Halo: The Master Chief Collection now on Steam

[Dayyālu]

PC remaster wont solve it, it's the game design. For people like this and many others actual gameplay is an aged concept. That's why objective markers exist universally now (or else basic level design), completely eliminating navigation/orienteering, a legitimate form of gameplay. One example.

Hi Ash

Why are you criticizing people for comparing positively Halo 2 to its direct PC gaming contemporaries by referring to the previous generation of console shooters that share no lineage with Halo at all (considering that at best Halo shares lineage with Marathon)?

I'm very curious about your reply. You started this.

I fully understand that getting called a retard by the entire thread may have soured you, but I'm quite interested in why you specifically felt the need for such an haphazard position.

 

[Ash]

No backtracking buddy. Sure, you could say early 2000s and late 90s are two separate "eras" (definition of era = several hundred million years btw) even though it's not a very big timeframe. In game design terms they kind of are very far apart as games as things accelerated rapidly back then, Nonetheless I've read your posts. You're the same backwards ass type that thinks console was some desolate wasteland that Halo comes along and saves the day for when it is in reality one of the prime early decline series that featured game design catering to fucking retards. The irony is rediculous:

I'll need to play more, but for now the Halos feel like competent and fun games despite middling presentation: in my brain for long a "console shooter" was a boring slog like FEAR 2 or something.

Holy fucking shit that's a shitton of words for a console shooter. Whatever, sometimes you need to sperg. Onwards to Halo 2, let's see what they did...

Another that acts superior and like they know it all about vidja, while simultaneously praising a game made for retards that dumbed everything down (Halo) and disregarding the classics (Turok, D64 etc).

Lol the language you use. They "feel" like competent and fun games. Lol they either are or they are not, you sound like you're trying to convince yourself you had fun. Hint: you are.

 

[Dayyālu]

No backtracking buddy. I've read your posts. You're the same backwards ass type that thinks console was some desolate wasteland that Halo comes along and saves the day for when it is in reality one of the prime early decline series that featured game design catering to fucking retards.

Hi Ash

Can you explain why you took offense to a comparison between Halo 2 and its 2004-era contemporary shooters so much that you felt the need to specifically pick the quote and compare Halo 2 to an entire previous generation of console shooters that share nor lineage nor are contemporaries with Halo 2.

I'm very curious about your reply.

Another that acts superior and like they know it all about vidja, while simultaneously praising a game made for retards that dumbed everything down (Halo) and disregarding the classics (Turok, D64 etc).

Hi Ash

I'm very happy that you successfully read my posts and realized that I admitted that I do not have the best knowledge of console-only games, because I never owned a console and I had to emulate anything I wanted to test in recent times.

Nonetheless, can you explain if Halo 2 is better or worse than Doom 3, Far Cry 1, Half Life 2, and other 2004 era PC FPS shooters, considering you took offense to that specific phrasing

Thank you Ash

I'm very curious about your reply.

 

[Ash]

Nonetheless, can you explain if Halo 2 is better or worse than Doom 3, Far Cry 1, Half Life 2, and other 2004 era PC FPS shooters, considering you took offense to that specific phrasing.

I read a number of your posts prior, but only quoted that sentence. Perhaps I could have quoted more for accuracy. Other 2004 "era" FPS?

PC:

RTCW (2002)
Clive Barker's Undying (2001)
NOLF2 (2003)

Console:

Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth (2005)
Urban Chaos (2006)
Timesplitters: Future Perfect (2005)

^not saying they're amazing but they're all better than goddamn Halo 2.

Looking back at 2004 specifically, fucking dire year. In my mind it wasn't until 2005-6 that the decline really got started, but this is explained because I was always a year or two behind back then (I'd get games when they'd go down in price) and there were still gems in other genres, it hadn't quite caught on past RPGs and FPS as well as certain niche genres. Yeah Doom 3, HL2 etc were also decline, inspired by all the other devs selling out with the xbox and bungie specifically leading the way with Halo. Xbox was the PC dev sellout machine. really that's where the real root of decline started: 2002 ish. there are not many good games I can think of on that machine.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

I’m glad he ignored me, as I have a very strict reciprocal policy when it comes to ignores that means I don’t see his posts either - but I do see the replies to him, which are hilarious without the context. Getting good laughs from this thread now.

 

[Morenatsu.]

I too think Halo is kind of crap for the dumbing down and especially the constant copy-paste environments... but it actually is a relatively decent scripted shooter with fun vehicles. (Too bad Halo 2 decided to make it ALL banalshitboring.) Now guess what Doom 64 is: shitty slow Doom. A couple of interesting ideas, but nothing else. Just extreme darkness, bland atmosphere, boring gameplay, and a whole bunch of overrated nothingness. Who. Gives. A. Shit. Halo is better for what it is than those games are for what they are.

But it's not a surprise that he thinks that those games are better, because he thinks a game just having stuff makes it good. Doom 64 has explorayshun, therefore its bettar than Gaylo. Is it fun? Well... no... but...!! Gaylo bad!!! My version of Unreal has wepon upgrads therfore itS BETAERR!!!! (NEVERMIND THE FACT THEY ARE FUCKING RETARDED LOL.) That, my friends, is how Ash's brain works. Who the fuck wants to play RTCW of all things? Next you're going to tell me Soldier of Forture is actually a good game.

Looking back at 2004 specifically, fucking dire year. Yeah Doom 3, HL2 etc were also decline, inspired by all the other devs selling out with the xbox and bungie specifically leading the way with Halo.

You play a lot of games, don't you? I've bet you've played every FPS ever. Surely you must have realized the precedent for Doom 3 and Half-Life 2's decline was already set by... PC games! Completely independently of any consoles! I mean, just look at the aforementioned RTCW, SoF, shit like that. HL2 and Doom 3 wish they could be as declined as those games were.

 

[Ash]

One more retard (not surprised to learn you're a Halo fanboy) enters the fray begging for the ignore button.

RTCW is a legitimately good game only declined in its adherence to some degree of realism, which is pretty much dictated by the setting/themes (World War 2). So for example, because of the themes we mostly get hitscan combat. This is acceptable justification if the devs insist on making a WW2 game as their form of expression, even if it is not what I'd prefer. It does NOT feature game design that intentionally whores itself out to the lowest common denominator like the obvious rest that followed. This is a obvious, important distinction. It is also a vastly superior game to Wolf 3D. Just because the PC had some bad games doesn't mean any precedent was set by the fact. Again, the distinction is sellout trends, dumb fucking furry kid.
Secondly, it features pretty damn good level design even considering the setting and realism adherence. How is that any way comparable to Halo's non-existent level design?

because he thinks a game just having stuff makes it good. Doom 64 has explorayshun, therefore its bettar than Gaylo.

You're a retard, but there is minor truth in what you say: yes, Halo is so damn barebones even as a straightforward shooter that yes, it's goddamn terrible and too simple to enjoy. If you want to play whack a mole be my guest. Love sucking your thumb behind cover waiting for your shields to recharge don't you boy? Love that two wep limit? Snail movement and weapons with pea shooter range in huge empty levels, like that makes sense.

What happened to the monocled fellows that once resided here in the prestigious codex that coined the term "popamole" and why have they been replaced with the lamest of furries, popamole worshippers and the like?

 

[Dayyālu]

PC:

RTCW (2002)
Clive Barker's Undying (2001)
NOLF2 (2003)

Console:

Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth (2005)
Urban Chaos (2006)
Timesplitters: Future Perfect (2005)

Good. Now we're evolving from the mindless sperging you threw before.

I too consider RTCW superior to the Halos. I opened my CE post by praising it!

Undying is a different beast, and it shits the bed almost as badly as Halo 1 during its endgame ( ETERNAL AUTUMN ANYONE. Or the cuts. or the fact that Lizbeth's levels are almost endless compared to the other siblings.). I still love it a lot because its ambience is unparalleled and some gameplay ideas are incredibly neat - its dual wielding is excellent. It shits the bed tho, hard. You enjoyed Undying's worst levels, between the cavemen and the endless Howlers? They're almost as bad as The Library.

NOLF2 is gud bar some stinkers and bad mechanics.

CoC DCE is barely comparable. As a shooter it's barebones, very barebones. It's an experimental game, not a action-y shooter.

Never played Urban Chaos. Timesplitters always fascinated me, but I'd need to set up a emulator for it. I checked some longplays, but I'd seriously need to check it first hand because the vids make it look like a cramped on the rails experience, and I guess there's something more to it.

really that's where the real root of decline started: 2002 ish.

I do not particularly disagree with you. As I admitted, I had a very specific idea for a "console shooter" in my brain: games that are derivatives of PC titles forcefully put in a console environment (with varying degrees of quality depending on ports) or for console-only shooters games that are cramped, linear, devoid of verticality and quick enemies (again, more Project Snowblind if someone even remembers that it existed).

Replaying Halo CE/2/3 challenged my assumptions. You're completely free to disagree, but after finishing Halo 3 I'm starting to think that maybe Bungie were less shit than other developers and tried. There are improvements between the games, differences in level design and weaponry, and of course I legit praise the enemy AI routines that give you reactive opponents. They aren't efficient or great, they're fun to shoot at. Much like the Replicas in FEAR.

I needed a brainless shooter to have fun with (and to sperg about extensively, it's half of the fun!) and the Halos are providing.

There's no need to compare Doom/Quake era games with Halos: they're completely different beasts, barely comparable by being FPS shooters. If I had to compare Bungie's output, I'd have to work on Marathon. And I don't think Marathon is in the same range, bar of course for writing, surprisingly charming.

It seems to me that you're ... angry because I'm not saying they're utter crap? They aren't, compared to the majority of their direct contemporaries. I stand by my point, and I guess we'd have to agree to disagree.

Thank ye for your reply, honestly.

INext you're going to tell me Soldier of Forture is actually a good game.

FIGHTING WORDS, SON! I DARE TO SAY THAT SOF IS THE GREATEST GROIN SHOOTING EXPERIENCE A MAN WILL EVER EXPERIENCE!

 

[Wunderbar]

PSX MOH game was the start of the decline, then MOHAA continued the trend on PC, then CoD continued MOHAA's ideas while further dumbing the genre down.
And you know who made the original Medal of Honor? Steven Spielberg!

Every. Single. Time.

 

[Ash]

Never played Urban Chaos. Timesplitters always fascinated me, but I'd need to set up a emulator for it. I checked some longplays, but I'd seriously need to check it first hand because the vids make it look like a cramped on the rails experience, and I guess there's something more to it

I would not recommend Timesplitters. It is like a party grabbag, five mini games instead of one wholesome solid chunk (singleplayer, competitive multiplayer, coop multiplayer, level editor, challenges mode). It's good for what it is, but not really any point in it if you're not playing games in a party context and no LAN option. Same with Urban Choas -- Neither are amazing, definitively console shooters I'd say, point is they're just better than Halo.

Cthulhu is not as barebones as you claim. Encounter design and AI, yes. Mechanically, no fucking way.

Not sure what makes the game "experimental" either. It's pretty solidly a blend of FPS, survival horror and adventure game. Not exactly a wildly different concept for the time if you know your survival horrors. It fits that mold nicely. I guess it doesn't count for pureblood FPS comparisons though.

 

[Ash]

PSX MOH game was the start of the decline, then MOHAA continued the trend on PC, then CoD continued MOHAA's ideas while further dumbing the genre down.
And you know who made the original Medal of Honor? Steven Spielberg!

Every. Single. Time.

Lol damn Jews nice spot.

PSX MOH interesting take. However health system was normal, weapon limit was 4 (which is going slightly beyond realism for WW2 shooter, but stil is decline), level design was somewhat linear but not terrible, and while it was cinematic, it was cinematic done with actual goddamn substance for once, unlike all the military shooters that followed. the game was somewhat easy though yet not braindead like Halo, so maybe you're on to something. Whatever the case, possibly the first popular FPS that was perhaps a little declined, alongside Goldeneye, but both did an OK job given the newfound realism focus and console limitations. It was Halo that is very clearly a case of "we should simplify ALL this stuff because money". Goldeneye and MOH not quite. Realism and immershun focus dictated at least some of it, with partial justification. They play better than most modern realism-dictated shooters.

 

[DalekFlay]

Why do you believe Halo's combat to be better than Turok's? Turok is boomer shooter stuff and I would say it's vastly more engaging, but maybe you have some good insights to share?

All I remember combat wise in Turok is shooting dudes and dinos that ran straight at me and circle strafing easy bosses. Maybe I haven't played it enough in recent years, but that's my memory. Halo combat is... I think obviously... more involved, especially when you play on harder modes and really have to use grenades and stuff like plasma pistols to remove shields and things like that. You're right that in most ways outside of combat Turok has more gameplay, but then Halo excels in other areas like atmosphere. Honestly the real answer to which is better depends on mood and preferences.

 

[Citizen]

Halo combat is... I think obviously... more involved

Halo: Combat Involved

 

[JDR13]

I'm guessing Ash and Citizen also think Ocarina of Time is still the best Zelda.

 

[wahrk]

It's just the same tired spiel I already heard 15 years ago. Muh gaylo ruined shooters, circle strafing while holding lmb is the pinnacle of shooter combat, etc. I don't even know what triggered him because I don't think anyone was arguing Halo > 90s shooters or even making the comparison.

Where did I say Halo and Goldeneye were awesome, you fucking retard?

You said they were "good". No need for semantics, retard.

I guess it was this? Two pages of butthurt sperging because someone said Halo was "good"?

 

[Deleted member 7219]

It's just the same tired spiel I already heard 15 years ago. Muh gaylo ruined shooters, circle strafing while holding lmb is the pinnacle of shooter combat, etc. I don't even know what triggered him because I don't think anyone was arguing Halo > 90s shooters or even making the comparison.

Where did I say Halo and Goldeneye were awesome, you fucking retard?

You said they were "good". No need for semantics, retard.

I guess it was this? Two pages of butthurt sperging because someone said Halo was "good"?

Best post in this thread since the last one that was actually about the games themselves. Summed it all up.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

I’m tempted to argue for wahrk to be monocled for that post alone.

 

[Citizen]

I'm guessing Ash and Citizen also think Ocarina of Time is still the best Zelda.

Majora's Mask is. I didn't play botw yet tho

 

[DalekFlay]

Link to the Past is still the best Zelda.

 

[Morenatsu.]

One more retard (not surprised to learn you're a Halo fanboy) enters the fray begging for the ignore button.

RTCW is a legitimately good game only declined in its adherence to some degree of realism, which is pretty much dictated by the setting/themes (World War 2). So for example, because of the themes we mostly get hitscan combat. This is acceptable justification if the devs insist on making a WW2 game as their form of expression, even if it is not what I'd prefer. It does NOT feature game design that intentionally whores itself out to the lowest common denominator like the obvious rest that followed. This is a obvious, important distinction. It is also a vastly superior game to Wolf 3D. Just because the PC had some bad games doesn't mean any precedent was set by the fact. Again, the distinction is sellout trends, dumb fucking furry kid.
Secondly, it features pretty damn good level design even considering the setting and realism adherence. How is that any way comparable to Halo's non-existent level design?

I'm not a Halo fanboy, I've only played the first two since they were on PC and both were massive disappointments. Despite this, there were good aspects, and there's nothing wrong with more straight-forward shooters being what they are. The problem with Halo, aside from the lol checkpoint shield-charging console gameplay (actually, Bungie's previous games already had checkpoints), is that the game is a rushed piece of crap with boring copy-paste interiors. But outside of that, the game looks and sounds good and is decent whenever it isn't shit. And I don't even own an Xbox (of any generation).

RTCW is the banalshitboring of PC shooters, along with every Raven game after Hexen. Combat felt pathetic, and I can barely remember the game despite having played it relatively recently. You might as well be saying ‘Gear of War sucks, Counter-Strike: Condition Zero Deleted Scenes is so much better lol’. (and of course you believe HITSCAN BAD. tell me, do you like projectile shotguns?)

The precedent for those games was absolutely set by PC games. That doesn't mean it wasn't ‘selling out’, but it just has little to do with consoles, at least not directly. Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 barely worked on the Xbox, let alone played well. They weren't consolified multi-platform games, or console ports, or whatever. There weren't like Deus Ex: Invisible War, or anything like that. PC games were already moving in the direction of dumbed-down cinematic games even without the help of the Xbox. Developers always had these kinds of aspiration for their games. They didn't care about your autistic form of ‘design’.

because he thinks a game just having stuff makes it good. Doom 64 has explorayshun, therefore its bettar than Gaylo.

You're a retard, but there is minor truth in what you say: yes, Halo is so damn barebones even as a straightforward shooter that yes, it's goddamn terrible and too simple to enjoy. If you want to play whack a mole be my guest. Love sucking your thumb behind cover waiting for your shields to recharge don't you boy? Love that two wep limit? Snail movement and weapons with pea shooter range in huge empty levels, like that makes sense.

What happened to the monocled fellows that once resided here in the prestigious codex that coined the term "popamole" and why have they been replaced with the lamest of furries, popamole worshippers and the like?

Believe it or not, games are more about those disgusting superficial elements such as ‘story’ and ‘setting’ and ‘teh experiieeeenceee’ than they are about raw game mechanics. Unless those mechanics are so good as to be able to stand on their own, they need to be part of a larger experience that is actually interesting, because that's where the entertainment value of singleplayer games lies. So yes, Halo is better than Doom 64, because at the very least it present itself as entertaining adventure. It has better pacing, better graphics, and is, in fact, more fun. Sometimes it's better for the game just to be simpler and straight-forward if that's more entertaining than having it be bogged down with slow-as-fuck boredom, as was the case in Doom 64. You don't seem to understand that a game requiring more effort to play does not automatically make it better. Doom 64 is just tedious. There's nothing especially fun about it. Why not just play the actual Doom? It's better in every way. You know, sometimes people don't want games to waste their time. This is like saying one JRPG is better than the other just because it has more grinding, despite the fact it actually has a much lesser, shittier story than the other, so all that grinding is just a waste. BUT MUH AUTISM REEEEEEEEEEEEEE. Well guess what, motherfucker. Popamole is indeed preferable when the alternative is the most uninteresting spreadsheet ever. Why should I ever care about weaksauce Doom when there's already a better one?

inb4 lol u think halo has good story lol u dumb haha retard xd

 

[Ash]

Representation of your brain processing as you dumb fucks play Halo and attempt to argue in its favor:

How about instead of pretending it is not glorified whack-a-mole you admit you enjoy it for ulterior aspects such as story, couch coop with your equally braindead buddies, or atmosphere? the furry kid here is getting there but still thinks the gameplay is somehow fun. But hey, perhaps you do genuinely find it fun, it's clear I'm dealing with simple minds after all.

Link to the Past is still the best Zelda.

This (or Link's Awakening). Ocarina of Time was never at any point in time the best. The fact that JDR thinks it was is standard run of the mill NPC stuff.

Despite this, there were good aspects, and there's nothing wrong with more straight-forward shooters being what they are.

Sure, like some arcade light gun game, or Wolf 3D, or FEAR, or Unreal Tournament. I'm not particularly fond of most those games because they are a bit too simple, but the context matters in each case (Arcade game for quick sessions, early FPS before id had figured out fun, can't really defend FEAR's simplicity I guess but the game is...OK and nobody is trying to claim it is better than classic design as Halo fanboys do time and time again, UT is multiplayer where the complexity comes from human opponents). Halo singleplayer had no excuse. More importantly, Whatever merit it has it is not in gameplay. It's mind-numbingly boring. It's not simple but fun. There are many games I'd label that (e.g Mario, tetris), Halo is just a bland boring piece of shit singleplayer game. You like glorified whack-a-mole. Worse, because whack-a-mole is over in a minute, and you're not prodding along at a snail pace (or in some lame vehicle) doing nothing in between the action.

Also, the claims that the combat is somehow more "evolved" or involving than boomer shooter stuff where all you do is circle strafe holding LMB just goes to show you do not have very analytical minds.

 

[Morenatsu.]

Representation of your brain processing as you dumb fucks play Halo and attempt to argue in its favor:

How about instead of pretending it is not glorified whack-a-mole you admit you enjoy it for ulterior aspects such as story, couch coop with your equally braindead buddies, or atmosphere? the furry kid here is getting there but still thinks the gameplay is somehow fun. But hey, perhaps you do genuinely find it fun, it's clear I'm dealing with simple minds after all.

RTCW is whack-a-mole, too. Did you play it?

I don't have buddies for couch co-op. I don't even have an Xbox. Did you read my post?

Halo isn't a great game. I said that. In fact, I essentially did say what you've said here. Do you even listen at all?

No, you don't. You live in your own little retarded world where all that matters is ‘complexity’ for the sake of ‘complexity’, not because it serves a good purpose or makes the game interesting or anything at all. You can shit-talk all you want, but when it comes down to it, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You made that all very clear with your mod. All you did was make a bunch of shit additions to a game that didn't need them. Why the fuck does a game need the guns to be customizable when all that does is create stupid clown guns (when they aren't just useless upgrades)? Why the fuck do there need to be random enemies thrown in everywhere they don't belong? Because you are retarded and think more shit = better. You are nothing but a try-hard who can't bear to be seen enjoying something for being what it is. It's puerile. And even more puerile than that is going around dismissing people for being ‘dumb kids’, you dumb, butthurt kid.

 

[Ash]

OK furry. Keep telling me my decision-making is flawed.

You're a retard and you established that quite clearly already, numerous times over. Stop posting.

Somewhere in my top 30 games falls Mario Bros 3, which isn't exactly a complex game. Thus your whole argument falls apart. And generally, more = more, not less, by goddamn definition. Am I to be ashamed that I expect something a little more involved than hop skip jump or whack a mole? Those games failed to engage me by the time I hit 5 years old. Eat shit you little degenerate. I'd stomp on your head and rub your nose in it like the dumb shit-eating dog you are but you'd probably get turned on by that.

 

[Morenatsu.]

OK try-hard. Keep telling me my decision-making is flawed.

You're a retard and you established that quite clearly already, numerous times over. Stop posting.

 

[Ash]

See, the mentality and argumentation skills of a five year old. Says it all as to how you can enjoy your "evolved" combat.
Not one person has made any points in that regard beyond claiming "boomer shooter is circle strafing while holding LMB" and Halo is "more involving" because there are enemies with shields and a dedicated grenade button, as if that was even something new at the time (it was not - some "boomer shooters" had it prior).

At this point I think I give up on General Gaming.