PDA

View Full Version : Halo Reach



theWanderer
09-06-2010, 08:56 PM
Anyone else looking forward to it? Or is this board anti-Halo/Xbox/everything that's not Nintendo?

Jakob15
09-06-2010, 10:02 PM
Xbox sucks. PS3 rocks.

Anyways back on topic. I don't really like Halo games always died to fast in those games, plus I don't like playing shooting games that aren't realistic.

Xeyuzio
09-06-2010, 10:24 PM
Xbox sucks. PS3 rocks.

Anyways back on topic. I don't really like Halo games always died to fast in those games, plus I don't like playing shooting games that aren't realistic.
It's like you read my mind, Call of Duty FTW.

PharaohsVizier
09-06-2010, 11:57 PM
This board isn't anti-Xbox or PS3. I probably would have been excited if I went with an XBOX isntead of a PS3. Still wondering if I made the right choice there.

shadowhunter
09-07-2010, 12:35 AM
Wii, DS, and Xbox 360....hrmmm I'm packed for life.

theWanderer
09-07-2010, 10:26 AM
Xbox sucks. PS3 rocks.

Anyways back on topic. I don't really like Halo games always died to fast in those games, plus I don't like playing shooting games that aren't realistic.

You die faster in a non-realistic game? Huh... different skill set, I guess.


It's like you read my mind, Call of Duty FTW.

You're saying CoD is realistic?

...

:bounce:

Shadz
09-07-2010, 06:53 PM
I'm a PC gamer, I also have a ps3. But I'll say CoD sucks balls.

PharaohsVizier
09-07-2010, 07:46 PM
I think COD is a great sort of party shooter since its a lot easier to pickup than BF.

Xeyuzio
09-07-2010, 07:50 PM
You die faster in a non-realistic game? Huh... different skill set, I guess.



You're saying CoD is realistic?
Hmm... interesting, it has realistic feature and at least it's not a bunch of aliens and weird space ships.
...

:bounce:
It is realistic, well more realistic then that Halo stuff and CoD does not suck it's the best ever 221

theWanderer
09-07-2010, 08:04 PM
It is realistic, well more realistic then that Halo stuff and CoD does not suck it's the best ever 221

1. No, it sucks.
2. If I wanted realism, I'd step out the front door and join the army or something.


I think COD is a great sort of party shooter since its a lot easier to pickup than BF.

I actually got into BFBC a lot easier than CoD. Plus, with drivable vehicles, it's a lot easier for casual or first time players to rack up kills and generally have a good time. Flying an attack helicopter always leads to a good time, whether you know what you're doing or not.

DeltaBurnt
09-07-2010, 10:46 PM
Guys guys, can't we just agree that both Halo and COD both suck because they're over simplistic and cling to the mechanics they've been using for years?

Xeyuzio
09-08-2010, 06:49 AM
Guys guys, can't we just agree that both Halo and COD both suck because they're over simplistic and cling to the mechanics they've been using for years?
Fine but Pokemon and Mario use the same mechanics too, I think.

theWanderer
09-08-2010, 07:37 AM
Fine but Pokemon and Mario use the same mechanics too, I think.

Pokemon stopped being fun a long time ago.


Guys guys, can't we just agree that both Halo and COD both suck because they're over simplistic and cling to the mechanics they've been using for years?

Innovation doesn't exactly lead to a great game. Neither does making a game overly complicated. Unless you're some elitist prick.

DeltaBurnt
09-08-2010, 07:58 AM
Innovation doesn't exactly lead to a great game. Neither does making a game overly complicated. Unless you're some elitist prick.

So you're saying you'd rather play the same FPS game for the rest of your life over and over just with different maps and reskinned weapons?

Having a few similar sequels is ok, but Halo has been around since 2001 and I have yet to see any deviation from the original formula.

theWanderer
09-08-2010, 04:05 PM
So you're saying you'd rather play the same FPS game for the rest of your life over and over just with different maps and reskinned weapons?

Having a few similar sequels is ok, but Halo has been around since 2001 and I have yet to see any deviation from the original formula.

If I find it consistently fun, then yes; that's exactly what I'm saying. And so far it hasn't managed to disappoint me.

Why fix what's not broken?

DeltaBurnt
09-08-2010, 05:09 PM
If I find it consistently fun, then yes; that's exactly what I'm saying. And so far it hasn't managed to disappoint me.

Why fix what's not broken?

Well back in the stone age hunting and gathering and moving around all the time worked, it worked real well. However agriculture and being sedentary proved to grant much more rewards such as civilization.

It's not fixing anything, it's moving onto better concept and games. Current gen platforming games haven't fixed Super Mario Bros., they build onto and bring a better overall experience (ever played Braid of VVVVVV?)

theWanderer
09-08-2010, 07:27 PM
Well back in the stone age hunting and gathering and moving around all the time worked, it worked real well. However agriculture and being sedentary proved to grant much more rewards such as civilization.

How can you even compare the advancement of the human race to something as simple as a video game? Did we develop agriculture for fun? Obviously not.

As long as Halo is fun, then I'm fine with that. Millions of people seem to agree with me on that point.

PharaohsVizier
09-08-2010, 07:49 PM
Yea I'm going to have to agree with thewanderer here. Games can evolve sure, but they don't really need to as most of them haven't even been played for a decade yet. I'm still into Tetris years after they made it, and the original is still one of the better versions. :)

DeltaBurnt
09-08-2010, 08:34 PM
How can you even compare the advancement of the human race to something as simple as a video game? Did we develop agriculture for fun? Obviously not.

As long as Halo is fun, then I'm fine with that. Millions of people seem to agree with me on that point.

Um...video games are technology, which is 90% of our lives and advancements right now. Plus an analogy will always work no matter how big the difference in importance.

Also just because millions of people like playing the same game 5 times doesn't mean we all have to deal with games that never move forward.


Yea I'm going to have to agree with thewanderer here. Games can evolve sure, but they don't really need to as most of them haven't even been played for a decade yet. I'm still into Tetris years after they made it, and the original is still one of the better versions. :)

True but the versions of Tetris you play today have definetly changed from the original have they not? And it adds to the experience.

All I'm saying is I'd rather play something new and fun and something outdated and has been fun.

Constant people criticize how games like Final Fantasy and other RPGs are repetitive and have been done over and over. Then they turn right around and eat up Halo as if it's a completely new genre of game. Atleast with Final Fantasy the battle systems change with each game, there's a new setting, new story, and everything.

I fall victim to playing sequels to games that haven't changed at all from the original, it is fun, however I just don't get the same feeling as I do when I play a completely new game. When I see something like Portal at E3 I get really excited (let's pretend we're in the past and I'm talking about seeing the original Portal at E3), then I goto see what Sony's cooking up and they have a sequel to Resistance, inFamous, and LittleBigPlanet all very good games and I'm happy they get a sequel. But I just have a pit of boredom in my heart when seeing them and playing them.

itsjoanna
09-18-2010, 09:48 AM
the game is actually good, if you were like me that was excited for the release.
Everyone has a different opinion, no one man/woman is the same.