Halo 2 Gone Gold! Sweet!

heyheyhey said:
Got Goldeneye? Me and my friends still get together and play Goldeneye every now and then, and its what? 6-7 years old? Best part is though, we probably have more fun with it than most of our PC games, so no, I'm not a "0m65 pC r0x0r5 j00!!1" !!!!!!, I just know an overated game when I see it, and Halo is exactly that.
Click to expand...

Well I guess it being overrated is a matter of opinion. So oh well.

But the fact of the matter is it was the first FPS to introduce vehicles, any sort of AI that was worth a damn, and it had awesome graphics. And I thought the story line was awesome as well....

Of course I didn't think Doom 3 was as bad as people made it sound so who knows!!! :p

Goldeneye was damn cool though. Many a nights were spent on that....

iZero said:
All I know is that I'll be playing Halo 2 with my controller while everyone else on here will be watching Steam "pre-load" four megs of encrypted sound files for Half-Life 2 *OMFG, DOOD*.
Click to expand...

That made me laugh, and I feel the same way.
 
iZero said:
Apparently you are since you take issue with Halo 2's release on the system. All I know is that I'll be playing Halo 2 with my controller while everyone else on here will be watching Steam "pre-load" four megs of encrypted sound files for Half-Life 2 *OMFG, DOOD*.
Click to expand...

lol.... xbox live > steam
 
iZero said:
Apparently you are since you take issue with Halo 2's release on the system. All I know is that I'll be playing Halo 2 with my controller while everyone else on here will be watching Steam "pre-load" four megs of encrypted sound files for Half-Life 2 *OMFG, DOOD*.
Click to expand...

If I were truly upset at Halo 2 being released on the XBox, I would have taken 5 hours of the 10 OT I've already worked and just bought one already. As I even stated in my post, "They've got every right to run their company as they see fit". My issue is on the way they have handled, and are currently handling the porting of Halo/Halo 2 to the PC platform. It was....understandable...with Halo. With no XBox launch issue, and with the understanding of a major desire for a PC port, it is somwhat surprising and somewhat disturbing that they are so far following the Halo playbook page by page. I've no problem with them not being able to do a simultaneous release....my problem is that they are backhanding the PC arena. Like I said, I respect their right do it. If MS came out tomorrow and said there will never be a port of Halo 2 to any other system ever.....I would fully respect their right to do it.....just as I would exercise my right to speak poorly of them for making that decision.

And no, I will not be 'watching Steam', etc. I do not have Steam on my system nor do I have any interest in installing it, or Half-Life 2.

Wondernerd said:
You know, anytime I see Micro$oft or M$ or Bill Gate$, I groan. It comes off more as "I hate Microsoft because they are richer then me". Even if that isn't the goal.

What backhanded treatment?
Click to expand...

I can understand the M$ thing bothering you, as it does come off that way. It's pretty much become a part of the lexicon around where I am, along with "DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS"....

The 'backhanded treatment' more specifically refers to the way that the PC port was handled for Halo, and the way it seems to be operating for Halo 2. Instead of keeping the work that had been started on a PC version they trashed it and went XBox only. Instead of working on a dual development schedule (which I will admit would have made it more difficult), they stayed XBox only. Instead of picking that work up and completing a PC version, they farmed out to a third party for a port of the XBox, which among other things guaranteed the lack of any possibility of Co op being retained. They are beginning to follow the same pattern, with the 'there is no development for the PC planned'. I respect that they did what they had to do in order to help ensure the success of the XBox launch. However they could have done so in such a way as to not sabotage so severely the PC version.

>But when smaller and less well funded companies can do it better and faster, it begs the questions

Yeah, Poor Sony is barely able to stay solvent.
Click to expand...

Was not specifically referring to Sony. How many companies release console versions of games, then release the PC version a few months later? How many manage to do simultaneous release for multiple platforms? How many of those companies don't have the vast resources of Microsoft behind them?
 
Instead of picking that work up and completing a PC version, they farmed out to a third party for a port of the XBox, which among other things guaranteed the lack of any possibility of Co op being retained.
Click to expand...

As soon as Halo was released, Microsoft realized the potential of the franchise. Bungie was immediately assigned Halo 2. They didn't have time to waste on porting to a platform that wasn't a guarantee (The PC market is already saturated). Halo didn't sell nearly as well on the PC as it did on the Xbox, even before people realized it wasn't a good port. They just weren't interested...the fact that it was a poor port only served to accentuate that feeling.

How many manage to do simultaneous release for multiple platforms? How many of those companies don't have the vast resources of Microsoft behind them?
Click to expand...

How many first-party developers put their flagship titles on other platforms?

You don't see Gran Turismo 4, Mario, or Zelda slated for PC release any time soon, do you?

By the way, shoe-horning hundreds of new members into Bungie might get them developing faster, but their signature quality and innovation will be lost in the process.
 
WickedAngel said:
As soon as Halo was released, Microsoft realized the potential of the franchise. Bungie was immediately assigned Halo 2. They didn't have time to waste on porting to a platform that wasn't a guarantee (The PC market is already saturated). Halo didn't sell nearly as well on the PC as it did on the Xbox, even before people realized it wasn't a good port. They just weren't interested...the fact that it was a poor port only served to accentuate that feeling.
Click to expand...

From what I recall (and yes, this is memory so it could be faulty), most people started to realize it would be bad the moment they found out it got farmed out to Gearbox.....some because it was 'Gearbox', others because it was being dumped on a third part company that wasn't involved in the development of the game. The overall lack of communication during the development, which consisted of a large part of 'it'll be done when it's done' and 'well, this feature might not make it', as well as the dropping of co-op (which from a programmatic/scheduling standpoint I perfectly understand), not to mention all this taking over a period of two years, pretty much cemented the fact that it would not be a well done port. That definitely had an effect on the sales of the project, and as soon as those who bought it found out how buggy it was (I consider myself lucky...didn't have any problem running it, but I recall that it was pretty much a 50-50 chance whether or not the game would run right on a given system) and communicated that to their associates...well...there you go.

That is why I made the 'backhand' comment. It was pretty obvious from the get-go that the PC version of Halo was not a very high priority.....at which point why even bother to do it if you're not going to do it well?

How many first-party developers put their flagship titles on other platforms?

You don't see Gran Turismo 4, Mario, or Zelda slated for PC release any time soon, do you?
Click to expand...

No....some due to licensing, some due to preference of focus. But there are others who are able to do it, without the massive resources/funding of Microsoft....I understand the whys and wherefores, and I respect the position, I'm just really surprised to see them, in essence, making the same mistakes all over again.

By the way, shoe-horning hundreds of new members into Bungie might get them developing faster, but their signature quality and innovation will be lost in the process.
Click to expand...

On that I totally agree. I just find it.....surprising, that if there has been consideration of doing a port to the PC (most likely) that they seem to not have learned any lessons from the last experience.
 
whoami? said:
No....some due to licensing, some due to preference of focus. But there are others who are able to do it, without the massive resources/funding of Microsoft....I understand the whys and wherefores, and I respect the position, I'm just really surprised to see them, in essence, making the same mistakes all over again.
Click to expand...

Huh? It's always due to licensing - they hold the license, they want you to buy a console from them, they use the game as an incentive to buy the console.

3rd party developers such as Rockstar aren't trying to sell you a console. Therefore, they can offer their titles on multiple platforms.

Sega used to offer some of their first-party titles on PC, because back then, PC gaming and console gaming were two distinct markets. Now, with a PC in so many homes, things aren't so simple. The fact of the matter is, if MS puts Halo 2 on PC anytime in the near future, it will cost them console sales, especially since they're trying to shake the whole "I can get the same games on PC" myth before Xbox 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top