Halo means nothing to PC gamers.

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]

@ TC:

How come you start a thread trying to speak for an entire group, and when members of that group tell you that you are indeed not speaking for them, you tell them that they are the ones in the wrong?

Its rather arrogant, and more than a little self-serving.

PayDaMurdaMan

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]

@ TC:

How come you start a thread trying to speak for an entire group, and when members of that group tell you that you are indeed not speaking for them, you tell them that they are the ones in the wrong?

Its rather arrogant, and more than a little self-serving.

PayDaMurdaMan

hey hey i'm a 14 year old 'kid'. does that mean i start off threads like these? stop speaking about ALL us 'minors' please :)

I'm sure some PC gamers like Halo, myself being one of them.

The reason Halo doesn't really do well on the PC is because it's released way too late and it normally just a crappy port. They only do it to make a little bit more money after using Halo to sell some XBox's.

zeus_gb

Whoa! I didn't know you post here! :o

And I agree that it does bad usually because it's released way too late.

[QUOTE="Subcritical"][QUOTE="InsaneBasura"]

PC FPS, or PC games in general, are usually more complex. Deus Ex vs Invisible War would be a good example.

skrat_01

Deus Ex Invisible War was atrocious. I played it for about 15 minutes and was completely disgusted. But I think that is the developers fault.

For example, complexity in FPS games is kind of an oxymoron. Are FEAR, Far Cry, Doom 3, Quake 4, etc complex? No. Technically they are, but gameplay depth-wise no.

Or Rainbow 6 Raven Shield, and Lockdown and Vegas.

QFT. You will never see a game like those on consoles without dumbing down. It really comes down which audience you are developing for. Console games for the most part are UBER casual while there are a ton more sophisticated games on PC.

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="Sakura321"]

You enjoy running around doing bunny jumps, using hardly any tactics to take down your enemies

skrat_01

I assume you played it on normal or heroic? On legendary (which is the difficulty everyone should be playing on anyway) it's so much more tactical than Half Life 2. Even hard in Half Life 2 simply requires good aim and understanding on which weapons to use in which situations, while halo on legendary is closer to a fps equivalent of Ninja Gaiden. Every single elite is a huge obstacle, and the zealots (gold plated ones) are tougher than many bosses in other games. Complete mastery of all the weapons (they ALL have their uses), the melee and grenade systems is required if you want to stand a chance.

And I do love Half Life 2.

"you need to play it on Legendary to experience it".
Biggest bull**** EVER. You simply take damage easier, and Covenant are more accurate. It doesent make the experience any better, just harder. And for the record ive beaten the game on heroic, and 1/2 on Legendary - SP - not Co-op.

And no Half Life is even more tactical in many instances - and the fast pace of the game, forces the player to think on their feet more. Hell the Grav Gun is a pure example of how diverse tactically the game can be.

People love to interpreate Halo as 'tactical' because of the weapon limitations, and slow pace. While the weapon limitations force you to make tactical decisions - it hardly makes the game 'oh so tactical', and the pace - ha.

Jeez Hunters in HL2 Ep2. Most tactical enimies - and tactics needed to defeat - in any linear FPS. They make the Covenant look like mindless drones.

And comparing Halo to Ninja Gaiden is laughable. Ninja Gaiden is quick frantic action, Halo is slow paced FPS combat.
And no to stand a chance, the best option is to stay back and shoot from cover - letting your shield regen when it takes hits. You draw enimies out (they are pretty pathetic when it comes to tactics at long range - and exploit it) and take them down. Easy as said and done.

Every time I argue about Halo with you it's as if we had played different games :P. I simply think it's laughable to call Half Life 2 tactical, it's run and gun for 90% of the game, and you wouldn't even have to use different weapons if it wasn't for the limited ammunition. I'm not saying Halo isn't run and gun, but on legendary you really have to know how to use every weapon right and grenades and melee are actually more than just something you use when you're really screwed, they're vital for your survival.

I compared it to Ninja Gaiden because both require the ability to quickly change your tactics depending on what's happening on the screen and lots of knowledge about your enemies and your own limitations. The pace is very different, and my comparison might fall on that point, but personally I think there's more than enough similarities to make it. The way you claim to play halo is one I used in the very beginning, but quickly abandoned as it was both dull and frustrating, one plasma grenade too close to your cover and 15 minutes of camping was wasted. Long range battles could get very easy using this tactic though, unless there were wraiths nearby, which usually was the case on the larger maps anyway.

I never claimed Halo was 'oh so tactical' only that it was more tactical than HL 2, and I simply find it wierd anyone that isn't a HL fanboy would claim otherwise. It does have it's tactical moments, but on the whole you're mostly running and gunning with whichever weapon you have ammo for at the moment. And for the record, I've completed Half Life 2 on hard 4 or 5 times, once using the gravity gun for pretty much every encounter I could use it in.

As a PC gamer I consider Halo average at best compared to my most favourite fps of all time, Half-Life 2. But saying Halo doesn't mean anything at all to me thats just ignorant. Its certainly not a bad game and I like to play it sometimes at my friends house.

PC/360 standards aren't very big anymore like last-gen. Back then UT2k4, Far Cry and Half-Life 2 were exclusive. This gen not so much except for Crysis of course.

Halo means nothing to PCgamers

Thats weird considering i love both Halo and Pcgaming(and i'm loving this UT3 demo atm)

Halo meansI wasted $60 on a 360 game I was really looking forward to, I got it home and the graphics gameplay and sound were justnot what I expected. The story was also very boring I just forced myself to finish the game for the achievements. The ai is just stupid even after I collected the skulls the game was meh notthe game all the previews claimed was the second coming.

I had my doubts after playing the beta but it was a beta so I got the game anyway. I am play tf2, ut3 beta and crysis beta that are all more enjoyable to me than halo 3 and portalI played3 times and lost track of time. On halo3 I was watching the clock saying I just need to do xyz to get my achievements or I would have quit.

Every time I argue about Halo with you it's as if we had played different games :P. I simply think it's laughable to call Half Life 2 tactical, it's run and gun for 90% of the game, and you wouldn't even have to use different weapons if it wasn't for the limited ammunition. I'm not saying Halo isn't run and gun, but on legendary you really have to know how to use every weapon right and grenades and melee are actually more than just something you use when you're really screwed, they're vital for your survival.

I compared it to Ninja Gaiden because both require the ability to quickly change your tactics depending on what's happening on the screen and lots of knowledge about your enemies and your own limitations. The pace is very different, and my comparison might fall on that point, but personally I think there's more than enough similarities to make it. The way you claim to play halo is one I used in the very beginning, but quickly abandoned as it was both dull and frustrating, one plasma grenade too close to your cover and 15 minutes of camping was wasted. Long range battles could get very easy using this tactic though, unless there were wraiths nearby, which usually was the case on the larger maps anyway.

I never claimed Halo was 'oh so tactical' only that it was more tactical than HL 2, and I simply find it wierd anyone that isn't a HL fanboy would claim otherwise. It does have it's tactical moments, but on the whole you're mostly running and gunning with whichever weapon you have ammo for at the moment. And for the record, I've completed Half Life 2 on hard 4 or 5 times, once using the gravity gun for pretty much every encounter I could use it in.

inoperativeRS

And yes that tactic is effective, even though its dull. Now you are saying Halo requires tactics to change on the fly depending on what is happening on screen - and your limitations. This is pretty ironic, because in HL2 there is much more of that happening. Encounters with combine forces such as manhacks, soldiers, striders and hunters, requires a huge amount of change in tactics on the fly. Hell HL2 Episode 2 demmands it frequently, about 1/3+ of the way through.
You need to use the right thing in the right situation, and how to use the enviroment to your advantage. The Gravity gun enforces that even more - using it as a defensive tool (not just for makeshift shields).

Having combine soldeirs surround the house you are bunkered down in, then send in manhacks, can change the tactical situation dramatically. Then add in hunters comming in through upstairs windows, and flanking the side, and you have an extremmely challenging situtaion, that relies on your tactical prowess, and adjustments to the sitation.

I could say HL2 offers a more tactical experience in this regard because of "happening on the screen and lots of knowledge about your enemies and your own limitations." - as you said - but the variety of enimies requires a broader use of tactical desisions, and adaption to the situtaion. Use of the enviroment also adds to tactical depth in HL2.

Yea you never said 'oh so tactical' -that is an exaggeration on my behalf. However you can read my claims on Half Life being more tactical in some regards. And yes there is plenty of tactical movements in many instances, as I have stated, and offers a bigger variety in tactics to be implemented than Halo (3). And yes ive beaten HL1, and 2 + Eps multiple times, and all Halo games multiple times.

I guess it boils down to what type of tacitcs involved in either game. I do think that Half Life 2 is much much much more comparible to Ninja Gaiden in your example, however Halo certainly has its own merits in tactical gameplay, its just different, in many regards.

Only because Bungie don't try one bit to make this a PC game, its a port. Halo 3 is designed for xbox 360 control scheme and thats how its supposed to be played. Just like UT is a PC game, console iterations eg. 360 and ps3 versions have simply not got the control scheme to make this game work for the gamer, no matter how many mods there are or how good the graphics look.hongkingkong

Hell I dont see how Half Life 2, to be honest, on console could be the same experience as on PC. In many instance it is so frantic, and there is so much happening, I thought to myself of how flustered a console gamer could be with a gamepad - and the pacing - in comparison to the much slower Halo 3. Take the part where you are ambushed by various combine - in a village - in HL2 Episode 2.

Yes Halo works best on consoles no doubt.
Sure the invitable PC version would be better in many regards, but that doesent stop it from being the most suitable for consoles.

HL2 is a run and gun FPS, no doubt - just like Halo (Halo moreso TBH). But that doesent stop it from being 'tactical', same with Halo as you said. And with Half Life 2 you need to know what weapon to use in the right situation. Hell with such a variety of enimies, that is blatantly obvius, thus its no wonder the player can still carry such an arseranal of weapons - as you are constant flicking between them.

And yes that tactic is effective, even though its dull. Now you are saying Halo requires tactics to change on the fly depending on what is happening on screen - and your limitations. This is pretty ironic, because in HL2 there is much more of that happening. Encounters with combine forces such as manhacks, soldiers, striders and hunters, requires a huge amount of change in tactics on the fly. Hell HL2 Episode 2 demmands it frequently, about 1/3+ of the way through.
You need to use the right thing in the right situation, and how to use the enviroment to your advantage. The Gravity gun enforces that even more - using it as a defensive tool (not just for makeshift shields).

Having combine soldeirs surround the house you are bunkered down in, then send in manhacks, can change the tactical situation dramatically. Then add in hunters comming in through upstairs windows, and flanking the side, and you have an extremmely challenging situtaion, that relies on your tactical prowess, and adjustments to the sitation.

I could say HL2 offers a more tactical experience in this regard because of "happening on the screen and lots of knowledge about your enemies and your own limitations." - as you said - but the variety of enimies requires a broader use of tactical desisions, and adaption to the situtaion. Use of the enviroment also adds to tactical depth in HL2.

Yea you never said 'oh so tactical' -that is an exaggeration on my behalf. However you can read my claims on Half Life being more tactical in some regards. And yes there is plenty of tactical movements in many instances, as I have stated, and offers a bigger variety in tactics to be implemented than Halo (3). And yes ive beaten HL1, and 2 + Eps multiple times.

I guess it boils down to what type of tacitcs involved in either game. I do think that Half Life 2 is much much much more comparible to Ninja Gaiden in your example, however Halo certainly has its own merits in tactical gameplay, its just different, in many regards.

skrat_01

Ep. 2 certainly is MUCH more tactical than HL2 itself or episode 1, if we're arguing about that you might have a point, but the original HL2 just didn't have many situations that would have required tactics. The enemy variety is very limited compared to Ep. 2, the environments don't support a tactical approch even close to as much as in Ep. 2 and I even found the AI in Ep. 2 to be much more fun to play against generally. I don't even know if they changed it, but that's simply the way I felt about it.

Anyway, this thread is about Halo, not HL. As I said, taking out enemies from behind cover didn't work for me on legendary, or at least my nerves weren't good enough for it, as I quit using it after having been killed by plasma grenades many times in row after having camped behind the same rock for at least 15 minutes taking out one enemy at a time.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

HL2 is a run and gun FPS, no doubt - just like Halo (Halo moreso TBH). But that doesent stop it from being 'tactical', same with Halo as you said. And with Half Life 2 you need to know what weapon to use in the right situation. Hell with such a variety of enimies, that is blatantly obvius, thus its no wonder the player can still carry such an arseranal of weapons - as you are constant flicking between them.

And yes that tactic is effective, even though its dull. Now you are saying Halo requires tactics to change on the fly depending on what is happening on screen - and your limitations. This is pretty ironic, because in HL2 there is much more of that happening. Encounters with combine forces such as manhacks, soldiers, striders and hunters, requires a huge amount of change in tactics on the fly. Hell HL2 Episode 2 demmands it frequently, about 1/3+ of the way through.
You need to use the right thing in the right situation, and how to use the enviroment to your advantage. The Gravity gun enforces that even more - using it as a defensive tool (not just for makeshift shields).

Having combine soldeirs surround the house you are bunkered down in, then send in manhacks, can change the tactical situation dramatically. Then add in hunters comming in through upstairs windows, and flanking the side, and you have an extremmely challenging situtaion, that relies on your tactical prowess, and adjustments to the sitation.

I could say HL2 offers a more tactical experience in this regard because of "happening on the screen and lots of knowledge about your enemies and your own limitations." - as you said - but the variety of enimies requires a broader use of tactical desisions, and adaption to the situtaion. Use of the enviroment also adds to tactical depth in HL2.

Yea you never said 'oh so tactical' -that is an exaggeration on my behalf. However you can read my claims on Half Life being more tactical in some regards. And yes there is plenty of tactical movements in many instances, as I have stated, and offers a bigger variety in tactics to be implemented than Halo (3). And yes ive beaten HL1, and 2 + Eps multiple times.

I guess it boils down to what type of tacitcs involved in either game. I do think that Half Life 2 is much much much more comparible to Ninja Gaiden in your example, however Halo certainly has its own merits in tactical gameplay, its just different, in many regards.

inoperativeRS

Ep. 2 certainly is MUCH more tactical than HL2 itself or episode 1, if we're arguing about that you might have a point, but the original HL2 just didn't have many situations that would have required tactics. The enemy variety is very limited compared to Ep. 2, the environments don't support a tactical approch even close to as much as in Ep. 2 and I even found the AI in Ep. 2 to be much more fun to play against generally. I don't even know if they changed it, but that's simply the way I felt about it.

Anyway, this thread is about Halo, not HL. As I said, taking out enemies from behind cover didn't work for me on legendary, or at least my nerves weren't good enough for it, as I quit using it after having been killed by plasma grenades many times in row after having camped behind the same rock for at least 15 minutes taking out one enemy at a time.

The thread is about how halo means nothing to PC gamers, Half life is a very popular game for pc gamers, hence I think it is relevant.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

HL2 is a run and gun FPS, no doubt - just like Halo (Halo moreso TBH). But that doesent stop it from being 'tactical', same with Halo as you said. And with Half Life 2 you need to know what weapon to use in the right situation. Hell with such a variety of enimies, that is blatantly obvius, thus its no wonder the player can still carry such an arseranal of weapons - as you are constant flicking between them.

And yes that tactic is effective, even though its dull. Now you are saying Halo requires tactics to change on the fly depending on what is happening on screen - and your limitations. This is pretty ironic, because in HL2 there is much more of that happening. Encounters with combine forces such as manhacks, soldiers, striders and hunters, requires a huge amount of change in tactics on the fly. Hell HL2 Episode 2 demmands it frequently, about 1/3+ of the way through.
You need to use the right thing in the right situation, and how to use the enviroment to your advantage. The Gravity gun enforces that even more - using it as a defensive tool (not just for makeshift shields).

Having combine soldeirs surround the house you are bunkered down in, then send in manhacks, can change the tactical situation dramatically. Then add in hunters comming in through upstairs windows, and flanking the side, and you have an extremmely challenging situtaion, that relies on your tactical prowess, and adjustments to the sitation.

I could say HL2 offers a more tactical experience in this regard because of "happening on the screen and lots of knowledge about your enemies and your own limitations." - as you said - but the variety of enimies requires a broader use of tactical desisions, and adaption to the situtaion. Use of the enviroment also adds to tactical depth in HL2.

Yea you never said 'oh so tactical' -that is an exaggeration on my behalf. However you can read my claims on Half Life being more tactical in some regards. And yes there is plenty of tactical movements in many instances, as I have stated, and offers a bigger variety in tactics to be implemented than Halo (3). And yes ive beaten HL1, and 2 + Eps multiple times.

I guess it boils down to what type of tacitcs involved in either game. I do think that Half Life 2 is much much much more comparible to Ninja Gaiden in your example, however Halo certainly has its own merits in tactical gameplay, its just different, in many regards.

inoperativeRS

Ep. 2 certainly is MUCH more tactical than HL2 itself or episode 1, if we're arguing about that you might have a point, but the original HL2 just didn't have many situations that would have required tactics. The enemy variety is very limited compared to Ep. 2, the environments don't support a tactical approch even close to as much as in Ep. 2 and I even found the AI in Ep. 2 to be much more fun to play against generally. I don't even know if they changed it, but that's simply the way I felt about it.

Anyway, this thread is about Halo, not HL. As I said, taking out enemies from behind cover didn't work for me on legendary, or at least my nerves weren't good enough for it, as I quit using it after having been killed by plasma grenades many times in row after having camped behind the same rock for at least 15 minutes taking out one enemy at a time.

On legendary that tacic as worked for me just fine - unless there is covenant snipers, which i just out shoot.
You just have to be patient and pace yourself, but yes its not as fun as ahem 'jumping in'. That worked just fine for me on Heroic, and what ive played of Legendary. When it comes to grenades being thrown at you - you simply move back further, avoiding the explosion, and drawing them out.

In multiplayer however I hate this whole wait tactic.