls more right on a console pad than any other game ever had. Yes, even the great Goldeneye's controls blew in comparison, not to mention how nearly impossible it was to play Quake 3 on a Dreamcast controller, which didn't have enough buttons to allow you to aim and zoom at the same time. This is thanks in part to the Xbox controller's design, but also because of the very subtle auto-aim that is a more like a sticky cursor than your typical Unreal auto-aim. While I agree you get much more control on FPS' with a KB/M, it simply doesn't apply to Halo, when a KB/M wouldn't help at all, except in terms of preference. Other shooters, yes, just not Halo.
Your 'seasoned' friends must've flat-out sucked.
I'm willing to wager that only a very small percentage of Xbox owners own a GBA, and those that do probably don't give a crap about linking them. I personally know about 15 people with Xbox's, and not a one of them owns a Gameboy. The Xbox currently has something though, that Nintendo systems probably won't ever have again for the adult market, which is the 'coolness' factor. The fact is, that Nintendo and Microsoft only really get along because they target totally different age groups, and it's likely to stay that way. If you're going to buy a console for a child, get a gamecube. But for your kid in college, get an Xbox.
Yes, Halo is not only developed by the same people that did the Marathon series, but also shares many plot devices in common, particulary in relation to the AI. This is why many people believe that Cortana will go 'rampant' in Halo 2, and also why the ilovebees site has a lot of references to an AI. Technically, I believe it's even possible that the Halo plot could be directly related to the Marathon games, and not just similar.
I love charging at someone, firing until my clip runs out, then butting them in the face with my gun (something I wish other FPS' had) and then desecrating their fallen corpses while they look on, waiting to spawn again. But yeah, I guess the shield /health system has something to do with that.
Bungie is actually still quite intact. The orginal founder you mentioned did leave and start his own game company, which will be using and licensing a modified version of the original Halo engine, but the rest of them, for the most part, are still there. Heck, they started working on Halo 2 immediately after they finished the first game. Bungie is still very much it's own development studio, and not just a name. You might want to check out bungie.net.
That would be the Library, which most people agree is the worst level. It's also one of the hardest on Elite.
Even Bungie will agree with you on the repeating levels, since they had to re-use some environments in order to meet the Xbox launch date. But if you think the AI is bad, you're just plain wrong. Halo is universally regarded as having some of the best FPS AI, possibly even the best ever. Try playing on something other than easy.
I ended up having completely no interest in the game. Is it better than a Zelda, a KOTOR, a Shadowrun, or even a Final Fantasy game? Nope, not according to most people. And yet, PM, who had claimed so many great things about Black and White, which came out to be a disappointment, had the nerve to say that this was "the greatest RPG ever". He did the exact same thing, and yet somehow even reviewers were tricked into giving the game suck great scores, even admitting that it was so short, missing so many of the innovative features, and in no way differentiates itself from things that have been done before, and better, in game like KOTOR (which had much better light/dark paths). Besides being able to fart and get married (which you can do in the Sims even), there's just nothing original about the game that makes it stand out, at all. And yet he has the nerve to now apologize about features that were left out, when it was he who brought them all up in the first place, and claimed the game as a second coming? Sorry PM, but the apology just doesn't cut it. Don't apologize for missing features, apologize for the fact that you were talking out of your ass about a game that's only decent, and nowhere near greatness. That, and anyone in software development knows that you never promise users features unless you know for sure that you can deliver them.
See, this is what you get when you don't standardize your online network. Ports getting opened all over the damn place. I'm not surprised at all that they've got these problems, given the total lack of structure in Sony's online service (or lack thereof). In comparison, Xbox Live uses three ports: UDP 88, UDP 3074, and TCP 3074. What happens, I wonder, to people playing Final Fantasy online through a router that are also running a webserver? If your standard port 80 is being forwarded to the webserver, then it'll be totally screwed up, and some people wouldn't know why without sniffing it out.
Well, at least on the Xbox, you've got Halo/Halo 2, and The Rainbow Six and Ghost Recons if you want co-op.
Of course, it has to be a prequel, about how Rick Moranis becomes Darth Helmet, possibly revealing more backstory about his father's sister's uncle's brother's cousin's roomate.