Entirely redundant, as I've said, because that can be said for nearly any other shooter. DOOM? Shoot badies, collect keys, flip switch, rinse, repeat. Halflife? Shoot badies, checkpoint, shoot badies, checkpoint, rinse, repeat.Originally Posted by KONAMI Man
UT/Q3? Shoot badies, look at scores, shoot badies, look at scores, rinse, repeat. Wow, that was a real effort trying to debase those games, some of the best FPS games, with your argument.
I think the word I used was 'interesting', not 'spectacular', and there's a world of difference in that. Besides, in a genre that quite often has a token storyline and nothing else, having an interesting storyline is something that makes a game stand out. At least, for those who actually care about the plot of games.Storyline was nothing spectacular, I must say... Graphics are what you'd expect from the XBOX at the time... Multiplayer was nothing overly different to what was out there on the PC at the time, and the single player missions were just... Well... badly designed... The inclusion of vehicles does not make it a better game at all...
It was hyped... Overly hyped... Good game...? Maybe... I've seen better...
If anyone has unbiased info regarding Halo 2, please post it...
The graphics are what you'd expect from the XBOX at the time? Yes, its easy to say that now three years down the track. At the time, however, those kind of visuals hadn't really been seen before, and that's exactley why it blew so many people away. Go back and read some reviews, see just how many people thought the graphics were standard fare. I'll save you some trouble, the answer will be 'very few, at most'.
As for the missions being badly designed, in what way? HALO is a story-driven game, and the missions did well at guiding you through it without making the areas too restricted. The only real complaint I could think of is that a lot of the building design had a samey feel about it, but that doesn't detract much from the gameplay experience.
Now, the vehicles. No, having vehicles in a games doesn't make it a better game by default, but that's hardly the case here. As previously stated, they were well designed, well made, and a whole lot of fun. People like the idea of vehicles in FPS games, most people do anyway. Hell, there were rumours back in the day of Duke Nukem 3D (before it was released) that it was going to feature a drivable motor-cycle! People were excited about that, just like they were about the talk of vehicles in UT2003. Then Ut2004 came out and everyone loved them. What about the Tribes series? Those games wouldn't have been half as good without the vehicles in them, I imagine.
Sure, if the vehicles were only there for eye-candy, then you'd be right. But they were thoroughly integrtated into the plot and it's a better game for it, I'd say.
Over hyped? Yes, for sure. I agree with you on that 100%
I had to sit through lit-class with a couple of people who would talk about HALO, nearly non-stop, practically every day. I was ready to strangle them after the third day of it, and I was damn sick of hearing about HALO. But, most big games are hyped up far too much - there's very little you can do about it. In the end, it didn't stop me from enjoying playing through the game, as it shouldn't for anyone else.
