- gamertag: An0nz
- user homepage:
CoD is a good game, even if the Halo series are better in some aspects. Anyone who insults either is just bad in that game. Grow up.
Posted by: OrderedComa
I see plenty of logic in both, maybe what you're looking for is informative? Because books are certainly much more informative than a game could ever be, depending on the book.
No, I'm looking for logic. Games are focused on gameplay,not logic. In a Halo (excluding Halo Wars) game, no automatic weapon can get headshots, you're limited by the game mechanics in terms of what you can do, and the story is only as good as the cutscenes.
I highly doubt that everyone who's played both will agree with you. It sounds to me, from what you've said so far, that Crysis is more your gaming love than Halo and your opinions might be a little bit biased, but that's ok because Halo is my gaming love and I'm more biased toward it than any other shooter. From what my friend said about Crysis today when I asked him about it, he said it, I think he was talking more about Crysis 2, was poorly made hodge-podge of Halo, CoD, and BF:BCII. Now because I haven't played the game, I will try my best to maintain a neutral view of it, but my friend kinda knows what he's talking about when he talks about games, so that may color my view a bit, but I shall try my best to stay neutral.
Actually I'm neither console or PC gamer, I like both equally, I'm just behind in the PC gaming world because I haven't had a computer that's good for gaming for quite a while. And what mindset are you talking about exactly?
You're probably right. Not 100% of players who play both will agree with me. Only 99%. It's like asking if someone thinks $1000 is more than $500. It's just that obvious. Halo doesn't show your super-soldier might through gameplay, the player just knows that you play as a super soldier, but you never actually use abilities that would prove to be so.
First of all, your friend...well, he's your friend, so he's probably going to side with you, and second, I don't know what he's smoking because Crysis 2 isn't actually released yet. (not the retail version anyways)And honestly, whenever someone say that they honestly just sound like they're fairly narrow minded and set on the simple idea of "everyone wants to copy from mainstream games". Just like how when everyone hears of Guild Wars 2, they immediately think "they're trying to copy World of Warcraft". On another note, if your friend is making judgments based on the recent fail of the Crysis 2 MP demo, then I doubt he can make a proper judgment. If, however, he's gotten himself on a copy of the leaked beta, well, I personally have only seen an friend play that as well, so I can't comment on that.
If you're behind on pc gaming but still relatively knowledgeable about console gaming..that would make you a bigger console gamer than pc. But Crysis 1 was released in 2007, so you must be years behind the pc gaming curve. The only reason Crysis wasn't huge like Halo or CoD was because it wasn't as much of a game as graphic showcase; you can play it just like any other game, but you needed an extremely good computer. Back when it was released, the best possible gaming pc couldn't even run the game at more than "high" settings, and the FPS was fairly low.
I don't have Cryis as my gaming love...I'm an extremely rounded gamer, and I simply look at what's good about a game compared to others. Halo just doesn't compare when you look at the portrayal of military prowess. Again, this is funny, people tend to place all these mainstream games on a pedestal, as if they are the ultimate games of the decade, but there are other, maybe less famous games out there that are easily the same caliber if not better.
As for the mindset? PC gamers have long realized the potential for games to actually "act out" the scenes you can see in a movie, and so the portrayal found in pure-console games like Halo are simply sup-par in comparison. Can't blame them. Consoles are working with outdated tech now.
You don't need to be able to do something in game to tell you that the player character is special or a super soldier, it helps, but it is not necessary, one can exist without the other. There is very, very, very little difference between "plot" and "ability". The "plot" is influenced [i]by[/i[ your "abilities".
If Noble Team acted the way they were supposed to the game would have played itself, you wouldn't have to do anything, and the game would be way too easy. As for Lone Wolf, it's like any boss fight where you can see the boss's life meter, even though you technically "killed" the boss in gameplay, it shows a cutscene of you killing it. You can view it as a more of a countdown to the death scene. Super Smash Bros. Brawl is a perfect example of this, all the boss fights in the campaign mode have a life meter, and even though it shows them die, immediately after it goes into a cutscene where the monster gets killed by the protagonists.
There is a difference between knowing that the player is special and having the game actually SHOW you, the latter being portrayal. For example, what would make you feel like a soldier more during World War II? Being enlisted in the army reserves, or actually being sent to the front-lines?
If a game tells me I am a super-soldier, and yet from my capabilities are limited compared to other sources (novels) or other portrayals (competing games or movies) then I find it kind of hard to actually believe that I'm special.
There is a fine line between plot and ability...and I think you should learn that before you step into that argument again. In any case, I'm talking about player-controllable abilities, not abilities as you would describe a character.
And I just love when people say that. There are ways to make NPCs better without making them play the entire course of the game. Look at Gears of War. Look at Mass Effect, or even look at CoD. First, there's nothing wrong with making NPCs who are good enough to match that of an average player, that just means you get to put more enemies on the field. Secondly, these NPCs can be demonstrated to be special through other means than making them so smart the game plays itself, namely, cutscenes that occur more than once that reinforces this specialty throughout the course of the game.
Brawl is not a FPS, is it? Many game genres sport the "drain health and yet still alive thing", but that doesn't fit well in FPS games. Then again, this is a small issue; as I've said before, all that they had to do was trigger the cutscene as soon as the shields were drained, and everything would make much more sense.
That is simply your opinion, and I do not agree or disagree with it because I have not played Crysis. However, my point still stands that you can't use it as evidence of what Spartans should do in Halo's gameplay. And you obviously have superior strength, it takes the marines in Halo many hits to beatdown an Elite or Brute, whereas the player kills them in two hits, one to take out armor/shields and the other to deliver the killing blow.
Yea...I CAN use it as evidence, because that's simply a comparison to see how gameplay can be used as a tool to fill in the descriptions, it's not about whether Spartans should do this or that, but rather that if they were fleshed out properly, it would look much more like Crysis than Halo. Go watch a Halo match in theatre mode...So arcade it's not even funny.
Yea, Spartans are stronger than marines in game, but that and flipping vehicles (which automatically flip when you hit a button) are the only times you really see their strength in gameplay. In Crysis, you can actually use that strength in situations other than hitting people, and the actions are usually portrayed more similar to how you would see in Mirror's Edge, where you can visually see your characters perform the actions.
Eh, yes and no, the ODSTs are better than your average mook, so they are essentially super soldiers, but they're still normal, so they're not exactly a super soldier, more like a badass normal
Yea. So they're not super-soldiers, which just trumps your point about the only rule about super-soldiers being that they're better than the average run-of-the-mill recruit.
[Edited on 02.20.2011 12:09 PM PST]