[QUOTE="vashkey"]Halo has been around for almost eight years. So far there have been four games. Zelda, Mario, Pokemon, Guitar Hero, Final Fantasy, Shin Megami Tensei, Kingdom Hearts, The Sims, Resident Evil, Call of Duty, Sonic the Hedgehog, Metroid, Grand Theft Auto, Castlevania and Metal Gear have each individually had more games released since Halo has been around. ODST is the only upcoming Halo game with a solid release date. Gearbox isn't making a Halo game and Peter Jackson's Halo game has been put on hold despite it's announcement over three years ago and not even so much as a screen shot has been shown. If Halo is really milked like you guys act then chances are most your favorite game series are even more so. Your list is off- Zelda has only released two games since the release of Halo 1. Handhelds don't count since MS doesn't have one. If MS did, no doubt there'd be a Halo for it. Also- are we counting Mario spinoffs? If we aren't, then we can say the same about that series (only SMS and SMG out since the release of Halo 1)
If it flops, the PS3 will still be a complete waste of money. Either way, GOW3 will provide Cows with a couple of good hours of gaming. Cows will get to play their PS3 for a few hours, then they'll return to SW and argue that their few hours of gaming is better than the 360 or Wii. No matter what, the cows will lose.
Didn't watch the conference, but seeing 2 Marios and a Metroid announced is a pretty f***ing big deal, especially because they're in addition to some very promising 3rd party games. Who cares about the conference itself? Nintendo's conference is simply trying to get REAL media coverage, not just System Wars hype. That should have been obvious to anyone slightly familiar with Nintendo's marketing strategy, or anyone who has any knowledge of marketing in general.
Metroid wins where one can compare the two. Metroid takes gameplay. Locking onto an enemy is a far more realistic concept than Halo's lame dual thumstick twiddling that has since plagued console FPS. Metroid takes challenge. The series makes the player think. MP2 had the best boss fights that I have ever seen in a video game. The hidden items always keep the player aware of their surroundings. Halo rarely makes anyone use their intellect when they play the game. Metroid's graphics also win. Sure, Halo boasts more texture detail and more power. But, Metroid nails the atmosphere and art. Metroid also has elements from a number of genres. When explaining what Metroid is to someone who has never heard of it before, I say it's a combination of all that is good in Zelda, Mario, and Halo. It has Zelda's fetch quests, items, upgrades, and bosses. It has Mario's platforming (mostly in the MP1). It has Halo's setting and is FP. I'll give Metroid and Halo a tie in the music department. Metroid's music artfully reflects and supplements the environment. Halo's theme gets me pumped up to go kill s***. Both work well for their games. That said, MP3 made me angry with it's attempts to make the game closer to Halo by taking out items, adding a similar plot, a vehicle, and making it feel like an action game, not adventure. Metroid rewards you for making progress, like a new visor, gun, or ability that suddenly opens up areas that you could see but not get to. Halo forces you to sit through a really s***ty plot. MP 1 and 2 don't make you subscribe too much to it. You can skip the reading parts and not really get much of a plot. MP3 tried to be like Halo too much and failed. Metroid demands exploration and gives many route choices. Halo is more linear than a 2D Mario. Metroid only fails in the multiplayer department. Echoes MP sucked hard. Halo gave the world a decent online FPS experience. I give Halo credit for this, but I fail to really reward it since PC online bends Halo over and makes it squeal like a pig.
[QUOTE="RealBongo"]no one forces you to buy or play them...foxhound_fox
And yet the foaming-at-the-mouth general public knows no better. That is why games like The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape From Butcher Bay (one of, if not the best shooter of last gen) did so poorly commercially, while 50 Cent Blood Money did so well. The average consumer doesn't research games before they buy them, they buy whatever has their favourite brand name on it (whether it be Nike or a person, like Hannah Montana).
And the developers making all the good games can't bring in profits and then go under.
for few elite enthusiasts.. it's not exactly a mass market appeal
successful pc developers aren't really pushing the edge of high end graphics either, they're finding success with mass market specsvoxware00
And what about World of WarCraft having more users than Xbox Live alone? And what about this? 263 million online gamers. If your computer can run the original Half Life, chances are it will be HD.
Didn't Crysis sell 3 million copies? That is a lot more than most console developers could hope for in sales. That is three times the "magic number." The only reason they haven't profited is because they spent such an assload of money on developing an engine... which will most likely in time bring them more profits through licensing than Crysis ever could. i am well aware. i think that the games that we are used to will become a solid niche within the industry and will not be the sole focus of developers. sure, we'll continue to get hardcore games, but they'll be fewer in number. we will never again see a year like 1998. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:1998_video_games riddick was a nerdy (but good) movie that didn't have the appeal of 50 cent. perhaps developers should focus on obtaining a decent liscense or franchise before they make a good game... if nintendo were to develop a solid platformer, but they don't have a good character to put in it, who are they going to use? a new character or mario? mario, duh, because he will sell many copies. that is how SMG was developed. they had a number of gameplay ideas (rabbit chasing, spherical worlds, waggle spin attack, IR item gathering among others)that they combined into one game and stuck a familiar face on it to make it sell more.
cnn did a story on this a lil bit ago on tv. gaming industry is anything but being killed. the industry paradigm is shifting- in the way that nintendo predicted/gambled, which is the exact opposite of what sony thought. sony's sales are suffering as a result. within the next 18 months or so, i'd expect major announcements about sony's next next-generation system or new hardware that mimics the wii's gameplay.
[QUOTE="too_much_eslim"]I find it funny you mention two other games, but focused on Halo. I hate it when people hate on Halo. It deseerves all the praise it gets.Epak_
No it doesn't. Halo is the definition of average.
compare halo 1 to every other console shooter in 2001. i dare you to try to argue that.
[QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"]I hate "points" systems for buying things. I don't want a bunch of leftover points that are essentially free money for whatever company. I just want to buy something and only pay for what I bought. Jerks.saruman354
Good call. I especially hate Microsoft's system. At least with Nintendo, 500 points = $5.00. Twenty bucks on XBL is...what? 1600 points? That makes no sense! Who came up with that!?
Log in to comment