Halo 4 - Underwhelming?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Hero in a half shell:
While I don't really see anything inherently wrong with that gameplay video, I don't really see anything 'right' either, the Forerunner AI looks pretty generic and the glowing skull reveal just presents a tonne of questions, the weapons are rather generic, and the world looks just like any other forest you'd see in a videogame, earth-evolved trees and all. I think it just doesn't live up to the expectation that grew out of the Forerunner legends. The way 343 talked about their weaponry being so much greater than yours, yet they turn out to be pretty standard, the enemies all have a very videogame-y feel to it, standard small swarm enemies, standard large enemy, standard miniboss...
And there's still no explanation about the suit. Why does he have a new HUD, new armour, new vision abilities? These better be explained.

Shotgun Guy:
hopefully it will turn out to be a misunderstanding and a bunch of Covies are pissed at Chief for killing their troops and it will make him look like a murderous asshole. I don't think they'll actually do this but it is the only way I'd actively support fighting the Covenant and even then it'd better only be for a fraction of the game.

I would actually love them to do this, that would be an awesome early twist to pull out of the bag, especially if you could have it that the Chief kills Covenant forces all the way to the ship, and then arrives at it to find the humans and Covenant working together to defend it from the AI attackers. After a brief explanation from the crew that the war is over and peace was declared they mention reinforcements that should be arriving any moment now, and you realise you've killed them all.
It would really give the player a pause for thought early on in the game, and afterwards exploring an awkward stage of how exactly the Chief should react to explain why the reinforcements aren't coming, since he isn't really 'programmed' for compasion or thought on the battlefield, it would be a really interesting scenario.

The armor is the same, everything is just artisitc licesnes so to speak, 343i has a different style, and the upgraded vision is part of what Cortana added while he was in cryo.

And the bottum part won't happen, John gets woken up because Elites are boarding and when he sees them, they rush at him and attack him.

See, ONI wanted the Elites to fight a civil war throughtout Glasslands, and with information about one of the new covenant weapons on the site, they appeared to have succeeded. It is most likely this got leaked and thats why they're attacking.

Also the fact that many Humans still want blood for the war.

I wasn't underwhelmed. In fact, for a game I didn't even care about, I thought the demo did a good job of getting me interested. I thought the visuals looked great and I liked seeing new enemies for a change. However, it probably won't change my stance on Halo: love couch multiplayer but find the campaigns boring, so I'll just let me Halo-fan-friend buy it and play at his house.

Terminate421:

Zenn3k:

Korten12:

Not going to bother anymore...

Ignorance is bliss, eh?

You trying to argue against what I said or support it, I'm confused.

If the former: You point at stuff, you press button till it dies, if you get hurt, you hide till you are not hurt anymore. Walk from A to B.

MOST shooters are the same game, every COD is the same, every Halo is the same. The graphics might get nicer, but the gameplay remains the same.

image

You've never played a Halo game, I can tell from that statement, if you can explain the full plot to Halo 3 and Halo: Reach, I will believe you MAYBE. Now go back to your RTS's which are all the same or all your JRPG's which involve whiny teenagers.

It's not like they added:

New Weapons
New Health System
New Vehicles
New Methods of taking out vehicles besides shooting them
New enemies
New class based gameplay
New horde mode
New Custom game mechanics
4 Player Co-op
Space Combat
Theater mode
map editor

But no, its all the same. It always has been the same game. This is fact based your statement. All first person shooters are the same. This means that Half-life 2 is the exact clone to Call of Duty 4, according to your logic.

I'm starting to like this guy and his Owl.

Danne:

Terminate421:
snip

I'm starting to like this guy and his Owl.

I love owls. They're my 2nd favorite animal.

I like Halo for the overarching story and the universe, that's what really means I will get this one. I cannot say that the game-play footage excited me that much, it's still the same old Halo when it comes down to it.

I will buy it, I am sure I will like it, but I am not expecting miracles.

synobal:
Am I the only guy that is confused. I thought Master Chief was in cyro on a spaceship wreck that was flying around in some other solar system. Can anyone catch me up on why he is on a planet in the trailer? Do we know yet?

I give you the Legendary ending to Halo 3.

Try around 2:50. Pretty sure that planet is the same planet that we saw in the first trailer. And I do believe that it was established at the beginning of Halo 3 that Chief can survive jumping off of a ship an reentering a planet's atmosphere.

Terminate421:

Danne:

Terminate421:
snip

I'm starting to like this guy and his Owl.

I love owls. They're my 2nd favorite animal.

image

Back on topic. Halo=Good!

synobal:
Am I the only guy that is confused. I thought Master Chief was in cyro on a spaceship wreck that was flying around in some other solar system. Can anyone catch me up on why he is on a planet in the trailer? Do we know yet?

At the end of Halo 3, it showed the Master Chief nearing an unknown planet. In Halo 4 it starts out with you waking up 4 years later (coenciding with the legendary ending of 3) and the Covenant are attacking your ship (though oddly just Grunts, Elites, and Jackals) and are not wearing military grade gear.

After fighting your way you land inside the world, Reqiuem, which is a Forerunner Shieldworld. Probably a level inbetween that and the level shown in the trailer, or at least a long cutscene.

Robots? Meh, as far as a new enemy goes I'm not impressed. Bring back the flood (did I really just say that?)

I'm still sore from Bungie duping everyone that Halo 2 wasn't the final game
I know, I know, but after that Halo died for me after Halo 3

Underwhelming was the entire Microsoft conference in a nutshell. When you made Halo 4, Call of Duty BOS 2, and Gears of War 4(?) look boring and average, that has to be an achievement in something.

I wouldn't call it underwhelming.

I'd call it Halo. It's doing nothing different in the way of game play mechanics that hasn't been done by the previous games in the franchise before. It's just Halo. It's another chapter in the story.

Nfritzappa:
I miss the old music...

Wheres the choir?

Yeah same here....

Really loved the monk chant

Marik2:

Nfritzappa:
I miss the old music...

Wheres the choir?

Yeah same here....

Really loved the monk chant

They still said songs like that will be in 4 I believe.

Terminate421:

You've never played a Halo game, I can tell from that statement, if you can explain the full plot to Halo 3 and Halo: Reach, I will believe you MAYBE. Now go back to your RTS's which are all the same or all your JRPG's which involve whiny teenagers.

It's not like they added:

New Weapons
New Health System
New Vehicles
New Methods of taking out vehicles besides shooting them
New enemies
New class based gameplay
New horde mode
New Custom game mechanics
4 Player Co-op
Space Combat
Theater mode
map editor

But no, its all the same. It always has been the same game. This is fact based your statement. All first person shooters are the same. This means that Half-life 2 is the exact clone to Call of Duty 4, according to your logic.

I'd like to point out that something that people unfamiliar with cars (or at least viewers of top gear) will probably not get.

Just about every year or two Porsche comes out with a new 911. Every single part of it (just about) is replaced, and it usually runs a little better than the last, but for the most part it's the same old story.

Saying something is new is really only half true. It's been updated, is more accurate. Jetpacks, in Reach, were new for Halo. A UI interface with bars in slightly different locations? Updated. See the difference?

And even if it is better than previous titles (which it probably will be), it's pretty hard to get exited about what feels like a glorified software update.

TheCommanders:

Terminate421:

You've never played a Halo game, I can tell from that statement, if you can explain the full plot to Halo 3 and Halo: Reach, I will believe you MAYBE. Now go back to your RTS's which are all the same or all your JRPG's which involve whiny teenagers.

It's not like they added:

New Weapons
New Health System
New Vehicles
New Methods of taking out vehicles besides shooting them
New enemies
New class based gameplay
New horde mode
New Custom game mechanics
4 Player Co-op
Space Combat
Theater mode
map editor

But no, its all the same. It always has been the same game. This is fact based your statement. All first person shooters are the same. This means that Half-life 2 is the exact clone to Call of Duty 4, according to your logic.

I'd like to point out that something that people unfamiliar with cars (or at least viewers of top gear) will probably not get.

Just about every year or two Porsche comes out with a new 911. Every single part of it (just about) is replaced, and it usually runs a little better than the last, but for the most part it's the same old story.

Saying something is new is really only half true. It's been updated, is more accurate. Jetpacks, in Reach, were new for Halo. A UI interface with bars in slightly different locations? Updated. See the difference?

And even if it is better than previous titles (which it probably will be), it's pretty hard to get exited about what feels like a glorified software update.

So new enemies, new weapons, new game modes, new vehicles, new environments, and new spins on characters are "glorified software updates"? Whatever you say pal.

erttheking:

So new enemies, new weapons, new game modes, new vehicles, new environments, and new spins on characters are "glorified software updates"? Whatever you say pal.

Well if by that you mean the slightly different colored shotgun and assault rifles, then sure there's new weapons. I will admit that Cortana could have an interesting story arc, but the chief is the same old mr mcblandy bland soldier.

TheCommanders:

erttheking:

So new enemies, new weapons, new game modes, new vehicles, new environments, and new spins on characters are "glorified software updates"? Whatever you say pal.

Well if by that you mean the slightly different colored shotgun and assault rifles, then sure there's new weapons. I will admit that Cortana could have an interesting story arc, but the chief is the same old mr mcblandy bland soldier.

Oh yes, the 30 seconds of on screen action that you saw the, yeah, that was undeniable proof that they're the same,,,also the shotgun was fired a grand total of once and the other weapon wasn't even like the assault rifle, it was more like the battle rifle, which, once again, we only saw kill one enemy. Also I don't recall those weapons disintegrating their targets, so "slightly" really doesn't cut it. What's more, Chief's character is going to be explored more in Halo 4 as well, and even then you could argue that he had a bit of personality going on, he isn't bland simply because his character traits aren't smacking you in the face.

I don't think it will be a BAD game by any means, but to me, the story ended with Halo 3. I believe 343 will do a good job, but it just seems like Microsoft (as Yahtzee predicted in his H:R review) is just carrying the corpse over the coals for the cash. If it turns out to be spectacular, then I might get it, but I'm not feeling that anticipation that I did with the other games.

Dangit2019:
I don't think it will be a BAD game by any means, but to me, the story ended with Halo 3. I believe 343 will do a good job, but it just seems like Microsoft (as Yahtzee predicted in his H:R review) is just carrying the corpse over the coals for the cash. If it turns out to be spectacular, then I might get it, but I'm not feeling that anticipation that I did with the other games.

The story ended with Halo 3....The story ended with....am I the only one who saw the legendary ending to Halo 3? It ended on a MASSIVE cliffhanger!

erttheking:
-snip-

I completely agree that I haven't seen enough of the game. I'm just saying that so far, based on what I've seen, I'm not impressed. I'm open to the possibility of the end product blowing my mind, but not counting on it.

erttheking:

Dangit2019:
I don't think it will be a BAD game by any means, but to me, the story ended with Halo 3. I believe 343 will do a good job, but it just seems like Microsoft (as Yahtzee predicted in his H:R review) is just carrying the corpse over the coals for the cash. If it turns out to be spectacular, then I might get it, but I'm not feeling that anticipation that I did with the other games.

The story ended with Halo 3....The story ended with....am I the only one who saw the legendary ending to Halo 3? It ended on a MASSIVE cliffhanger!

Technically, I played it on normal, so yes, I can pretend that that didn't exist.

Besides, that ending really was only there to shoehorn another possible sequel into the mix anyway.

TheCommanders:

erttheking:
-snip-

I completely agree that I haven't seen enough of the game. I'm just saying that so far, based on what I've seen, I'm not impressed. I'm open to the possibility of the end product blowing my mind, but not counting on it.

You did see the enemies catching grenades in mid air and throwing back at you, deploying shields that lacked the exploitable nick that the Jackles had and teleporting didn't you? Call me crazy but I think it's safe to say that that's new to the series. It seems to me that 343 is trying to take the franchise in a new direction. That's the only point that I'm trying to make, and for me personally, that's all I need to believe that this game will be good.

luvd1:
snip

Zhukov:
Uuuuuurgh.

Underwhelming is putting it kindly.

Also, why is he shooting Covenant at the start? The war is over, they said it like six times. Also, didn't the Elites split from the other Covenant species? Why are they back together?

There's a very good explanation for this. It's part of the backstory (and is already explained, but I won't spoil it) and will be explained in-game too.

No need to knock something just because you don't understand it and don't bother to look for an answer.

In-story, several years at least have passed, plenty of time for any grudges to be played out

Dangit2019:

erttheking:

Dangit2019:
I don't think it will be a BAD game by any means, but to me, the story ended with Halo 3. I believe 343 will do a good job, but it just seems like Microsoft (as Yahtzee predicted in his H:R review) is just carrying the corpse over the coals for the cash. If it turns out to be spectacular, then I might get it, but I'm not feeling that anticipation that I did with the other games.

The story ended with Halo 3....The story ended with....am I the only one who saw the legendary ending to Halo 3? It ended on a MASSIVE cliffhanger!

Technically, I played it on normal, so yes, I can pretend that that didn't exist.

Besides, that ending really was only there to shoehorn another possible sequel into the mix anyway.

So what? Are you saying that they should've just ignored it? You may have done that but if the developers had done it too, it would've been a massive cop out to those who actually beat the game on legendary.

TheCommanders:

Scarim Coral:

The only nicpik is when that Forerunner hunter thing got upclose to Chief and its face open up to reveal its face, it's so cliche (it look like a energy/ red human skull oh gee don't tell me they are human related).

I just remembered, did Halo used to have the CoD style scripted events such as this? I don't think it did. Is the game that used to be called innovative now jumping on the proverbial bandwagon?

Well there was one in Reach with an Elite, that tackles Six followed by Six punching it in the side of the head, all of this done from the first person perspective and without input from the player so it's been on the bandwagon for longer than this.

OT: Honestly, I was impressed seeing what they have to work with. It seems to me that Bungie really wanted Halo 3 to be the end (I mean the Coveneant were completely destroyed leaving only the Flood which would make H4 just another zombie game) Also, from what I saw it looked like the Elites and other Covenents were illusions created by the Forerunners who are bad guys now apparently. I agree on the weapons though, when is Halo going to invent new weapons instead of having multiple races versions of the same weapons

EDIT: Just realized, the gameplay trailer had me under the impression that MC and Cortana have still not made contact with any other humans yet Chief appears to be sporting some new armor and a new gun, where'd he get that stuff?

erttheking:

TheCommanders:

erttheking:
-snip-

I completely agree that I haven't seen enough of the game. I'm just saying that so far, based on what I've seen, I'm not impressed. I'm open to the possibility of the end product blowing my mind, but not counting on it.

You did see the enemies catching grenades in mid air and throwing back at you, deploying shields that lacked the exploitable nick that the Jackles had and teleporting didn't you? Call me crazy but I think it's safe to say that that's new to the series. It seems to me that 343 is trying to take the franchise in a new direction. That's the only point that I'm trying to make, and for me personally, that's all I need to believe that this game will be good.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree then.

TheCommanders:

erttheking:

TheCommanders:

I completely agree that I haven't seen enough of the game. I'm just saying that so far, based on what I've seen, I'm not impressed. I'm open to the possibility of the end product blowing my mind, but not counting on it.

You did see the enemies catching grenades in mid air and throwing back at you, deploying shields that lacked the exploitable nick that the Jackles had and teleporting didn't you? Call me crazy but I think it's safe to say that that's new to the series. It seems to me that 343 is trying to take the franchise in a new direction. That's the only point that I'm trying to make, and for me personally, that's all I need to believe that this game will be good.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree then.

I guess we will. After all I can only prove the facts, I can't prove that the game will be good.

erttheking:

Zenn3k:

Korten12:

Not going to bother anymore...

Ignorance is bliss, eh?

You trying to argue against what I said or support it, I'm confused.

If the former: You point at stuff, you press button till it dies, if you get hurt, you hide till you are not hurt anymore. Walk from A to B.

MOST shooters are the same game, every COD is the same, every Halo is the same. The graphics might get nicer, but the gameplay remains the same.

Oh sure, we get new vehicles, weapons, enemies, environments, characters, armor abilities, game modes, space combat, forge mode, theater mode, new custom games, and engines that feel completly different, but apart from that? Completely the same game. (sarcasm)

Taking a game engine that already exists and adding weapons, enemies, environments, blah blah blah blah blah...is like, 3months development time. Glad you enjoy paying a fresh $60 for what amounts to DLC, re-sold as a full game.

You like the game? Fine, more power to you, but the doesn't change the fact its the same game...what, 5 times now? You can blind yourself that new weapons and "characters" (lawl!!!!) are somehow revolutionary innovations in gaming, but they are not.

erttheking:

Dangit2019:

erttheking:

The story ended with Halo 3....The story ended with....am I the only one who saw the legendary ending to Halo 3? It ended on a MASSIVE cliffhanger!

Technically, I played it on normal, so yes, I can pretend that that didn't exist.

Besides, that ending really was only there to shoehorn another possible sequel into the mix anyway.

So what? Are you saying that they should've just ignored it? You may have done that but if the developers had done it too, it would've been a massive cop out to those who actually beat the game on legendary.

No, what I'm saying is that the setup for a sequel was unnecessary. The ending (anticlimactic in action as it was) tied up every storyline in a neat little bow. There were no questions resolving the Forerunners that couldn't have been solved in the expanded universe novels or whatnot, but they decided to have him crashing into it just to get one last ride. I'm not saying it was evil or anything (like what CoD is doing with its unnecessary sequels), what I'm saying is that the entire resolution that will come in Halo 4 is only resolving a setup made purely for economic gain.

Terminate421:

Zenn3k:

Korten12:

Not going to bother anymore...

Ignorance is bliss, eh?

You trying to argue against what I said or support it, I'm confused.

If the former: You point at stuff, you press button till it dies, if you get hurt, you hide till you are not hurt anymore. Walk from A to B.

MOST shooters are the same game, every COD is the same, every Halo is the same. The graphics might get nicer, but the gameplay remains the same.

[/img]

You've never played a Halo game, I can tell from that statement, if you can explain the full plot to Halo 3 and Halo: Reach, I will believe you MAYBE. Now go back to your RTS's which are all the same or all your JRPG's which involve whiny teenagers.

It's not like they added:

New Weapons
New Health System
New Vehicles
New Methods of taking out vehicles besides shooting them
New enemies
New class based gameplay
New horde mode
New Custom game mechanics
4 Player Co-op
Space Combat
Theater mode
map editor

But no, its all the same. It always has been the same game. This is fact based your statement. All first person shooters are the same. This means that Half-life 2 is the exact clone to Call of Duty 4, according to your logic.

Yes I have, I played Halo 1 and 2, ya know, when the series was not only fresh, but made by the people who INVENTED IT.

I really don't care what the plot of Halo 3 and Reach are, I'm pretty sure it goes something like: The covenant are attacking, shoot them till you win.

As I told someone else who quoted me...new weapons, vehicles, enemies, theater mode...whatever, 3 months development per game. The game engine never changed, so its just adding on to what already exists and changing things around. You take a game with a bunch of weapons, how hard is it to make a new weapon? Make a gun model, make gun model shoot something...wow, that takes a couple guys maybe a week? Please, its not impressive to ADD on to something that already exists, its easy as hell.

At least HL2 did something new when it came out, it had (at the time) revolutionary in game physics. What has Halo done to push the genre? I know the answer, its regenerating health, Halo was one of the first to do it...everyone copies it now of course...otherwise, its a generic shooter, always has been. Decent story I guess, good VO...but a generic shooter.

Zenn3k:

erttheking:

Zenn3k:

You trying to argue against what I said or support it, I'm confused.

If the former: You point at stuff, you press button till it dies, if you get hurt, you hide till you are not hurt anymore. Walk from A to B.

MOST shooters are the same game, every COD is the same, every Halo is the same. The graphics might get nicer, but the gameplay remains the same.

Oh sure, we get new vehicles, weapons, enemies, environments, characters, armor abilities, game modes, space combat, forge mode, theater mode, new custom games, and engines that feel completly different, but apart from that? Completely the same game. (sarcasm)

Taking a game engine that already exists and adding weapons, enemies, environments, blah blah blah blah blah...is like, 3months development time. Glad you enjoy paying a fresh $60 for what amounts to DLC, re-sold as a full game.

You like the game? Fine, more power to you, but the doesn't change the fact its the same game...what, 5 times now? You can blind yourself that new weapons and "characters" (lawl!!!!) are somehow revolutionary innovations in gaming, but they are not.

...Ugh, that is a very tired, overused and above all weak argument. Three months of development time? Uh, you do know that this game was announced a year ago right? And, call me crazy, I think that they were working on it beforehand. Existing game engine...uh, I'm guessing that you haven't played Halo 3 or Halo Reach because, let me tell you pal, they feel very VERY different from one another.

The same game...oh for christ's sake you're repeating yourself now, if you really think that Halo CE and Halo Reach are even remotely close, then I pretty much know that you haven't played them. I have, and they feel completely different, on account of them being completely different games. Also innovation (lawl, see, I can put them in here to act like a jerk too) is something that doesn't seem to be really understood that well by people like you. You seem to be under the impression that if a game doesn't change everything, it's "DLC re-sold as a full game" which is just stupid. The point of a sequel is to take a game and improve it while adding enough for it to stay fresh, but not enough so that it becomes a completely different game, which Halo has been doing a very good job of. Then again, you're probably one of those people who think that franchises are by definition bad.

You know how Call of Duty has those "indicators" for when you are aiming at an enemy to help out the methanol sipping retards who play that game? Well, come right on over said 343, and all they did was change it to appear when aiming at the head.

There were so many things wrong with the trailer. It pretty much confirmed my "not going to buy" stance on the game.

Dangit2019:

erttheking:

Dangit2019:

Technically, I played it on normal, so yes, I can pretend that that didn't exist.

Besides, that ending really was only there to shoehorn another possible sequel into the mix anyway.

So what? Are you saying that they should've just ignored it? You may have done that but if the developers had done it too, it would've been a massive cop out to those who actually beat the game on legendary.

No, what I'm saying is that the setup for a sequel was unnecessary. The ending (anticlimactic in action as it was) tied up every storyline in a neat little bow. There were no questions resolving the Forerunners that couldn't have been solved in the expanded universe novels or whatnot, but they decided to have him crashing into it just to get one last ride. I'm not saying it was evil or anything (like what CoD is doing with its unnecessary sequels), what I'm saying is that the entire resolution that will come in Halo 4 is only resolving a setup made purely for economic gain.

Halo 2 was technically unnecessary, the ending for Halo CE tied up the storyline in a neat little bow. There weren't any questions that couldn't be tied up elsewhere. Halo 4 got made for the same reason that Halo 2 did. People wanted more Halo. Of course they were doing it to make money too. After all, Halo was made to make money in the first place, all games where. If it wasn't it would've been given away.

Zenn3k:

Yes I have, I played Halo 1 and 2, ya know, when the series was not only fresh, but made by the people who INVENTED IT.

When developers change hands over a game, that doesn't mean its a bad thing. Halo 3 and Reach were made by Bungie too.

I really don't care what the plot of Halo 3 and Reach are, I'm pretty sure it goes something like: The covenant are attacking, shoot them till you win.

image

Wrong, you're wrong. All wrong. There is no words to describe how wrong you are. Your arguments are pretty much not valid at this point. Ask anyone, even fucking Yahtzee and they'll tell you that you are wrong.

As I told someone else who quoted me...new weapons, vehicles, enemies, theater mode...whatever, 3 months development per game. The game engine never changed, so its just adding on to what already exists and changing things around. You take a game with a bunch of weapons, how hard is it to make a new weapon? Make a gun model, make gun model shoot something...wow, that takes a couple guys maybe a week? Please, its not impressive to ADD on to something that already exists, its easy as hell.

Really? Maybe you should listen to ertheking more. In all honesty, do so because he and I agree on many things involving Halo, why? Because we are right.

3 months to develop something? You have no idea what you are talking about. At this point your arguments are not only invalid but just flat out wrong. Seriously, an opinion is one thing but saying it like that is just wrong.

At least HL2 did something new when it came out, it had (at the time) revolutionary in game physics.

image

Is that all it did? Because than it makes it sound rather generic about its shooting aspects. Its physics may be important for development now, but if thats all its riding on, then Halo should be revolutionary for everything else it brought to the table. Such as its own MAP EDITOR, THEATER MODE, and NEARLY LIMITLESS CUSTOMIZATION OF GAMETYPES all in one title (Halo 3).

What has Halo done to push the genre? I know the answer, its regenerating health, Halo was one of the first to do it...everyone copies it now of course...otherwise, its a generic shooter, always has been. Decent story I guess, good VO...but a generic shooter.

Ah yes, the "Generic shooter with regenerating health"

This is also a wrong argument because you haven't played Reach. Reach brought in a new health system, shields but with health that DOESN'T FUCKING REGENERATE.
Regeneration is just a new thing, Halo brought new things to its own table, I'm not saying each Halo game is revolutionary, I have been saying that Halo brings new things each game that make it different enough from the last to warrant it as a worthy sequel.

Also, generic shooter?

image

Every Halo hater has used that exact words right there, and you know what? They've all been wrong. Name one other shooter that plays like Halo....Oh wait, there is NONE.

If you say "Well, Call of Duty has regenerating Health so that means it plays EXACTLY like Halo", thats just wrong. Watching an online video of the game does not make your opinion valid. Come back and argue with me about then when you have actually played it.

Mechanics can be the same in more than two games, does that make the either game generic? No. Halo has similar aspects to its previous games but adds enough things to make it a sequel which makes it its OWN NEW GAME.

I could pick up Halo: Combat Evolved and immediatly tell that it plays differently to

Your argument has been "Oh, every Halo game is the same, regenerating health with two weapons that is a massive borefest because I am right"

If you don't like Halo, fine. That's your opinion. But when you say stuff about Halo that is wrong. You're wrong and the opinion becomes invalid, simple as that.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked