The God Halo single-handedly made an entire genre tremble.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="blingchu55"]He never mentioned strategic shooters nor did the quotes. And there are now strategic shooters on consoles

blingchu55

Rainbow Six is a series of tactical shooter FPS games. There are many Rainbow Six version out there, they were very tactical, much more than the latest Rainbow Six games.

The only FPS I'm looking foward to this gen is Timespitters 4.

[QUOTE="mr_mozilla"]FPS was already pretty popular, they just started appearing more on the consoles like pretty much everything that's been done to death on PC(next gen it will be MMORPGs), but I think online and xbox in general had more to do with that.TheInordinately

I'm done with this thread (not bothering to read any more of TheInordinately's posts).

Doom and half-life/counterstrike dwarf halo in terms of what they did for the fps genre.

The fact that fps's are popular on consoles now is not because of halo, it's because consoles were finally able to handle the genre in a way that was somewhat similar toPC's, albeit with avastly inferior control scheme.

Saying FPS's wouldn't be this popular if not for halo is wrong. It's not my opinion that it's wrong, it's a FACT that it's wrong.Half-Life/Counterstrike were as popular, if not morepopular, worldwide than halo (easily). FPS's wouldmade the move to consoles before haloand were thriving. Halo is just another shooterwith mega hype, nothing more.

Don't you ever say Halo created Call of Duty.

Call of Duty began on the PC years before Halo was thought of.

. It's not just the console gamers who demand dumbed down games, it's everyoneEk-Andy

Nonsense. Sales prove you dead wrong. You just don't want to admit it so you make up stories how PCgamers are doing the same thing you console gamers do.

smaller, they're mostly gamers who are in between hardcore and casuals

Especially since recently even casual PCgames have been getting more and more complex

You seem to blame all of your problems on console gamers, which is a complete scape goat. Ek-Andy

I don't mind it much to be honest. Console gamers are responsible for the switch in many of my beloved IPs, but on the other hand the result was that the most mainstream PCgamers did switch to consoles in recent years, which resulted in PCgames getting more hardcore. It wasn't the goal, but the results are beneficial for me. I do miss more hardcore FPSes, but the return of typically PCish genres to spotlight more than makes up for it in my book

Only a very small share of the "hardcore" PC gamers remain. They make up a tiny fraction who buys the "hardcore" games in the first place. Want to know why those games wont sell? Because you can get them for free. Most of the so called "hardcore" PC gamers are too busy downloading games illegally to buy new games anyway. Mabye you should stop blaming console gamers for everything and look at what's really causing a shift to the casual, illegal downloads.

Ek-Andy

At first I was dissapointed by consolization of many games, but then I took a look about how many exclusive PC hardcore games are being released and in development, far more than 5 years ago, so in the end it did turn out for the best from my perspective.

Don't you ever say Halo created Call of Duty.

Call of Duty began on the PC years before Halo was thought of.

Luth3r

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]

Then, it must have been another guy. Nonetheless, I think that Halo is the God of the genre because it has made it so huge single-handedly. It's such an achievement.

Mr_Apple_Soup

no, you're wrong. shooters were almost always popular, back since when duke nukem was out on DOS. now the FPS genre on consoles had been pretty basic UNTIL the n64 advanced the genre with games like perfect dark and goldeneye. if anything, halo should thank those games for making console FPS's more mainstream, mainstream enough to the point where a game like halo could swoop in and completely propel the console FPS genre into a mainsteam and casual stage. halo did have influence, alot of influence, but it isn't a "god", not at all. it basically took a bunch of good elements already there in FPS and brought it on to consoles in one polished package.

so yes, we can thank halo for helping generalize FPS's on consoles, but don't act like its the only game to do so. in fact, if you look at it, CoD4 is doing just as much for the genre that halo did, to FPS's on consoles this gen

You're being extremely ludicrous at the moment. Before Halo, shooters weren't nearly as successful and popular as they have been lately. Before Halo, most shooters were made for the PC. Now, most are mainly developed for consoles. The game that is responsible for everything is not Half-Life nor GoldenEye 007, but Halo.

[QUOTE="Luth3r"]

Don't you ever say Halo created Call of Duty.

Call of Duty began on the PC years before Halo was thought of.

blingchu55

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"][QUOTE="mr_mozilla"]FPS was already pretty popular, they just started appearing more on the consoles like pretty much everything that's been done to death on PC(next gen it will be MMORPGs), but I think online and xbox in general had more to do with that.mudman91878

I'm done with this thread (not bothering to read any more of TheInordinately's posts).

Doom and half-life/counterstrike dwarf halo in terms of what they did for the fps genre.

The fact that fps's are popular on consoles now is not because of halo, it's because consoles were finally able to handle the genre in a way that was somewhat similar toPC's, albeit with avastly inferior control scheme.

Saying FPS's wouldn't be this popular if not for halo is wrong. It's not my opinion that it's wrong, it's a FACT that it's wrong.Half-Life/Counterstrike were as popular, if not morepopular, worldwide than halo (easily). FPS's wouldmade the move to consoles before haloand were thriving. Halo is just another shooterwith mega hype, nothing more.

What I have written is entirely correct. Halo changed the entire first-person shooter genre. It's exceedingly huge today, and growing. And most shooters are - unluckily for PC gamers :lol: - created mainly for consoles. The one responsible? Halo. Whether you like it or not.

[QUOTE="mudman91878"]

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"] First-person shooters would never (never!) have been this popular and successful if it weren't for Halo. Don't even try, dude.TheInordinately

I'm done with this thread (not bothering to read any more of TheInordinately's posts).

Doom and half-life/counterstrike dwarf halo in terms of what they did for the fps genre.

The fact that fps's are popular on consoles now is not because of halo, it's because consoles were finally able to handle the genre in a way that was somewhat similar toPC's, albeit with avastly inferior control scheme.

Saying FPS's wouldn't be this popular if not for halo is wrong. It's not my opinion that it's wrong, it's a FACT that it's wrong.Half-Life/Counterstrike were as popular, if not morepopular, worldwide than halo (easily). FPS's wouldmade the move to consoles before haloand were thriving. Halo is just another shooterwith mega hype, nothing more.

What I have written is entirely correct. Halo changed the entire first-person shooter genre. It's exceedingly huge today, and growing. And most shooters are - unluckily for PC gamers :lol: - created mainly for consoles. The one responsible? Halo. Whether you like it or not.

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]

[QUOTE="mudman91878"]

I'm done with this thread (not bothering to read any more of TheInordinately's posts).

Doom and half-life/counterstrike dwarf halo in terms of what they did for the fps genre.

The fact that fps's are popular on consoles now is not because of halo, it's because consoles were finally able to handle the genre in a way that was somewhat similar toPC's, albeit with avastly inferior control scheme.

Saying FPS's wouldn't be this popular if not for halo is wrong. It's not my opinion that it's wrong, it's a FACT that it's wrong.Half-Life/Counterstrike were as popular, if not morepopular, worldwide than halo (easily). FPS's wouldmade the move to consoles before haloand were thriving. Halo is just another shooterwith mega hype, nothing more.

SamiRDuran

What I have written is entirely correct. Halo changed the entire first-person shooter genre. It's exceedingly huge today, and growing. And most shooters are - unluckily for PC gamers :lol: - created mainly for consoles. The one responsible? Halo. Whether you like it or not.

Dude, doesn't change the fact!

Dude, doesn't change the fact!

TheInordinately

[QUOTE="blingchu55"][QUOTE="Luth3r"]

Don't you ever say Halo created Call of Duty.

Call of Duty began on the PC years before Halo was thought of.

Doom_HellKnight

[QUOTE="mr_mozilla"]FPS was already pretty popular, they just started appearing more on the consoles like pretty much everything that's been done to death on PC(next gen it will be MMORPGs), but I think online and xbox in general had more to do with that.TheInordinately

Here we go again! People, get it into your heads: the FPS genre was hugely popular on the PC long BEFORE Halo. Gamespot actually labeled Doom the most important shooter EVER.

http://uk.gamespot.com/features/6143094/index.html

"It wouldn't be fair to say Doom was the first first-person shooter, but it can be said that it's inarguably the most important. Without this seminal game from id Software, the shooter genre--heck, all of gaming--simply wouldn't be what it is today. To give you an idea of Doom's significance, the game was solely responsible for the word "deathmatch" and its entry into the greater gaming lexicon. Yeah, it was that influential."

Halo was a great game but it is far from having the impact PC games such as Doom, Quake, Half-Life, Crysis and many others have had on the FPS genre.

[QUOTE="Doom_HellKnight"]

[QUOTE="blingchu55"] Halo came out 2 years before itblingchu55

How doesn't it? Call of duty tyoe games were around before halo.. that's his point.

[QUOTE="mudman91878"]

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"] First-person shooters would never (never!) have been this popular and successful if it weren't for Halo. Don't even try, dude.TheInordinately

I'm done with this thread (not bothering to read any more of TheInordinately's posts).

Doom and half-life/counterstrike dwarf halo in terms of what they did for the fps genre.

The fact that fps's are popular on consoles now is not because of halo, it's because consoles were finally able to handle the genre in a way that was somewhat similar toPC's, albeit with avastly inferior control scheme.

Saying FPS's wouldn't be this popular if not for halo is wrong. It's not my opinion that it's wrong, it's a FACT that it's wrong.Half-Life/Counterstrike were as popular, if not morepopular, worldwide than halo (easily). FPS's wouldmade the move to consoles before haloand were thriving. Halo is just another shooterwith mega hype, nothing more.

What I have written is entirely correct. Halo changed the entire first-person shooter genre. It's exceedingly huge today, and growing. And most shooters are - unluckily for PC gamers :lol: - created mainly for consoles. The one responsible? Halo. Whether you like it or not.

People, there's no point in debating this, this guy is wrong plain and simple. He'll just keep posting the same nonsense over and over again...

The only FPS I'm looking foward to this gen is Timespitters 4.

InfinityMugen

I second this. The only two FPS franchises I've ever gotten into are Metroid Prime and Timesplitters.

It's funny how Halo gets so much praise yet I still do not find it fun. I like shooters but halo just is not that intresting to me. call me a hater or whatever but thats my opinion.

The only FPS I'm looking foward to this gen is Timespitters 4.

InfinityMugen

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"]

The only FPS I'm looking foward to this gen is Timespitters 4.

gameofthering

Crytek Bought Free Radical, a Few Months Back I believe so TS4 is not out of the question yet.

It sucks that shooters now dominate consoles. I would rather play Dark Cloud 2 than Halo any day. I would rather play Sonic Unleashed than Call of Duty 4 any day. What consoles need are more original games.

halo brought the trend of dev's adding aim assist to first person shooters on consoles, making the whole point of a shooter pointless because the game aims for you. halo ruined the whole genre, quake is halo's dad.1234520

Halo made shooters so much more popular due to the fact that it was so excellent. :)

It sucks that shooters now dominate consoles. I would rather play Dark Cloud 2 than Halo any day. I would rather play Sonic Unleashed than Call of Duty 4 any day. What consoles need are more original games.

GeoffZak

Blame Halo, baby. As a matter of fact, I think that Halo showed us that first-person shooters can be made better on consoles, and thus, as you said, almost no one wants to create a first-person shooter mainly for the PC. Crytek did it, but no one plays Crysis now. :(

[QUOTE="1234520"]halo brought the trend of dev's adding aim assist to first person shooters on consoles, making the whole point of a shooter pointless because the game aims for you. halo ruined the whole genre, quake is halo's dad.TheInordinately

Halo made shooters so much more popular due to the fact that it was so excellent. :)

Your topic title does not make sense. How did it make a genre tremble? It made a genre explode into a overly populated genre.wooooode

You see, these shooters were mainly played on the PC before Halo, but now, they are mainly played on consoles. So Halo was significant and changed the path. :)

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"][QUOTE="locopatho"]Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were the first big console FPS games.Saturos3091

I agree. There needs to be a more even distribution of genres. FPS's take up about 70% of the market and the only ones I truely enjoyed were from Valve and RARE (N64 era). I miss Platformers *tear*. Super Mario Galaxy, New Super Mario Bros., and Braid are the best of this gen for me.

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]

[QUOTE="1234520"]halo brought the trend of dev's adding aim assist to first person shooters on consoles, making the whole point of a shooter pointless because the game aims for you. halo ruined the whole genre, quake is halo's dad.IronBass

Halo made shooters so much more popular due to the fact that it was so excellent. :)

No, it wasn't. It was the game. :?

No, it wasn't. It was the game. :?TheInordinately

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]No, it wasn't. It was the game. :?IronBass

It wasn't the marketing, I meant. But more like the game.

Marketing can't invent a genre. :)

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="TheInordinately"]No, it wasn't. It was the game. :?TheInordinately

It wasn't the marketing, I meant. But more like the game.

Marketing can't invent a genre. :)

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]

[QUOTE="IronBass"] It "wasn't" what?IronBass

It wasn't the marketing, I meant. But more like the game.

Marketing can't invent a genre. :)

So, in what way would marketing help Halo make first-person shooters popular?

So, in what way would marketing help Halo make first-person shooters popular?TheInordinately

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]So, in what way would marketing help Halo make first-person shooters popular?IronBass

Nice try, but no. It was the game that was so excellent. If it was the marketing, why didn't the others continue making different games but started marketing them well?

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="TheInordinately"]So, in what way would marketing help Halo make first-person shooters popular?TheInordinately

Nice try, but no. It was the game that was so excellent. If it was the marketing, why didn't the others continue making different games but started marketing them well?

Yes, the fact that the games is good is a factor, too. But the marketing is as important factor in this case as the game's quality. It's an undeniable fact.

And your question doesn't make much sense at all. The companies that can allow themselves to market a game as MS did with Halo are very, very, very few.

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]

[QUOTE="IronBass"] A well-marketed game sells well. A games that sells well becomes popular. A popular game makes its genre popular. The popular genre calls the attention of devs and they start making games of the same genre, making it even more popular. It's a common cycle in this industry. IronBass

Nice try, but no. It was the game that was so excellent. If it was the marketing, why didn't the others continue making different games but started marketing them well?

Yes, the fact that the games is good is a factor, too. But the marketing is as important factor in this case as the game's quality. It's an undeniable fact.

And your question doesn't make much sense at all. The companies that can allow themselves to market a game as MS did with Halo are very, very, very few.

So, are you saying that Halo could have been a poor game and still hugely successful if it just were marketed well?

So, are you saying that Halo could have been a poor game and still hugely successful if it just were marketed well?TheInordinately

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]So, are you saying that Halo could have been a poor game and still hugely successful if it just were marketed well?IronBass

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="TheInordinately"]So, are you saying that Halo could have been a poor game and still hugely successful if it just were marketed well?jg4xchamp

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]So, are you saying that Halo could have been a poor game and still hugely successful if it just were marketed well?IronBass

But I am not sure if a poor first-person shooter game called 50 Cent would have been successful and if it would have made shooters very popular, and if it would have moved shooters from the PC to the consoles (if you know what I mean, intelligence is always good) if it just were marketed in a good way. Do you? No.

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="IronBass"] A lot of poorly-designed games have been very successful, like 50 Cent. But, if you read my posts (reading comprehension is always good), you'll find out that I said that Halo's success was a mix of both. It's a very high quality game that was insanely marketed. The recipe for success. IronBass

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="TheInordinately"]So, are you saying that Halo could have been a poor game and still hugely successful if it just were marketed well?TheInordinately

But I am not sure if a poor first-person shooter game called 50 Cent would have been successful and if it would have made shooters very popular, and if it would have moved shooters from the PC to the consoles (if you know what I mean, intelligence is always good) if it just were marketed in a good way. Do you? No.

what about doom and quake?themagicbum9720

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="TheInordinately"]So, are you saying that Halo could have been a poor game and still hugely successful if it just were marketed well?TheInordinately

But I am not sure if a poor first-person shooter game called 50 Cent would have been successful and if it would have made shooters very popular, and if it would have moved shooters from the PC to the consoles (if you know what I mean, intelligence is always good) if it just were marketed in a good way. Do you? No.

[QUOTE="TheInordinately"]

[QUOTE="IronBass"] A lot of poorly-designed games have been very successful, like 50 Cent. But, if you read my posts (reading comprehension is always good), you'll find out that I said that Halo's success was a mix of both. It's a very high quality game that was insanely marketed. The recipe for success. IronBass

But I am not sure if a poor first-person shooter game called 50 Cent would have been successful and if it would have made shooters very popular, and if it would have moved shooters from the PC to the consoles (if you know what I mean, intelligence is always good) if it just were marketed in a good way. Do you? No.

Quit bringing up marketing, then. :|

It has already been stated that Halo: Combat Evolved did not have "insane" marketing, like you want to put it.

Halo: Combat Evolved invented the popular first-person shooters on consoles, showed us that yes, it must not be done on the PC, and it did all this without marketing.

And why Halo 2 sold so much isn't just thanks to marketing. It was because the first Halo game was so excellent, that so many wanted to play Halo 2. Three weeks before release, over 1.5 million people had purchased the game - had the marketing even started then?