halo 2 is definatly the most overrated game I've ever played. It's a little bit of fun for about 20 minutes then I just get tired of it. I think pure hype alone sold halo 2 and it will sell halo 3. Halo was a great game though. Despite the fact that I hate halo 2, I still think it's the best fps on an console that I've over played.
I jumped on no bandwagon, either. I bought the original Xbox for Halo because I kept hearing how awesome it was.
I hated it. I'm not saying it's a bad game, but the people who kept praising its originality need a reality check.
I hated it. I'm not saying it's a bad game, but the people who kept praising its originality need a reality check.
If the game wasn't so overhyped I may have looked at it diffrently when I played it. The campain in single player on halo 2 wasn't awful, but people stated that it was the greatest game ever made so I had to check it out. I don't understand how some people can say that half-life 2 is awful, but halo 2 is great.
Ok, we agree that Halo was overhyped, but come on, the Halo-hater bandwagon is getting really old.
For PC gamers it offered nothing new to the table. It doesn't have deep puzzles, missions that require a lot of thought, realistic physics, uber graphics, or originality for that matter. But that said, it is a very polished game. Gameplay/control is excellent on both PC and console. Two player co-op story mode that actually works well. Implementation of vehicles. Graphics that are great on both computer monitor and SD TV. When I say graphics I don't necessary mean screen resolution, AA, or texture detail. I'm talking about the artistic design (in that sense it's more of a personal taste). Halo doesn't excel at any one thing, but it does combine all the element to create a solid game that can be enjoyed by casual gamers and even some hardcore gamers.
Because the casual gamers outnumber the hardcore gamers by a large margin, Halo was created with more emphasis on pleasing the former than the latter. That shouldn't come off as a surprise because Microsoft & Bungie want to make money. To do so would require making something fun for the general gaming masses.
This may come as a total shock for you PC gamers but a lot of people think computer games are "too complicated". Developers can add all the realism, detail, bells & whistles, and what-not, but if it's not fun then what's the point? What's fun and immerseful for the hardcore gamer can be a turnoff for the casual. The majority of people want something they can just pickup without much thought.
An example, when I showed my friend Oblivion to demonstrate what today's computer games can do he was wowed by the graphics and attention to detail, but he won't touch the game with a ten foot pole because the higher learning curve (or perception of it) to get anywhere in the game is a turnoff for him. Heck, he won't even try all the WW2 shooters because they place too much emphasis on realism and thus also too complicated.
I think a lot of PC FPS players are bitter due to the fact that Halo (a perceived inferior shooter) has outsold all their favorite shooters combined. In actuality they should be thankfull of Halo (as well as Golden Eye). How often does a FPS dominate a console market? It brings positive attention to the genre and you people still lament, B&M that's it not up to par. What would you rather have represent the genre? Halflife? Farcry? FEAR? What would appeal to the general audience? A labrat in an unfortunate experiment gone wrong. A man interrupted from his vacation finds himself stranded on an island full of criminals. A cop with heightened senses, who may or may not be pyschic. Or a super soldier in cool armour who battles aliens on a mysterious planet.
Alas, it's fruitless to argue with hardcore PC gamers. Who else would spend $500 on a video card to be able to play one game? Heck, some even put two of them together so they can bump up the FPS well beyond the acceptable playable rate, run at 1600x1200 with 16xAA, HDR, and the whole shabang. With such hardcore conviction, how can a console game hope to please these people?
For PC gamers it offered nothing new to the table. It doesn't have deep puzzles, missions that require a lot of thought, realistic physics, uber graphics, or originality for that matter. But that said, it is a very polished game. Gameplay/control is excellent on both PC and console. Two player co-op story mode that actually works well. Implementation of vehicles. Graphics that are great on both computer monitor and SD TV. When I say graphics I don't necessary mean screen resolution, AA, or texture detail. I'm talking about the artistic design (in that sense it's more of a personal taste). Halo doesn't excel at any one thing, but it does combine all the element to create a solid game that can be enjoyed by casual gamers and even some hardcore gamers.
Because the casual gamers outnumber the hardcore gamers by a large margin, Halo was created with more emphasis on pleasing the former than the latter. That shouldn't come off as a surprise because Microsoft & Bungie want to make money. To do so would require making something fun for the general gaming masses.
This may come as a total shock for you PC gamers but a lot of people think computer games are "too complicated". Developers can add all the realism, detail, bells & whistles, and what-not, but if it's not fun then what's the point? What's fun and immerseful for the hardcore gamer can be a turnoff for the casual. The majority of people want something they can just pickup without much thought.
An example, when I showed my friend Oblivion to demonstrate what today's computer games can do he was wowed by the graphics and attention to detail, but he won't touch the game with a ten foot pole because the higher learning curve (or perception of it) to get anywhere in the game is a turnoff for him. Heck, he won't even try all the WW2 shooters because they place too much emphasis on realism and thus also too complicated.
I think a lot of PC FPS players are bitter due to the fact that Halo (a perceived inferior shooter) has outsold all their favorite shooters combined. In actuality they should be thankfull of Halo (as well as Golden Eye). How often does a FPS dominate a console market? It brings positive attention to the genre and you people still lament, B&M that's it not up to par. What would you rather have represent the genre? Halflife? Farcry? FEAR? What would appeal to the general audience? A labrat in an unfortunate experiment gone wrong. A man interrupted from his vacation finds himself stranded on an island full of criminals. A cop with heightened senses, who may or may not be pyschic. Or a super soldier in cool armour who battles aliens on a mysterious planet.
Alas, it's fruitless to argue with hardcore PC gamers. Who else would spend $500 on a video card to be able to play one game? Heck, some even put two of them together so they can bump up the FPS well beyond the acceptable playable rate, run at 1600x1200 with 16xAA, HDR, and the whole shabang. With such hardcore conviction, how can a console game hope to please these people?
I was just reading about Will Wright saying something similar about sim city 4. He admitted that he made the most recent sim city game too complex for most people to enjoy. He said it's likely that his next simcity game will be like sim city classic. I personally liked simcity 4 for its complex nature, but I do know people who hated it for that.
Wow.Without Opera, I would not have been able to see that whole picture.Even at 20% zoom, it still looks freaking amazing.
That little 'power button' safety(I presume) looks like crap 
Also, erm, what's the point of a pic at that resolution?
Also, erm, what's the point of a pic at that resolution?
SonicIce
Diamond Member
- Apr 12, 2004
- 4,771
- 0
- 76
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
- May 9, 2004
- 8,443
- 124
- 106
Developers love to use the latest DX9+ hardware features utilized in the game engine, but at the same time, create artwork so shoddy that makes it look worse than it's predecessors, and people wonder why the hardware requieements are so freaking high. This game is called F.E.A.R.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 12K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter