This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]camera direction driving is the only thing I can think of. Everything else has been done before, people who just started gaming with the x-box or never owned a PC that could play games just don't know any better.Ilived
What other fps pc game had more of a complete package than Halo? If it came out for the pc only, everyone here would be raving how innovative it was.
counter strike? oh wait..no driving:P
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word.
thegoldenpoo
You're way off.
Please put up something worth debating instead of just saying "NO".
NO! you are just wrong. nothing to debate. WRONG
halo wasn't innovative at all...it just took things other games did and touched it up a bit. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make anyone a cow. however saying it was certainly does make the person a lemming. beause a game had a good control scheme doesn't make the game innovative, it just make it funner to play. fun=/=innovation.
also lemmings if your praising unique control schemes...then why do you bash the wii so much???just a side thaught
[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]camera direction driving is the only thing I can think of. Everything else has been done before, people who just started gaming with the x-box or never owned a PC that could play games just don't know any better.Dibdibdobdobo
I've never owned a PC for gaming but i started playing FPS way back on the N64 and PS1. Nothing has changed since then.
oh. my. god.
you actually have no idea whats going on do you? alot has changed scince then, go buy a decent PC. play STALKER. experience its awsome immersion then tell me how exactly that could or has been done on N64. i will honestly find you and give you a cookie, honesly if you do.
[QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]enygma500
Please put up something worth debating instead of just saying "NO".
NO! you are just wrong. nothing to debate. WRONG
halo wasn't innovative at all...it just took things other games did and touched it up a bit. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make anyone a cow. however saying it was certainly does make the person a lemming. beause a game had a good control scheme doesn't make the game innovative, it just make it funner to play. fun=/=innovation.
also lemmings if your praising unique control schemes...then why do you bash the wii so much???just a side thaught
list the feature's the first halo took from other games and didnt make better.
[QUOTE="Meu2k7"][QUOTE="Slyprince"]it made rechargable health popular
you didnt have to switch to a grenade to use it
it had vehicle combat that was actually fun
fun co op
fun multiplayer
lawlessx
2 of the lamest "noob" features every introduced to FPS. now grenades are more spammable than ever, and theres alot less risk of death with recharging health.
bloody halo.
i always thought rechargable sheild's made games abit more complex.
Especially when they take place in WW2. That adds a deep layer of mystery to the game. You have to ask the questions... How could we have shields and rechargable health in that day and age? Is this game supposed to be based on an alternate timeline or alternate universe?
[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]camera direction driving is the only thing I can think of. Everything else has been done before, people who just started gaming with the x-box or never owned a PC that could play games just don't know any better.Ilived
What other fps pc game had more of a complete package than Halo? If it came out for the pc only, everyone here would be raving how innovative it was.
Half-life/TF, and people do ;)
[QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word.
enygma500
You're way off.
Please put up something worth debating instead of just saying "NO".
NO! you are just wrong. nothing to debate. WRONG
halo wasn't innovative at all...it just took things other games did and touched it up a bit. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make anyone a cow. however saying it was certainly does make the person a lemming. beause a game had a good control scheme doesn't make the game innovative, it just make it funner to play. fun=/=innovation.
also lemmings if your praising unique control schemes...then why do you bash the wii so much???just a side thaught
:lol:
the self-owning hipocrasy is strong with this one. :lol:
[QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]lawlessx
Please put up something worth debating instead of just saying "NO".
NO! you are just wrong. nothing to debate. WRONG
halo wasn't innovative at all...it just took things other games did and touched it up a bit. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make anyone a cow. however saying it was certainly does make the person a lemming. beause a game had a good control scheme doesn't make the game innovative, it just make it funner to play. fun=/=innovation.
also lemmings if your praising unique control schemes...then why do you bash the wii so much???just a side thaught
list the game's the first halo took from other games.
lol to tell you the truth i cant even think of anything unique enough in the game. its just a basic fps with a good story
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word.
Ilived
You're way off.
Please put up something worth debating instead of just saying "NO".
Here is one...multiplayer. Nothing like it on consoles before(especially the co-op mode). Let me put it this way, Halo was innovative in a way of that it made a new standard for console fps. That standard was, put out a great all around experience with great multiplayer. In any case, I'm going to assume you are one of those people who hated Halo's popularity more than the actual game itself so you like to discredit it every chance you get.
Lawlz funny how you changed it too a attack on me due to not being able to discuss anything. I never played the Mulitplayer on the game to be honest which i never mentioned due to not experiencing it 1st hand. I put up several points on why Halo was not innovative and all you come up with is a stupid attack on me which is hilarious. Go away if you cannot discuss anything.
The end.
You are so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Dibdibdobdobo
[QUOTE="ukillwegrill"]Don't ask silly questions.It just did, ok?ukillwegrill
Yeah i agree man,this kid has a good point,i mean...it just did
Did it now? After reading three pages the only innovative feature I can find is rechargeable shields, vehicle combat, and the ability to throw grenades while shooting a rifle. To clarify, I'm talking about innovation for console FPS since none of these thigns were done before Halo on a console, on PC it's a different story.
From what I can tell, Halo isn't as innovative as everyone says. I think people are looking for too many reasons to justify themselves saying it's the best FPS ever. There is nothing wrong with that until you get into a debate or you see a reviewer who says the same stuff.
Can Halo be the best FPS or game in existance? Yes, but not for innovation or the most common argument, "Everyone else plays it, so it's the best.."; but rather for it being a complete, solid title that is fun, has great music, good graphics, and awesome action as well as a great storyline.
None of these things make it innovative but they do make the game fun and great regardless of the subjectivity of it.
[QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]camera direction driving is the only thing I can think of. Everything else has been done before, people who just started gaming with the x-box or never owned a PC that could play games just don't know any better.FragTycoon
What other fps pc game had more of a complete package than Halo? If it came out for the pc only, everyone here would be raving how innovative it was.
Half-life/TF, and people do ;)
No that wasn't more of a complete package. I guess what I mean, there is a reason why so many say it is innovative, but there is no good reason why so many others bash it. It doesn't deserve the bashing.
[QUOTE="leejohnson7"][QUOTE="Slyprince"]it made rechargable health popular
you didnt have to switch to a grenade to use it
it had vehicle combat that was actually fun
fun co op
fun multiplayer
Slyprince
Whoa now.... three of those are subjective, and the other two aren't a good thing.
Rechargeable forcefields aren't your health, and you still have a health system in the first Halo. Vehicle combat? You mean where armoured vehicles redirect damage to the passengers and driver? Co-op was fun, but I had fonder memories in Timesplitters 1.
I thought the tc meant the halo series in general
and you cant tell me handiling the turret while your friend drove wasnt fun
Not when I could see the car being shot but my shields going down.
It was stupid. I enjoyed it for a while but I just don't like it.
[QUOTE="FragTycoon"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]camera direction driving is the only thing I can think of. Everything else has been done before, people who just started gaming with the x-box or never owned a PC that could play games just don't know any better.Ilived
What other fps pc game had more of a complete package than Halo? If it came out for the pc only, everyone here would be raving how innovative it was.
Half-life/TF, and people do ;)
No that wasn't more of a complete package. I guess what I mean, there is a reason why so many say it is innovative, but there is no good reason why so many others bash it. It doesn't deserve the bashing.
any game that get's printed on a soda can deserves to be bashed:P
[QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word.
thegoldenpoo
You're way off.
Please put up something worth debating instead of just saying "NO".
NO! you are just wrong. nothing to debate. WRONG
halo wasn't innovative at all...it just took things other games did and touched it up a bit. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make anyone a cow. however saying it was certainly does make the person a lemming. beause a game had a good control scheme doesn't make the game innovative, it just make it funner to play. fun=/=innovation.
also lemmings if your praising unique control schemes...then why do you bash the wii so much???just a side thaught
:lol:
the self-owning hipocrasy is strong with this one. :lol:
how is that self owning????there was nothing innovative about halo. i've played them and ill tell you right now its nothing nearly as speecial as people say it is. trying to praise the game as the most innovative game ever is crap. i only said the truth, iand i dont care if you dont like it or not
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]camera direction driving is the only thing I can think of. Everything else has been done before, people who just started gaming with the x-box or never owned a PC that could play games just don't know any better.thegoldenpoo
I've never owned a PC for gaming but i started playing FPS way back on the N64 and PS1. Nothing has changed since then.
oh. my. god.
you actually have no idea whats going on do you? alot has changed scince then, go buy a decent PC. play STALKER. experience its awsome immersion then tell me how exactly that could or has been done on N64. i will honestly find you and give you a cookie, honesly if you do.
I upgraded my PC Friday to be honest. Last FPS which i played on PC where Soldier of Fortune and Rainbow 6. I've played many of the Console FPS's though! I never said it could of been done on the N64 i just said i have been playing FPS since the N64/PS1 era.
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
DrinkDuff
I can only recall two levels with open-ended environments. The rest of the game is just as open-ended as Perfect Dark and Golden Eye. What is more, dual-analog free-aiming isn't innovative as it was necessary to play the game on an Xbox controller. ;)
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
DrinkDuff
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
[QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]enygma500
halo wasn't innovative at all...it just took things other games did and touched it up a bit. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make anyone a cow. however saying it was certainly does make the person a lemming. beause a game had a good control scheme doesn't make the game innovative, it just make it funner to play. fun=/=innovation.
also lemmings if your praising unique control schemes...then why do you bash the wii so much???just a side thaught
:lol:
the self-owning hipocrasy is strong with this one. :lol:
how is that self owning????there was nothing innovative about halo. i've played them and ill tell you right now its nothing nearly as speecial as people say it is. trying to praise the game as the most innovative game ever is crap. i only said the truth, iand i dont care if you dont like it or not
read what was bolded afew more times and you just might see where you made you're error.
[QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
VoodooGamer
I can only recall two levels with open-ended environments. The rest of the game is just as open-ended as Perfect Dark and Golden Eye. What is more, dual-analog free-aiming isn't innovative as it was necessary to play the game on an Xbox controller. ;)
Halo, Assault on the Control Room, The Silent Cartographer, Truth and Reconciliation..wait you know what, every level had a mixture of both, just some had more of an open-ended element.
[QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
enygma500
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]xsubtownerx
how about wolfenstein and doom for starters. pretty much the starting of the genre. not much has changed since those cept controls, graphics of course but core gamplay remains the same. regardless of whether you lems want to belive it or not halo is a generic fps. im not saying its a bad game by any means but its in no way innovative. unfortunatly like i said earlier fun=/=innovation
[QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Ilived
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
Your not to good at this debating lark now are you! You say things but dont put up any points on why! Pretty hilarious really.
How you manage to get a Level 20 anyways? Im confussed on how this level system works.
[QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Dibdibdobdobo
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
[QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]lawlessx
halo wasn't innovative at all...it just took things other games did and touched it up a bit. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make anyone a cow. however saying it was certainly does make the person a lemming. beause a game had a good control scheme doesn't make the game innovative, it just make it funner to play. fun=/=innovation.
also lemmings if your praising unique control schemes...then why do you bash the wii so much???just a side thaught
:lol:
the self-owning hipocrasy is strong with this one. :lol:
how is that self owning????there was nothing innovative about halo. i've played them and ill tell you right now its nothing nearly as speecial as people say it is. trying to praise the game as the most innovative game ever is crap. i only said the truth, iand i dont care if you dont like it or not
read what was bolded afew more times and you just might see where you made you're error.
i did read what was bolded. im not stupid. saying halo wasn't innovative doesn't make you any kind of fanboy like you seem to think it does. however believeing wholeheartedly that fps wouldn't be where they are today without halo makes you a fanboy, be it a halo fanboy or a lemming.
[QUOTE="Slyprince"]it made rechargable health popular
VoodooGamer
Ok theres one. Halo 2 really kick started the movement towards rechargeable health, I remember before you had to look for health packs and Halo got rid of that. And, in my opinion it was for the better.
It pretty much created competitive online play for consoles. Before halo 2 i can't think of any online game on a CONSOLE that was that popular or competitive.
That in itself, going by how many online games we have now is a bloody big thing in itself.
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Ilived
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
Nope i didnt skip any post! You havent put up one valid point but Multi-player.
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Ilived
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
you said open enviroments and vehicles....not really an innovation in the fps genre beyond that all it was was controls. sorry and rechargeable health. rechargeable health MAY have been somewhat new ill have to check. my memories a little fuzzy. but im pretty sure even that was just taken and improved upon
[QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
VoodooGamer
I can only recall two levels with open-ended environments. The rest of the game is just as open-ended as Perfect Dark and Golden Eye. What is more, dual-analog free-aiming isn't innovative as it was necessary to play the game on an Xbox controller. ;)
That's laughable. Even the so called "corridor levels" in Halo were actually pretty spacious and diverse in terms of gameplay and geometry by comparison, and there were more than two open levels. You even had the chance to pilot a flying vehicle in one of the open levels (something unprecedented in an FPS). The only complaint that can be leveled against it is how repetitive the level design and environments were. But it was still better than some of the confusing designs in PD and Goldeneye. And the A.I. It is just so much better than anything Perfect Dark ever did. Honestly, Halo:CE's enemies made PD's look like zombies.During the first year of the PS2's life, there were a couple of console FPS but they didn't use the now standard control scheme that Halo: CE used. Just because it seems like common sense now doesn't mean it was in 2001, when Halo:CE was released.
Prettymuch just perfected console FPS. Smooth control, vehicles, coop, LAN. Just such an amazing and refined package. Halo2 was a huge step backwards imo and is total junk though.Lazy_Boy88
perfecting the console FPS doesn't mean innovating it. taking someone else's game and touching it up doesn't eman its done anything new. and the biggest change made was to the control scheme
[QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Dibdibdobdobo
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
Nope i didnt skip any post! You havent put up one valid point but Multi-player.
You just don't get it. There isn't a fps game out there that used all the elements and improved on it in ONE game. You got vehicles, you got huge unscripted battles, you got open-ended environments, you got strong enemy AI, perfect control scheme, fantastic multiplayer, good story...etc. Sure games had at least ONE of these things, but Halo had ALL of them in just one game. That is the complete package I'm talking about. It's ok you hate it for being popular, but don't discredit for what it really did or try to act like it did nothing.
OOPS my bad. Multiplayer was on PERFECT DARK, TIMESPLITTERS, GOLDEN EYE.
If you said Online Multi-player id have given you a cookie.
OOPS sarcasm. I suppose TimeSplitters is the most innovative FPS of all time due to having Monkies.
No-one's challenged my points yet
recharging shield, grenades as an equal to firearms, melee attack always available, co-op, two weapon limit.samusarmada
How many of these are now staples of the console fps?
[QUOTE="VoodooGamer"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
DrinkDuff
I can only recall two levels with open-ended environments. The rest of the game is just as open-ended as Perfect Dark and Golden Eye. What is more, dual-analog free-aiming isn't innovative as it was necessary to play the game on an Xbox controller. ;)
That's laughable. Even the so called "corridor levels" in Halo were actually pretty spacious and diverse in terms of gameplay and geometry by comparison, and there were more than two open levels. You even had the chance to pilot a flying vehicle in one of the open levels (something unprecedented in an FPS). The only complaint that can be leveled against it is how repetitive the level design and environments were. But it was still better than some of the confusing designs in PD and Goldeneye. And the A.I. It is just so much better than anything Perfect Dark ever did. Honestly, Halo:CE's enemies made PD's look like zombies.During the first year of the PS2's life, there were a couple of console FPS but they didn't use the now standard control scheme that Halo: CE used. Just because it seems like common sense now doesn't mean it was in 2001, when Halo:CE was released.
you're comparing ai on n64 to ai on xbox. thats laughable at best. the xbox is so far above and beyond the n64 in terms of...wel everything, if there weren't some signifigant increases in intelligance that would kinda suck. also goldeneyes levels were just as open as halo's
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Ilived
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
Nope i didnt skip any post! You havent put up one valid point but Multi-player.
You just don't get it. There isn't a fps game out there that used all the elements and improved on it in ONE game. You got vehicles, you got huge unscripted battles, you got open-ended environments, you got strong enemy AI, perfect control scheme, fantastic multiplayer, good story...etc. Sure games had at least ONE of these things, but Halo had ALL of them in just one game. That is the complete package I'm talking about. It's ok you hate it for being popular, but don't discredit for what it really did or try to act like it did nothing.
I do get it though. Were on about innovation here which you dont get.
Split screen mutliplayer
System link multiplayer
Halo CE pretty much felt like it did everything perfect at launch.
[QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="VoodooGamer"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
enygma500
I can only recall two levels with open-ended environments. The rest of the game is just as open-ended as Perfect Dark and Golden Eye. What is more, dual-analog free-aiming isn't innovative as it was necessary to play the game on an Xbox controller. ;)
That's laughable. Even the so called "corridor levels" in Halo were actually pretty spacious and diverse in terms of gameplay and geometry by comparison, and there were more than two open levels. You even had the chance to pilot a flying vehicle in one of the open levels (something unprecedented in an FPS). The only complaint that can be leveled against it is how repetitive the level design and environments were. But it was still better than some of the confusing designs in PD and Goldeneye. And the A.I. It is just so much better than anything Perfect Dark ever did. Honestly, Halo:CE's enemies made PD's look like zombies.During the first year of the PS2's life, there were a couple of console FPS but they didn't use the now standard control scheme that Halo: CE used. Just because it seems like common sense now doesn't mean it was in 2001, when Halo:CE was released.
you're comparing ai on to ai on xbox. thats laughable at best. the xbox is so far above and beyond the n64 in terms of...wel everything, if there weren't some signifigant increases in intelligance that would kinda suck. also goldeneyes levels were just as open as halo's
Oh yeah the Facility was as open as Assault on the Control Room.
No-one's challenged my points yet
[QUOTE="samusarmada"]recharging shield, grenades as an equal to firearms, melee attack always available, co-op, two weapon limit.samusarmada
How many of these are now staples of the console fps?
cows would just pretend not to see this post
OOPS my bad. Multiplayer was on PERFECT DARK, TIMESPLITTERS, GOLDEN EYE.
If you said Online Multi-player id have given you a cookie.
OOPS sarcasm. I suppose TimeSplitters is the most innovative FPS of all time due to having Monkies.
Dibdibdobdobo
hay, Halo had monkeys!.... errr... Apes :P
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]OOPS my bad. Multiplayer was on PERFECT DARK, TIMESPLITTERS, GOLDEN EYE.
If you said Online Multi-player id have given you a cookie.
OOPS sarcasm. I suppose TimeSplitters is the most innovative FPS of all time due to having Monkies.
FragTycoon
hay, Halo had monkeys!.... errr... Apes :P
I WANT MONKIES..... Not apes. Apes are big and smell!
[QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Dibdibdobdobo
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
Nope i didnt skip any post! You havent put up one valid point but Multi-player.
You just don't get it. There isn't a fps game out there that used all the elements and improved on it in ONE game. You got vehicles, you got huge unscripted battles, you got open-ended environments, you got strong enemy AI, perfect control scheme, fantastic multiplayer, good story...etc. Sure games had at least ONE of these things, but Halo had ALL of them in just one game. That is the complete package I'm talking about. It's ok you hate it for being popular, but don't discredit for what it really did or try to act like it did nothing.
I do get it though. Were on about innovation here which you dont get.
Innovation can mean lots of things. Like the fact that Halo had everything packed into one game...no game had that...that's innovative.
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Ilived
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
Nope i didnt skip any post! You havent put up one valid point but Multi-player.
You just don't get it. There isn't a fps game out there that used all the elements and improved on it in ONE game. You got vehicles, you got huge unscripted battles, you got open-ended environments, you got strong enemy AI, perfect control scheme, fantastic multiplayer, good story...etc. Sure games had at least ONE of these things, but Halo had ALL of them in just one game. That is the complete package I'm talking about. It's ok you hate it for being popular, but don't discredit for what it really did or try to act like it did nothing.
you dont seem to get it good sir. all the fanboys say halo is innovative but you just proved them wrong while trying to be on their side. simple by saying other games did it but halo had it all is what make halo not innovative. its a good game but one thing it isn't is innovative...you do understand the meaning of the word right??
ALL CAPS AINT INNOVATIVE EITHER!!!!!1111one
[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Ilived"][QUOTE="enygma500"][QUOTE="DrinkDuff"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]That is so wrong. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are corridor shooters. Halo is the first console FPS that had large open environments with, fantastic A.I., free-roaming vehicles, rechargable shields, a new system that mapped grenades and melee to different buttons for immediate access to in firefights, and dual-analog free-aiming. It did plenty of innovating, and its still more playable than the other great console FPSs (mainly goldeneye).Halo = Meh in innovation.
Guns combined with Grenade launchers where on Perfect Dark if i remember right which still to this day has the best guns around on any FPS. Timesplitters was out before Halo if i remember right and had perfect dual-analog controls.
No halo was not innovative in any aspect of the word. Innovation on FPS scene died with Perfect Dark and Golden Eye on the N64 era. Hell the last true innovative FPS if you can count it as one is Metroid Prime series on the GameCube and Wii.
Ilived
a different control scheme doesn't make the gameplay innovative. i agree they mapped the controls really well but as for the game itself theres nothing overly special about it
A lot of things were special about it. It had everything what fps games wanted to have and more.
LIKE.......
I already said it, maybe you skipped what I posted.
Nope i didnt skip any post! You havent put up one valid point but Multi-player.
You just don't get it. There isn't a fps game out there that used all the elements and improved on it in ONE game. You got vehicles, you got huge unscripted battles, you got open-ended environments, you got strong enemy AI, perfect control scheme, fantastic multiplayer, good story...etc. Sure games had at least ONE of these things, but Halo had ALL of them in just one game. That is the complete package I'm talking about. It's ok you hate it for being popular, but don't discredit for what it really did or try to act like it did nothing.
I do get it though. Were on about innovation here which you dont get.
Innovation can mean lots of things. Like the fact that Halo had everything packed into one game...no game had that...that's innovative.
CONTRADICTION LAWLZ.
Like i said before your not good at this debating lark.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment