- SentientGiraffe
- |
- Exalted Heroic Member
i laugh at the people who say i would pay 100 dollars for halo 1 with XBL. when it comes down to it, if Bungie released halo 1 with XBL support and wanted 100 dollars for it every one of you would complain saying its too much money for an old game that you already own and just need xbox support for.
You guys complain about 10 dollars for maps and say you would pay 100 dollars for halo 1. lol
And the tard who said halo 3 went from 500,000 to 50,000 because they went to halo 1 or COD 4, you are an idiot, too.
Halo 3 plus the map pack is roughly $70. That's not an unreasonable price. Halo with live support would be about twice as good. That would set it at around $140. It would have more replay value than Rock Band, and that's $170. The problem with the map pack is that it's almost required. Halo 3 had the weakest map set of the 3 games. Also, the new maps aren't as good as Halo maps. If the map pack included Blood Gulch, Sidewinder, and Damnation I would pay much more than $10. It's not the cost of the maps; it's the value of the maps.
Posted by: twin twisters
halo1 would never beat halo3 the only reason your saying that is because you dont have halo3 or a xbox360 so stop making these stupid forums
1) I have both consoles and all 3 games. Halo 1 is better than Halo 3.
2) Punctuation is your friend.
3) I think you mean threads.
Posted by: Emo Slaya
All I can say is take off the Rose coloured glasses of Nostalgia, half your facts are biased considering that on LAN, you play with friends not random jackasses that scream into the mike constantly.
After taking off those glasses, should we rush to the next new thing that comes out?
Posted by: Emo Slaya
Console gamers are all the same, right when the next "new" thing comes out, they all rush to it. Look what happened to GOW, what was left of their fanbase went off to play Halo 3.
I think that's the reason a lot of people switched to Halo 2 and ultimately switched to Halo 3.
[Edited on 01.02.2008 1:11 PM PST]