Will you be getting Halo 2?

Will you be getting Halo 2? Check the one that applies to you.

  • Yes, I already have an Xbox

    Votes: 255 39.8%

  • No, but I have an Xbox

    Votes: 31 4.8%

  • Yes, I'm getting an Xbox for this game

    Votes: 55 8.6%

  • NO! And shut the fuck up! :p

    Votes: 300 46.8%
  • Total voters
    641
  • Poll closed .
No, I'm not too big on FPS games. A few of them strike my fancy, but it's pretty rare.

That said, if one of my friends buys it and I play it and like it, I may go out and buy it... but don't hold your breath!! :p

EDIT: Didn't see the 2nd option... went straight to the STFU option. It just doesn't really appeal to me, even though I have an Xbox.

There are just too many other games fighting for my attention right now anyway.
 
yea im sure halo2 is fun and all but i didnt buy an xbox for the first halo, im certainly not buying one just for halo2.. pc games are where its at baby
 
I won a copy from the Mountain Dew sweepstake (+1 year live + headset) wife said itcame today 1/2 hour more of work
 
Just hit the poll. Where's the option for "Waiting for the PC version"?
 
BobSutan said:
Just hit the poll. Where's the option for "Waiting for the PC version"?
Click to expand...

Maybe we'll add that option in 3 years when Halo 2 is out on PC :p jk....well...half kidding
 
/sigh

I would say yes but... fact is while I can’t help and give Microsoft credit where credit is due for pulling Halo from the PC and making it their main Xbox title (hell, that was smart), I also can’t forgive ‘em for doing so.

I’m one of those that read the prequel novel, played the story (because that’s really what you are doing) and continued the later novels. If Halo has anything going for it, it’s the story combined with enough solid solo gameplay elements to make it a killer title (give us co-op on PC darn it!).

So if Halo 2 where coming out for the PC would I buy it? Yes, yes, and yes... but I’m still bitter about the whole Halo -> Xbox thing, so I’ll wait.

- James
 
Console games suck especially FPS's.

How the hell can anyone play a FPS with a freaking gamepad.

All the hype around this game is starting to make me annoyed. =/
 
Obviously many people can play FPSs with a gamepad. Hardcore PC gamers and casual console gamers love Halo, of course some from both of those groups hate Halo too. In general I prefer PC games, especially for FPSs, but the people that think console games are an abomination annoy the hell out of me. Anyone who questions that there is such a thing as a good console game have never played Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Halo, PGR 2 .... Console games can be just as good as PC games when it comes to story and gameplay, graphics are usually a little behind assuming you have a fast computer but that opens up a whole discussion on how much it costs to get a console vs a good gaming computer.
 
I will buy Halo2 for PC... It doesn't feel right using a Controller like PS2 for FPS gaming.
A PC MOUSE is the perfect tool for FPS gaming well that's my opinion.
 
As soon as it runs well on a PC (or on an X-Box emulator on PC) I'll download it to check it out, but probably won't play it for more than 15 minutes, so I most likely will not buy a copy.
 
Budzman said:
Console games suck especially FPS's.

How the hell can anyone play a FPS with a freaking gamepad.

All the hype around this game is starting to make me annoyed. =/
Click to expand...
I do agree that a mouse is needed for good FPS gameplay, but, several of the best games of all time have only been available on console (or you can run them on an emulator on your PC).

SEGA NHL on Genesis, and perhaps Mario Kart on N64 are a couple that come to mind. Oh, and of course the Tekken and Street Fighter series.
 
Console games suck especially FPS's.

How the hell can anyone play a FPS with a freaking gamepad.
Click to expand...

Yet another ignorant PC elitist.

Your input is not wanted. We desire the opinions of those whose number of fingers in addition to their IQ exceeds the number 11.
 
This is all pretty funny to me.

Are there actually people that think that a console FPS can even come remotly close to shooters on the PC?

Let's look at why the "next-gen" consoles have damn-near ruined the FPS genre.

Finally, with the advent of "next-gen" consoles, console games have been somewhat comparable to PC games as far as graphical prowess is concerned. While it's quite obvious that the XBox rules the graphics roost in the console market, as evidence of its advanced development of Ghost Recon 2 versus the Ghost Recon on the PS2 and numerous other examples, it is equally obvious that the graphics of the XBox can't even begin to compare with those of even a mid-range PC. This is no surprise to anyone, least of all Microsoft, who actually loses money with each Xbox sold; that is, the cost of production of a single unit outweighs the cost of sale of a single unit.

I'll wait for all console fan-boys to end their "grafix aretn' impotant!!!1!11!!!one!!!1!11!eleven!!!!1!!" drivel.
...
...
...
...
waiting...
...
...
done...wait, a few more....
...
...
...
OK there we go. You will not find a stronger advocate of "gameplay over graphics" then myself. I've always believed this, way back when all my friends dropped huge ducats on SLI Voodoo2 board to play Quake II in 1024x768 and made fun of me for playing Tribes in 800x600 on my Voodoo I. I still remember a section of the now-defunct PC Games magazine, featuring the Obsidian X24 (or something), which was effectively two Voodoo2 chips and 24 (!!!!) megs of RAM for something like 400 USD. That was as rediculous then as it is now. So, let's all say it togther, please, "Graphics don't make a game great". Alright, that was healthy. However, it is foolhardy to entirely dismiss graphics; if that were true, I'd still be able to physically count pixels on my 386 (math co-processor notwithstanding).

What is important is gameplay. Now I've stepped on this soapbox on just about every major online tech/gaming community except for the [H], so here goes. I love quality PC games, especially shooters and RTS games. I was enthralled with Half-Life, Deus Ex, System Shock 2 before that, and the original Blood beforehand. My RTS history is equally glorious, being an advocate of Warcraft III (why is that game so good?), Total Annihilation, Rise of Nations the Myth series, and basically anything with Meir's name on it. I also love original concepts, such as the understated Black and White, Giants, No One Lives Forever, most of the Sims games (the real Maxis ones, not just "The Sims"), Tron 2.0, Worms, and by God, the insanely rediculously understated Rainbow Six series and America's Army.

These are all a stellar bunch of games, and yes, I am a PC "elitist" as some people will label me. The reason is very simple, really: the recent equilibrium of console and PC tech has made it possible for the same games to be released for all four platforms. Quite frankly, half of these games have no business on a console. What ends up happening is that only the most graphically elite games (ie, those that can't possibly be developed for consoles) such as Far Cry, Doom III, etc, make it exclusively to the PC where they originally belong. What happens now is that most shooters are dumbed-down to appease the console gamers because that's where the money is. Take Deus Ex: Invisible War. I couldn't wait to tear open the box and give it a whirl, basing all my enthusiasm on its predecessor. What ended up happening, as we all now know, is that the game was a pretty big flop compared with other PC shooters. The graphics were obviously terrible, and the gameplay was far too simple and lacked the complexity of a PC game just so it could be multi-platform.

This is why Halo is such an anomaly. When I first heard of it, I put it on my watch list: a shooter about aliens and a big, ring-shaped planet. Cool. I still have the original PC trailers promoting the GeForce 2 line of graphics cards. When the game came out on the XBox, people, forgive the phrase, went apeshit. For awhile I didn't play it, having no access to an XBox, but my two console-wielding buddies went out and blew about four hundred bucks a piece on XBoxs one night and we set the whole thing up: two TVs, eight guys. I wanted to play through single player first, as I feel the game should stand on its own with no multiplayer whatsoever (Thief, anyone?), but they insisted on Blood Gulch "team slayer". And I guess that's what did it to me first, "Why don't they call it deathmatch?", I said to myself. The game just didn't measure up to even an average PC shooter, even after we beat the single player a few days later. Yeah, it kept me occupied, but kind of in the same manner as a movie you only see once, kind of like it, buy the DVD, and watch it again maybe three more times, only to have it collect dust on your shelf. I think we've all done that before.

I remember the same thing happened with Goldeneeye on the N64, one of the worst consoles in history. Everyone was going crazy over this aweful game that somehow was incredibly amazing. I just didn't get it. But then I did. Console people just aren't used to good games, especially shooters. They simply don't understand what they're all about. Whereas I was used to average shooters, they went crazy over the first one they saw. I can't blame them, really. When I look back at how truly aweful the original Doom is (and why the majority of the gaming community is unsatisfied with Doom III), I can understand the problem at hand: ignorance. I don't mean that in the typical negative fashion that is most commonly and unfortunatly sattled with the word. It's simply not a console gamer's fault he hasn't played any good shooters, or, up until recently, any at all.

Fast forward to today. You can't throw a rock in Best Buy without hitting some Battlefield Whatever, Medal of Honor: Cool-Sounding Add-On, or Call of Duty: Derivative Garbage available for at least two of the consoles and the PC. More so now then ever before, big-name companies take proven concepts (most notably World War II and street-racing these days) that worked (maybe) in one or two games on maybe one platform. I will admit, I really enjoyed the Medal of Honor MP demo and played it for almost two weeks. I enjoyed it, but not enough to buy it. Also, me and my friend played Rallisport challenge on the Xbox for a solid weekend before I grew tired of it. But the copycats just kept coming. No thanks also to mediocre games such as the GTA series and name-recognition games such as Manhunt, which was truly a waste of my ninety minutes, which people buy by the millions just to piss off their parents or whatever.

All this didn't really bother me until about eighteen months ago when I noticed that there just weren't any decent games anymore, anywhere. Beside Warcraft III and maybe Day of Defeat, TFC, and Raven Shield, I was pretty bored. Then it hit me: the consoles are out for blood. Their object is to destroy whatever semblance of decency remains on the PC. They want you to go out and buy console games en masse because they're relativley simple to make now due to their obvious low quality and the recent recession the United States has emerged from. In fact, I blame consoles for essentially destroying (or fatally crippling) the entire flight-sim genre. Gone are the days of Falcon 4.0 and Longbow, let's instead play NCAA '02, '03, '04, and '05! Adventure games met a similar fate. Where's Monkey Island when you need it? It's OK, we have Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Adolescence or whatever it's called.

Further, the consoles' attempt at shooters have range from laughable to so-so. Turok? Time Splitters? Red Faction? Metroid Prime? What is going on? Well, it's quite simple: you simply can't throw a ton of money at someone and tell them to make a creative, entertaining game. They can throw alot of pizzaz on it and make it real presentable. You can market it and hype it, of course, but you can't make it good.

Guys, I've played Halo 2. My friend snagged it from a Walgreen's that put it out early. It's more of the same. That may mean a lot to you, but it doesn't mean a whole lot to me. The only decent part is slicing people open with the sword. If there's a PC demo out in the future, I'll probably play it, for lack of anything else better to do, but that's probably it.

That leaves me here, stranded, amongst multi-platform trash, and about eight days to a game that will hopefully restore my faith in PC gaming. Let's hope it works.
 
hikeskool said:
This is all pretty funny to me.

Are there actually people that think that a console FPS can even come remotly close to shooters on the PC?

Let's look at why the "next-gen" consoles have damn-near ruined the FPS genre.

Finally, with the advent of "next-gen" consoles, console games have been somewhat comparable to PC games as far as graphical prowess is concerned. While it's quite obvious that the XBox rules the graphics roost in the console market, as evidence of its advanced development of Ghost Recon 2 versus the Ghost Recon on the PS2 and numerous other examples, it is equally obvious that the graphics of the XBox can't even begin to compare with those of even a mid-range PC. This is no surprise to anyone, least of all Microsoft, who actually loses money with each Xbox sold; that is, the cost of production of a single unit outweighs the cost of sale of a single unit.

I'll wait for all console fan-boys to end their "grafix aretn' impotant!!!1!11!!!one!!!1!11!eleven!!!!1!!" drivel.
...
...
...
...
waiting...
...
...
done...wait, a few more....
...
...
...
OK there we go. You will not find a stronger advocate of "gameplay over graphics" then myself. I've always believed this, way back when all my friends dropped huge ducats on SLI Voodoo2 board to play Quake II in 1024x768 and made fun of me for playing Tribes in 800x600 on my Voodoo I. I still remember a section of the now-defunct PC Games magazine, featuring the Obsidian X24 (or something), which was effectively two Voodoo2 chips and 24 (!!!!) megs of RAM for something like 400 USD. That was as rediculous then as it is now. So, let's all say it togther, please, "Graphics don't make a game great". Alright, that was healthy. However, it is foolhardy to entirely dismiss graphics; if that were true, I'd still be able to physically count pixels on my 386 (math co-processor notwithstanding).

What is important is gameplay. Now I've stepped on this soapbox on just about every major online tech/gaming community except for the [H], so here goes. I love quality PC games, especially shooters and RTS games. I was enthralled with Half-Life, Deus Ex, System Shock 2 before that, and the original Blood beforehand. My RTS history is equally glorious, being an advocate of Warcraft III (why is that game so good?), Total Annihilation, Rise of Nations the Myth series, and basically anything with Meir's name on it. I also love original concepts, such as the understated Black and White, Giants, No One Lives Forever, most of the Sims games (the real Maxis ones, not just "The Sims"), Tron 2.0, Worms, and by God, the insanely rediculously understated Rainbow Six series and America's Army.

These are all a stellar bunch of games, and yes, I am a PC "elitist" as some people will label me. The reason is very simple, really: the recent equilibrium of console and PC tech has made it possible for the same games to be released for all four platforms. Quite frankly, half of these games have no business on a console. What ends up happening is that only the most graphically elite games (ie, those that can't possibly be developed for consoles) such as Far Cry, Doom III, etc, make it exclusively to the PC where they originally belong. What happens now is that most shooters are dumbed-down to appease the console gamers because that's where the money is. Take Deus Ex: Invisible War. I couldn't wait to tear open the box and give it a whirl, basing all my enthusiasm on its predecessor. What ended up happening, as we all now know, is that the game was a pretty big flop compared with other PC shooters. The graphics were obviously terrible, and the gameplay was far too simple and lacked the complexity of a PC game just so it could be multi-platform.

This is why Halo is such an anomaly. When I first heard of it, I put it on my watch list: a shooter about aliens and a big, ring-shaped planet. Cool. I still have the original PC trailers promoting the GeForce 2 line of graphics cards. When the game came out on the XBox, people, forgive the phrase, went apeshit. For awhile I didn't play it, having no access to an XBox, but my two console-wielding buddies went out and blew about four hundred bucks a piece on XBoxs one night and we set the whole thing up: two TVs, eight guys. I wanted to play through single player first, as I feel the game should stand on its own with no multiplayer whatsoever (Thief, anyone?), but they insisted on Blood Gulch "team slayer". And I guess that's what did it to me first, "Why don't they call it deathmatch?", I said to myself. The game just didn't measure up to even an average PC shooter, even after we beat the single player a few days later. Yeah, it kept me occupied, but kind of in the same manner as a movie you only see once, kind of like it, buy the DVD, and watch it again maybe three more times, only to have it collect dust on your shelf. I think we've all done that before.

I remember the same thing happened with Goldeneeye on the N64, one of the worst consoles in history. Everyone was going crazy over this aweful game that somehow was incredibly amazing. I just didn't get it. But then I did. Console people just aren't used to good games, especially shooters. They simply don't understand what they're all about. Whereas I was used to average shooters, they went crazy over the first one they saw. I can't blame them, really. When I look back at how truly aweful the original Doom is (and why the majority of the gaming community is unsatisfied with Doom III), I can understand the problem at hand: ignorance. I don't mean that in the typical negative fashion that is most commonly and unfortunatly sattled with the word. It's simply not a console gamer's fault he hasn't played any good shooters, or, up until recently, any at all.

Fast forward to today. You can't throw a rock in Best Buy without hitting some Battlefield Whatever, Medal of Honor: Cool-Sounding Add-On, or Call of Duty: Derivative Garbage available for at least two of the consoles and the PC. More so now then ever before, big-name companies take proven concepts (most notably World War II and street-racing these days) that worked (maybe) in one or two games on maybe one platform. I will admit, I really enjoyed the Medal of Honor MP demo and played it for almost two weeks. I enjoyed it, but not enough to buy it. Also, me and my friend played Rallisport challenge on the Xbox for a solid weekend before I grew tired of it. But the copycats just kept coming. No thanks also to mediocre games such as the GTA series and name-recognition games such as Manhunt, which was truly a waste of my ninety minutes, which people buy by the millions just to piss off their parents or whatever.

All this didn't really bother me until about eighteen months ago when I noticed that there just weren't any decent games anymore, anywhere. Beside Warcraft III and maybe Day of Defeat, TFC, and Raven Shield, I was pretty bored. Then it hit me: the consoles are out for blood. Their object is to destroy whatever semblance of decency remains on the PC. They want you to go out and buy console games en masse because they're relativley simple to make now due to their obvious low quality and the recent recession the United States has emerged from. In fact, I blame consoles for essentially destroying (or fatally crippling) the entire flight-sim genre. Gone are the days of Falcon 4.0 and Longbow, let's instead play NCAA '02, '03, '04, and '05! Adventure games met a similar fate. Where's Monkey Island when you need it? It's OK, we have Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Adolescence or whatever it's called.

Further, the consoles' attempt at shooters have range from laughable to so-so. Turok? Time Splitters? Red Faction? Metroid Prime? What is going on? Well, it's quite simple: you simply can't throw a ton of money at someone and tell them to make a creative, entertaining game. They can throw alot of pizzaz on it and make it real presentable. You can market it and hype it, of course, but you can't make it good.

Guys, I've played Halo 2. My friend snagged it from a Walgreen's that put it out early. It's more of the same. That may mean a lot to you, but it doesn't mean a whole lot to me. The only decent part is slicing people open with the sword. If there's a PC demo out in the future, I'll probably play it, for lack of anything else better to do, but that's probably it.

That leaves me here, stranded, amongst multi-platform trash, and about eight days to a game that will hopefully restore my faith in PC gaming. Let's hope it works.
Click to expand...


I'm guessing you voted no, I'm not getting it? :p



Thanks for voting... ;)
 
my local eb is opening at midnight for peopel with presells, ill be there, so will my brother.
 
First of all, the N64 was definitely not one of the worst consoles ever. There were plenty of good games for it.

If you define 'good games' so narrowly, there have NEVER been many good games for any system. Not that you really defined a good game, you said 'graphics, gameplay good, these games .... bad'. And consoles are the downfall of gaming, um ...right. How about you stop playing games all together.
 
shut the fuck up:D

no, realy. I'll I heard today was Halo 2 Halo 2 Halo 2. I was about to kill the next person that said that. Halo 2 got seriously dissed in vB today though........we took a poll, and about 70% of the class said it was gay. Most of the others said it was just "alright." Now, that was of course a class of nintendo nerds(myself among them) and people that just happen to enjoy playing an fps.......with, I dunno...........maybe a mouse and keyboard?(myself also included).

Main point is, traditional fps on a console is joke. DooM III is going better then this, simply because you have a mouse to play with. And don't even get me started with the amazing game that is farcry.........it eclipsed Halo 2 long before it even came close to being finished.

Half Life 2 and Metroid Prime 2 Echoes for me. kthx
 
I swear to God, the PC elitists come out in droves the second anyone utters the word "console". It's really pathetic. They're so intimidated by the fact that a game on a system that is one-third as powerful as their hardware and one-tenth as expensive as their entire rig can challenge their beloved graphics engines...I mean, games.

it eclipsed Halo 2 long before it even came close to being finished.
Click to expand...

And you're making this judgement based on...what? The fact that you haven't played Halo 2, or the fact that every reviewer that has played it hails it as one of the best FPS games of all time on ANY system?

it is equally obvious that the graphics of the XBox can't even begin to compare with those of even a mid-range PC.
Click to expand...

The only thing that is obvious here is that you know next to nothing in regards to what the Xbox is capable of. Show me a mid-range PC that is pushing visuals on par with Halo 2, Chronicles of Riddick, Ninja Gaiden, or the dozens of other titles that you've made judgements on without ever having played.

What happens now is that most shooters are dumbed-down to appease the console gamers because that's where the money is. Take Deus Ex: Invisible War.
Click to expand...

Yet another pathetic attempt to blame a shitty game on consoles. Deus Ex was the fault of the developer, not the platform. Remember Knights of the Old Republic? It was on the Xbox MONTHS before it ever reached the PC. Did it seem "dumbed-down" to you? The thousands of reviewers that gave it high marks seem to think otherwise.

The rest of your post is derivative bullshit that really means nothing outside of accenting the fact that you are a jaded PC elitist. That's easily the largest compilation of biased garbage that I have ever seen thrown into one post. Congratulations.
 
Alot of people can't AFFORD something to run HL2, DOOM3, and all the other PC goodies you may judge Xbox games against. And more (like myself) have noting but dialup. What should we do when we can't afford gameing rigs? read books? play sports? woodworking? For 150 bucks, it don't get any better than that. Some are lucky for even that. When others were on their computers, I was Pacmanning it up on atari. So what, am I any lesser of a gamer? answer me that.
 
bountyhunter said:
shut the fuck up:D

no, realy. I'll I heard today was Halo 2 Halo 2 Halo 2. I was about to kill the next person that said that.
Click to expand...

Halo 2 ;) .

Also gettin at Midnight. Woo Hoo!

Incase anyone was wanting to get it at Midnight, a crapload of EB's and GameStops are still pre-ordering untill closing (unless said store has already run out). And you can go pick it up at Midnight with your reciept.
 
Thanks to BestBuy sending out all the "regular" copies early, I have 3 copies this afternoon with one Special Edition on the way.


halo_early.jpg


:( Like I said earlier, I am so busy that I won't be able to play for a week to ten days...lame. (everyone else will be gaming it up soon though)
 
Steve said:
Thanks to BestBuy sending out all the "regular" copies early, I have 3 copies this afternoon with one Special Edition on the way.


halo_early.jpg


:( Like I said earlier, I am so busy that I won't be able to play for a week to ten days...lame. (everyone else will be gaming it up soon though)
Click to expand...

you lucky man...you could just ehem "get sick" for a day or two....

you know, the flu and everything is going around.
 
Having played Halo2 prior to its release, I can safely say that it is a fun game. It is probably the best game on the XBOX, but that isn't really saying much. We'll see what happens when Half life 2 comes out, but I think HL2 will be better.

In closing, GTA:SA is a lot more fun and has about a billion times more things to do than Halo2.

If you don't have a PS2 though, you are welcome to live in denial and have fun with Halo2 =)
 
theflux said:
Having played Halo2 prior to its release, I can safely say that it is a fun game. It is probably the best game on the XBOX, but that isn't really saying much. We'll see what happens when Half life 2 comes out, but I think HL2 will be better.

In closing, GTA:SA is a lot more fun and has about a billion times more things to do than Halo2.

If you don't have a PS2 though, you are welcome to live in denial and have fun with Halo2 =)
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges jackass. There's a lot more to do in World of Warcraft than GTA:SA but if you're not in the beta you are welcome to live in denial.. :rolleyes:

Not to mention that it's all a matter of opinion.
 
just bought it, not reserved just walked in and got it, limited edition. Dallas area gamestop no lines when I was there at 12:40.
 
As of 1:26am Pacific time, there were over 26,000 people playing Halo 2 online, probably quite a few more playing through the single player story.

http://www.bungie.net/stats/

So I guess there are a few people that like it, myself included. I admit that I am a PC FPS snob, for me it's about control. I just don't get the same dexterity from an Xbox controller. And my hands tend to cramp up after a while. But even that said, Halo 2 is a lot of fun, and it's refreshing to play a multiplayer shooter without worrying about lots of hacks, cheats, or power-hungry admins randomly kicking people. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like the crowd I encounter in Halo 2 multiplayer games just seem a lot more mature and "into the game" than a lot of what I see in Counter Strike, Desert Combat, and even Call of Duty on the PC, which seem to attract more and more griefers these days.
 
no

i never even understood the big deal behind halo 1 to begin with.. it felt just like another average cookiecutter FPS game to me. whatever it was that made it so overhyped, i cant quite pinpoint
 
WickedAngel said:
Yet another ignorant PC elitist.

Your input is not wanted. We desire the opinions of those whose number of fingers in addition to their IQ exceeds the number 11.
Click to expand...

Pot, meet kettle.

All hype aside, I'm sure it'll be a good game, regardless of the platform its played on. When it comes to PC or concole, its merely a matter of personal preference. For me, I can't stand the way multiplayer is splitscreened on the XBox, and I'm not lucky enough to afford one of them, let alone 2 or 3 like some folks around here. For me, PC gaming is where its at, but then I usually don't like the formats that typically excell on consoles. For example, some genres that consoles are more suitable than the PC are sports games, some driving games, and Tekkenish fighting games. The controller setup and face-to-face with your buddies just works well and is really fun. However, when it comes time for games like Mechwarrior, UT2K4 (and other FPS), RPGs, etc. I don't see how being limited to the handfull of control options on a console is bearable when compared to the flexibility and robustness that the PC offers. I'm not talking PC vs Console mind you, I'm saying that in my opinion some game formats work better on PC, and other game formats work better on the console. Bottom line, if I'm gonna play Madden against some friends, we'll use a console and sit on the couch. If I'm gonna get into a frag-fest with a FPS then I'll fire up the PC. Of course there are those that will play anything on a console because that's what they're used to. On the other side of the coin, some people will play anything on the PC because that's what they like and are used to. I'm sorta caught in the middle. If I had the time and money, I might have gotten a console or two to play when friends are over. But since I've got 6 computers sitting here (made from previous spare parts), we usually fire up a few rounds of CS or UT2K4 instead.
 
"And shut the fuck up"

Is it really necessary to put that in the page vote?

wouldnt

"And shut the f##k up" be better? :confused:
 
when it comes out on pc i will buy it

xbox = shitty
 
When they release the newly Xbox 2 because I don't want to buy the old Xbox before the new Xbox 2 comes out. :confused:
 
corran_horn314 said:
First of all, the N64 was definitely not one of the worst consoles ever. There were plenty of good games for it.

If you define 'good games' so narrowly, there have NEVER been many good games for any system. Not that you really defined a good game, you said 'graphics, gameplay good, these games .... bad'. And consoles are the downfall of gaming, um ...right. How about you stop playing games all together.
Click to expand...

OK, OK, you got me...the Virtua Boy was a little better, but not much. Seriously, throw the N64 next to the likes of the Dreamcast, SNES, NES, Genesis. hell, even the TurboGrafx 16 had some really great ports. The only console I can think of off-hand that was a complete waste was the Jaguar. But I will say this of Nintendo: I appreciate their dedication to develop truly unique games, whether they're any good or not, at least they're still tyring. And I'm glad to see Sega is still making games, especially the Sonic Team, makers of some truly decent games.

What I said was consoles are the downfall of the FPS and generally unique games as a whole. Seriously, how many more Final Fantasy games will there be before I die? How long will Rockstar continue to pay many millions of dollars to actors to do voice-acting in their games before they go after poor controls, bugs, and general repitition in their games (and yes, I've played the new one, even with a PS2 controller)? Hell, when was the last time an actual new game genre was introduced? And yes, I named "good" games. If you can't find them, you need to worry about something more then the contents of my post.


And to the Angel guy:

First off, my PC sucks pretty bad. I'm rocking a 2.2 GHz P4 (533 bus) with 512 MB of RDRAM. I duped my non-gaming (but wealthy) friend into give me his Radeon 9800 Pro in his Dell XPS for my crusty Ti 500. So no, I don't care much about hardware to a huge extent, I just want to play good games.

Well, I don't know how many of these reviewers
a) weren't paid by Microsoft, or
b) played anything but console games in their "careers",
but I can actually use my own judgement and not have to pay to read someone else's. For what it's worth, PC Gamer UK said about Half-Life 2 something to the extent of, "...gaming may never be this good again". I didn't pay to read that, but that quite has been floating around lately. Again, I'll play it and find out for myself and express my opinion accordingly.

OK, I'll rock about 1200 USD and build a very respectable bare-bones gaming PC (no monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, etc). In fact, I plan to in about three months, depending on the market.

Saddle an overclocked 2.4C P4 (or AMD equivalent; that's another topic entirely) with a Geforce 6800GT and a gig of RAM and throw me any XBox game.
We'll see what happens. I'd probably be able to play those on my PC, but probably at low resolutions, which is OK because most people play consoles
on basic tube televsions which only support 800x600 anyway. I can run Doom III, Far Cry, and the Counter-Strike: Source beta (which I assume is a
decent gauge of how well I'll run Half-Life 2) pretty well considereing most of my gear is going on three years old.

Further, if I've passed any "judgement" on a game, as you state I have, it's whether to try it or not and then to evaluate only after I'm done with
it.

I'll disagree that Deus Ex is the fault of the developer. It's a common trend to see sub-par multi-platform games all over the place, much more then ever before. It can't just be a coincidence.

I've never been a huge fan of the Star Wars genre as a whole. The only Star Wars game I've played and enjoyed is the original Jedi Knight. I can't comment on Knights because I have had little exposure to it, but it's not a game I would enjoy from my understainding, so there's little incentive for me to play it.

Youc an call me biased, jaded, etc, but that's not really true. I've had a pretty rich heritage of gaming across several platforms and I've just decided that PC games serve my type of play the best. I don't know what's wrong with that. What I do see is wrong is the highjacking and planned destruction of my favored genre, the first person shooter.

And Mr. Kubala:

No, as I was saying with the Angel gentleman, you aren't less of a gamer, just a different one from me. You like Mario, I like the Quake guy. No big deal. Dial-up is really no excuse not to game online. I'm sorry, but if you live anywhere near a major urban area (within about one hundred and fifty miles) and do proper research, you can find a suitable dial-up solution for a reasonable price. Believe me, before I went off ot college, I couldn't afford cable either, but now I reap the benefits of an OC3. Back home I could definitly compete online, I just had to be that much better. Further, you can play non-shooter games such as Warcraft III on dial-up with only a few problems. If I can do it, anyone can.

I can actually vouch for reading and sports. It's important to stay menatlly and physically sharp, and play games when you want to escape from your pressures. So yeah, go to your library, hang out and throw a frisbee. It's much more fun you might think it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top