Feel free to comment,fanboyism must be avoided. Vote without bias. Don't comment like 'oh yeah','hell yeah'.I mean,make a sentence or two(or a way longer comment). Criticism,positive or negative is welcomed but don't hate blindlessly.
no, it won't. The entire series is a mediocre rip off of the tribes series, It would do better with no story at all and there is absolutely nothing groundbreaking in it at all. Even the multiplayer gets old fast.
I really dont think its going to redefine anything, all I can see from Reach is Halo with Jetpacks..and Tribes has/had me covered for many years with that. Dont get me wrong for Halo its a good improvement considering Halo generally plays a lot slower than most FPS titles would, but I cant really see it being groundbreaking or revolutionizing when its already been done. All in all its going to be Halo and people are going to fly off the handle for it, but weither or not the jetpacks are implemented well is what will define the game as a whole..Because if its too complicated, the millions of children that scream into your ear via xbox live will find it too hard to play and drop the game, turning Halos large fanbase into something much much smaller. Thats what I think anyway, if my 360 didnt fry and Microsoft didnt want the entire cost of the console just to "look at it" (They litterally said that) I'd probably still be playing Halo on and off..So all in all I think it'll be good, but the jetpacks have been done before so its more "Hey this is the same old Halo but Look What We Can Do!" than "Hey look now you can do THIS". Meaning they're putting in something known to be cool (jetpacks) for the sake of keeping the gameplay fresh..which is a smart move considering how old Halo gets over time, but they're not adding anything truely new or anything to really change things up. -Insert even longer portion here- Also why is it that they have Jetpacks in Reach, which is supposed to be before Halo..yet Halo, Halo 2 and Halo 3 didnt have this? I'm waiting for that explanation from Bungie, Lol.
Explain "redefine". That term gets thrown around a lot, and it always seems to mean "they made the graphics shinier and added a gimmicky new feature" nowadays. It'll be Halo 3 with jetpacks. That's it.
lol at redefine. I watched the multiplayer beta trailer and I'm happy to say that I'm genuinely excited for the beta so I can try it but I really really don't think it'll redefine anything. It'll be fun though, and I always liked the Halo's campaign mode (unlike the multiplayer mode). The campaign will be Halo ODST + more. The multiplayer hopefully will be substantially better than Halo 3 (fuck it was so boring playing it online). It won't redefine crap but it'll be a fun distraction (hopefully), like most games. wat I don't remember jetpacks before Halo Reach. As for the poll, it'll be another Halo game.
I am pretty sure it won't because seriously, it's just another run-of-the-ill FPS with another story, etc. MAG on the PS3 refined online gameplay. Batllefield: Bad Comapny redefined destruction in games. Jame's Cameron's AVATAR redifined movies and CGI, graphics, animation, etc! Those three franchises/titles redifined stuff! And another! Mass Effect 2, chose your way of the story!
I just like the campaigns. I have only played Halo series 5 times altogether. That's the only interesting thing about it. It's just over-rated. It's nothing like Perfect Dark or anything else I like.
FPS are like rpg's, all they do is ethier use the best parts of established games with little gimmicks here and there, or make an arse of it's self and fail. But same applies to all games that are of an established gene.
It'll probably just be another regular Halo game. Good or bad, I'm not sure. Only way I'll find out is by playing the multiplayer beta in may.
MAG, no. If you mean by the number of players, sure. Otherwise what was done in MAG has been done by Battlefield or by Tribes. And KOTOR had the choose your own story way way before Mass Effect 2, I'm sure there was one before KOTOR also.
Ever heard of Baldur's gate?Fallout 1& 2?Planescape Torment?Kotor?(star wars)-all those are deeper and have much more replaybility than Mass Effect 2. Mass Effect 2 is not innovative just like most sequals but it is a very well executed game. Kotor is about 60 hours while Mass Effect 2 is 20-30 hours. It's nothing revolutionary if you are used to PC RPG.PC RPGs had have choices and open-ended gameplay since like maybe mid and late 90s. Still,the presentation,art,sound effects,and of course the combat are all very well designed.(the story itself,like most games,is mediocre.It's the characterization that makes it cinematic) Not directed to you Natalie,but gary. Huge number of players-maybe more innovative for consoles. But on PC...Oh wait gary,ever heard of Massively-Multiplayer online games? As for online matchmaking(or anything related to online play),there's plenty of games that did it before(including Battlefield and Tribes)..wait isn't Blizzard's Battle Net was launch in 1997?Has PSN or X-box LIVE been around back then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_net Post Merge: [time]1269036746[/time] Behold the the 'official game of the decade list'.(well,the list was voted by game developers across the board)http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4227/gamasutras_top_12_games_of_the_.php Gamasutra is a game developers website.
Yeah, I've heard of them but I really think that we're talking about console games (as a part of the main subject because HALO reach will be on the XBOX 360 first, than other systems) And yes, I heard about Battle Net and MMOs! Don't you think that some of use have tried RuneScape? Maybe World of warcraft? I'm talking directly to consoles, not the PC!!!
There was barely any hype for FFXIII, and that game delivered well... I hate halo cause it RROD'ed my 360.
NOT so,it currently has a metascore of 83%. Compared to previous entries all above 90%. @Gary.When did you mention that you are talking about console?
Games don't cause the RRoD, the Xbox causes the RRoD. KOTOR was on the Xbox. Tribes was on the PS2 (with 64 players omg). And MAG has not redefined anything. Sure it forces you to play as a team, but games have done that way before MAG, player count, doesn't really matter. The reason why player count doesn't matter in MAG is because you rarely see 24 people at a time, it's concentrated fights. Either way it hasn't redefined anything, it's added more players, but that's nothing in terms of redefine or revolutionize. Also you've said nothing referring only to consoles.
off topic: i Don't think FFXIII was over rated on topic: I spent hours and days on halo 3, i feel that halo took skill to get good and people were always trying to get better
