Give me a good reason that halo sucks. | First Page | Forum

Gaia Forums » Entertainment » Gaming Discussion

Strike FreedomX

(?)Community Member

Offline

Post: 13744829_1 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:10:21 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:10:21 +0000

I'm pretty much getting tired of people saying halo sucks without reason.
So here is your chance, if you can give me a halfm - decent answer, then congratulations. Come in here and say something like "OMg halo teh best" or "Gaylo" Then you will be put into the list of failures at life.

Failures at life list:
SiImeria
Just had to ruin the streak.

Final Darkness

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_2 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:11:41 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:11:41 +0000

Also, if you haven't played Halo 2 online, your opinion will be worth less.

Strike FreedomX

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_3 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:12:05 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:12:05 +0000

Final Darkness

Also, if you haven't played Halo 2 online, your opinion will be worth less.

Ah yes.

Dampylle

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_4 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:13:43 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:13:43 +0000

I would not necesarily say it sucks.... but I will definatley say it is mediocore

it really brought nothing new to the table to be honest, and what it did do it primarily borrowed from earlier FPS titles that did it a little better in many cases.

The gameplay is not even the best I have seen for a FPS in terms of single player or multiplayer.... Give me Blood 2 for single player any day, and Unreal Tournament for Multiplayer.

I personally think it is a completley average FPS that got more hype because it was one of the first solid exclusives on the Xbox, and because it was one of the first games that took advantage of live

but to be honest there are better uses of online play on PC in earlier games and better Single player campaigns that likewise have been on PC for ages.

Chrisb319

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_5 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:13:59 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:13:59 +0000

Halo is a good game, not god's gift to humanity as many people claim.

Halo didn't do anything better/new then any other FPS game out it just didn't have any decent competition from the console point of view.

Samething with Goldeneye it wan't THAT great it was just the best FPS game out at the time on the N64.

Omnipotent Trevor

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_6 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:14:39 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:14:39 +0000

I'm not a big fan of FPS games, but even so, Halo seems pretty average to me.

I'd rather play Ghost Recon, Timesplitters, or Time Crisis.

SiImeria

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_7 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:14:43 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:14:43 +0000

Well let's see here...

It's a pretty mediocre FPS since you're restricted to few guns. Which in all is useful in some situations. The fact is the only reason Halo did so well was because of the grenades being seperate from the guns, having it's own control. I've no problem really with Halo the first, it's the 2nd one I didn't like.

- It was too short.
- WAY WAY WAY too overhyped.
- The dual-wield was more of a nuisance then anything.
- The guns were changed dramatically compared to the first.
- And the fact I hate Xbox, gives me more of a reason, since the controls and the resistance on the controller triggers bothers me. Which is why is I hate the dual-wield.
- I LIKE having more then 2 guns

Strike FreedomX

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_8 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:14:51 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:14:51 +0000

Good, Good, going smoothly so far....

BloodRose23

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_9 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:15:31 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:15:31 +0000

Its just not in my preference.
User Image

Strike FreedomX

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_10 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:15:44 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:15:44 +0000

SiImeria

Well let's see here...

It's a pretty mediocre FPS since you're restricted to few guns. Which in all is useful in some situations. The fact is the only reason Halo did so well was because of the grenades being seperate from the guns, having it's own control. I've no problem really with Halo the first, it's the 2nd one I didn't like.

- It was too short.
- WAY WAY WAY too overhyped.
- The dual-wield was more of a nuisance then anything.
- The guns were changed dramatically compared to the first.
- And the fact I hate Xbox, gives me more of a reason, since the controls and the resistance on the controller triggers bothers me. Which is why is I hate the dual-wield.
- I LIKE having more then 2 guns

Well, we have a first failure here, why? Read bolded statement.

Terminal Dogma

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_11 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:16:44 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:16:44 +0000

I haven't seen any decent arguments against it yet that don't apply to almost every other game.

Solluce

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_12 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:16:59 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:16:59 +0000

I didn't like either Halo's pacing for the single-player campaign. In the original, things simply got too repetitive towards the end, with repeating level designs and such. In 2, it became very predictable for me when combat would occur. VERY predictable, as in the sequence of move, engage enemy, move, engage enemy, etc. did not change much at all over the course of the game. I still think the best part of Halo in any game in the series is towards the beginning of the original when you actually crash on Halo and have to explore the place, and most everything is unpredictable.

This is nothing against multiplayer. I prefer the original's since it seems more balanced, but both are very good.

Really, my only beef is with the single-player campaign.

Strike FreedomX

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_13 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:17:49 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:17:49 +0000

Terminal Dogma

I haven't seen any decent arguments against it yet that don't apply to almost every other game.

Like I said, half-way decent.

Chrisb319

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_14 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:18:22 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:18:22 +0000

Strike FreedomX

SiImeria

Well let's see here...

It's a pretty mediocre FPS since you're restricted to few guns. Which in all is useful in some situations. The fact is the only reason Halo did so well was because of the grenades being seperate from the guns, having it's own control. I've no problem really with Halo the first, it's the 2nd one I didn't like.

- It was too short.
- WAY WAY WAY too overhyped.
- The dual-wield was more of a nuisance then anything.
- The guns were changed dramatically compared to the first.
- And the fact I hate Xbox, gives me more of a reason, since the controls and the resistance on the controller triggers bothers me. Which is why is I hate the dual-wield.
- I LIKE having more then 2 guns

Well, we have a first failure here, why? Read bolded statement.

The Dual-Weild made perfect sense BECAUSE of the controller you had two triggers for your TWO guns. The Xbox controller was remade into a smaller unit and isin't as big as it once was. Controllers are just something you get use to not an excuse to suck or badmouth a game.

Ze Royal Viking

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 13744829_15 created on Sun, 21 May 2006 06:19:04 +0000
Posted: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:19:04 +0000

Nothing wrong here!

Report This Topic | unblock images

1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 20 21 22 > >>

Gaia Forums » Entertainment » Gaming Discussion

Welcome to Gaia! ::

Quick Reply

More Information