Just wait until they play Virtua Fighter.

I fucking love that game, but holy shit is it technical as fuck.

Fucking Virtua Fighter.

Virtua Fighter 5 is getting an XBLA release with a full update.

I smell a lot of BS in this thread, mainly from Joey.

Finally with a new dev, the game might become enjoyable to more than the people that currently play it.

Currently I see nothing more than an empty shell of a game that takes itself too seriously (end of Halo3 much?). I can do with the physics of it, as annoying as moon gravity is. It's the lack of believable damage done by the toy weapons, and the repetition of levels (those fucking triangle rooms in the first Halo? Fucking ridiculous). Plus stupid music and story that build up at the end...I mean neither are stipud but just seems to me like the devs assume the game is more epic than it actually is. I just don't see it.

That's why I hope the new developers make some changes. I'll deffo give it another look if it's different.

Oh and I don't see an issue with the Worthog being in Forza, from a Halo fan's POV. I mean it's supposed to be complimentary...

Yeah, completely throw a middle finger at the current (huge) fanbase by trying to appease people who like the modern war games.

That'll go over GREAT.

HERE BE SECRETSExcept it won't.

No no no, you want a game that takes itself way too seriously, look no further than Gears of War. Halo actually has some compelling characters in it, e.g. Sgt Johnson, Cortana, Captain Keyes, and yes, Master Chief. Yeah, some of the more nuanced details of their backgrounds are in the books rather than the games, but Master Chief is a much more interesting character than Marcus Fenix. Yeah, Halo 3 didn't deserve ALL the hype that it got, but it certainly deserved a fair bit of it.

Gears of War doesn't take itself too seriously.

It's fanbase certainly does though.

Sure the characters are about as compelling as a fart, but, hey, fart's can be pretty compelling sometimes, yeah?

I never thought that Halo took itself too seriously. It's had the same sort of tone throughout the series. Halo 3's story got stupid toward the end, but that wasn't the tone of the story's fault. Halo: Reach and ODST had the tone down pretty fucking well.

Also, I never got the gripe about the whole 'toy weapons' and 'unrealistic damage' argument against Halo.

It's ALWAYS taken about a full clip from the AR (followed by a melee usually) to kill someone. I think most of the people that try to make this argument don't really understand that it all pretty much makes sense in the Universe. Also, the damage thing? He's a fucking amplified supersoldier with some beast armor for one thing. If you take away the shields, you die really fuckin' quick.

That's what half the strategy is in the game. How am I going to effectively remove the shields of this guy and then kill him with the weapons at my disposal? If I can't do it faster, I'll need to find a new weapon, or be sneaky about it.

If you make it so two chest shots with the Battle Rifle (DMR) kills your opponent in multiplayer, then all you have is Call of Duty in Halo skin. Fuck that shit.

I wasn't asking for it to me changed to CoD, dude, I was saying they should refresh it and change some aspects, that was it keeps it on it's toes and potentially gains new players. I fucking hate cod, myself, but keeping the same old forumula and being too scared to make any changes is as CoD as it gets.

The damage thing, it's the asthetics of it. I don't feel empowered like I do with other shooters, and as far as I understand it, that's the big gripe with people that don't like the game. The enemies don't seem to know back or react to being shot, they just randomy run around and shoot at you. They don't even cover. And the noises when you hit someone, it's just lame.

The game doesn't allow you to use any proper tactics or do things a different way. The only time I experienced it was in Halo 3, you had a flying craft and you had to take out two large robot scorpoions. I got my mate to fly me onto it, and pick me up. It was immense. But the rest is just corridor shooting, and repetetive.

And the story has LITTLE depth. Books are not a part of the game therefore hold no weight in this debate. You don't judge a game by the books. And the cinematics are quick and shit, and I don't mean to offend, but they seem to be aimed at attentionless kids who have no need for a story.

Anyway through reading that, I'm sure you'd see the changes I'd make. The key to a good game is to engross and empower the player. Halo does none of this for me but then again I don't play multiplayer...

You know what happens when developers overhaul the formula of a really popular game when that formula is working? The fanbase evaporates. That's why we've never seen a game like Halo or Legend of Zelda or something equally established and popular changed to "refresh it". Also, I know you haven't played ODST or Reach, because if you had, you wouldn't be making most of this argument.



It's a sci-fi game with energy shields, armor made of advanced alloys, big glowing swords, and little midget aliens. I think some suspension of disbelief is required here. And again, if you'd played Reach, you'd know that the enemies aren't stone-dumb zombies; they take cover and all that just fine. Hell, even in the original trilogy, it was only the Flood that did as you describe.



You're playing as a genetically enhanced super soldier that's had just about every other person like him wiped out, with no one else around that can keep up with you. Also, Reach.



No, but you DO judge a franchise by all the media used to propagate it, and that's what you're doing is judging the franchise as a whole. Like it or not, the books ARE a legitimate part of the Halo experience. Even if you do discount the books, though, the storytelling is a LOT more compelling than CoD or Gears or Bulletstorm or a lot of other shooters you could name, especially in...wait for it...Reach.



There's been a consistent, underlying theme in my post. I'll leave it to you to find it.

Never mind, fuck it. Play Reach. You'll see how your argument falls apart afterward.

The halo series is often credited as having some of the best AI in shooters.

Elites definitely cause you all sorts of trouble on any difficulty, and can absolutely RUIN you on higher difficulties

Not in 1 and 2.

Hell, I'm pisspoor at shooters, but it was "run, point, shoot, kill, move on".

Reach does interest me, but meh, FPS. Not my bag.

in fairness, halo 1 was a LONG time ago, and the fact that elites rolled out of the way of grenades was impressive to most.

Okay, what difficulty did you play on? 'Cause I remember that I had trouble moving forward in Halo 1 in the higher difficulties.

Any halo on legendary will fuck your shit up. Seriously, I got killed by grunts with plasma pistols in Reach playing on legendary countless times. Oh and the jackals with snipers, you pretty much have to memorize where they are because they will head shot you the second they can see you, and they're ALWAYS looking directly at you unless you're camo'd.

The Halo games aren't super difficult altogether on Legendary, but each one has a certain part or two in each that will hold you off for a little while.

Wish I hadn't have posted till I got my PC and net, given how hard this is to post on a phone.

My issue is not with the difficulty of the game, I said AI. You can make a game tough but it doesn't mean the AI is great. Great AI is a believable enemy that impresses you to head into combat with. Gears has wicked AI that use cover properly and flank properly. It makes it fun.

All I've ever seen up to Halo 3 (smoke's was right, I stopped at that) was enemies moving in a fucking stupid fasion. It's like the way enemies move in Fallout3 and NV, it's left to right and unnatural, it's bullshit. And its not that Halo has aliens, it's shitty programming. Moving away from grenades was done in Half Life, waaay before Halo. I'm talking winning by using convincing tactics, not giving the bots inhuman accuracy.

And a series, Smokes, cannt be judged by a single game. I didn't play Reach but Auss reckon's it's shit, but even if it was good, it doesn't make all of them good. I'm sure it's an improvement and I wouldn't mind giving it a shot but how have the rest of series been so popular whilst seeming so boring? It just completely baffles me. I'd love to enjoy Halo, I really try to like it every time I play, but I end up lying to myself and wasting my time.

Maybe it's me. I'm a PC player and Halo is very console-y and arcadey. Mayne it's not shit, maybe we just don't connect.

It'd help if it had a story worth paying attention to :s