Halo 2 PC INFO!

[Asknoone]

Pretty amazing?

I almost choked on my cup of tea.

 

[VirusType2]

Pretty amazing?

I almost choked on my cup of tea.

Samon, you don't like anything. Lol @ tea. Fair enough, 'it's not your cup of tea.'

Yes. The music was tight, the graphics were amazing to me in 2001 (before I bought my first modern PC to play Half-life2), the vehicles were ****ing awesome.. driving the rover around with realistic physics.. Enemies that are smart and duck behind shit. Friendly co-op teamates to help .. and they say really funny things that sound like life-like reactions, and the story was cool.

Like many, I got bored of it and stoped playing it, but how is that different from EVERY game I have ever bought?

 

[Asknoone]

I could have choked. You'd have been responsible! You...Halo collaborator you..!!

 

[Gray Fox]

Halo; PC
Metacritic:
Avrage= 83 based on 39 outlets
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/halo?q=halo

Gamerankings:
Avrage= 86 based on 67 outlets
http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/291594.asp?q=halo

Kupoartist is hence correct to say that for the pc it was between 8-9.

 

[kupocake]

I suppose the whole world is in on this conspiracy Kopa.

Indeed. Especially the hottest spot north of Havana itself

So I guess 102 media outlets were bribed money and nobody said anything?

I never said that was exclusively that was the case, just one of a range of possibilities. What is a FACT however is that the games industry and the games magazine industry are in a symbiotic relationship. No-one can piss off MS too much if they want to be a competitive publication, and if MS need to have a game convince people to buy their machine, razzing on it won't win you any brownie points. Similarly, take all those X-Box only magazines. They need a killer app as much as microsoft, because if no-one has an X-Box, how will the sell X-Box magazines? If you can honestly say that even one of the media outlets isn't in some way influenced by the success of the companies they report on, you are not living in the real world. Plus, do you honestly believe that 102 media outlets are all brilliantly put together, unbiased and not plainly just a pile of sh*t? A good portion of them will just go with the flow for their own sakes.

If Gamespot wants X-Box exclusives, it has to appease Microsoft. If Davey G's Video Game Barn wants to have any credability, Davey G better not stray too far from the Gamespot opinion, because people won't believe his word over theirs.

You know why the PC version scored less? Because it required a really powerful PC to run what the Xbox did, and still had some problems.

Oh is that a fact? I mean apparently I don't work with facts and you're the gatekeeper to the realm of truth, so it that must be the case! I very much doubt those reasons alone are enough to explain why one version scored an entire 10% less than than the other on average.

Finally, may I just say that if I need to ever dredge up an unneccessarily insulting attack made by an overzealous fanboy who feels wounded by someone talking ill about his favorite toy (hell, I even said that the game wasn't all that bad!), I need only come back to this thread.

 

[MultiVaC]

Well, did any of those reviews mention that Halo has the absolute worst level design of all time? Because it does. Even Doom 1 had more interesting levels, Halo's were just too pathetic for me to play by myself. I needed co-op, otherwise I just wouldn't do it. If I was a reviewer, I would've knocked a good 3 points off the score for that, such repetition is unacceptable.

 

[VirusType2]

Finally, may I just say that if I need to ever dredge up an unneccessarily insulting attack made by an overzealous fanboy who feels wounded by someone talking ill about his favorite toy (hell, I even said that the game wasn't all that bad!), I need only come back to this thread.

<3

Why are you insulted?

You know what is funny, I don't recall insulting you, just arguing that ridiculous theory that you made up one day while day dreaming that Microsoft has paid millions of people to be in on a conspiracy to vote a 9 or 10 for a video game.

The whole thing about the keeping on good terms with companies, how would that be any different than with Nintendo or Sony. So what you are saying to me is that video game reviews are completely worthless; whoever pays the most money gets the highest score, and that isn't true. Like you said, they can lose credibility. If anyone found out they would be forever scarred and damaged.


The best games ever made are the true games to judge all others by. This is how they get their scores. For example, games like Half-Life2, Oblivion, and Vice City are some of the best games ever made, and all other games are judged by the best games ever made. If a game that came out that completely trumped one of these past greats, then it would automatically score a 10. From then on, other games would be judged by the new king. Agree with me? When Halo came out in 2001, Half-life2 and Doom 3, and Quake 4 and Oblivion weren't out yet. It's a bit easy to be unimpressed and say that these games are better.


I'm sorry If I offended you, I'm just bored and feisty.

Even though I think Metal Gear and Mario are generally disappointing games that don't nearly deserve the scores they get, I don't go in a metal gear or mario64 thread and say that Nintendo was giving out hand-jobs to get a 10 on super mario64, and that anyone who thing that Metal Gear is a good game is a ****ing tool, because they are pretty high quality games, they just aren't my thing.

Everyone has their own tastes in games, and EVERYONE SHOULD KEEP THEIR INDIVIDUAL TASTES IN MIND WHEN SELECTING THE RIGHT GAMES, BECAUSE THE REVIEWER MIGHT HAVE DIFFERENT TASTES THAN YOU.


And I never noticed any level repetition until it became the latest e-fad to say so. I guess so, a little, but... um.. ever play a video game before? Most all of them are like that.

 

[Cole]

I play Super Mario 64 To This Day. It's fun throwing bowser around and around and around till you become dissy and fall over!

 

[MultiVaC]

How could you not notice the level repetition in Halo? It's probably the most prominent feature of the game to me. Go play the Library level again and name one level in any game that's as repetitive as that.

 

[VirusType2]

By the way Kupo, I do agree with you about PS magazine, and Xbox giving a very slight edge to their systems' games in their magazines. I have long believed this to be true. How will they sell magazines if they say every game sucks?

However, for the most part, they mainly only hype the game in the previews but are fairly honest in their reviews. Reviews that generally co-oberate with every other websites' scores.

I prefer to get my game reviews from websites that support all the consoles for this reason. And I use my own judgment from past experience as well.

 

[kupocake]

Why are you insulted?

You know what is funny, I don't recall insulting you, just arguing that ridiculous theory that you made up one day while day dreaming that Microsoft has paid millions of people to be in on a conspiracy to vote a 9 or 10 for a video game.

It isn't a ridiculous theory, it's basic buisness sense. Your painting it as a conspiracy is a malicious and ridiculous hyperbole of what I originally said. Insulting someone isn't about calling their mother fat or their pets stupid. It's about tone, speaking down to people as if you're some almighty truth

The whole thing about the keeping on good terms with companies, how would that be any different than with Nintendo or Sony.

I never said they weren't guilty of the same influence over the journalists who leech off them as part of their vocation.

So what you are saying to me is that video game reviews are completely worthless; whoever pays the most money gets the highest score, and that isn't true.

You're twisting money into the equation when I said that was only a possibility. Again. If not money, it's the raw elements of running a computer-games outlet. Reviews, Previews, News, EXCLUSIVES. No company will bend over backwards for a company that doesn't do others favours. Reviews aren't entirely worthless, but they certainly aren't a safe and concrete guideline because BUISNESS HAPPENS. If you cannot believe that this is how the entire magazine industry operates, you are living in a bubble.

Like you said, they can lose credibility. If anyone found out they would be forever scarred and damaged.

No-one has any delusions about the undeniable truth of magazine journalism, except fanboys arguing a point. People don't need to "find out" what is basic common buisness sense, and if they did, it would not shock them. If a media outlet is successful, that is the way it operates and anyone who has the authority to expose it can do so for any other decent media outlet, and can in turn likely be exposed themselves. Advertising is another similar realm: PC magazines carry adverts for peripherals and give them shining reviews because advertisers pay them money.

Everyone has their own tastes in games, and EVERYONE SHOULD KEEP THEIR INDIVIDUAL TASTES IN MIND WHEN SELECTING THE RIGHT GAMES, BECAUSE THE REVIEWER MIGHT HAVE DIFFERENT TASTES THAN YOU.

That's funny, because last I noticed, you seemed to consider games reviews as a fabulous rosetta stone for the undeniable quality of the Halo games

However, for the most part, they mainly only hype the game in the previews but are fairly honest in their reviews. Reviews that generally co-oberate with every other websites' scores.

Now you see the light This is true. I am not argueing that the practice is so intense that every sucky game is passed through with a good review just because of pressure on the magazines. It may influence people to give sucky games mediocre scores or good games excellent scores, but all in all being a lap-dog loses you significant credability as well. The issue is that there are certain software titles whose success can mean the difference between the success and failure of an entire Platform. Halo is one of these, synonomous with the X-Box. If Halo failed, the XBox could well have bombed. It really isn't that hard to see how Microsoft would do their upmost to make the game a success, and if that involves being underhand, I believe they are fully capable of that.

 

[bam23]

I don't see why Halo gets so much hate. It's a high quality game.

So it's coming out for PC. Halo fans will be glad to hear it.

If you don't like the game then what is there to worry about? If you like the game, you can buy it.



Yea, but to be fair, not everyone has 'already finished this game'. I have never played it myself.


I'm looking forward to Halo 3 on 360. I think this one is going to be incredible.

I don't think it's the fact that Halo2 is coming out on PC. It's the fact that you need to get a completely new OS to play it.

I don't think anyone here would mind a PC version of Halo2 if it didn't require Vista.

 

[Jintor]

As above.

It is a high quality game that has horrible level design. So... painfully... repedative... also, the Lighting! Why can't i see anything? Oh, look, let's make the torchlight TINY and not actually able to illuminate anything more than a few feet away.

That's about all of my gripes with it.

 

[SAJ]

There's a HALO2 ?

Why wasnt I told ?!!

 

[VirusType2]

(this took a few minutes to type, so it's a little delayed reaction)

I was never a Halo fan boy or anything like that. All I was arguing was that it was a very good game. I never said it absolutely deserved a 9.8 or that it was a must have game for everyone, or anything.

This thread is about Halo2 coming to PC. They had already ported Halo, so it was inevitable.

My entire argument is "why does everyone flame Halo games so entirely much?", even going as far as to say that the ratings on 150 websites are fixed, and all the users that 36,000 voters on one site alone are lying for Microsoft. These 36,600 voters score for Halo2 averaged out to be 9.7, which is basically 36,600 people saying the game is nearly perfect.

I have never even tried Halo2. In fact, I've never seen any trailers or anything of it! I have owned Halo though, so this is where my opinion of the series comes from. My assumption is that Halo2 'should' be better than Halo, simply because it now has on-line multiplayer. Although I've heard people saying that Halo1 is better, and/or that Halo2 sucks, it sounds like you either love it or hate it.


Regardless if you think the reviews of Halo was a gift, certainly most of the people who bought Halo2 more than likely owned Halo. Therefore, they were their own judge of the game Halo, and must have really liked it, because by using this information, they figured Halo2 would be even better, or at least more of the same, and thus it sold more copies in the first day than any other game in history. Does that mean it's the best game in history? Certainly not, and I never argued that it was. Still, when you look at user ratings for the game, they are 8.5 - 9.5. A great game by any standards.


Halo 2 used the same technology as Halo. Therefore, it wasn't much better graphically than Halo.

Therefore, I am really looking forward to Halo3. It looks absolutely gorgeous so far. The graphics in Halo were pretty good at the time, but they were absolutely nothing like this. I think this new Halo3 engine sounds incredible, and I think they are going to nail this game, and then finally everyone will STFU about 'halo sux'. It mostly annoys me because I could name 100 games off of the top of my head that actually suck, but you never hear anyone complaining about that all the time - it's always Halo!


Halo wouldn't have so many fans if it wasn't an outstanding game - regardless of reviews. This game seems to have a love it or hate it thing going on. Just go to any forum discussing Halo, and it will be 7 people saying how awesome the next Halo is going to be, interrupted by some random first time poster getting banned for saying tons of "you suck! halo fans suck and are stupid!", and the cycle just keeps repeating like this. I don't really understand that, and that is all I was trying to say. You don't see this kind of bashing with any other game, and I don't get it.

 

[Shakermaker]

My 2 cts.

Halo ftl

 

[Cole]

Halo wouldn't have so many fans if it wasn't an outstanding game - regardless of reviews. This game seems to have a love it or hate it thing going on. Just go to any forum discussing Halo, and it will be 7 people saying how awesome the next Halo is going to be, interrupted by some random first time poster getting banned for saying tons of "you suck! halo fans suck and are stupid!", and the cycle just keeps repeating like this. I don't really understand that, and that is all I was trying to say. You don't see this kind of bashing with any other game, and I don't get it.

There will always be people bashing things. The bigger something is the more people bash hit. Take a look at Microsoft once. Microsoft can create a new interface thats so inventive and creative and it many people will just bash it. Microsoft creates a new OS, there first major one in what 5 or 6 years? People that never even touch it start bashing it.
Apple creates the Ipod's, I've seen the Ipods bashed over and over. Yet I never see a much less popular IRiver H10, which can pull off a lot of the same features as the Nano never even heard of therefor can't be bashed.

I've played Halo mp and Halo 2 mp. I'm not a major fan but I think it's a fun game. I prefer Halo over Halo 2. I put Halo at the same standards of HL2.

Also a lot of the time people will just get sick of everyone saying how fun something is. I mean Halo and Halo 2 are fun games, but my cousins...they are big Xbox guys. They use to play Halo and Halo 2 and really don't like Half-Life or Half-Life 2 except there little brother. You know what they play the most now? Day of Defeat. Who got them hooked on it? Me. Of coures throw in 3 Tv's, 3 Xbox's, A bunch of people, some food, it's Halo 2 time. Not sure what this last paragraph has to do with anything besides the first sentence.

 

[kupocake]

To me, Halo is the one thing that gets consistantly bashed because there is actually a concrete aspect of it to be questioned. Repetition isn't a subjective thing like so many other aspects of games that get bashed: it can be proven that such an such an area is a mirror or copy of another, and it can be proved that Halo does that all too much. The effect is amplified by its success in the face of that one concrete flaw. People wonder "why can't they see the glaringly obvious?" I think then you get subjectivity, because it is critical whether you like everything else about the game, and that you don't concentrate on what is clearly wrong about it. I don't honestly believe I've ever heard anyone say that Halo's level design was outstanding. Sure, I've heard people say that bits of it are and I do agree with them, but I've never heard anyone claim that a substantial ammount of it was all that great. The people who love it concentrate on other aspects.

 

[destrukt]

virustype with his analogies of wisdom, and quotes of truth have truly 'owned' all of you, if only i was as eloquent as him. /bows

Half life sucks. Sorry an all, but it does.

i can dance all day.


when i played through halo (both) i wasn't expecting amazing level design, i was expecting more or less just run and shoot, it's that type of fps..

anyone have that quote from one of the bungie guys ? something like the "same 30 seconds of fun over and over again."

also, the level design actually isn't bad (i haven't played sp in like a year so i'm trying to remember offhand); fights on a space ship including low-grav areas, fight in a destroyed city ranging fomr buildings to beachfronts, fights on falling tower things (one of the levels where you're the arbiter), stealth game (playing as arbiter) and so on..

 

[DrDevin]

Halo didn't really bring much to the table, it just took everyones ideas, put them together and made them work well. It didn't really invent anything. Halo 2 was even worse touting dual wielding as an amazing feature.

The game had good graphics for its time but suffered from poor framerates and the PC release was a lot worse as it ran very poorly while not looking that good.

The worse part of the game was the level design as the library level is a perfect example of cookie cutter creation with a few pieces of architecture copy and pasted to lengthen gameplay.

Much of the game was made up of corridors that were obvious copies of each other while simply being rotated. Even whole rooms in the interior of halo are mostly copies with little variation.

The final level failure was when you approached near halfway through the game when you are told to fight through all the repetitive corridors you just made it through, backwards! Even the arrows on the ground must be followed in reverse.

That is not to say halo is a bad game. It was better then most and I enjoyed it. I think it deserved the 8.6/10 PCGAMER gave it (iirc). It was more then above average (5/10) but it did not really offer anything special except that it was well polished.

 

[VirusType2]

I believe I owe some of you an apology. I have good reason to explain why I may have been acting out of character.

You see, my air-conditioning in my house broke a few weeks ago, and the past couple days - and especially all day today - were about 95 degrees in my room. I don't know what system of measurement you guys use, but for us, somewhere around 72 is comfortable, and somewhere around 95 is really ****ing hot, dangerous as well.

On top of this, I suffer from severe insomnia from ADHD, coupled with violent mood swings from Bi-polar2. Since it has been so hot, and I have difficulty sleeping, I've not slept in nearly 3 days.

The extreme heat and lack of sleep, and personality disorders have made me extremely irritable. The air quality has been terrible, and if all that isn't enough to make anyone ornery, I've been having quite a bit of trouble breathing anymore lately, since I've been a heavy smoker for 15 years.

It has cooled off considerably since night has fallen, and its only about 84 in my room right now, and is finally tolerable.


The air-conditioner repair-man is coming tomorrow, thankfully. This should 'chill me out'.



Despite my disposition at times, there is no one on this forum that I don't love and respect.*[1]


*[1]subject to change without notice :smoking:



Now I go back to creating monsters.

It's alive!

I've created another 3 more monsters for Doom 3 overnight, and got about 95% of these guys in the right places in all the maps. These monsters will replace repetitious monsters, they won't be tons of extra monsters everywhere. For example, if there were 5 fat zombies on one level, now there is one; the rest have been replaced by new monsters. OK, I got to get back to it, bye!

 

[destrukt]

i think virustype2 needs a hug..

 

[kupocake]

Oh believe me, I'm a grouchy little bitch too right now. It's 4am and I really should sleep for that exam I have in 6 hours. The last few days have been bad bad bad!

 

[Sparda]

Halo sucks. Sorry an all, but it does.

WRONG

 

[VictimOfScience]

RIGHT

Fixed.:E

 

[Jintor]

Pah. It's a great game when it's great, and a repedative, darkened nightmare when it's shat.

 

[Sparta]

Halo doesn't suck.

Halo 2 Single-player sucks, but the MP almost makes up for it. Almost. Actually i still prefer Halo MP over Halo 2. So much more fun. I can't remember any memorable times playing Halo 2 MP, with friends or on Live.

Actually Halo 2 sucks, but i'm still curious as to how well this will translate to PC. I dont know why i'm curious but i just am.

 

[destrukt]

halo mp with pistol == so fun.

or, halo mp with cache editor == insane amounts of fun.

 

[Sparda]

You're right Sparda

Fixed

 

[Zephos]

I awoke today to realise the truth, it indeed is a pile of shit

Agreed. This doesn't interest me in the least, and I bet the port will be a choppy shit ride.

 

[Lucid]

Golly Gee! I sure was wrong when I said Halo wasn't bad.

Corrected.

 

[Zephos]

Corrected.

Anyway, after being disappointed with the evil Halo...I discovered a game called Metroid Prime. It had a good story (or backstory?), great graphics...sound and guess what? It was innovative! My thrist for a good FPS (well, it wasn't exactly a FPS) was quenched afterwards.

I really don't know why I bought this into the conversation.

 

[Jintor]

Because it was a direct competitor back when the PS2, XBox and Gamecube were battlin' it out (haha, Pokemon...) for dominance while the PC stood on the sidelines and hoped for HL2 to come out.

 

[kupocake]

Because it was a direct competitor back when the PS2, XBox and Gamecube were battlin' it out (haha, Pokemon...) for dominance while the PC stood on the sidelines and hoped for HL2 to come out.

Plenty of FPS games came out in the interim, but many of them simply sucked. Unreal 2 anyone? I'd sure as hell take Halo over that. Unreal 2 was just a nicer looking Halo with level design that was completely dire for a completely different reason.