Maybe if you’re shit at games <_<
It was just a far more tense run’n’gun level for me, though with quite a bit of stealth anyway, because I loved Crysis’ stealth. Can’t beat hiding cloaked in the bushes, as a convoy of koreans goes past, before bursting out with a speed-run, then using that momentum to strength jump onto the back of the convoy, and throwing the koreans off the back, before planing a grenade on the back, and jumping back off. All in delicious slow-motion, too. (time_scale 0.5)
You OBVIOUSLY have not played the game.
>_>
It is fun, and just plain awesome, and probably the 2nd or 3rd most inovative FPS ever. I give first to the first FPS ever (it invented it after all) and the second to the first all 3D FPS.
Yeah.
Yeah, Crysis blows DOOM, Half-Life, Quake, Far Cry, Halo, and hell, Metroid Prime out of the water in terms of innovation. It stole its single innovative point from Deus Ex, except they dumbed it down a bit.
I dunno, dues-ex didn’t have it quite so on-the-fly, but otherwise I agree, it wasn’t so innovative.
Who the fuck says a game has to be innovative to be good though? That’s bollocks.
Also, it so blows halo out of the water for innovation. Halo had what, only having 2 guns?
EDIT: What the fuck is up with invision today? This is the third time it’s told me my post failed, when it didn’t.
Okay I dunno why I included Halo. Maybe for the streamlinedness.
But if you count streamlining, that’s half of what Crysis did! Take a boatload of elements from other games, and give you the UI to change them in realtime, rather than through a menu or some shit. But yeah.
Well fuck you!
Not if I fuck you first!
halo has dynamic dual wielding, grenade hot buttons and is one of few games that combine shooting, grenades and melee in such a sublime and smooth way, (though admittedly crysis does that pretty well itself) also it gave us the good ole’ sticky grenade.
You should have gone with a 8800, they run the game a LOT better.
However, OC 260 FTW!
I heard it’s optimised for the 8800, too.
"halo has dynamic dual wielding, grenade hot buttons and is one of few games that combine shooting, grenades and melee in such a sublime and smooth way, (though admittedly crysis does that pretty well itself) also it gave us the good ole’ sticky grenade. "
Halo 1 was pretty innovative, and fun. It doesn’t get enough credit. 2 was basically 1 + higer def textures - good level design, and 3 was a cash in, so people seem to put it in the same box. Though everything Halo did has been done better, it HAS been out for about 7 years, so that’s alright. (I’d argue Far Cry, coming 2 years afterwards, did the weapons better, and was a fantastic game anyway).
But yeah, Crysis = Halo*Crack? Admittedly it’s set on earth, and has AI which isn’t utter balls, but I like the equation.
I definitely wouldn’t call halo 3 a cash in and I mist certainly wouldn’t compare Crysis with Halo, they’re just two completely different games, its like comparing the legend of zelda with super mario bros.
besides the way halo streamlined its experience is pretty great, and since gameplay wise not much has changed since 2001 i fail to see the problem, also the weekly events and multiplayer do make Halo 3 worth coming back to over and over again, but I wouldn’t expect people who’ve only played the first campaign level to understand that >_>
but I’m not trying to start an argument here so lets just drop it
Saying “let’s just drop it” is like admitting defeat (Yes, I am being a douche).
You can compare Legend of Zelda with Mario very well, considering. They both evolved from their respective 2D forms into Nintendo’s mainstream media today, spanning over twenty years and several generations of gaming. Of course, then you could compare actual gameplay and such to determine which you preferred, which you can also do with Halo and Crysis.
I’m not here to bash on Halo (I’ve done more than my fair share of that. See: Hunter vs. Spartan in the Locked Topic Wasteland), however, I honestly think that it became too overhyped. Of course, that’s something to be expected from a game that started out optimizing FPSes.
The problem is exactly what you’re failing to see. It isn’t that gameplay has changed, it’s that it hasn’t. If I wanted to play the same game for 8 years, I would’ve bought Halo and been done with the series, and rightly so. However, Bungie and Microsoft realized after Halo 2 was a big hit that people “didn’t like change” (See: People bitching about lack of Assault rifle in Halo 2. People not liking BR. I’ve heard my fair share of that. Still do, in fact). So they said “Hey, let’s make the same game, but give it a new story, new levels, and give them the same guns!” And that’s what they did. And that’s ALL they did.
Since gameplay hasn’t changed much since Halo 1, I can actually get onto some Halo Modding websites and see mods so that Halo 1 has all the equipment and vehicles, hell, even some of the maps, from Halo 3. It’s like the same exact game, just a slight graphical downgrade.
The fact that gameplay hasn’t changed at all in the Halo series isn’t something to be proud of. It’s something that the Halo series should hang its head in shame for.
Take the Prime series, for instance. Around the same time period in terms of release dates, we have seen several changes in gameplay from the first. Screw attack, PED suit, Hyper Mode, atmospheric damage, etc. and the most prevalent one of all, moving from planet to planet and the size of each individual map on the planets.
Gameplay-wise, while the Halo series hasn’t changed at all, the Prime series has added near-constant innovation, some of it good, some of it bad, but that’s what innovation has to look forward to. Negative or positive reviews from the public. I remember the people who were bashing Metroid Prime 2’s difficulty and how the atmosperic damage was too high, but I don’t remember each individual person who talked about how they no-scoped this guy in Halo. The reason is I’ve been hearing about no-scopes since 2001. I only heard about atmospheric damage for about, what, 3-4 years now, and even then people no longer complain because Prime 3 took that innovation away because it received a negative view from the Public.
My point is while you take a risk with innovation, its a risk that every gaming company should take. If every gaming company took the same route as Bungie/Microsoft, well, we would literally have game specific definitions of each genre by this point, and the taste of gaming would no longer be something I savor.
Damn, I sure grabbed that bull by the horns and went with it.
Ok lets look at this from a PC games standpoint
all your complaints about Halo can also be pointed at Half Life, the gameplay hasn’t changed since 2004
also the AR argument is utter bullshit, I mean the AR in Halo CE was like a more powerful version of the SMG without the kickback and without the dual wielding, the AR was added back into Halo 3 to provide you with a balanced weapon to spawn with.
Also no one bitched about the BR, its the second most popular weapon in Halo 3 (the first being the butt of the gun).
Furthermore why the hell would you change something that works? I mean valve clearly agrees with me.
None of the mods for Halo custom or Halo 2 Vista that “put halo 3 on the PC” come close to the polish and smoothness offered by Halo 3, and the equipment in those mods epic fails compared to the Halo 3 counterparts, the engines just aren’t made for that shit.
now that my wayward thoughts are in a post with no organization i believe we should stop this before Dazzy comes in wielding his mighty bannhammer.
See, I agree with you on Half-Life. That is my biggest complaint about the series. Lack of innovation. But Valve has a far richer background of games than Bungie. And even then, Half-Life has included a large amount of innovation, and it appears that with each installment, they do add to it, providing with enough innovation to have people not bitching about the same type of gameplay. Valve and innovation go hand in hand, actually. Look at Portal. Tell me that’s not innovative.
I’m not saying the AR argument isn’t bullshit, I’m just saying I’ve heard it more times than I can count.
I heard plenty of people bitch about the BR in Halo 2. Tell me what game types people didn’t bitch about BRs in, give me a time machine, and I’ll go play those games, not the social playlists that everyone uses.
The BR is the most popular weapon in Halo 3? How do you figure? It’s the second starter weapon, I give you that, but if I see a BR right next to a sniper rifle, I’m gonna make a beeline to the Sniper Rifle, not the BR. In my book, that pegs the SR as more popular than the BR. Remember, popularity is not how many people use it, it’s do people prefer it over another weapon. And I would bet my life on an AR (or an SR) over a BR any day.
You change something that works to make it better. For example, let’s say you have a solid iron pulley. It works, all right. Effective, very reliable, and you don’t have to worry about it breaking anytime soon. In fact, you could toy with it, polish it, give it a second solid iron pulley to work with, and it would still work and be very effective. Now take your neighbor, for instance. He also has a solid iron pulley. It works just as well as yours does. He can also change it to suit his needs. But your neighbor decides that he can have something more effective. So he designs and builds two new pulleys. One is made out of, say, steel, and the other is made out of several metallic alloys.
Both work very well, but after a few months of use, it becomes apparent that your neighbor still uses his steel pulley, but your iron pulley sits in your work area, unused. It’s just not as useful as it used to be. But your neighbor’s steel pulley is still just as effective. So you decide that you’ll just buy a new iron pulley, one that’s smaller and looks better. So you do. You like your new pulley. It’s very useful. But you notice that your neighbor, in addition to his steel pulley, he also has a new steel pulley working in tandem with the old one. This doubles his work output, while your stuck working with your one iron pulley that’s…shiny, I guess.
Do you see the dilemma here? While your neighbor has decided to become innovative, and now he can do more with his two pulleys, you decided to go buy a new pulley that’s nice and pretty, but only lets you do a little more than you could before. But now you can’t afford a new pulley, and this one gets old very fast. But your neighbor is still enjoying his two pulley system.
Changing something that works gives you the ability to do more with the space you are given. If no innovation was added to physics engines, we’d still be stuck with “you kick a box, it moves a couple inches.” Fun. With innovation comes shortcuts, and with shortcuts comes efficiency.
The engine in Halo PC can handle it easy. It’s modders who constantly screw up on the way such a weapon works, how a vehicle moves, etc. For example, I have seen a mod where a Hornet is put into Halo PC, and the betas sucked. But after the modders actually manned up and did it correctly, those Hornets become gods on Blood Gulch.
You can’t just flat out say that “none of the mods” work. That’s just a bad generalization. I’ve seen plenty that are beautiful, and work more smoothly than some of the vehicles that were actually included by Bungie.
What is your definition of “Polish and Smoothness”? If you mean graphics-wise, well, no shit. Of course Halo 3 is superior. If you mean mechanics, see my last statement about the vehicles.
My point is simply that Halo is not a very innovative series. If there had been more innovation in it, I’d be more inclined to buy a 360 and get pumped for Halo 3 Recon (or whatever it’s called now). But I’m not, because I know that the Halo series is known for it’s hype, not for its innovation.
I finished Halo 3 on legendary in a day, actually.
It was stupidly easy for a “hard” mode.
Valve may not change the weapons you’re using, but HL2, Ep1, and Ep2 have at least introduced new elements, Ep1 being Alyx fighting alongside you all the time, and Ep2 being the epic hunter battles. Halo worked, sure, but it’s been improved upon. Unfortunately not by it’s sequels 
this
@si: go to bungie.net the BR is the second most used weapon on almost all the heatmaps so i kinda win that argument
@PY: halo 2 introduced the dual wield and Halo 3 introduced equipment and the arbiter as a sidekick, also it has the biggest and most unique arsenal of weapons evar, so you cant REALLY call halo 3 not…
wait why the hell am i talking about innovation? when the fuck was it decided that a game had to be innovative to be good? I mean isn’t bringing well done and integrated dual wielding, melee, grenades, equipment and gunplay all together in one package good enough?
“Who the fuck says a game has to be innovative to be good though? That’s bollocks.” - PY, last page
And anyway, I so can. It introduced DUAL WIELDING. Yeah, that’s was new. To the halo franchise.
“Halo 3 introduced equipment and the arbiter as a sidekick”
Soooooo… items and a forced sidekick-esque character? That’s never been done before, oh no.
“also it has the biggest and most unique arsenal of weapons evar”
Find me a game with LESS weapons. It’ll be really fucking hard.
But yeah, why are we arguing about innovation here? Halo 2+ isn’t, but does that make them worse games?
No, it’s the fact they’re Halo 1 with a texture pack.
Most of the games with more weapons than halo 3 are pretentious military shooters where 90% of the weapons are the same with varying increments of damage, accuracy and recoil, whereas each of Halo 3s weapons are unique, each completely different.
“they’re Halo 1 with a texture pack.” -PY
and new weapons, and dual wielding, and equipment, and new, differently designed maps, and a new campaign, and weapon modifications, and better matchmaking and in halo 2s case it added online.