Why is Halo taken for granted?

"...I really get the feeling that people don't realize how much Halo: Combat Evolved changed console shooters..."

I like how you said "changed CONSOLE SHOOTERS..." Yes, halo really bought the FPS over to the console. It is a fine and I must say again: a well polished FPS. As a long time PC gamer.Halo introducted console players to what a PC FPS is like and it is great in that respect. But I think there is a good number of console players who think HALO is god or something. They preach it and worship. But do they even know that most if not all the features in HALO are already in the PC FPS a long time ago. FPS on PC is better due to the hardware requirements of FPS every year. Anyway, not going to rant....

People should just appreciate how polish Halo is but that is all. Cause if you compare Halo to FPS on PC, I think Halo is just a very good game but not ground-breaking like the ones on the PC. I can name Doom, Doom 2 (coop play), Quake, Red Faction (semidestructable terrain), and my all time favorite... Starsiege Tribes v1.0. It is free for download on www.download.com

i still play it everyday on multiple platforms. im a halo PC and halo xbox player and i love that game to death.

i should be featured in "lead 2" a halo PC community montage and i will be releasing my 2nd soon.

i found my niche in gaming in halo. i have always played games here and there....but once i played halo (online multiplayer)....i was HOOKED.

Halo innovations- shield system seen in many FPS across all platforms today

emphasis on melee- its actually valuable Has been done in plenty of FPS games

emphasis on grenades- they work "____________________________________"

stresses vehicular combat in a third person view UT2004 and BF1942+ have done it better

vehicle controls are very different from previous games Preference

wolverine4262

Your use of the word "Emphasise" is another way of say its been done before isnt it?

"...I really get the feeling that people don't realize how much Halo: Combat Evolved changed console shooters..."

I like how you said "changed CONSOLE SHOOTERS..." Yes, halo really bought the FPS over to the console. It is a fine and I must say again: a well polished FPS. As a long time PC gamer.Halo introducted console players to what a PC FPS is like and it is great in that respect. But I think there is a good number of console players who think HALO is god or something. They preach it and worship. But do they even know that most if not all the features in HALO are already in the PC FPS a long time ago. FPS on PC is better due to the hardware requirements of FPS every year. Anyway, not going to rant....

People should just appreciate how polish Halo is but that is all. Cause if you compare Halo to FPS on PC, I think Halo is just a very good game but not ground-breaking like the ones on the PC. I can name Doom, Doom 2 (coop play), Quake, Red Faction (semidestructable terrain), and my all time favorite... Starsiege Tribes v1.0. It is free for download on www.download.com

gamenux

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

Theres plenty of games out there that are fun. Why should Halo get more recognition than the others?

Ninja-Vox

Because it's better than "all the others". Seriously, great games all get the same amount of attention. Everyone went crazy over Half Life 2. People line up to get the new GTA.

Halo isn't treated differently. It's anticipated because the two games before it were huge hits in both the eyes of gamers who enjoyed them and critics who reviewed them.

Simple.

And none of those games you mentioned are new or innovative. Yes, they are good games. Great. I look forward to games that look good yet arent innovative myself, (see sig). A game doesnt have to be innovatie to be good and fun. But why exactly does it deserve so much recognition over, say, No One Lives Forever, also a 2 time AAA series? Because its popular? Its popularity doesnt actually have anything to do with how good or bad the game actually is. If so, we might as well praise 50 Cent Bulletproof.

[QUOTE="MrDziekuje"]Halo isn't anything special.Heil68

I agree with that. Ah, you didn't see that coming did you. Try looking at the titles I've rated before acting like a smartass. I gave Halo a higher score than Prime.

[QUOTE="wolverine4262"]

Halo innovations- shield system seen in many FPS across all platforms today

emphasis on melee- its actually valuable Has been done in plenty of FPS games

emphasis on grenades- they work "____________________________________"

stresses vehicular combat in a third person view UT2004 and BF1942+ have done it better

vehicle controls are very different from previous games Preference

sadikovic

Your use of the word "Emphasise" is another way of say its been done before isnt it?

Melee had not been done the way Halo does it before. In most FPSs before Halo there was a melee specific weapon, in Halo every weapon can be used as a melee weapon. Again, Halo is like Rome, it takes pre-existing ideas and improves apon them. I also love how you state his point about halo's vehicle controls is a matter of preference and yet you go and state "UT2k4 and BF1942 do it better" isn't that also a matter of preference?

[QUOTE="wolverine4262"]

Halo innovations- shield system seen in many FPS across all platforms today

emphasis on melee- its actually valuable Has been done in plenty of FPS games

emphasis on grenades- they work "____________________________________"

stresses vehicular combat in a third person view UT2004 and BF1942+ have done it better

vehicle controls are very different from previous games Preference

sadikovic

Your use of the word "Emphasise" is another way of say its been done before isnt it?

[QUOTE="wolverine4262"]

Halo innovations- shield system seen in many FPS across all platforms today

emphasis on melee- its actually valuable Has been done in plenty of FPS games

emphasis on grenades- they work "____________________________________"

stresses vehicular combat in a third person view UT2004 and BF1942+ have done it better

vehicle controls are very different from previous games Preference

sadikovic

Your use of the word "Emphasise" is another way of say its been done before isnt it?

The shield system, I believe Starsiege Tribes v1.0 is the 1st game I played to have that type of shield system. In the game, you just get a SHIELD PACK.

There are some many useful grenades in Starsiege Tribes v1. There is even mines and gun torrents, you can attached to walls, ceilings, almost anything.

There is vehicle combat in Starsiege Tribes v1. Everything is useful.

halo is a bit overrated, but it was a success because everything was solid .. gameplay, graphics etc

you don't notice how good everything is, or was, until you play another shooter .. something like killzone or black

then you realise how talented bungie are to create a great experience with little frustration

my only negatives for halo is the repetitive level design .. but the gameplay was great

name a recently released pc shooter which hasnt been done before.
JPOBS

The Ship.

What do i win?

[QUOTE="sadikovic"][QUOTE="wolverine4262"]

Halo innovations- shield system seen in many FPS across all platforms today

emphasis on melee- its actually valuable Has been done in plenty of FPS games

emphasis on grenades- they work "____________________________________"

stresses vehicular combat in a third person view UT2004 and BF1942+ have done it better

vehicle controls are very different from previous games Preference

gamenux

Your use of the word "Emphasise" is another way of say its been done before isnt it?

The shield system, I believe Starsiege Tribes v1.0 is the 1st game I played to have that type of shield system. In the game, you just get a SHIELD PACK.

I cant remember the last time i was playing a fun game, then stopped myself and asked. what about this is innovative? FancyKetchup25

I cant remember the last time a played an unoriginal game, then stopped myself and said, "wow, im really going play this game again for years because it totally offers nothing new. Surely, its something to remember it by!"

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"][QUOTE="XaosII"]

Theres plenty of games out there that are fun. Why should Halo get more recognition than the others?

XaosII

Because it's better than "all the others". Seriously, great games all get the same amount of attention. Everyone went crazy over Half Life 2. People line up to get the new GTA.

Halo isn't treated differently. It's anticipated because the two games before it were huge hits in both the eyes of gamers who enjoyed them and critics who reviewed them.

Simple.

And none of those games you mentioned are new or innovative. Yes, they are good games. Great. I look forward to games that look good yet arent innovative myself, (see sig). A game doesnt have to be innovatie to be good and fun. But why exactly does it deserve so much recognition over, say, No One Lives Forever, also a 2 time AAA series? Because its popular? Its popularity doesnt actually have anything to do with how good or bad the game actually is. If so, we might as well praise 50 Cent Bulletproof.

Let me ask you this:

You have a Starcraft Avatar. Why did the unveiling of Starcraft 2 make front-page news on every games site in the universe? Why did they unveil it at an exhibition centre rather than just release screens like everyone else? Why is it one of the most anticipated games ever?

Because it kicks ass. There are many reasons games are anticipated. Some because they have amazing graphics (Lair), some because of innovative control schemes (metroid), others because they are made by well-known developers (mass effect).

Others however, are anticipated simply because they're awesome. People love them. You can try to break it down all you like with "how innovative is it?" or "the controls were done before!" but at the end of the day, the package as a whole kicks a lot of ass.

Starcraft is loved because a) It's really fun b) It has a great variety of units and strategies and c) It tells an amazing story set in an amazing universe.

Halo is the same. It's fun. The gameplay works well. And it tells a story so many people have got into thanks to the vivid universe it's set in.

Command and Conquer is a frequent AAA series. Relic have been making AAA RTS games for ages now. But they aren't the same as the unique games that come along now and then like Starcraft or Halo that just capture a lot of people like other games dont.

Cows slowly made Halo less significant here with daily "halo is over-rated" threads. Seriously, not a day goes by without one.Ninja-Vox

Wait how about the "Game X is ripping off of Halo" or "This game isisint near as good Halo" or "Halo is the best game ever" Those threads are way more common by the MS fanboys. Halo was so boring and it didint bring nothing new. Also for those people who say we had cause its popular thats just stupid. I hate Halo cause the story sucked and the game was just uniteresting and yes iv played and ownd halo before. Heck I was excited when I got Halo, but all that hype tricked into buying the game.

I cant remember the last time a played an unoriginal game, then stopped myself and said, "wow, im really going play this game again because it totally offers nothing new. Curely, its something to remember it by!"

XaosII

It happened to me while playing Ninja Gaiden.But oh wait, it did nothing innovativ. So i suppose it was a bad game, right?

[QUOTE="FancyKetchup25"]I cant remember the last time i was playing a fun game, then stopped myself and asked. what about this is innovative? XaosII

I cant remember the last time a played an unoriginal game, then stopped myself and said, "wow, im really going play this game again for years because it totally offers nothing new. Surely, its something to remember it by!"

Did Star Wars offer anything new? Hell no. When it was previewed it was historically called "yet another sci-fi movie". Believe it or not however, Star Wars interested quite a few people.

Why? Because regardless of how you break it down, it was an awesome movie which captured a lot of people's hearts with it's characters, story and setting.

Again you could say; what make star wars so special? Break it down to special effects. Acting. Dialogue. All of it's probably done better elsehwhere. But as a whole, it was amazing.

I dont see what you're even trying to achieve. You said popularity doesn't mean something is good; but Halo isn't good because it's popular, it's popular because it's good. Are you honestly trying to say the millions of fans and reviewers who rated both games AAA across the board all got it wrong?

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"]Cows slowly made Halo less significant here with daily "halo is over-rated" threads. Seriously, not a day goes by without one.finalfantasy94

Wait how about the "Game X is ripping off of Halo" or "This game isisint near as good Halo" or "Halo is the best game ever" Those threads are way more common by the MS fanboys. Halo was so boring and it didint bring nothing new. Also for those people who say we had cause its popular thats just stupid. I hate Halo cause the story sucked and the game was just uniteresting and yes iv played and ownd halo before. Heck I was excited when I got Halo, but all that hype tricked into buying the game.

Please dont say Halo is awesome threads are more common than halo hate threads. Halo threads are only ever made when something new about halo is revealed. Or when the game comes out. Cows have bashed halo relentlessly for years, without reasons.

Halo is a great game. If you dislike it fine, but at least have the sense to realise that your opinion differs somewhat from the general consensus here.

I hate the terminator movies. But i'm not stubborn enough to say that the reviewers all got it wrong, and that the people who DO like it do so incorrectly.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="FancyKetchup25"]I cant remember the last time i was playing a fun game, then stopped myself and asked. what about this is innovative? Ninja-Vox

I cant remember the last time a played an unoriginal game, then stopped myself and said, "wow, im really going play this game again for years because it totally offers nothing new. Surely, its something to remember it by!"

Did Star Wars offer anything new? Hell no. When it was previewed it was historically called "yet another sci-fi movie". Believe it or not however, Star Wars interested quite a few people.

Why? Because regardless of how you break it down, it was an awesome movie which captured a lot of people's hearts with it's characters, story and setting.

Again you could say; what make star wars so special? Break it down to special effects. Acting. Dialogue. All of it's probably done better elsehwhere. But as a whole, it was amazing.

I dont see what you're even trying to achieve. You said popularity doesn't mean something is good; but Halo isn't good because it's popular, it's popular because it's good. Are you honestly trying to say the millions of fans and reviewers who rated both games AAA across the board all got it wrong?

It just you people clam those scores as fact when thier just opinion. Halo isint the greates FPS to ever be born.

Let me ask you this:

You have a Starcraft Avatar. Why did the unveiling of Starcraft 2 make front-page news on every games site in the universe? Why did they unveil it at an exhibition centre rather than just release screens like everyone else? Why is it one of the most anticipated games ever?

Because it kicks ass. There are many reasons games are anticipated. Some because they have amazing graphics (Lair), some because of innovative control schemes (metroid), others because they are made by well-known developers (mass effect).

Others however, are anticipated simply because they're awesome. People love them. You can try to break it down all you like with "how innovative is it?" or "the controls were done before!" but at the end of the day, the package as a whole kicks a lot of ass.

Starcraft is loved because a) It's really fun b) It has a great variety of units and strategies and c) It tells an amazing story set in an amazing universe.

Halo is the same. It's fun. The gameplay works well. And it tells a story so many people have got into thanks to the vivid universe it's set in.

Command and Conquer is a frequent AAA series. Relic have been making AAA RTS games for ages now. But they aren't the same as the unique games that come along now and then like Starcraft or Halo that just capture a lot of people like other games dont.Ninja-Vox

And while i actually agree with several of your points, why is Halo a much more talked about game than Starcraft? Maybe not the fairest of comparisons, but not only is Starcraft older than Halo, and did more than Halo, its still more popular than Halo, and its not brought up anywhere near as much. Is Starcraft more fun than Halo? Thats up for some heavy, heavy debating, but you'll find plenty of people in both camps.

Starcraft 2 looks promising based on its pedigree and whats been shown so far. So does Halo 3. That deserves some recognition on its own for both games. Yet, i fail to see any reason to "revere" either Halo or Starcraft 1. They did what they did and its done.

And none of those games you mentioned are new or innovative. Yes, they are good games. Great. I look forward to games that look good yet arent innovative myself, (see sig). A game doesnt have to be innovatie to be good and fun. But why exactly does it deserve so much recognition over, say, No One Lives Forever, also a 2 time AAA series? Because its popular? Its popularity doesnt actually have anything to do with how good or bad the game actually is. If so, we might as well praise 50 Cent Bulletproof.

XaosII

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]name a recently released pc shooter which hasnt been done before.
XaosII

The Ship.

What do i win?

It may be original but it was terrible. Do you force yourself to play poor games just because they do something new?

No one was comparing Goldeneye or Perfect dark to PC shooters. Halo was because it was so great that fanboys had to turn to PC.

The genre itself was still new on consoles and didnt gain any major grounds until Halo was released. I know this because I was there in 1999. Look at the FPS lineup before and after Halo.

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]name a recently released pc shooter which hasnt been done before.
XaosII

The Ship.

What do i win?

And while i actually agree with several of your points, why is Halo a much more talked about game than Starcraft? Maybe not the fairest of comparisons, but not only is Starcraft older than Halo, and did more than Halo, its still more popular than Halo, and its not brought up anywhere near as much. Is Starcraft more fun than Halo? Thats up for some heavy, heavy debating, but you'll find plenty of people in both camps.

Starcraft 2 looks promising based on its pedigree and whats been shown so far. So does Halo 3. That deserves some recognition on its own for both games. Yet, i fail to see any reason to "revere" either Halo or Starcraft 1. They did what they did and its done.

XaosII

They did what they did better than anyone else. Simple as that. Honestly, millions of people do not love these games over all the rest for no reason.

Cant you see your arguement is rediculous? Are you seriously saying the likes of Starcraft and Halo are loved by so many people, incorrectly?

They got it wrong? They're not as great as they all think they are?

Also, Halo is more talked about because there have been two games, and the third and final is out this year. There hasn't been a new addition to Starcraft in over a decade.

I played HALO and Starsiege Tribes v1.0. I think in terms of features, and solid gameplay, Starseige Tribes v1 just overshadosHALO on everything except AI. Tribes has bots in later mods but the original game did not have NPC, everyone is online at 32 max.

Here is some of starsiege tribes v1. features that i really are fun.

1.) 3 types of armor. Everyone one has its strength and weakness. Light are usually fighter, nimble fighters, cloaks,scouts, and snipers, pilots. While the Medium is support and repair. They can help to build and quickly set up command bases and resupply unit anywhere in the game. Medium can build defenses to slow or stop the enemy. Heavy is the slow but dangerous indoors. Their launch cannon can vaporize entire rooms of enemies. In the hands of a skilled player indoors, the Heavy is dangerous too if they know how to slide back and forth using the terrain.

2.) A variety of vehicles. The lightvehicles aregood for air support and capturing the flag, setting up sniping zone and a sensor network. The transport can get your heavy and medium armor to the battlefield quickly to support the battle. They are valuable and you use them to run over an enemy. Only bad thing is its speed. But you can get 4 passengers to defend it when fully loaded.

3.) sensor network is more valuable than most people think. When a good sensor network, you know exactly where the enemy is coming and their forces are concentrated on. Therefore, you use less man power to defend your base when you have a good sensor network.

4.) deployable gun torrents can attach to almost anywhere making them a killer for unsuspected foes.

5.) You can issue communications and orders. Itis easy with a few predefined shortcut keys. This is great in the heat of battle or when your fortress is being infiltrated. People rarely talk crap on Starsiege Tribes v1 like they do in other FPS.

6.) maps are just large enough and fortress is just big enough. There is a variety of maps. So depending on the terrain and type of bases you have, the tactics really changes. All depending on what type ofarmor your foes and comrade choose affects the tactics used.

7.) Even the cheezy blaster that everyone is given when they respawn is useful cause it conserve ammo. Also can kill. Every weapon I have found useful depending on the situation.

Game is the most balance and feature rich that I recall playing

[QUOTE="FancyKetchup25"]I cant remember the last time i was playing a fun game, then stopped myself and asked. what about this is innovative? XaosII

I cant remember the last time a played an unoriginal game, then stopped myself and said, "wow, im really going play this game again for years because it totally offers nothing new. Surely, its something to remember it by!"

Seriopusly, your arguement is just bad.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]name a recently released pc shooter which hasnt been done before.
JPOBS

The Ship.

What do i win?

It was a half-life mod. The single player was abysmal, but it had decent online. Even then though, it was just a quirky multiplayer game.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="FancyKetchup25"]I cant remember the last time i was playing a fun game, then stopped myself and asked. what about this is innovative? Ninja-Vox

I cant remember the last time a played an unoriginal game, then stopped myself and said, "wow, im really going play this game again for years because it totally offers nothing new. Surely, its something to remember it by!"

Did Star Wars offer anything new? Hell no. When it was previewed it was historically called "yet another sci-fi movie". Believe it or not however, Star Wars interested quite a few people.

Why? Because regardless of how you break it down, it was an awesome movie which captured a lot of people's hearts with it's characters, story and setting.

Again you could say; what make star wars so special? Break it down to special effects. Acting. Dialogue. All of it's probably done better elsehwhere. But as a whole, it was amazing.

I dont see what you're even trying to achieve. You said popularity doesn't mean something is good; but Halo isn't good because it's popular, it's popular because it's good. Are you honestly trying to say the millions of fans and reviewers who rated both games AAA across the board all got it wrong?

Halo 1. It was good. It deserved AAA. Halo 2...massively, extremely, astronomically, overhyped, over scored piece of putrid smudge shoved down gamer's throats. Halo 2 was the most overhyped game in history and that killed it. The multiplayer was the ONLY thing good about this game. The single player just sucked...ya just sucked. Halo 2 is a multiplayer game only. If Halo 2 was like Warhawk, a multiplayer game only, it would have been great, but they messed up the single player so bad I lost all hope in the Halo series. What a piece of junk.

Halo 3 better NOT turn out as Halo 2 did. The only thing that will save Halo 3 is the SINGLE PLAYER!!! We all know the multiplayer is gonna be more or less the same as Halo 2 with new features (go figure). but the single player is the most important NOT MULTIPLAYER. For all the hype this game is getting the Single player better have the following:

- Very long Single Player (20+ hours)

- NO LOADING TEXTURES WHILE IN GAME!

- It has to be fun (Halo 2 was not...god that game was bad)

-It better have the best graphics I have ever seen because god forbid if it's getting hyped this high and the graphics are average, it's a FLOP.

-Lots of locations.

-BETTER SOUND!!! (Halo 2 had the worst gun sounds ever)

-The best effects I have ever seen (once again, according to the hype)

-HALO 3 SELLS 8 MILLION 360's!!. If this does not happen then the game is a FLOP!

This is what happens when you hype a game this high. You have extreme expectations. Thank you Halo fanboys. If this game does not meet any of the critera above, I concider the game a total, massive, FLOP.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

And while i actually agree with several of your points, why is Halo a much more talked about game than Starcraft? Maybe not the fairest of comparisons, but not only is Starcraft older than Halo, and did more than Halo, its still more popular than Halo, and its not brought up anywhere near as much. Is Starcraft more fun than Halo? Thats up for some heavy, heavy debating, but you'll find plenty of people in both camps.

Starcraft 2 looks promising based on its pedigree and whats been shown so far. So does Halo 3. That deserves some recognition on its own for both games. Yet, i fail to see any reason to "revere" either Halo or Starcraft 1. They did what they did and its done.

Ninja-Vox

They did what they did better than anyone else. Simple as that. Honestly, millions of people do not love these games over all the rest for no reason.

Cant you see your arguement is rediculous? Are you seriously saying the likes of Starcraft and Halo are loved by so many people, incorrectly?

They got it wrong? They're not as great as they all think they are?

Also, Halo is more talked about because there have been two games, and the third and final is out this year. There hasn't been a new addition to Starcraft in over a decade.

I think the issue here is that im talking in the context of the OP's point, not in the entire picture.

Halo and Starcraft are not incorrectly loved. They do not however, deserve massive recognition today when there are games that are better out there. Maybe they were awesome for its time, and thats a big deal. Any reason why we shouldn't just take the game for granted now? They did what they did and thats it.

Im not saying those games were overrated. IM saying, they are overrated, today. And theres less of a reason to think about them, today, especially when they didnt do something new at the time. Most people have moved on to newer and better games.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]name a recently released pc shooter which hasnt been done before.
JPOBS

The Ship.

What do i win?

Well... since i proved your question wrong the only thing you can resort to is undermining the response. That actually doesnt change how The Ship is actually new and refreshing in some parts.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="FancyKetchup25"]I cant remember the last time i was playing a fun game, then stopped myself and asked. what about this is innovative? JPOBS

I cant remember the last time a played an unoriginal game, then stopped myself and said, "wow, im really going play this game again for years because it totally offers nothing new. Surely, its something to remember it by!"

Seriopusly, your arguement is just bad.

Why would i when something better will come along, especially when the game didnt even provide anything new at the time? I doubt you'll be playing anything but a tiny handful of all your games 7 years later.

Halo isnt taken for granted, it is just viewed differently by different people. The way I see it, it wasnt ground breaking, it just had the cog wheels in the right proportion turning at the right speeds, and this is good, but by the time I played it (either 03 or 04 and on PC to boot) I just couldn't seethe magic. However they have the expansive environments that allow for a lot of exploration (but you choose not to, probably because of the mission you are on once you land, and the fighting with covenant keep you on your toes) which makes you feel the illusion of actually being on a halo, and not just on a mapped part of one with a cheesy back drop.

They are on to something, and I just hope that with all the R&D that has gone into multi-player, they have at least a 15-18 hour campaign sorted out for the 3rd instalment with original thinking and ideas that work outside the FPS rule book in order for me to feel personally impressed.

I'm sure all of the western media will give it 9. somethings anyway, but I havent enjoyed every AAA game, and have enjoyed some AA games more (obviously as the scores dont mean anything but other opinions), but this game generally HAS to be something special.

*Yawn*

Is tribes still free? Might take it for a spin again. :)

dream431ca, i will be happy if it's a game as enjoyable and lasting as the first's single player and the second's multiplayer. By all means come up with as many reasons as you can to call it a flop.

On planet earth, i'll enjoy it for the reasons above, if it can do it. :)

I think the issue here is that im talking in the context of the OP's point, not in the entire picture.

Halo and Starcraft are not incorrectly loved. They do not however, deserve massive recognition today when there are games that are better out there. Maybe they were awesome for its time, and thats a big deal. Any reason why we shouldn't just take the game for granted now? They did what they did and thats it.

Im not saying those games were overrated. IM saying, they are overrated, today. And theres less of a reason to think about them, today, especially when they didnt do something new at the time. Most people have moved on to newer and better games.

XaosII

But nobody is saying Halo 1 and Starcraft 1 are better than all the newer FPS and RTS games. They're anticipating Halo 3 and Starcraft 2 based on the idea that they will be as enjoyable as the prior games.

People won't admit this, but Halo revonlutionized the FPS genre. Also, it was different and better at the time. And the contols were great too. Why dod you think some places calls Halo the best Cosnole Launch game ever?

Why dod you think some places calls Halo the best Cosnole Launch game ever?DuDisNow

They were probably on crack. Nothing has touched Mario 64 yet.

[QUOTE="norfair_dweller"]

[QUOTE="XaosII"]Because its neither new or innovative. Doesnt matter if it seemed fresh or good on a console, whats innovative about taking something that already exists ona nother platform and applying it yours?MGS9150

The impact it had should then be disregarded?

The only reason it was so popular was because it was a very good game on the xbox, it was the only killer app xbox players had so they hyped it to no end.

Or maybe its the fact that it was one of the greatest games created ever. and because it was one of the few outstanding games on the xbox some how made the game 9th highest rated game ever right?

I tired of this pathetic excuse "the only reason its good is because the other games waren't" come up with another excuse:x

[QUOTE="FancyKetchup25"]

[QUOTE="XaosII"]Because its neither new or innovative. Doesnt matter if it seemed fresh or good on a console, whats innovative about taking something that already exists ona nother platform and applying it yours?Ninja-Vox

But it was fun...

Indeed. What game is innovative? Seriously, i wonder if he could name some innovative shooters. Halo was fun. By virtue of the fact that all he can do is point out it didn't do anything amazingly new is proof alone that there's little to justify claiming it wasn't awesome.

Nobody loved halo because it was innovative. They loved it because it was incredibly fun.

Because its neither new or innovative. Doesnt matter if it seemed fresh or good on a console, whats innovative about taking something that already exists ona nother platform and applying it yours?XaosII

See thats the problem. It didn't do anything new but took what was there and made every facet of it bad ass.

So thats something.

There was the Ford Pinto then came the Mustang, still runs on 4 wheels but its refined.

halo 1 was okay. halo 2 was a big improvement though.mistervengeance

[QUOTE="DuDisNow"] Why dod you think some places calls Halo the best Cosnole Launch game ever?MrDziekuje

They were probably on crack. Nothing has touched Mario 64 yet.

[QUOTE="norfair_dweller"]

[QUOTE="XaosII"]Because its neither new or innovative. Doesnt matter if it seemed fresh or good on a console, whats innovative about taking something that already exists ona nother platform and applying it yours?MGS9150

The impact it had should then be disregarded?

The only reason it was so popular was because it was a very good game on the xbox, it was the only killer app xbox players had so they hyped it to no end.

I was heavily anti-XBOX, and regarded my PS2 as my little God Box. Then I played Halo, and decided between that and Splinter Cell... I needed an XBOX. I can tell you it wasn't considered good just because the XBOX lacked games.