-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
KILLZONE!... its not really THAT bad
- Thread starter Templar Wizard
- Start date
Wafflecopter
Banned
:lol Hilarious.dark10x said:
Wafflecopter
Banned
Let's see the list for FPS's.
Halo wasn't the first to have vehicles. OWNED
Halo wasn't the first to have dual wielding. OWNED
Halo was a mishmash of all sci-fi cliches passing as it's story. OWNED
Halo had repetitive enviroments and gameplay. OWNED
Halo didn't have weapon restrictions first. OWNED
Halo didn't have a regenerative shield first. OWNED
Halo wasn't the first to have decent physics. OWNED
And before you say it, because of course you will, Halo perfected none of these things. OWNED
That about sums up this argument.
Halo wasn't the first to have vehicles. OWNED
Halo wasn't the first to have dual wielding. OWNED
Halo was a mishmash of all sci-fi cliches passing as it's story. OWNED
Halo had repetitive enviroments and gameplay. OWNED
Halo didn't have weapon restrictions first. OWNED
Halo didn't have a regenerative shield first. OWNED
Halo wasn't the first to have decent physics. OWNED
And before you say it, because of course you will, Halo perfected none of these things. OWNED
That about sums up this argument.
Templar Wizard
Member
Zer0 said:
ha. apples and oranges you fool.
why notcompare bf2 with modern combat. thats a REAL comparsion. why just stop at halo2? why not compare it with any other fps????
and how exactly does one game 'badly rape' another? in terms of what? xbox online shooter? because thats what halo2 is. bf2 isnt.
personal preference does not constitute ACTUAL value, only in the individual.
I think you're insane and incorrect, but I have to hear your answers to a couple questions...
"Halo wasn't the first to have vehicles. OWNED"
Obviously true, but you can't deny the quality of Halo's vehicles in comparison to other games. Games like Tribes inspired the original concept of Halo, and I was an absolute Tribes whore, but Halo's vehicles were more enjoyable to control and offered a much more complex physics simulation.
"Halo wasn't the first to have dual wielding. OWNED"
Do you understand dual wielding, though? Why not name the games you think beat Halo to the punch.
"Halo was a mishmash of all sci-fi cliches passing as it's story. OWNED"
So? It was presented very well for an FPS. The vast majority of FPS titles on the market don't exactly excel here either. The best FPS stories can be found in games that really aren't regular shooters (like Deus Ex, which had pretty terrible gunplay...)
"Halo had repetitive enviroments and gameplay. OWNED"
So, it's all about the visuals is it? First of all, Halo 2 does not suffer from this in most of its levels (those covenant homeworld levels were dull as hell, though) and secondly, visual repetition does not mean gameplay repetition. Assault on the Control Room in Halo 1 re-used so many set pieces, but each re-usage of those pieces presented a very different scenario. There is no argument here, as that's how it is. Of course, you probably weren't bothered by games that throw the same boring enemies (that do nothing but stand there) at you over and over again through a variety of environments. Screw gameplay variety, I want scenery changes!!!111
"Halo didn't have weapon restrictions first. OWNED"
I agree, but like I said, this isn't about individual features. It's the package. Choosing each one of Halo's features and saying "well, this game had THIS feature" and "that game had THAT feature" is missing the point. You can't just pick and choose. It's all or none.
"Halo didn't have a regenerative shield first. OWNED"
I'm drawing a blank here. I wish I had my collection handy so I could review each game to be certain, but for the major titles, I can't recall a single game that offered this same functionality.
"Halo wasn't the first to have decent physics. OWNED"
Halo's physics were better than decent, though. Physics and animation in PC FPS games was the absolute PITS prior to Halo. Do you really remember how awful most games looked in motion? There were other FPS titles with physics, but those physics simply weren't comparable.
...but it did. There is tons of polish lavished upon each gameplay element.
Honestly, I suppose this is something that I like about Bungie. They focus on the core gameplay and make it work beautifully. Myth - The Fallen Lords WAS one of my favorite RTS titles back in the day...and that was a result of its focus.
I really enjoy when a developer decides to focus on a certain type of gameplay and polish it up to perfection. Games that attempt to do a whole lot, but do none of them well, really don't sit well with me unless they do a WHOLE lot. Deus Ex is one of my favorite games of all time, but its individual gameplay elements are so flimsy.
I suppose I should say this...
Regardless of what you think of the game, it IS different. It may use elements from other games, but the overall package and design is simply different!
"Halo wasn't the first to have vehicles. OWNED"
Obviously true, but you can't deny the quality of Halo's vehicles in comparison to other games. Games like Tribes inspired the original concept of Halo, and I was an absolute Tribes whore, but Halo's vehicles were more enjoyable to control and offered a much more complex physics simulation.
"Halo wasn't the first to have dual wielding. OWNED"
Do you understand dual wielding, though? Why not name the games you think beat Halo to the punch.
"Halo was a mishmash of all sci-fi cliches passing as it's story. OWNED"
So? It was presented very well for an FPS. The vast majority of FPS titles on the market don't exactly excel here either. The best FPS stories can be found in games that really aren't regular shooters (like Deus Ex, which had pretty terrible gunplay...)
"Halo had repetitive enviroments and gameplay. OWNED"
So, it's all about the visuals is it? First of all, Halo 2 does not suffer from this in most of its levels (those covenant homeworld levels were dull as hell, though) and secondly, visual repetition does not mean gameplay repetition. Assault on the Control Room in Halo 1 re-used so many set pieces, but each re-usage of those pieces presented a very different scenario. There is no argument here, as that's how it is. Of course, you probably weren't bothered by games that throw the same boring enemies (that do nothing but stand there) at you over and over again through a variety of environments. Screw gameplay variety, I want scenery changes!!!111
"Halo didn't have weapon restrictions first. OWNED"
I agree, but like I said, this isn't about individual features. It's the package. Choosing each one of Halo's features and saying "well, this game had THIS feature" and "that game had THAT feature" is missing the point. You can't just pick and choose. It's all or none.
"Halo didn't have a regenerative shield first. OWNED"
I'm drawing a blank here. I wish I had my collection handy so I could review each game to be certain, but for the major titles, I can't recall a single game that offered this same functionality.
"Halo wasn't the first to have decent physics. OWNED"
Halo's physics were better than decent, though. Physics and animation in PC FPS games was the absolute PITS prior to Halo. Do you really remember how awful most games looked in motion? There were other FPS titles with physics, but those physics simply weren't comparable.
...but it did. There is tons of polish lavished upon each gameplay element.
Honestly, I suppose this is something that I like about Bungie. They focus on the core gameplay and make it work beautifully. Myth - The Fallen Lords WAS one of my favorite RTS titles back in the day...and that was a result of its focus.
I really enjoy when a developer decides to focus on a certain type of gameplay and polish it up to perfection. Games that attempt to do a whole lot, but do none of them well, really don't sit well with me unless they do a WHOLE lot. Deus Ex is one of my favorite games of all time, but its individual gameplay elements are so flimsy.
I suppose I should say this...
Regardless of what you think of the game, it IS different. It may use elements from other games, but the overall package and design is simply different!
Templar Wizard said:
the last time i checked bot where FPS and both have multiplayer ( i was talking bout the mp side )
battlefield 2 rapes halo2 in scale,gameplay,gfx,were talking about games on diferent systems...at least thats why i have tought when i see halo2 in a post about killzone
if there is any fool in this post its you my friend and a very big one
Zer0 said:
It's still apples to oranges...
I'm not going to sit here and compare Halo to Thief like a twat. I mean, "they both have single player campaigns with a story and are in first person LOL!!!111" That wouldn't make sense...
Halo 2 and BF2 are nothing alike. They are both EXCELLENT games, but they can both be enjoyed. The platform matters not, it's about the games themselves.
Foreign Jackass
Member
Different, yes. Innovative, no. Your point was that it was full of incredible innovations that revolutionized the FPS genre. Now you're backing into the "complete package" argument. We win, you lose! WOOHOO!dark10x said:
I DO believe that, but I also believe that a lot of people on the GAF have such a different view on these things that I could not possibly get my point across. For me, Halo's additions addressed so many problems that I had been complaining about. Hell, I didn't even realize half of this stuff until I really learned how to play the game (thanks to ArcadeStickMonk...though he is still much better than I am). I say innovative for that very reason. It changed my outlook on the genre and gave me hope. I've played TOO MANY FPS games and they were turning into dull quicksave fests. I would mindless plow through them and turn around at the end of it and realize that I didn't have fun.
I stand by my initial points and think all of you are just "missing the point". Unfortunately, my point is too difficult to convey through text and there are too many hard heads here.
I think the classic PC way of FPS gaming is broken and needs a change. HL2, as much as I enjoyed it, disappointed me in a variety of ways...and most of those disappointments stem from older PC FPS roots which so many games refuse to give up.
Your "we win" statement could not possibly be more true, unfortunately. You are so obsessed with a design that I have grown sick of...and I have to suffer as a result. Hey, as long as you are happy. You VERY CLEARLY play these games for entirely different reasons than I do...
Foreign Jackass
Member
Well, yeah, I play FPSs so that I can argue over the Internet over which one is good and which one is completely unplayable and awful.
Foreign Jackass
Member
dark10x said:
Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Half Life, Half Life 2, Ghost Recon, Battlefield 2, some other Rainbow Six games I mainly played on co-op, Goldeneye 64, Metroid Prime, outdoor stages of Far Cry without monsters, Call of Duty, Counterstrike Source, Counterstrike, Day of Defeat. Arguably some of those aren't pure FPSs, and some others cannot be "finished".
I only love pure FPSs on multiplayer. If it's not on multiplayer, I want it to have a great story, great mechanics/puzzles, great characters, or character customization. I like good AI and well, good graphics. Some involving set pieces (like Call of Duty) can get me going for a while, even though "it's on rails". If I want some smart firefights, I'll go on multiplayer.
Foreign Jackass said:
Very good list, I'd say...
Deus Ex, SS2, and Thief II are my top three FPS games, actually, with Halo and Half-Life right behind them. HL2 and Halo 2 would probably fall behind those as well. SS2 is also the best co-op experience I've ever had and have played through it in CO-OP several times.
Prime is also one of my favorites, but isn't really an FPS at all (as you said).
Hate Goldeneye and Far Cry, not a CS fan at all, and found that Call of Duty should have been called Scripts of Duty...but the list is otherwise great.
I'm actually kind of suprised that you'd express so much Halo hate, honestly. Of course, mind set plays such a massive role in whether you can enjoy something or not. Obviously you don't agree, but out of all of those games, I totally feel that Halo's actual gunplay is far and away better than any of them. I suppose actual combat isn't your thing, though, and you are more focused on either the experience or whatever feeling you get out of stuff like CS...
Wafflecopter said:Let's see the list for FPS's.
Halo wasn't the first to have vehicles. OWNED
Halo wasn't the first to have dual wielding. OWNED
Halo was a mishmash of all sci-fi cliches passing as it's story. OWNED
Halo had repetitive enviroments and gameplay. OWNED
Halo didn't have weapon restrictions first. OWNED
Halo didn't have a regenerative shield first. OWNED
Halo wasn't the first to have decent physics. OWNED
And before you say it, because of course you will, Halo perfected none of these things. OWNED
That about sums up this argument.
What part of "mixing everything that was good in other FPS and using it in one game" you didn't get, also it have new things that I've never seen in other FPS before it.
. in my personal case is the only game this gen that I've replayed more than 10 times, so I didn't find it boring and/or repetitive.
Anyway some people will troll everything that is more or less mainstrean just because is cool.
This game was revolutionary for the FPS genre (The first Halo), and the devs really hit it when they named it "Combat Evolved".
Foreign Jackass
Member
dark10x said:
See my edited post for details.
However, I'll just add that whatever way you put it, combat in single player will never be as good as combat in multiplayer. That's what I get out of CS, Call of Duty online, BF2, etc..
Foreign Jackass said:
See, I'm not a big fan of online multiplayer in most cases...at least the combat aspects.
I really loved the combat in Tribes, though, as it (like Halo) was never just about "aiming" (though good aim was important at times). Tribes remains my favorite online FPS to this day. The usage of movement physics and the strange weapon selection was so interesting and enjoyable. Running around in CS is just so...dull in comparison. I have no fun with that sort of combat.
What I enjoyed about Halo's single player combat is its focus on scenario. Mastering a certain segment was akin to doing the same within Metal Slug. Learning how everything in a scenario works and solving it. It was addictive and interesting to me.
Foreign Jackass
Member
See, that I can't understand. Aiming is like, for me, 50% of the combat aspect. Aim assist totally kills combat in multiplayer, and isn't even that great in single player (MP suffered from it, and Halo too). It's a SHOOTER. You have to AIM at some point.dark10x said:
Foreign Jackass said:
The only game I can think of where precise aiming was enjoyable for me would be UT's instagib matches. Those were satisfying as hell, especially with low grav + quad jump.
I don't care about aim assist, I just think the idea of running around with some realistic weapon and aiming isn't fun. I prefer a different style of combat.
In CS, you bust out your AK or something and go chasing after people. Never did anything for me. It's so "typical" at this point and offers absolutely NO thrill whatsoever.
In Tribes, you pull out your ELF and knock them to the ground. Then, launch over them and drop a disc on their heads. When you have high momentum and are skiing through the landscapes, this kind of combat becomes so thriling. The combat dynamics are so different in Tribes and really appealed to me.
Halo's combat allows for so many tactics that simply aren't a part of most games...and a lot of those tactics do not rely solely on aim (though aim is important in some situations). It's the variety in the combat that interests me.
Ash Housewares
The Mountain Jew
akascream said:
I don't get it either, but then I think innovation is overrated, I like using what works
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
Bail out of the thread Dark.
Every shithead who refuses to comprehend what Halo is doing and why what it is doing can be deemed a positive step, is one less shithead to get thrown in with us in matchmaking:
Calling bullshit every time I shotty\melee combo them, dropping out of the game, and informing us that we are gay because we understand how to play Halo.
Every shithead who refuses to comprehend what Halo is doing and why what it is doing can be deemed a positive step, is one less shithead to get thrown in with us in matchmaking:
Calling bullshit every time I shotty\melee combo them, dropping out of the game, and informing us that we are gay because we understand how to play Halo.
First single player FPS to integrate them seamlessly in the game with fantastic controls while allowing them to modify the gameplay both strategically and from a complete gameplay dynamic. On rails levels where you are confined to a vehicle shooting at people does not vehicle integration make. Tribes did it before Halo sure, but it didn't have any kind of single player framework nor a compelling physics implementation.
It was the first to bind each weapon to a firing key that allowed you to mix and match your duel wielding combinations. This opened up the strategic options of the firefights 10 fold. Generic double pistol combos from Shadow Warrior and Blood are nowhere near the same thing.
Yep. Find me a game with an original plot, I can count them on one hand.
The first one did, not the second. Even with the repetitive environments with Halos fantastic AI and excellent enemies each room while being repetive in visuals provided a unique strategic combat challenge to overcome.
Choosing your weapons before hand in R6 and Counterstrike is not the same thing as being able to dynamically choose your weapon load out on the fly based on what you find to match the situation at hand.
Unless your talking other genres like space sims, I disagree here. Every major FPS I can think of used the old limited health, health powerups/stations system.
The first Halo not only had fantastic physics applied to its environments before other shooters started doing it, but Bungie coded it all themselves instead of relying on Havoc as a crutch.
You're an ignorant jackass. OWNED
i dont think halo owns golden eye or deus ex,or bf2 or some strategic fps like the swat series
halo is a excellent game in its own,in his system ( halo on pc passed without glory) and its audence ( xbox users) but its not perfect and its not changing the genere as much as realistic fps are changing it ( how many games use the shield regenerator?) as strange it sounds i thing sand box games like grand theft auto will change fps genere more than another game
halo is a excellent game in its own,in his system ( halo on pc passed without glory) and its audence ( xbox users) but its not perfect and its not changing the genere as much as realistic fps are changing it ( how many games use the shield regenerator?) as strange it sounds i thing sand box games like grand theft auto will change fps genere more than another game
Similar threads
- Locked