Something went wrong. Try again later

Video_Game_King

So is my status going to update soon, or will it pretend that my Twitter account hasn't existed for about a month?

36563 59080 823 928
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Anyone else think game critics are playing a big prank on gamers?

               (Or are they really deluded enough to think these two games are decent?) The games I speak of, of course, are Halo 3 and The Ooze. Yes, both these games are hideously overrated. Now I know what many of you are thinking: of me dying a horrible death for insulting your messiah. Just remember that I didn't start the Flame War. And in an attempt to keep the hatred to a minimum, I'll start with The Ooze and end with Halo 3. So as I alluded to in the last sentence, The Ooze. It was a Genesis game released when the system was pretty much dead, so don't expect major quality. Anyway, there was a story here, but I decided to make up my own: you play as Fred Fredburger (oozified, of course (at 1:39)), who....eh, the story they provided was better than the one I'm trying to come up with. As I said before, you play as a pile of ooze, and you have several ways to attack your enemies. You can shoot ooze balls at your enemies, strike them with your oozy appendages, or collect an instant death poison power up. Speaking of power ups, there are only a few I found: aside from the poison thing, there's super speed, DNA for the "good" ending (more on that later), and extra ooze. Ooze acts as your health and form of attack, and it's really fun to roam around levels as a huge nuclear mess.
               Wait, "roam around levels"....isn't that where the big flaw comes in? Exactly. What could've been a good game was ruined by awful level design. Most of your time will be spent looking for switches to activate or random holes in the architecture that lead somewhere. Some of these switches and holes are hidden out of vision with no hints as to their existence! Who designed these levels, sadists with an unusually random train of thought? Naturally, this means the game is hard. You'll spend a lot of time on this game, just figuring out where the hell you're supposed to go. So you'd think that this would make for a decent ending, right? Well, The Ooze suffers from Ghosts 'n Goblins Syndrome, throwing a crap ending at you for 100%ing it.
               While I'm bashing the game, I might as well bring up exploding enemies. Aside from collecting goo orbs, you also collect extra ooze by beating enemeis. However, kinda late in the game, you encounter exploding enemies. "No problem, right? I'll just collect a large amount of ooze, stay at a distance, and attack them with my oozy appendages." Not gonna work, Mr. Optimistic. Some of these enemies are actually dragged into you as soon as you beat them. And they explode within an inch of your life (literally). The only way to avoid this is to shoot your goo at them, which again, uses up health. Either way, you're gonna lose health.
               It's a shame that The Ooze sucks so hard, because there were some good ideas behind it. After all, who doesn't want to control a poisonous puddle of muck, destroying everything in that dares cross their path? And the idea itself is well executed, as I mentioned earlier. Graphics are decent, and the music pushes the limits of the system, so you'd think the game would be great, right? Too bad crap level design ruined the whole thing. So I give it the Chakan Award for Bad Genesis Level Design.

               *sigh* Well, it had to come to this eventually, didn't it? Gonna review Halo 3. I know a lot of you are going to bash my head in like a furious Sonic, but I'm going to state my opinion anyway! But first, a bit of useless backstory. On my experiences, obviously. Through a series of tough negotiations, I was allowed to borrow one Xbox 360 game from somebody. I chose Halo 3 just to see what the fuck everybody loved about it. Before I played the game, I found a poster in the box unclaimed. Why do I say this? Well, I already had a Halo 3 poster. Being the massive idiot I am, I now have two Halo 3 posters adorning my walls.
               However, none of this answered my original question: what's so great about Halo 3? After playing it for a few days (ooh, short game, not getting off to a good start), I can safely say that I still don't know what people love about it so much. I must admit that I didn't play the two previous Halo games, but why should I?; a truly great game doesn't have to use other games as a crutch. Given the previous, I had no idea what was going on storywise. Apparently, some purple chick was stolen, and bad aliens are trying to do something with their god that involves proposal rings of death. So some good aliens (who rebelled against the bad aliens) team up with you to win back th-I CAN'T TAKE ANYMORE OF THIS!!! I seriously had no idea what was going on throughout the entire game, and although stories don't always hold back a game, it really helps to know what the hell you're doing.
               Whatever, I didn't understand the story, let's move onto something else. How about the mandatory gameplay explanation? Well, this is a first person shooter, and you get a variety of weapons, ranging from swords and hammers to rifles and grenade launchers. Too bad you can only carry two at a time. Why is there this asinine weapon limit on the player? To make it feel more realistic? First off.....no. Real soldiers are trained to carry pounds upon pounds of heavy equipment daily; I think Master Chief can live with another weapon. Second, why realism? Realism isn't always good. And this wouldn't be so bad if all your weapons could pick up and restock on ammo, but no, only a select few can. So you're forced to scavenge weapons on the fly, a strategy which usually gives you a shit weapon. I fail to see the appeal in this, one of the series' hallmark concepts.
               The other hallmark of the series? The cover system. Rather than a simple HP system that would encourage conservation, strategy, and not running in like Rambo, you get regenerating health. If you're low on health, don't worry; just find something to hide behind, and you'll get it back. It doesn't even have to be decent cover, since enemies suddenly forget of your existence if you happen to hide behind a nearby pebble. It removes all strategy from battle, all of them devolving into one common tactic: pump the aliens full of lead until they're completely magnetic, hiding behind anything if you lose enough health. However, unlike the limited inventory, I can see how this might have worked. If Bungie decided to make a Vietnam based shooter, where the atmosphere and scenarios would have encouraged active cover and plodding combat, then I (and gamers worldwide) would most likely enjoy it more. After all, how many Vietnam based shooters have you played? Exactly. But instead, Bungie wanted to have their cake and eat it, too (original meaning heauh), by making it a crappy action-oriented FPS.
               Wait, I can hear it now. "Vincent, you can't call Halo 3 crap!" Yes, I can. Shut up. "But there have to be some good things about it, like the graphics." No, and I told you to shut up. The graphics are OK. At times, it looks a bit like Ninja Gaiden II, and I thought that game had decent graphics...most of the time. Howevecr, Halo 3 has some sort of lighting problem; the game constantly osscilates between "surface of the sun" and "dear God, I'm blind." I tried turning up the

Where I would rank this game.
Where I would rank this game.
brightn ess both on my television and the game itself, yet neither fixed the problem. Maybe there should've been a feature to bring down the contrast, maybe? Aw, who the hell am I kidding, nothing could make this game better. I tried listening to music from good games while playing it, thinking that would make the game better, but like Duke Nukem 64, it fixed nothing. The deployable cover system remained useless; the final boss was still piss easy; the combat was still mindless and patronizing; and the story was still more confusing than the damn Voynich manuscript.
               Seriously, what has happened to gaming that this is considered good? This game is not good at all. I'd say this is what happens when you apply film philosophies to the video game medium, but that would sound pretentious. Besides, Final Fantasy XII displays that with far more gusto than Halo 3 ever could. No, wait, I will say that is what happens when you do what I just said. The story is up its own ass far enough, and the music is the passive ambiance crap you see (OK, hear) in big name movies. Why do you think I listened to all that music? I came into this game expecting a fantastic adventure, but I wouldn't rank this in my top 10 games of all time. I wouldn't even put it in my top 20. I don't know where I'd put it, but it definitely goes below my crap threshold (the point where games stop being good and start sucking). So I give this game the Kefka was Onto Something Award for Destruction of Humanity, and await your inevitable complaints, whether they're directed at my actual opinion, or towards the length of this blog. And of course, there are alternatives...

  

(Oh, that reminds me of a few things I forgot, like how the vehicles control like crap, or how your allies can't be trusted with 4th grade safety scissors. Just had to put that in here.)
289 Comments

289 Comments

Avatar image for twoonefive
TwoOneFive

9793

Forum Posts

203

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By TwoOneFive

Well, all I know is, you have to be fucking high on something to think that the fight for GOTY was GTA4 or MGS4. 

I can't believe it when I hear Jeff Gerstmanns defense for it, saying things like "it forced me to make realllly hard choices, waahh" lol not real quote but he did say something along those lines in defense of the game. 
If you think watching very long and poorly written cut scenes all day (mgs4) and being nagged by your cell phone by annoying friends all day while you drive all over town (gta4) is a lot of fun,  then i guess you really thought those were the games of the year. i however, was busy playing games that were fun: Resistance 2, Dead Space, Saints Row 2 etc. 
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
TwoOneFive said:
"Well, all I know is, you have to be fucking high on something to think that the fight for GOTY was GTA4 or MGS4. 
I can't believe it when I hear Jeff Gerstmanns defense for it, saying things like "it forced me to make realllly hard choices, waahh" lol not real quote but he did say something along those lines in defense of the game. 
If you think watching very long and poorly written cut scenes all day (mgs4) and being nagged by your cell phone by annoying friends all day while you drive all over town (gta4) is a lot of fun,  then i guess you really thought those were the games of the year. i however, was busy playing games that were fun: Resistance 2, Dead Space, Saints Row 2 etc. 
"
I didn't play either of those games, and both were released in 2008; Halo 3 was released in 2007. I haven't played either of those games, so I wouldn't know their quality, especially in relation to Halo 3.
Avatar image for crunchuk
crunchUK

6052

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By crunchUK
Video_Game_King said:
"TwoOneFive said:
"Well, all I know is, you have to be fucking high on something to think that the fight for GOTY was GTA4 or MGS4. 
I can't believe it when I hear Jeff Gerstmanns defense for it, saying things like "it forced me to make realllly hard choices, waahh" lol not real quote but he did say something along those lines in defense of the game. 
If you think watching very long and poorly written cut scenes all day (mgs4) and being nagged by your cell phone by annoying friends all day while you drive all over town (gta4) is a lot of fun,  then i guess you really thought those were the games of the year. i however, was busy playing games that were fun: Resistance 2, Dead Space, Saints Row 2 etc. 
"
I didn't play either of those games, and both were released in 2008; Halo 3 was released in 2007. I haven't played either of those games, so I wouldn't know their quality, especially in relation to Halo 3."
Look at it this way - GTA4s population has been gradually sliding down whilst halo 3s is actually increasing. Totally overrated amirite.



And this is where some idiot tells me "but halo is 4 kiddiez WAAAH" despite not having even played halo 3, let alone to any real extent. In fact i could name quite a few giantbomb users like that
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
crunchUK said:
Look at it this way - GTA4s population has been gradually sliding down whilst halo 3s is actually increasing. Totally overrated amirite.And this is where some idiot tells me "but halo is 4 kiddiez WAAAH" despite not having even played halo 3, let alone to any real extent. In fact i could name quite a few giantbomb users like that"
Um...OK then. Honestly, I don't play that many modern games. I'm a very old school gamer.
Avatar image for linkyshinks
Linkyshinks

11399

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By Linkyshinks
Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"The steering isn't delayed.  The car just slides so it doesn't turn on a dime."
I found it to be delayed. You turn the analog stick, wait a second, and Chief steers it in your direction. And why not make it turn on a dime? What's wrong with that?"

It's a conscious design decision in my eyes, sometimes a lesser degree of control is conducive for fun. If they had the level of control you are talking about it could have negative ramifications on difficulty in many areas. 

The vehicle in the game as it is, requires that the players gets to grips with it delicate controls, something which is positive aspect, why you may ask?. because It would be far too useful if it had a greater degree of control. Just ask any hardcore Halo player.


Glad you got the responses :0)  




Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
Linkyshinks said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"The steering isn't delayed.  The car just slides so it doesn't turn on a dime."
I found it to be delayed. You turn the analog stick, wait a second, and Chief steers it in your direction. And why not make it turn on a dime? What's wrong with that?"
It's a conscious design decision in my eyes, sometimes a lesser degree of control is conducive for fun. If they had the level of control you are talking about it could have negative ramifications on difficulty in many areas.  The vehicle in the game as it is, requires that the players gets to grips with it delicate controls, something which is positive aspect, why you may ask?. because It would be far too useful if it had a greater degree of control. Just ask any hardcore Halo player.Glad you got the responses :0)   "
Negative ramifications? I wish it controlled like I'm saying it should! That would've made the final level a bit easier (although no less cliched).
Avatar image for linkyshinks
Linkyshinks

11399

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By Linkyshinks
Video_Game_King said:
"Linkyshinks said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"The steering isn't delayed.  The car just slides so it doesn't turn on a dime."
I found it to be delayed. You turn the analog stick, wait a second, and Chief steers it in your direction. And why not make it turn on a dime? What's wrong with that?"
It's a conscious design decision in my eyes, sometimes a lesser degree of control is conducive for fun. If they had the level of control you are talking about it could have negative ramifications on difficulty in many areas.  The vehicle in the game as it is, requires that the players gets to grips with it delicate controls, something which is positive aspect, why you may ask?. because It would be far too useful if it had a greater degree of control. Just ask any hardcore Halo player.Glad you got the responses :0)   "
Negative ramifications? I wish it controlled like I'm saying it should! That would've made the final level a bit easier (although no less cliched)."

You have to consider the effect in Multiplayer also.




Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
Linkyshinks said:
You have to consider the effect in Multiplayer also. "
Not sure what effect it could have, but I'm going to say "screw that!" as a response :P.
Avatar image for crunchuk
crunchUK

6052

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By crunchUK

Um......... The final warthog run was ridiculously easy

Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
crunchUK said:
"Um......... The final warthog run was ridiculously easy "
I found it to be one big tease, though. "The frigate's over here. No, wait, it's over there, run over there. Nah, decided it ain't here. Oh, it's there, right over there! You gotta trust me on this one! Seriously! No, it's over there, sorry about that."
Avatar image for crunchuk
crunchUK

6052

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By crunchUK
Video_Game_King said:
"crunchUK said:
"Um......... The final warthog run was ridiculously easy "
I found it to be one big tease, though. "The frigate's over here. No, wait, it's over there, run over there. Nah, decided it ain't here. Oh, it's there, right over there! You gotta trust me on this one! Seriously! No, it's over there, sorry about that.""
what


i thought this was about the warthog controls that are supposedly "terrible"
Avatar image for cl60
CL60

17117

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By CL60
Video_Game_King said:
"crunchUK said:
"Um......... The final warthog run was ridiculously easy "
I found it to be one big tease, though. "The frigate's over here. No, wait, it's over there, run over there. Nah, decided it ain't here. Oh, it's there, right over there! You gotta trust me on this one! Seriously! No, it's over there, sorry about that.""
um, what.
Avatar image for expletive
Expletive

1101

Forum Posts

270

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Edited By Expletive

you are Video_Game_King said:



               *sigh* Well, it had to come to this eventually, didn't it? Gonna review Halo 3. I know a lot of you are going to bash my head in like a furious Sonic, but I'm going to state my opinion anyway! But first, a bit of useless backstory. On my experiences, obviously. Through a series of tough negotiations, I was allowed to borrow one Xbox 360 game from somebody. I chose Halo 3 just to see what the fuck everybody loved about it. Before I played the game, I found a poster in the box unclaimed. Why do I say this? Well, I already had a Halo 3 poster. Being the massive idiot I am, I now have two Halo 3 posters adorning my walls.
               However, none of this answered my original question: what's so great about Halo 3? After playing it for a few days (ooh, short game, not getting off to a good start), I can safely say that I still don't know what people love about it so much. I must admit that I didn't play the two previous Halo games, but why should I?; a truly great game doesn't have to use other games as a crutch. Given the previous, I had no idea what was going on storywise. Apparently, some purple chick was stolen, and bad aliens are trying to do something with their god that involves proposal rings of death. So some good aliens (who rebelled against the bad aliens) team up with you to win back th-I CAN'T TAKE ANYMORE OF THIS!!! I seriously had no idea what was going on throughout the entire game, and although stories don'talwaysholdbackagame, it really helps to know what the hell you're doing.
               Whatever, I didn't understand the story, let's move onto something else. How about the mandatory gameplay explanation? Well, this is a first person shooter, and you get a variety of weapons, ranging from swords and hammers to rifles and grenade launchers. Too bad you can only carry two at a time. Why is there this asinine weapon limit on the player? To make it feel more realistic? First off.....no. Real soldiers are trained to carry pounds upon pounds of heavy equipment daily; I think Master Chief can live with another weapon. Second, why realism? Realism isn't always good. And this wouldn't be so bad if all your weapons could pick up and restock on ammo, but no, only a select few can. So you're forced to scavenge weapons on the fly, a strategy which usually gives you a shit weapon. I fail to see the appeal in this, one of the series' hallmark concepts.
               The other hallmark of the series? The cover system. Rather than a simple HP system that would encourage conservation, strategy, and not running in like Rambo, you get regenerating health. If you're low on health, don't worry; just find something to hide behind, and you'll get it back. It doesn't even have to be decent cover, since enemies suddenly forget of your existence if you happen to hide behind a nearby pebble. It removes all strategy from battle, all of them devolving into one common tactic: pump the aliens full of lead until they're completely magnetic, hiding behind anything if you lose enough health. However, unlike the limited inventory, I can see how this might have worked. If Bungie decided to make a Vietnam based shooter, where the atmosphere and scenarios would have encouraged active cover and plodding combat, then I (and gamers worldwide) would most likely enjoy it more. After all, how many Vietnam based shooters have you played? Exactly. But instead, Bungie wanted to have their cake and eat it, too (original meaning heauh), by making it a crappy action-oriented FPS.
               Wait, I can hear it now. "Vincent, you can't call Halo 3 crap!" Yes, I can. Shut up. "But there have to be some good things about it, like the graphics." No, and I told you to shut up. The graphics are OK. At times, it looks a bit like Ninja Gaiden II, and I thought that game had decent graphics...most of the time. Howevecr, Halo 3 has some sort of lighting problem; the game constantly osscilates between "surface of the sun" and "dear God, I'm blind." I tried turning up the
Where I would rank this game.
Where I would rank this game.
brightn ess both on my television and the game itself, yet neither fixed the problem. Maybe there should've been a feature to bring down the contrast, maybe? Aw, who the hell am I kidding, nothing could make this game better. I tried listening to music from good games while playing it, thinking that would make the game better, but like Duke Nukem 64, it fixed nothing. The deployable cover system remained useless; the final boss was still piss easy; the combat was still mindless and patronizing; and the story was still more confusing than the damn Voynich manuscript.
               Seriously, what has happened to gaming that this is considered good? This game is not good at all. I'd say this is what happens when you apply film philosophies to the video game medium, but that would sound pretentious. Besides, Final Fantasy XII displays that with far more gusto than Halo 3 ever could. No, wait, I will say that is what happens when you do what I just said. The story is up its own ass far enough, and the music is the passive ambiance crap you see (OK, hear) in big name movies. Why do you think I listened to all that music? I came into this game expecting a fantastic adventure, but I wouldn't rank this in my top 10 games of all time. I wouldn't even put it in my top 20. I don't know where I'd put it, but it definitely goes below my crap threshold (the point where games stop being good and start sucking). So I give this game the Kefka was Onto Something Award for Destruction of Humanity, and await your inevitable complaints, whether they're directed at my actual opinion, or towards the length of this blog. And of course, there are alternatives...

  
(Oh, that reminds me of a few things I forgot, like how the vehicles control like crap, or how your allies can't be trusted with 4th grade safety scissors. Just had to put that in here.)"
You are right sir I do went to smash your face in, but instead I am going to point out a few points of idiocy in your original post.

You state explicitly that you did not play the first two halo games and that it should not matter because a great game doesn't need to use other games as a crutch. and then go on to bash halo 3s story for not making sense to you.

While I most definitely agree that a good game should be able to stand alone, this does not mean that the story has to be so stupid, minimal and obvious that anyone can pick it up at any point and understand everything.

Go watch the original star wars movies, now show the last one to someone who hasn't seen the other two. are you really going to tell me that because that person has no fucking clue what is going on, that return of the jedi sucks? or that return of the king sucks?

Just because a story is to complicated to jump in to randomly does not mean it sucks.

Now on to another one of your "points" the "asinine" amount of weapons you can carry, this one like most of your "points" is just personal preference, but I believe that if this were an insomniac " hold every weapon in the fucking game at once" type of game it would simply be to easy. and besides there are constantly weapons everywhere, so its not like you are (ever) stuck with empty weapons.

And as for your bitching about halo 3, being a " crappy action oriented FPS" and the lack of strategy, once again THAT IS YOU PERSONAL FUCKING TASTE IN GAMES. You just don't like action games, that does not mean everyone who does is retarded, or that you are retarded. everybody has different opinions.

And last but certainly not least, the fucking multiplayer. did you actually make a halo 3 flame post and not even mention the multiplayer?  the multiplayer is the main reason ANYONE plays this game more that like 8 hours. and you didn't even mention it.

You are fully entitled to you opinion about halo 3, but please think about the things you are writing next time.

Good day, sir.
Avatar image for smugdarkloser
SmugDarkLoser

5040

Forum Posts

114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By SmugDarkLoser

My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant.
Damn, it's like what people call me.

Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
crunchUK said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"crunchUK said:
"Um......... The final warthog run was ridiculously easy "
I found it to be one big tease, though. "The frigate's over here. No, wait, it's over there, run over there. Nah, decided it ain't here. Oh, it's there, right over there! You gotta trust me on this one! Seriously! No, it's over there, sorry about that.""
whati thought this was about the warthog controls that are supposedly "terrible""
Yea, but I can have other complaints, can't I?

expletive said:
You are right sir I do went to smash your face in, but instead I am going to point out a few points of idiocy in your original post.

You state explicitly that you did not play the first two halo games and that it should not matter because a great game doesn't need to use other games as a crutch. and then go on to bash halo 3s story for not making sense to you.

While I most definitely agree that a good game should be able to stand alone, this does not mean that the story has to be so stupid, minimal and obvious that anyone can pick it up at any point and understand everything.

Go watch the original star wars movies, now show the last one to someone who hasn't seen the other two. are you really going to tell me that because that person has no fucking clue what is going on, that return of the jedi sucks? or that return of the king sucks?

Just because a story is to complicated to jump in to randomly does not mean it sucks.

Now on to another one of your "points" the "asinine" amount of weapons you can carry, this one like most of your "points" is just personal preference, but I believe that if this were an insomniac " hold every weapon in the fucking game at once" type of game it would simply be to easy. and besides there are constantly weapons everywhere, so its not like you are (ever) stuck with empty weapons.

And as for your bitching about halo 3, being a " crappy action oriented FPS" and the lack of strategy, once again THAT IS YOU PERSONAL FUCKING TASTE IN GAMES. You just don't like action games, that does not mean everyone who does is retarded, or that you are retarded. everybody has different opinions.

And last but certainly not least, the fucking multiplayer. did you actually make a halo 3 flame post and not even mention the multiplayer?  the multiplayer is the main reason ANYONE plays this game more that like 8 hours. and you didn't even mention it.

You are fully entitled to you opinion about halo 3, but please think about the things you are writing next time.

Good day, sir.
"
Please don't quote the whole thing, next time.

True, but what I'm saying is that the story is confusing and that good sequels don't have confusing stories. Dirge of Cerberus was confusing before and after I played FF7, and I can probably name a few other instances. But I won't, I'm lazy :P.

Wow, way to go to one extreme. I'm asking for it to build upon the concepts of the previous games WHILE being accessible for anyone who hasn't played the games before them; it shouldn't be 100% necessary to have played the two games before it.

Haven't seen LotR, wouldn't know :P.

There's such a thing as overly complicated and pretentious. It's called Final Fantasy XII.

Then they could have adjusted the difficulty to match your infinite inventory. Again, I'll resort to Half Life 2 and BioShock. Those games had a huge inventory, but were by no means easy; there were other things in the game that made it harder, like tank enemies.

I was complaining more about the game wanting to have its cake and eat it, too. I like action games, but not when they patronize to me by saying I should hide from the enemy. Metal Gear Solid didn't put on airs; it simply said "stay away from the enemies at all costs, this is a stealth mission." Halo 3, on the other hand, tells you that you are the only hope for this army (and I can see why). I like action games, I like strategy/stealth games, but pick one or the other.

Only 9% of eligible people play it for the multiplayer. If only 9% of people used the Esper system in Final Fantasy VI or Elika's magic abilities in the new Prince of Persia, I wouldn't consider those to be very good features. Besides, what about those of us without friends or a Gold account? And need I bring up the already stale argument of the ads?

Do you mean "word your blogs more carefully" or "try not to publish anything controversial?"

Sir? Oh, that's it, I'm whipping your ass...WITH THE LEGENDARY GUNWHIP!!! (It's a whip with a gun on the end.)
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches.
Avatar image for cl60
CL60

17117

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By CL60
Video_Game_King said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches."
You are a complete moron....
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
CL60 said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches."
You are a complete moron...."
How so? Explain. Again, I just didn't like the game, and found it hard to see the appeal in it.
Avatar image for cl60
CL60

17117

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By CL60
Video_Game_King said:
"CL60 said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches."
You are a complete moron...."
How so? Explain. Again, I just didn't like the game, and found it hard to see the appeal in it."
People including me have explained why you are a moron on many occasions, I'm not going to do it again.
Avatar image for crunchuk
crunchUK

6052

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By crunchUK
Video_Game_King said:
"crunchUK said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"crunchUK said:
"Um......... The final warthog run was ridiculously easy "
I found it to be one big tease, though. "The frigate's over here. No, wait, it's over there, run over there. Nah, decided it ain't here. Oh, it's there, right over there! You gotta trust me on this one! Seriously! No, it's over there, sorry about that.""
whati thought this was about the warthog controls that are supposedly "terrible""
Yea, but I can have other complaints, can't I?

expletive said:
You are right sir I do went to smash your face in, but instead I am going to point out a few points of idiocy in your original post.

You state explicitly that you did not play the first two halo games and that it should not matter because a great game doesn't need to use other games as a crutch. and then go on to bash halo 3s story for not making sense to you.

While I most definitely agree that a good game should be able to stand alone, this does not mean that the story has to be so stupid, minimal and obvious that anyone can pick it up at any point and understand everything.

Go watch the original star wars movies, now show the last one to someone who hasn't seen the other two. are you really going to tell me that because that person has no fucking clue what is going on, that return of the jedi sucks? or that return of the king sucks?

Just because a story is to complicated to jump in to randomly does not mean it sucks.

Now on to another one of your "points" the "asinine" amount of weapons you can carry, this one like most of your "points" is just personal preference, but I believe that if this were an insomniac " hold every weapon in the fucking game at once" type of game it would simply be to easy. and besides there are constantly weapons everywhere, so its not like you are (ever) stuck with empty weapons.

And as for your bitching about halo 3, being a " crappy action oriented FPS" and the lack of strategy, once again THAT IS YOU PERSONAL FUCKING TASTE IN GAMES. You just don't like action games, that does not mean everyone who does is retarded, or that you are retarded. everybody has different opinions.

And last but certainly not least, the fucking multiplayer. did you actually make a halo 3 flame post and not even mention the multiplayer?  the multiplayer is the main reason ANYONE plays this game more that like 8 hours. and you didn't even mention it.

You are fully entitled to you opinion about halo 3, but please think about the things you are writing next time.

Good day, sir.
"
Please don't quote the whole thing, next time.True, but what I'm saying is that the story is confusing and that good sequels don't have confusing stories. Dirge of Cerberus was confusing before and after I played FF7, and I can probably name a few other instances. But I won't, I'm lazy :P.Wow, way to go to one extreme. I'm asking for it to build upon the concepts of the previous games WHILE being accessible for anyone who hasn't played the games before them; it shouldn't be 100% necessary to have played the two games before it.Haven't seen LotR, wouldn't know :P.There's such a thing as overly complicated and pretentious. It's called Final Fantasy XII.Then they could have adjusted the difficulty to match your infinite inventory. Again, I'll resort to Half Life 2 and BioShock. Those games had a huge inventory, but were by no means easy; there were other things in the game that made it harder, like tank enemies.I was complaining more about the game wanting to have its cake and eat it, too. I like action games, but not when they patronize to me by saying I should hide from the enemy. Metal Gear Solid didn't put on airs; it simply said "stay away from the enemies at all costs, this is a stealth mission." Halo 3, on the other hand, tells you that you are the only hope for this army (and I can see why). I like action games, I like strategy/stealth games, but pick one or the other.Only 9% of eligible people play it for the multiplayer. If only 9% of people used the Esper system in Final Fantasy VI or Elika's magic abilities in the new Prince of Persia, I wouldn't consider those to be very good features. Besides, what about those of us without friends or a Gold account? And need I bring up the already stale argument of the ads?Do you mean "word your blogs more carefully" or "try not to publish anything controversial?"Sir? Oh, that's it, I'm whipping your ass...WITH THE LEGENDARY GUNWHIP!!! (It's a whip with a gun on the end.)"
that 9% also plays 99% of the halo being played
Avatar image for lamegame621
lamegame621

1000

Forum Posts

664

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By lamegame621
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
CL60 said:
People including me have explained why you are a moron on many occasions, I'm not going to do it again."
And I have explained my reasons for why many of the excuses I have encountered are flawed to some degree.

crunchUK said:
that 9% also plays 99% of the halo being played"
That doesn't exactly change the fact that few people who own the game actually play against each other or against other people.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889

Wow way too many posts.


This is my final thought.  If you only played the single player and you thought the game was bad because of it then your right.  The story isn't perfect and if you havn't played the others it might be hard to get into.  The last level does suck since it just stole it from Halo 1, but not done as well.  I know I didn't play Halo for the single player I played it for the multiplayer which is what the majority of people did.  Critics agree to.  Its a multiplayer game, not a single player and it was lacking in that category.  The funny thing is that if you think the halo is is overrated because the single player sucked  then your wrong, because your dead on and the majority of people/critics agree.

Now if you feel the multiplayer is overrated then I guess everyone will continue to flame.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"Wow way too many posts.

This is my final thought.  If you only played the single player and you thought the game was bad because of it then your right.  The story isn't perfect and if you havn't played the others it might be hard to get into.  The last level does suck since it just stole it from Halo 1, but not done as well.  I know I didn't play Halo for the single player I played it for the multiplayer which is what the majority of people did.  Critics agree to.  Its a multiplayer game, not a single player and it was lacking in that category.  The funny thing is that if you think the halo is is overrated because the single player sucked  then your wrong, because your dead on and the majority of people/critics agree.

Now if you feel the multiplayer is overrated then I guess everyone will continue to flame.
"
What I've been arguing is that multiplayer doesn't excuse the problems of the campaign mode. Certain problems, like weapon limits and the cover system, will carry into the multiplayer mode. And I agree on this game ripping off the final level of the first one. If you're finding this weird, let me explain: years ago, a friend of mine got Halo. My only memory of it was the final level, where he beat up a whiny orb and rode out on an ATV. He died often, and I did here.
Avatar image for origina1penguin
Origina1Penguin

3530

Forum Posts

2867

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By Origina1Penguin

The Ooze was a really difficult game.  I was young when I played it, but I still might not be able to beat it today.  I did enjoy aspects of it.  Just like Comix Zone, it had neat ideas and gameplay concepts.  It has been a long time since I played it, so I can't really comment on its quality.

Halo 3 is not a bad game.  It should definitely qualify as decent even to haters of the series.  However, I can't say if its quality comes from great application of gameplay mechanics or just a big budget to smooth everything out and optimize it.  I played the story a few times and I enjoy the skull options and co-op, but I could not get into the multiplayer and the plot was kind of wack so I really only played the game for a couple weeks.  I still enjoy Halo: Combat Evolved more than the sequels because I think the tone really changed and the series became washed out by trying to appeal to as many people as possible.

Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
Origina1Penguin said:
"The Ooze was a really difficult game.  I was young when I played it, but I still might not be able to beat it today.  I did enjoy aspects of it.  Just like Comix Zone, it had neat ideas and gameplay concepts.  It has been a long time since I played it, so I can't really comment on its quality.Halo 3 is not a bad game.  It should definitely qualify as decent even to haters of the series.  However, I can't say if its quality comes from great application of gameplay mechanics or just a big budget to smooth everything out and optimize it.  I played the story a few times and I enjoy the skull options and co-op, but I could not get into the multiplayer and the plot was kind of wack so I really only played the game for a couple weeks.  I still enjoy Halo: Combat Evolved more than the sequels because I think the tone really changed and the series became washed out by trying to appeal to as many people as possible."
Yay, somebody actually commented on The Ooze!

I'm not a hater of the series, since I've only played this one game. Anyway, I found the game overrated and not that good. The two are not synonymous, but they are in this one case (and others, but that's not the point).
Avatar image for ahriman22
ahriman22

2812

Forum Posts

381

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By ahriman22

Your point? Halo 3 is a shitty game, great that you've joined the good side, but you don't have to write a wall (Which I read entirely) and try to act like Yahtzee to make your point. You seem dumber than the fanboys because of the way you wrote it, it made you come off as extremely smug and annoying. Get over the fact that some think it's good and pull your head out of your ass.

As for being individualist... Great, you're an individual, unique, just like everybody fucking else.

Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889

A weapon limit isn't a "problem" though nor is the cover system in this game or other shooters.  Gears,  COD ,  Far Cry,  Rainbow six, and other top shooters of the genre all have weapon limitations, because thats how the genrea has evolved.  It's to add a strategic element to make a player think carefully about what weapon he/she should carry.


" Should I carry a sniper and a br or should I carry a shotty and sniper?  hmm.... tough choice.  What about rockets and a snipe?  Wait there's a problem.  If I run out of rockets how am I going to take down guys right in front of me....decisions decisions decisions."

Also if the game gives always a player to carry every type of weapon and not have them do it in multiplayer wouldn't it be inconsistant?
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
ahriman22 said:
"Your point? Halo 3 is a shitty game, great that you've joined the good side, but you don't have to write a wall (Which I read entirely) and try to act like Yahtzee to make your point. You seem dumber than the fanboys because of the way you wrote it, it made you come off as extremely smug and annoying. Get over the fact that some think it's good and pull your head out of your ass.As for being individualist... Great, you're an individual, unique, just like everybody fucking else."
Look, I have a lot to say about the game. I write everything I have to say about the game. And I could say the same thing about the way you worded your post, but that won't get me anywhere. And I wasn't trying to act smug or like Yahtzee; I only included the review because I knew people would post tldr.

And as for that....I don't remember why I put it in there, or how I did so. Sorry either for pretentious irrelevance or shitty memory.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"A weapon limit isn't a "problem" though nor is the cover system in this game or other shooters.  Gears,  COD ,  Far Cry,  Rainbow six, and other top shooters of the genre all have weapon limitations, because thats how the genrea has evolved.  It's to add a strategic element to make a player think carefully about what weapon he/she should carry.

" Should I carry a sniper and a br or should I carry a shotty and sniper?  hmm.... tough choice.  What about rockets and a snipe?  Wait there's a problem.  If I run out of rockets how am I going to take down guys right in front of me....decisions decisions decisions."

Also if the game gives always a player to carry every type of weapon and not have them do it in multiplayer wouldn't it be inconsistant?
"
Then it has evolved for the worse. If all JRPGs evolved to be like Final Fantasy XII (or have), then I'd call them out for it. And I pulled off the "strategic element' veil quite some time ago, since many of the battles feel the same.

Then have them do it in multiplayer, too. I never said one should have it and not the other.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889

If thats the case go play Obivion and Fallout.  Great games doing exactly what your asking, but don't say that fixing balancing issues and adding strategic elements to shooters is a bad thing and the genre has evolved for the worst. 


If that was the case then all of these games that I've mentioned before wouldn't be worth playing.  The consequences of giving the ability to carry every weapon would ruin multiplayer as we know it.
Avatar image for smugdarkloser
SmugDarkLoser

5040

Forum Posts

114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By SmugDarkLoser
Video_Game_King said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches."


Umm...why?  It's a straight up continuation.  Are you saying that something like the LOTR trilogy shouldn't exist?

Anyway, let's recap.
-You don't know any of the story, essentially jumping in at, imagine, say, the 3rd LOTR
....yet you bash the story and call it terrible

- You don't know how to properly control the thing (as demonstrated with the vehicles, equipment, etc.)
....yet you say you all those suck because you can't

- You haven't played the multiplayer
....yet you say it sucks and say it's the much like the sp because ifghting games are (co-op yea, but vs multiplayer, not at all)

- You bash halo for it's regerating health
...yet your playing on normal and openly said you shoot and have to hide behind a rock every two seconds peeking and shooting

- You call halo's music ambience music
...yet this is the main theme of halo (trilogy), this of 3

- You borrowed the game from a friend
...and you took his poster.  Are you a freaking asshole or what? >.>

Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"If thats the case go play Obivion and Fallout.  Great games doing exactly what your asking, but don't say that fixing balancing issues and adding strategic elements to shooters is a bad thing and the genre has evolved for the worst. 

If that was the case then all of these games that I've mentioned before wouldn't be worth playing.  The consequences of giving the ability to carry every weapon would ruin multiplayer as we no it.
"
The problem is that Halo did neither of those. The limited inventory adds nothing and feels arbitrary, and the cover system pretty much means all battles are the same, as I've said before.

I don't know if the genre truly has evolved for the worse, so I based that statement on your description. Unless of course those games pull it off better than Halo did. And how would giving players as many weapons as they please ruin multiplayer? Goldeneye had some good mutliplayer, as did many games that didn't capriciously limit your inventory.






A note: I am not insulting the genre or the system or anything stupid like that. I am only insulting the game. I don't want to repeat this over and over again.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
SmugDarkLoser said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches."
Umm...why?  It's a straight up continuation.  Are you saying that something like the LOTR trilogy shouldn't exist?"
I said games, not movies. I haven't seen the movies, so I wouldn't know. And truly great games must be great on their own. If they need other games to be good, then that's limiting the quality significantly.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889
Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"If thats the case go play Obivion and Fallout.  Great games doing exactly what your asking, but don't say that fixing balancing issues and adding strategic elements to shooters is a bad thing and the genre has evolved for the worst. 

If that was the case then all of these games that I've mentioned before wouldn't be worth playing.  The consequences of giving the ability to carry every weapon would ruin multiplayer as we no it.
"
The problem is that Halo did neither of those. The limited inventory adds nothing and feels arbitrary, and the cover system pretty much means all battles are the same, as I've said before.I don't know if the genre truly has evolved for the worse, so I based that statement on your description. Unless of course those games pull it off better than Halo did. And how would giving players as many weapons as they please ruin multiplayer? Goldeneye had some good mutliplayer, as did many games that didn't capriciously limit your inventory.A note: I am not insulting the genre or the system or anything stupid like that. I am only insulting the game. I don't want to repeat this over and over again."
The problem is that this is where the genre is at in this age.  If you hate Halo for these reasons then you should dislike every other shooter of today's generation, because they all involve the same basic setup, because they're industry standards.  This means that the genre now sucks under your opinion.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"If thats the case go play Obivion and Fallout.  Great games doing exactly what your asking, but don't say that fixing balancing issues and adding strategic elements to shooters is a bad thing and the genre has evolved for the worst. 

If that was the case then all of these games that I've mentioned before wouldn't be worth playing.  The consequences of giving the ability to carry every weapon would ruin multiplayer as we no it.
"
The problem is that Halo did neither of those. The limited inventory adds nothing and feels arbitrary, and the cover system pretty much means all battles are the same, as I've said before.I don't know if the genre truly has evolved for the worse, so I based that statement on your description. Unless of course those games pull it off better than Halo did. And how would giving players as many weapons as they please ruin multiplayer? Goldeneye had some good mutliplayer, as did many games that didn't capriciously limit your inventory.A note: I am not insulting the genre or the system or anything stupid like that. I am only insulting the game. I don't want to repeat this over and over again."
The problem is that this is where the genre is at in this age.  If you hate Halo for these reasons then you should dislike every other shooter of today's generation, because they all involve the same basic setup, because they're industry standards.  This means that the genre now sucks under your opinion.
"
Again, I only played this game. I haven't played that many others, so I'm not sure how much your assumption is worth.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889

I know you havn't played them yet.  You mentioned that in another post, but if you ever do you have to claim the same thing based on your commentes in your blog.

Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"I know you havn't played them yet.  You mentioned that in another post, but if you ever do you have to claim the same thing based on your commentes in your blog."
But doesn't that depend on how well each game pulls off the attributes Halo could not successfully utilize? Unless every shooter out there is a Halo clone, which I sincerely hope is not the case.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889
Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"I know you havn't played them yet.  You mentioned that in another post, but if you ever do you have to claim the same thing based on your commentes in your blog."
But doesn't that depend on how well each game pulls off the attributes Halo could not successfully utilize? Unless every shooter out there is a Halo clone, which I sincerely hope is not the case."
Not necassarily because most of your complaints are complaints about industry standards.  Such as weapon limitations, regenerating health, lack of a story, others as such.

Now not every standard is a good thing, such as the lack of a story.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"I know you havn't played them yet.  You mentioned that in another post, but if you ever do you have to claim the same thing based on your commentes in your blog."
But doesn't that depend on how well each game pulls off the attributes Halo could not successfully utilize? Unless every shooter out there is a Halo clone, which I sincerely hope is not the case."
Not necassarily because most of your complaints are complaints about industry standards.  Such as weapon limitations, regenerating health, lack of a story, others as such.

Now not every standard is a good thing, such as the lack of a story.
"
Those aren't standards, those are more gameplay features. If you read my review, I said that some of the concepts could be pulled off in a different atmosphere and work; maybe another game has already done that.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889
Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"I know you havn't played them yet.  You mentioned that in another post, but if you ever do you have to claim the same thing based on your commentes in your blog."
But doesn't that depend on how well each game pulls off the attributes Halo could not successfully utilize? Unless every shooter out there is a Halo clone, which I sincerely hope is not the case."
Not necassarily because most of your complaints are complaints about industry standards.  Such as weapon limitations, regenerating health, lack of a story, others as such.

Now not every standard is a good thing, such as the lack of a story.
"
Those aren't standards, those are more gameplay features. If you read my review, I said that some of the concepts could be pulled off in a different atmosphere and work; maybe another game has already done that."
They're standards.  Please tell me what  good mainstream games have been released in this genre without these gameplay features.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
There standards.  Please tell me what  good mainstream games have been released in this genre without these gameplay features."
First off, word choice (quite literally) :P. Second, I could say that they're not standards, but this would quickly turn into semantics if either of us continued on this path. And again, I-no, wait, I can name one: Half Life 2. That game had neither but was still good. Other than that, I can't name that many, mainly because I'm an old school gamer.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889
Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
There standards.  Please tell me what  good mainstream games have been released in this genre without these gameplay features."
First off, word choice (quite literally) :P. Second, I could say that they're not standards, but this would quickly turn into semantics if either of us continued on this path. And again, I-no, wait, I can name one: Half Life 2. That game had neither but was still good. Other than that, I can't name that many, mainly because I'm an old school gamer."
Find, discussion over.  Move onto somehting completly random. I want Dragon Age: Origins now!  Spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate Shadow's of Amn Woot Woot! lol

and yes these "features" are the standard lol

Oh and I have not played Half Life.  I know its an older game.  How old? I don't know.  Might get it with the Orange Box since its cheap now.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
There standards.  Please tell me what  good mainstream games have been released in this genre without these gameplay features."
First off, word choice (quite literally) :P. Second, I could say that they're not standards, but this would quickly turn into semantics if either of us continued on this path. And again, I-no, wait, I can name one: Half Life 2. That game had neither but was still good. Other than that, I can't name that many, mainly because I'm an old school gamer."
Find, discussion over.  Move onto somehting completly random. I want Dragon Age: Origins now!  Spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate Shadow's of Amn Woot Woot! lol

and yes these "features" are the standard lol
"
OK, that wording was better.

And onto something else random, I'm not into WRPGs. But I'll avoid that and say the Skullmonkeys is pretty damn sweet.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889

The last JRPG that I've played thats the had the most recent release date was Final Fantaxy X1/2 or something of the sort.  Thought it was fun, but not as fun as VII.  The majority of what I see now, which is something someone mentioned earlier, is that most of the JRPG main characters look either to cartoony or kiddish, or just depressing "I hate my life" hereos.  



Edit:  I meant VII not XII
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"The last JRPG that I've played thats the had the most recent release date was Final Fantaxy X1/2 or something of the sort.  Thought it was fun, but not as fun as XII.  The majority of what I see now, which is something someone mentioned earlier, is that most of the JRPG main characters look either to cartoony or kiddish, or just depressing "I hate my life" hereos.  "
FF12 was good? Oddly enough, I found it to be the most pretentious, up-its-own-ass game I've ever played, and I'm not exaggerating.
Avatar image for cl60
CL60

17117

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By CL60
SmugDarkLoser said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches."


Umm...why?  It's a straight up continuation.  Are you saying that something like the LOTR trilogy shouldn't exist?

Anyway, let's recap.
-You don't know any of the story, essentially jumping in at, imagine, say, the 3rd LOTR
....yet you bash the story and call it terrible

- You don't know how to properly control the thing (as demonstrated with the vehicles, equipment, etc.)
....yet you say you all those suck because you can't

- You haven't played the multiplayer
....yet you say it sucks and say it's the much like the sp because ifghting games are (co-op yea, but vs multiplayer, not at all)

- You bash halo for it's regerating health
...yet your playing on normal and openly said you shoot and have to hide behind a rock every two seconds peeking and shooting

- You call halo's music ambience music
...yet this is the main theme of halo (trilogy), this of 3

- You borrowed the game from a friend
...and you took his poster.  Are you a freaking asshole or what? >.>

"
Lets quote this because apparently the TC ignored it.
Avatar image for tbone81889
tbone81889

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tbone81889
Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"The last JRPG that I've played thats the had the most recent release date was Final Fantaxy X1/2 or something of the sort.  Thought it was fun, but not as fun as XII.  The majority of what I see now, which is something someone mentioned earlier, is that most of the JRPG main characters look either to cartoony or kiddish, or just depressing "I hate my life" hereos.  "
FF12 was good? Oddly enough, I found it to be the most pretentious, up-its-own-ass game I've ever played, and I'm not exaggerating."
I never played 12, so I do not know. Isn't that game an mmorpg?  
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
CL60 said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"SmugDarkLoser said:
"My god, when I was posting, the OP was at least a mindless hater.  Now he's just being ignorant. Damn, it's like what people call me. "
What of the posters around me? They're throwing around baseless claims in order to change my opinion on the game. "You're using it to martyr the entire FPS genre." I never said "FPSes suck" or anything of the like. "How can you say you hate the game if you haven't even tried out the multiplayer?" Akin to saying I can't hate a car until I ride with other people in it. Intrinsic problems are intrinsic problems. "You're just crap at it." I finished it within a few days. "How can you complain about the story when you've only played this one?" OK, this one is more legitimate, but as I said, truly great games don't use other games as crutches."


Umm...why?  It's a straight up continuation.  Are you saying that something like the LOTR trilogy shouldn't exist?

Anyway, let's recap.
-You don't know any of the story, essentially jumping in at, imagine, say, the 3rd LOTR
....yet you bash the story and call it terrible

- You don't know how to properly control the thing (as demonstrated with the vehicles, equipment, etc.)
....yet you say you all those suck because you can't

- You haven't played the multiplayer
....yet you say it sucks and say it's the much like the sp because ifghting games are (co-op yea, but vs multiplayer, not at all)

- You bash halo for it's regerating health
...yet your playing on normal and openly said you shoot and have to hide behind a rock every two seconds peeking and shooting

- You call halo's music ambience music
...yet this is the main theme of halo (trilogy), this of 3

- You borrowed the game from a friend
...and you took his poster.  Are you a freaking asshole or what? >.>

"
Lets quote this because apparently the TC ignored it."
Not exactly. I think he edited it after I quoted him. So let me do it here:

I bash it for being confusing. Again, may I bring up the "stand on its own" point?
I know how to control them, yet I can still call them crap. Why is the steering delayed? What's the excuse there?
Again, I'm saying that multiplayer does not excuse the problems I have listed.
So? How does that put my opinion into question? I can't say much for normal difficulty since it's pretty standard for many video games, but I can say that the health system pretty much encourages these repetitive tactics.
That's ambiance. I want active music, like this, or this, or even this.
That's beside the point. Besides, I don't think they'd mind :P.
Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King
tbone81889 said:
"Video_Game_King said:
"tbone81889 said:
"The last JRPG that I've played thats the had the most recent release date was Final Fantaxy X1/2 or something of the sort.  Thought it was fun, but not as fun as XII.  The majority of what I see now, which is something someone mentioned earlier, is that most of the JRPG main characters look either to cartoony or kiddish, or just depressing "I hate my life" hereos.  "
FF12 was good? Oddly enough, I found it to be the most pretentious, up-its-own-ass game I've ever played, and I'm not exaggerating."
I never played 12, so I do not know. Isn't that game an mmorpg?  
"
No, it's a piece of crap. Avoid it, unless you like games that play themselves.