Will PS2 ever successfully make a good Halo clone

PS2 is a game console, not a developer. As an inanimate object, it lacks the ability to develop games.

If you're using 'PS2' as some strange metaphor for 'all the studios who develop for the PS2', well then Killzone might shape up into something worthwhile.
 
[quote name='pukemon']metal arms is a damn good substitute but it is on all 3 platforms.[/quote]

Whats the new one called? I think that its Fire Warrior or something like that. What ever its called its the latest attempt to clone Halo. Its a pretty crappy game though. PS2 developers just give it up. You guys can never make another Halo
 
[quote name='fuchikoma']PS2 is a game console, not a developer. As an inanimate object, it lacks the ability to develop games.

If you're using 'PS2' as some strange metaphor for 'all the studios who develop for the PS2', well then Killzone might shape up into something worthwhile.[/quote]

Killzone looks pretty damn cool. I believe its being developed by SCEE, so is it coming to the US? Anyone have a clue about the release date?
 
[quote name='space_rover'][quote name='pukemon']metal arms is a damn good substitute but it is on all 3 platforms.[/quote]

Whats the new one called? I think that its Fire Warrior or something like that. What ever its called its the latest attempt to clone Halo. Its a pretty crappy game though. PS2 developers just give it up. You guys can never make another Halo[/quote]

I don't think Sony needs to make a game like Halo. Last time I looked at the sales figures it seemed like Microsoft was getting killed in console sales by the PS2
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback'][quote name='space_rover'][quote name='pukemon']metal arms is a damn good substitute but it is on all 3 platforms.[/quote]

Whats the new one called? I think that its Fire Warrior or something like that. What ever its called its the latest attempt to clone Halo. Its a pretty crappy game though. PS2 developers just give it up. You guys can never make another Halo[/quote]

I don't think Sony needs to make a game like Halo. Last time I looked at the sales figures it seemed like Microsoft was getting killed in console sales by the PS2[/quote]

Sony doesn't really need to do anything at this point. PS2 won by a landslide in terms of sales, and there is no real chance of the others catching up. However I don't really believe that the most popular gaming system/game is really the best. PS2 is very cool, but is not my gaming system of choice right now.
 
Other consoles may not need to "catch up" with Sony PS2 in terms of console sales. We'll see how the next gen console wars are waged. keep in mind XBOX also has XBLIVE subscriptions and gamers are willingly and happily paying $5+ month and the numbers are growing. Plus the XB download content is amazing. simply amazing. new missions (i.e. Armed & Dangerous), new maps, levels, etc constantly being added. more bang for the buck.

PS2 is a great system, so is XBOX, but I can't wait to see PS3 vs. XBOX2 and PSP vs. XBMobile.

Plus, too many retailers going out of business or closing game divisions and perhaps another game industry crash is on the horizon... I believe we're at the 10 year anniversary now. maybe the whole industry won't crash, but perhaps there's no longer room for 3 major consoles. and MS has plenty of capital to survive any crash.
 
really? 5 halo knock offs? I don't think just because something is a first-person shooter with a sci-fi theme it's a halo knock off. If you wanna go by that you might as well say halo is a knock off of half-life (ione example would be the 2 aliens you encounter "the flood") and that half-life is a knock off of Doom (opening a portal somewhere that unleashes a bunch of creatures). The only thing I've heard of or has been talked about taking halo on is Killzone but that's still pretty early.
 
killzone will knock halo off the map, halo was good in multiplayer, and hate to be sacreligious, but the single player had a good story but man did it get boring in the library!
 
[quote name='fuchikoma']PS2 is a game console, not a developer. As an inanimate object, it lacks the ability to develop games.

If you're using 'PS2' as some strange metaphor for 'all the studios who develop for the PS2', well then Killzone might shape up into something worthwhile.[/quote]

Damn...you beat me to mocking the stupid person. Take away all my fun, why don't you...
 
[quote name='space_rover']I think that its funny the way that after all these years they are still trying :lol:[/quote]

Please take your fanboy trolling self back to gamefaqs.

This isn't the place to start flame wars you monkey ass.
 
[quote name='grayghost81']Can I start a fire here and say that Halo really isnt that good a game to begin with?[/quote]

You can try, but you'd be wrong.
 
Here, let's formalize our feeling on Halo.
Point 1: It is a good game.

Point 2. It is not innovative. It doesn't really introduce anything we haven't see done in another game.

Point 3.It succeeds because it does things we've seen done well on PC game on a console game.. tapping a new market.

Point 4. Halo has now become overrated. It's a good, perhaps even great, videogame, but it is not nearly the "best game ever made" people try to tack on to it.


Halo 2 is going to have a hard time living up to the expectations people already have for it. People won't be satisfied with what Halo did to become good in the first place... doing everything competently. There's already a HUGE hype build-up for it, and to top it off, Doom 3 and Half Life 2 are likely to ship for it... What people expect from a FPS will likely be much greater... and therefore Halo 2 will likely have to do some REAL innovation this time to ever live up to the piles of hype heaped on it.

Bungie is going have to start to deal with the problem that Nintendo and the other big boys struggle with with thier sequels.... People saying "Yeah, this game is great, but it isn't great enough."

Everything following is my opinion and mine alone:
What really worries me it the shortened development cycle on Halo 2. I have a feeling that Halo started out life as a new iteration in the Marathon series... (Bungie has admitted that stories exist in the same universe) and could have been in development for much longer than people would assume Halo was. For all we know, the game could have been almost ready to be launched on the Mac as Marathon 4, and that Microsoft convinced Bungie to port it to the Xbox and have as a launch title.
 
Now that you mention it, I did play marathon 2 a few times, but that was like 5 years ago. I never knew a 3rd one even came out.
 
[quote name='JSweeney']Here, let's formalize our feeling on Halo.
Point 1: It is a good game.

Point 2. It is not innovative. It doesn't really introduce anything we haven't see done in another game.

Point 3.It succeeds because it does things we've seen done well on PC game on a console game.. tapping a new market.

Point 4. Halo has now become overrated. It's a good, perhaps even great, videogame, but it is not nearly the "best game ever made" people try to tack on to it.[/quote]

I don't know if those exactly summarize my feelings, but I would like to add my own $0.02:

1: Yes, it is.

2: Innovation is a new method or device. While FPS, and sci-fi ones no less, have been done time and time again, with Half Life being the most notable one before it, it's never been done as successfully on a console. I believe that's where the innovation was.

3: Exactly.

4: Now, the fact you get tired of it and yearn for something new, of course, that's a given, but I don't think it "has now become overrated."

Now, "Best Game Ever Made?" Well, I don't believe there's any game that's worthy of that title. However, in comparison to other console FPS, I still think Halo as an overall experience is the best value an FPS for home consoles has to offer. For now. It's up for grabs once the next round of b'guns comes out: Half Life 2, Doom 3, and Halo 2.

[quote name='JSweeney']Halo 2 is going to have a hard time living up to the expectations people already have for it.[/quote]

This is a valid point. However, the attempt to do so along with competition from the likes of Doom 3 and Half Life 2 is going make this a very exciting time for FPS fans, console and PC alike.

[quote name='JSweeney']Bungie is going have to start to deal with the problem that Nintendo and the other big boys struggle with with thier sequels.... People saying "Yeah, this game is great, but it isn't great enough."[/quote]

Start? There's always been those people, and always will be.

[quote name='JSweeney']Everything following is my opinion and mine alone:
What really worries me it the shortened development cycle on Halo 2. I have a feeling that Halo started out life as a new iteration in the Marathon series... (Bungie has admitted that stories exist in the same universe) and could have been in development for much longer than people would assume Halo was. For all we know, the game could have been almost ready to be launched on the Mac as Marathon 4, and that Microsoft convinced Bungie to port it to the Xbox and have as a launch title.[/quote]

Halo was in development at least as far back as 99, when it was shown at MacWorld Expo, I believe, if not sooner. However, Halo came out for Xbox in 2001, a 2 year spread. It's over 2 years now since Halo was released, and it's been said that Halo 2 has been in development since the first one hit store shelves. A shortened development cycle? Maybe, but not significant. I could see this being a factor if Halo 2 came out 6 months to a year after the first one, but that's not the case.
 
Will the wars ever stopp? Just buy both damn systems and play the ones with the better games at the time. I care noothing for who makes what game and the color of the console thats just plan stupid! I care about games simple as that. If a good games is on a different sytem play that game I wish everybody would stop being so jump on the band wagon and all. Who would have thought sony would have made a videogames shape out they way they did a few years back. Sony who is sony everybody kept asking. Now look its sony not sega, or nintendo thats making leaps. Just cause its a no name or smaller company doesn't mean that it will be bad. Heres the key to help us the gamers. Try ALL GAMES/systems Find out what you like and what you don't like about the sytems and TELL the makers. thats what helps us get the best products out there. Yes xbox has done some neat things, yes sony has done some neat things, both are not perfect. They still need work. They will both come up with more neat things to get us to buy that sytem. BOth will have different ideas. !thats what we need. Not everybody just jumping on to the bandwagon because of name! Boy i miss the old nes days! just games! Didn't have to worry aboput all of this stupid stuff!
 

I don't know if those exactly summarize my feelings, but I would like to add my own $0.02:

1: Yes, it is.
Good, I think most people without some kind of ax to grind can agree to this.

2: Innovation is a new method or device. While FPS, and sci-fi ones no less, have been done time and time again, with Half Life being the most notable one before it, it's never been done as successfully on a console. I believe that's where the innovation was.

But is it innovative to only do something only competently?
Halo made no radical changes to the genre of FPS's.
Sci-fi FPS had been done before... Perfect Dark had Sci-Fi elements, as did Timesplitters.

Even Doom, Wolfenstien and Half-life have had servicable ports to home consoles. Just because Halo does better on the console doesn't mean it's innovative.

Halo, while a great evolution in console FPS, did nothing revolutionary.
That is why I believe it isn't innovative. That doesn't take anything away from the game itself.. Zelda: Link to the Past was much the same, as it did very little in the way of innovation and redefining gameplay methods... it was just a highly polished, evolutionary step in the progression of a series.

3: Exactly.

4: Now, the fact you get tired of it and yearn for something new, of course, that's a given, but I don't think it "has now become overrated."

I think this applies more to the world of message boards and such that the game itself. No other group of people seem to be as vocal as those supporting Halo. Just like this topic, some fool posts something like this.
Where's the posts saying that Microsoft and Sony (and thier related developers) keep trying to rip of Zelda?
Or the posts asking why Microsoft and Nintendo can't measure up to the Eye Toy or something like that?


Now, "Best Game Ever Made?" Well, I don't believe there's any game that's worthy of that title. However, in comparison to other console FPS, I still think Halo as an overall experience is the best value an FPS for home consoles has to offer. For now. It's up for grabs once the next round of b'guns comes out: Half Life 2, Doom 3, and Halo 2.

I compeletely agree.


This is a valid point. However, the attempt to do so along with competition from the likes of Doom 3 and Half Life 2 is going make this a very exciting time for FPS fans, console and PC alike.

I just don't want all the hype to make Halo 2 seem underwhelming, and a disappointment to some... damaging a viable and well done franchise.


Start? There's always been those people, and always will be.
Yes, but Bungie really hasn't had to deal with it. I just hope something like this doesn't ruin another promising franchise.. it has happened before, and I don't doubt it could happen again.


Halo was in development at least as far back as 99, when it was shown at MacWorld Expo, I believe, if not sooner. However, Halo came out for Xbox in 2001, a 2 year spread. It's over 2 years now since Halo was released, and it's been said that Halo 2 has been in development since the first one hit store shelves. A shortened development cycle? Maybe, but not significant. I could see this being a factor if Halo 2 came out 6 months to a year after the first one, but that's not the case.

Actually, Bungie hasn't even published a release date for Halo 2 yet, so it is actually probably a bit premature to worry about the release cycle for it.. I mean, most information is hinting that Halo 2 would only ship in Q4 of this year, at the earliest. Bungie knows that this is the golden cow, and if they kill it, they can basically kiss thier future goodbye. I hope Microsoft is as understanding, and give them the time they need to make it right... even if that means it shows up as a launch title for Xbox2.
 
Will the wars ever stop?
Nope, tis the nature of the beast. One can only hope to find a group of people with which they can discuss and even disagree with... an not argue.

Just buy both damn systems and play the ones with the better games at the time.

And here I thought there were 3 viable console systems on the market (all of which I own, by the way.

I care noothing for who makes what game and the color of the console thats just plan stupid! I care about games simple as that.

Really, you aren't more excited when you hear Nintendo, Capcom or Konami is making a game then when you hear that Accliam, Activision or Atari are?



If a good games is on a different sytem play that game I wish everybody would stop being so jump on the band wagon and all.

Some people can only afford one console and a few games. If that happens, they'll bandwagon jump to support their machine. This is very prevalent on some gaming boards, as the younger demographic (the ones who can't afford as much) have the most time to post. Hence, more bandwagon jumping and hyping of thier console's game.

Who would have thought sony would have made a videogames shape out they way they did a few years back.

Quite a few people. They were using a heaper medium,offered a good alternative to the draconian policies from Nintendo regarding software publishing, and Sega's fumbling with a hardware standard gave Sony a good in to the market. That's all a gigantic multinational corporation that already has hardware and entertainment units need.




Sony who is sony everybody kept asking.

Unless they were mildly retarded or living under a rock, everyone was well aware who Sony was and what they did.


Now look its sony not sega, or nintendo thats making leaps.

Bah. Sony isn't making leaps. The are playing things very conservatively... they just happen to have an enormous software base, and great support from 3rd party developers. The last remotely innovative thing Sony has done is the eye toy.. beyond that, they seem to be content resting on thier laurels. (Unless of course, more is going on in the development of the PS3 than people know.)



Just cause its a no name or smaller company doesn't mean that it will be bad.

It doesn't mean it will be good either. As hard as it is to believe, there are a few companies that are much more apt to produce a good game... that's why they have followings.



Heres the key to help us the gamers. Try ALL GAMES/systems Find out what you like and what you don't like about the sytems and TELL the makers.

Bah. BS. Money talks, BS walks. You buy what you like at full price. You don't play cheapass with a series you adore, especially if a small company is producing it. Companies don't care about emails, message boards, etc. The are companies, after all. All that matters is the bottom line.


thats what helps us get the best products out there.

Nope. Sales Success does that. It also helps to perpetuate the growth of bad software. It's a catch-22. Companies don't care if you love them or hate them... as long as you buy thier game.


Yes xbox has done some neat things, yes sony has done some neat things, both are not perfect. They still need work. They will both come up with more neat things to get us to buy that sytem. BOth will have different ideas. !thats what we need. Not everybody just jumping on to the bandwagon because of name!

You say all this, yet completely ignore the Gamecube and Nintendo.
You seem to be doing a little bandwagon jumping yourself.



Boy i miss the old nes days! just games! Didn't have to worry aboput all of this stupid stuff

You are just to young to remember, then. I remember kids arguing about the NES and SMS, and even the rich kid arguing how awesome his new NEO GEO was. The web just makes it more available. This problem is nothing new.

Actually, there were even those fights and squables between Mattel, Coleco and Atari.

It existed, even if you didn't. Those of us who actually telneted into BBS's or University servers know that these arguments raged on the internet long before many of you were born, or had computers.
 
Say what you will, but every one knows that Halo is an excellent FPS. Its one of the few FPS like Goldeneye, Deus Ex,Castle W etc that I never had a hard time enjoying. One play of Halo and ye shall quickly realize that the game lives up to all of the hype. Regardless of sales figures the people at PS2 know that they need a game like Halo. Its what the gamers want. Cause In my opinion there arent any good FPS for PS2. And even if they were good there were to many bugs which screwed up the whole game.


When I started this post I didnt mean to make any one get emo. I just keep seeing these FPS for PS2 pop up out of every where that mirror Halo. The weapon types, only being able to carry 2 weapons at once, the visuals etc. Bottom Line Halo is a great FPS. For the type of game that it is, its very realistic. Bungie did a great job of writing a good story that dosent seem like the avg re hashed run of the mill sci fi FPS. Now, think deep Name for me one FPS on PS2 that can keep up with Halo audio, visually and story wise! I thought you couldnt
 
You're argument might have been better received if you came up with specific comparisons for people to agree or debate. The way it is right now it sounds like you're going: "Xbox has better FPS than PS2 neener neener!"

...To which most people will just say: "So what?" Especially after Nintendo just pushed the box into third place with their holiday sales numbers.
 
[quote name='space_rover']Say what you will, but every one knows that Halo is an excellent FPS. Its one of the few FPS like Goldeneye, Deus Ex,Castle W etc that I never had a hard time enjoying. One play of Halo and ye shall quickly realize that the game lives up to all of the hype. Regardless of sales figures the people at PS2 know that they need a game like Halo. Its what the gamers want. Cause In my opinion there arent any good FPS for PS2. And even if they were good there were to many bugs which screwed up the whole game.


When I started this post I didnt mean to make any one get emo. I just keep seeing these FPS for PS2 pop up out of every where that mirror Halo. The weapon types, only being able to carry 2 weapons at once, the visuals etc. Bottom Line Halo is a great FPS. For the type of game that it is, its very realistic. Bungie did a great job of writing a good story that dosent seem like the avg re hashed run of the mill sci fi FPS. Now, think deep Name for me one FPS on PS2 that can keep up with Halo audio, visually and story wise! I thought you couldnt[/quote]

please stop with the fanboyism. Its annoying, we all know that PS2 can not crank out the same power as an Xbox.

Its a launch title that came out 2 years ago, looks dated compared to newer shooters and the second half of the game is no where near as good as the first 5 chapters.

Personally Halo was the reason I got an Xbox, but its not the greatest and there are many better shooters out (Raven Shield, No One Lives Forever 2)
 
[quote name='grayghost81']Can I start a fire here and say that Halo really isnt that good a game to begin with?[/quote]

yay someone finally said it.

halo was merely ok. not great. not even good. just ok, ps2 doesnt need a halo clone because it has so many games that are better. like almost anything
 
i never played halo so i dont understand everyones obsession with it, however nothing ive seen even makes me want to play it, red faction, now that was a great console fps
 
I would count Socom 2 as a FPS (because that's the only way I play it) and I think it's a great, but like halo it's multi-player is better than it's single player game.
 
[quote name='punqsux']i never played halo so i dont understand everyones obsession with it, however nothing ive seen even makes me want to play it, red faction, now that was a great console fps[/quote]


Red Faction, Great? :lol: Thats funny! If you like Red Faction you will definitely LOVE Halo
 
*COUGH Tribes:Aerial Assault *COUGH....sleeper hit but it could whoop Halo's ass any day of the damn week. Variety of cool weapons: check, unique Vehicles: check, Jet packs: check, Online play: check. Isn't it funny how Halo only has one of those 4 things while Tribes proudly and successfullly wields all of them?
 
*COUGH Tribes:Aerial Assault *COUGH....sleeper hit but it could whoop Halo's ass any day of the damn week. Variety of cool weapons: check, unique Vehicles: check, Jet packs: check, Online play: check. Isn't it funny how Halo only has one of those 4 things while Tribes proudly and successfullly wields all of them?
Click to expand...

_>

Ummm... you named 4 things total, and the jetpacks thing is something that if I recall only Tribes did, of course Halo or any FPS for that matter won't have them. I could name a million things that Halo has that Tribes doesn't; good gameplay being one...

BTW, I for one don't even have Halo, but I felt the need to but in because there is no way that Tribes is better than Halo. Red Faction IMO is near the caliber of Halo; not quite but almost there. Just wait until Killzone is all I have to say, PS2 will get it's FPS gem.
 
[quote name='Mr_hockey66']Will the wars ever stopp? Just buy both damn systems and play the ones with the better games at the time. I care noothing for who makes what game and the color of the console thats just plan stupid! I care about games simple as that. If a good games is on a different sytem play that game I wish everybody would stop being so jump on the band wagon and all. Who would have thought sony would have made a videogames shape out they way they did a few years back. Sony who is sony everybody kept asking. Now look its sony not sega, or nintendo thats making leaps. Just cause its a no name or smaller company doesn't mean that it will be bad. Heres the key to help us the gamers. Try ALL GAMES/systems Find out what you like and what you don't like about the sytems and TELL the makers. thats what helps us get the best products out there. Yes xbox has done some neat things, yes sony has done some neat things, both are not perfect. They still need work. They will both come up with more neat things to get us to buy that sytem. BOth will have different ideas. !thats what we need. Not everybody just jumping on to the bandwagon because of name! Boy i miss the old nes days! just games! Didn't have to worry aboput all of this stupid stuff![/quote] Anyways MrSweeny! I just enjoy the games as I stated. I didn't mention nintendo at this point becuase we are talking about x-box vs. ps2. I do have nintendo, actually I have evry nintendo system ever made except gameboy and thats emulated on my computer! I have nes super nintendo, 64, and gamecube. I have ps2 and x-box. (still need to get my old sega back!) As to the point with the sells and numbers being bottom line. I do agree with this. HOwever rarely do I buy a game at 49.99 anymore. Thats crazy. As you can see I'm a CAG. I don't see why game companies can charge that much and people will pay it. They say its because of priricy but movies go through more pritied actions then games do and none would ever pay 49.99 dollars for a dvd! Oh of the subject sorry. No allso I ment sony as in game standards was not a well know name. Many people picked there snes/ sega (i forget the name now but the one before the dreamcast) over sony because of name. Allso look at rockstar games! Big name now and they made some good games. Who were they a few years ago a no name company! Thats what I has talking about. Yes the big names do put out better games. BUT THEY ARE THE SAME OLD CRAP JUST DIFFERENT YEAR! MARIO SHINOBI RYGAR NINJA GADIEN ALL STUFF I have allready seen! back in the 80,s actually. I look for the small companies to make the new and orginal stuff that keeps the market changing and growing. Who was BUNGIE a few years back! They help make the game which we argue. NOw wait maybe its their fault! DAMN YOU BUNGIE FOR MAKING A GOOD GAME AND ONLY LEAVING IT ONE ONE PLATFORM!
 
The reason Halo was so sucessful was because of the atomsphere it created when it was played. PS2 has many FPS's that play well but you just don't get "in the mood" when you play them. I mean in most of Halo's multiplayer maps, you use only one weapon whereas in other FPS's you can choose from like 50....you would think having more weapons would be more gun but it isn't. Graphics also come into play and that is one area where Halo doesn'y lack. The measure of a good game is its ability to keep you from putting the controller down and back in the SNES days, I played a game for 5 hours straight and not want to stop. It may have been because I was young but I can't to that on today's systems. The longest I can get is maybe 2 hours and only when they're is a lan party, can I go longer...
 
Anyways MrSweeny! I just enjoy the games as I stated. I didn't mention nintendo at this point becuase we are talking about x-box vs. ps2.

You mentioned "the wars" which implies the state of the entire industry, hence my pointing out of your neglect for Nintendo.




I do have nintendo, actually I have evry nintendo system ever made except gameboy and thats emulated on my computer! I have nes super nintendo, 64, and gamecube. I have ps2 and x-box. (still need to get my old sega back!)

Yippie. Good for you. What do you want, a cookie or something?



As to the point with the sells and numbers being bottom line. I do agree with this. HOwever rarely do I buy a game at 49.99 anymore.

Then don't complain when your favorite series die after the first game.
Especially if you like Niche titles.


Thats crazy. As you can see I'm a CAG. I don't see why game companies can charge that much and people will pay it.

Because they have to actually employ large staffs of programmers (who don't work for less that high 5 figures to mid-6 figures), artists, directors, producers... and thats just making the game. Don't forget your advertising departments and miriad of other groups that must get paid so that the games get to the shelf.

Guess what? GAMES HAVE BEEN THIS EXPENSIVE SINCE THE NES DAYS!!
The average game is actually cheaper now that it was during the NES and SNES days.


They say its because of priricy but movies go through more pritied actions then games do and none would ever pay 49.99 dollars for a dvd!

DVD's are worlds different. Movies have intial runs in theaters that make them lots of money. Videogames don't have that option... they get all of thier money from one purchase.

AGAIN! NEW GAMES ON THE AVERAGE ARE CHEAPER NOW THAN THEY HAVE EVER BEEN!! IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT, YOU DON'T DESERVE TO PLAY!!!


Oh of the subject sorry. No allso I ment sony as in game standards was not a well know name.

That doesn't matter. Sony still had a long history in the consumer electronics market. It's not that much of a leap to videogames.


Many people picked there snes/ sega (i forget the name now but the one before the dreamcast) over sony because of name.

No, they didn't. People bough the SNES because it came out 5 years before the playstation and had a HUGE library by the time. Very few people bought the Saturn, because Sega shattered consumer confidence with the 32X, Sega CD and all the other hardware follies they went through.

Learn the history of the industry before you try to talk about it.



Allso look at rockstar games! Big name now and they made some good games.

No they aren't. They have one dependable franchise. There the darling of some because of the breakaway success of the GTA series, yet many of there other works greatly underpeform.
I'd like to see Rockstar try to make a game that is fun, yet doesn't rely on shock value. Thier sales come from the people trying to buy the games that are "cool". But for every Grand Theft Auto 3 that comes out of them, you get a State of Emergency.

I perfered the company back when they were Take 2 and made Space Station Silicon Valley for the N64.


Who were they a few years ago a no name company!
Yet they haven't gotten thier name for quality games. So far, they have made one good game, and then slapped a few changes on the engine to make another game in the series. I curious to see what direction they take with Grand Theft Auto 4... that decision could make or break them.





Thats what I has talking about. Yes the big names do put out better games. BUT THEY ARE THE SAME OLD CRAP JUST DIFFERENT YEAR! MARIO SHINOBI RYGAR NINJA GADIEN

Just because it's old, doesn't mean it isnt good.
By the way... Rygar, Shinobi, Ninja Gaiden all play and control radically different than thier source material. For most of the children playing videogames right now, they have no idea what most of those series are (since the people who played them when they were new would be in thier very late teens to early twenties now.)


ALL STUFF I have allready seen! back in the 80,s actually.
Most people weren't playing games back in the 80's. There's a huge new market that has never heard of most of those games, and fanbases rabidly clammoring for remakes of games from the 80's.



I look for the small companies to make the new and orginal stuff that keeps the market changing and growing.

Those are few and far between. Most innovation in the industry comes from the big dogs. How many Zelda clones have thier been? Dragon Warrior clones? Mario Kart Clones? There are small companies that have break-away hits every so often, but they are often cult hits beloved by few but ignored by the industry and consumers as a whole.
For example. The gameplay mechanics for Grand Theft Auto 3 were use YEARS before that game came out on the playstation 2 in the games Space Station Silicon Valley and Body Harvest... but those two games were completely ignored. Grand Theft Auto 3 only got notices because of the HUGE amounts of negative press it got, which drove sales. (Of course, it didn't hurt that it was a good game with a tested gameplay mechanic)


Who was BUNGIE a few years back! They help make the game which we argue.

Bungie made the Marathon Trilogy for MAC computers. Marathon 2 came out on the PC. Most likely they were making Marathon 4, which ended up becoming the game we know as Halo.


NOw wait maybe its their fault! DAMN YOU BUNGIE FOR MAKING A GOOD GAME AND ONLY LEAVING IT ONE ONE PLATFORM!

You do realize that your post comes of as a group of pointless rantings that a cohesive argument, don't you?
 
Can we all stop responding to this stupid, inane thread?

By the very act of responding (my response included) we are lending credibility to this idiot's arguement.
 
PS2 = good graphs bad story: also, bad graphs good story. Halo =Excellent graphs,excellent story, excellent gameplay. PS2 cant even handle a game as perfect as Halo. PS2 dosent have a game as good as Halo though cause its to difficult to dev games for it. We all know PS2 has potential but its to difficult to harness the systems full potential. Thats whyt you guys dont get any excellnt ports like XBOX, the system sent from GOD
 
I haven't read all the responses to this topic so forgive me if I am repeating what someone else said but...

FPS GAMES DO NOT BELONG ON A CONSOLE unless you have a keyboard and mouse. Period. You simply cant equal the level of control without them.

Halo is not that great a game. Play Quake (any flavor is good) or Half-Life if you want to see what a real FPS is like.

I hate to burst your bubble but Halo 2 is going to more of the same. I saw the demo at last year's E3 and while it looked prettier, gameplay looked the same. It's kinda like your wife buying a new piece of lingerie but the sex still being the same. (Although the poster of this topic clearly isn't old enough to see a REAL woman in lingerie let alone have a wife...) :lol:
 
[quote name='space_rover']PS2 = good graphs bad story: also, bad graphs good story. Halo =Excellent graphs,excellent story, excellent gameplay. PS2 cant even handle a game as perfect as Halo. PS2 dosent have a game as good as Halo though cause its to difficult to dev games for it. We all know PS2 has potential but its to difficult to harness the systems full potential. Thats whyt you guys dont get any excellnt ports like XBOX, the system sent from GOD[/quote]

CAN YOU PEOPLE DO THIS COMMUNITY A FAVOR AND STOP FEEDING THIS WORTHLESS TROLL ALREADY!!!
 
[quote name='space_rover']PS2 = good graphs bad story: also, bad graphs good story. Halo =Excellent graphs,excellent story, excellent gameplay. PS2 cant even handle a game as perfect as Halo. PS2 dosent have a game as good as Halo though cause its to difficult to dev games for it. We all know PS2 has potential but its to difficult to harness the systems full potential. Thats whyt you guys dont get any excellnt ports like XBOX, the system sent from GOD[/quote]
What are graphs?
Seriously ban this troll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top