PS3 vs X-box 360

[livemusic]

Are you smoking crack? How many crappy Digimon, Super Truck Racing, Starsky and Hutch, Simpsons, Skrek, Stuntman, Incredibles, Yu-Gi-Oh, Tokyo Extreme Racing, Super Trucks Racing, Monster Jam, etc. titles sucked so much ass you almost had to comit suicide after looking at them? If anything, Sony gets the award for most crap titles on a console, and the only reason why that happens is because these little companies trying to make a buck target the PS2 because so many people own them.

What's crap to you may be a masterpiece to somebody else, you can't argue taste. In that case, the more the better.

Hell, even PGR3 makes any, ANY other racing game you can buy look (and I'm talking visually here) pathetic. And I've played em all.
I'm not saying PGR3 is TEH UBAR 133735T game, but it looks so bloody amazing. The in car views alone make it worth buying, the detail lavished on them is just incredible.

I don't know, I was watching some GT Legends pics and that game looks awesome. I'm even thinking of buying a new PC for games because of that.

 

[Dave A]

I've seen PGR3 and yes, it's graphically the best, but not by miles. Far from it, I can get a few of my PC games to look almost as good, including GT Legends.

 

[a6m5]

xbox
http://www.got-next.com/media_xb/fight_night2/fight_night23.jpg

xbox 360
http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360...rts-fight-night-round-3-20060119011914733.jpg

That's a pretty big jump if you ask me.

(it looks 5 times better when it's running though)

I couldn't see the first pic, but yes, second pic looks good. I can't quite tell from the pic, but from what I've seen or experienced from other X360 games in person, I'm not impressed. Yes, that's my final answer.

 

[code_kev]

Well that game's probably the best looking game you can play. If that doesn't impress you, nothing will.

IGN has the ps2 version of this game. Go look at it. Then look at the xbox 360 and ps3 versions. That is a big leap.

 

[RedOak]

Hmm i remotly follow this conversation, since its mostly funny and all... There are SOny Fanboys and Microsoft Fanboys in the room, and like every other gens of consoles, one 'HAS' to be better then the other... whatever dudes.

I'd like to point out tho, that nice graphics is sort of dependent on the engine and game itself... Everyone is talking about Fight Night 3... but to be honest... there ain't much to render in that game... 2 30-50,000 poly models, a ring and some remote background, half 2D, half 3D with textures. There's nothing 'extravagant' about it... so of course its nice looking, its not like its hard...

Now Project Gotham 3's city construction is something special. 90% 3D, you can make your own tracks in it... now that's Next-gent... (here goes for 360).

Now, have you guys looked at Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the patriots trailer? 100% in-game rendering... check out the level of details, the number of AIs in the scene, the level of polys on each + the visual effects... and of course, the level of details on the textures... that is next gen as well. (here goes for Ps3).

Overall... My take on the console war is:

The Xbox 360 will need about a year (7 so months from now) to release their real 'next gen' titles... I mean Saint-Row, GearsofWar, Only Human and so on... while most of the first line of titles announced by Sony already look like those 'second line' games from Microsoft.

I think since the PS3 is japanese made, the quality (in term of next-gen titles) will be superior to the Xbox 360 at the PS3's launch, which will make things even, once the PS3 is released.

I don't take anything off the 360... but right now... what makes the 360 stand out for most people, is the LIVE! features (marketplace and all), rather then the games.

And we don't know yet, if Sony plans on something similar for the PS3.

I'm not a Fanboy of any consoles, i own them all... and i work on them all the time at work... but right now, at this moment, i believe the PS3 will overpower the 360 by its graphic capabilities, and probably its programmation... from Japanese market titles. They are far far ahead of the occidental market and it shows on the last line of release on the PS2. Some of the games look better then most of the launch titles from the 360. (Gun, NHL, Ridge...).

anyways, all that to say, Both consoles are powerful, but the PS3 ain't out yet. So how's about leaving it at that for a while instead of 'gay bashing' on who's the bigger idiot for believing whatever they want to believe?

 

[a6m5]

Hmm i remotly follow this conversation, since its mostly funny and all... There are SOny Fanboys and Microsoft Fanboys in the room, and like every other gens of consoles, one 'HAS' to be better then the other... whatever dudes.

Which conversation are you referring to?. I hope you weren't calling me and code_kev, fanboys(though we all know kev is a #1 Xbox fanboy ). We were discussing the "next gen" graphics, but I don't think we ever said anything about PS3 or X360 is better than the other. I did say that I am not impressed by X360, so far. And that if PS3's graphics were of the same level, I would not be lining up to buy one.

 

[YSSMAN]

I try to remain as neutral as possible when talking about the console wars, but sometimes it is hard to forget my "general" bias twards Microsoft. I guess the thing that bothers me the most about these fanboy flamewars is that there really isnt going to be a winner untill there is proof of anything, and even then, no one on either side will budge one way or the other.

...I remember way back when I was a PS2 fan... Oh, how young I was, maybe about the age of 13 or 14. I was excited to get my GT3 game pack and be able to play with my friends as an equal who finially had a Playstation (I had been a Nintendo fanboy years before that). But alas, Microsoft announced the XBOX, and the PS2 suddenly sucked because of titles like Project Gotham and Halo... And the rest is history...

 

[a6m5]

(I had been a Nintendo fanboy years before that).

Always pulling for the underdog?

 

[Tenacious D]

Well, I'm a Nintendo fanboy of sorts too. Mostly a Sega enthusiast though. It's truly a shame that there will be no more Sega consoles, unless something bizarre happens in the space-time continuum.

As for Microsoft, even though I'm already a huge PS3 fan, the 360 is no slouch system. I think the difference lies in the fact that Sony from way back in the PSOne days devoted themselves to making the system developer friendly, with support like the best development kits they could have. The PS2 sure needed that, because as a system goes, it's the weakest on paper between it, the Dreamcast and GameCube because of the paltry ram Sony gave it. Developers hated it, but this forced Sony to give them some extremely advanced development tools to help the PS2 behave as if it had more ram through some clever data streaming from the disc, along with working on ways to squeeze every possible ounce of horsepower from the unit.

Some PS2s couldn't handle the extreme demands and failed, but for the rest of us, the results have been astounding. Gran Turismo 4 and Devil May Cry 3 are stunning masterpieces, almost as good as stuff running on an XBox360. It really shouldn't be doing that good.

Microsoft coming late to the table, still has given their developers a good kit for coming up with games and the games look terrific. But Sony seems to be trying to wage all out war, making the first generation of games look like second gen. For us, this means unbelievably cool games. For 360 fans, it's all good too, because the development community will be forced to up the ante even further. So in the end, we all win.

I do lament the fact that the Playstation won the console wars. Sega and Nintendo are downright friendly with the gaming community, giving them goodies and bonuses left and right. Microsoft and Sony, the other Microsoft, treat their customers like open wallets to be milked dry. It was a sad day when Sega gave up and now Nintendo is our only friend in the console world, sigh.

 

[tha_con]

Are you smoking crack? How many crappy Digimon, Super Truck Racing, Starsky and Hutch, Simpsons, Skrek, Stuntman, Incredibles, Yu-Gi-Oh, Tokyo Extreme Racing, Super Trucks Racing, Monster Jam, etc. titles sucked so much ass you almost had to comit suicide after looking at them? If anything, Sony gets the award for most crap titles on a console, and the only reason why that happens is because these little companies trying to make a buck target the PS2 because so many people own them.

Okay, since you completely missed my point. I made no direct comparison to PS2 and Xbox, I was however, debating your point that the Xbox had better "types' of titles, specifically FPS and Racers.

Please, enlighten me. Because as far as I know, FPS go about this far on Xbox:

Halo
Half Life 2
FarCry

Other than that, most of what comes out on the console is mediocre, hell, even Doom 3 sucks on the Xbox.

Then you Said racers. Hm...

Forza
PGR

What, aside from those two titles, are so amazing that they deserve to be "better" on that console and outshine all other consoles? Because as far as I know, all the other flagship racers are on both consoles.

So with that said, again, for all the "quality" types of games you're speaking about, there are a dozen others that suck to no measure, and then a few other good ones that are on multiple systems.

Yes, it was a better selling console overall... What 100 million units as compared to 20 million on the XBOX? Considering that the XBOX was brand new, thats pretty impressive... And what matters most is that it sold well in the US, the worlds largest gaming market, and the 360 is poised to do the same thing again.

Considering that a good percentage of those were GIVEN away though MULTIPLE contests, and that number ONLY indicates SHIPPED...it's semi impressive.

And actually, the fact that it "sold well in the US" is not what matters most. What matters most is that it failed to earn some developer support, and it only sells well because it's "better visuals" to mainstream casual gamers. Take away EA games and the Xbox is left with only Halo fans. EA helped put the Xbox where it is, no doubt about it.

I'll agree as far as visuals go, but with features? Wait and see... Microsoft is having a hayday with the XBLM, and having an HD drive available later in the summer or fall is another plus. The 360 is driving HD sales across the board, and it can be certain that the PS3 will do the same. But being that Sony really has only alluded to some of the features to be included with the system, they have never come on board to even say or show anything solid yet... As I have said before, we will see at E3...

Features, i.e.:

Out of Box HD movie capability
Out of box Wi-Fi
Out of Box Ethernet (Gigabit Ethernet at that)
Out of Box HDMI
Out of Box Backwards Compatibility
Out of Box Blue Tooth Connectivity
More USB Ports
Higher Resolution Output

To me, those are all important, as they mean one thing. In the next 5 years, when new TV's come out, my PS3 will be ready to do new things.

Just like PS2 had such a hard time with Progressive Scan, and was outdated. The PS3 will not have that problem, even in the future, it will be ready for both TV upgrades, AND online network upgrades (gigabit ethernet). Not to mention I won't have to purchase another drive to watch my HD movies, in which I can only play movies, and it will probably have half of the features of a normal stand alone player.

Yeah, Microsoft goofed on the production numbers. I really dont think anyone was anticipating a launch as huge as it was, but Microsoft had been saying for months that there werent going to be many to launch worldwide, I belive the number was only 1.5 million for the first shipments. The problems they had were minimal, and of course the media and the online interweb blew everything out of porportion when it came to the "meltdowns" and glitches... Its called keeping your "power brick" cool kids, get used to it...

I don't think the internet blew anything out of proportion. It was a very serious problem, serious enough for MicroSoft to address it. The fact is, the end user should not have to go through extra lengths to play their console safely, especially if no warning of such is mentioned in niether the manual or on the power supply itself.

Business is business I suppose, and if Sony wants to play dirty they most certainly can... There were mentions of Sony doing whatever possible to slow down the 360 any way they can earlier this year both in the press and on the old internets, and none of it has really surprised me other than the fact they have not shown any actual game footage, nor have they shelled out any details on any new title developments. Microsoft does hold the cards in this situation, and I am pretty surprised they havent let Allard or Moore completely tear into Sony and thier products...

As for the PSP vs DS, its a pretty easy call for anyone who knows anything about gaming... But to say the DS is better than a console? Thats called stretching the truth...

I don't think Sony is so concerend with "slowing down" the 360 right now, which is also why I think they have still kept silent. There's no need for them right now, from a business perspective, to be worried, because the 360's are spread so far and thin, they aren't getting significant market penetration.

Sony is making far more money selling PSP's and PS2's, if they were to say "hey, PS3 is out on this date at this price" people will stop buying, and save. But if they keep quiet, no on know's they buy, and then all of the sudden they can announce it. Right now Sony is playing the business game, and they are winning in sales. That's fine and dandy, because they'll need it when they release the PS3, it'll bust their wallets for a good year...poor sony.


And the DS thing was a joke....sort of...muahaha...I haven't touched my 360 in two weeks!! ...

 

[code_kev]

Please, enlighten me. Because as far as I know, FPS go about this far on Xbox:

Halo
Half Life 2
FarCry

...Doom 3 didn't suck.

Add Halo 2, Riddick, Time Splitters 1 through 3, Battlefield, oddworld (shooty one), Various incarnations of UT, and the up coming black. Pretty okay list if you ask me. Xbox has better FPS games, PS2 has better racers, simply because of GT4 though.

I think the difference lies in the fact that Sony from way back in the PSOne days devoted themselves to making the system developer friendly

Wrong. The ps2 was famously difficult to develop for.

It was a sad day when Sega gave up and now Nintendo is our only friend in the console world, sigh.

Sega bought it on themselves for being crap. Seriously, Sega could **** ANYTHING up. This is coming from a Sega fanboy in his youth.

Gran Turismo 4 and Devil May Cry 3 are stunning masterpieces, almost as good as stuff running on an XBox360

If your talking graphics wise, I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to say your talking out of your arse. Compared to proper 360 games (and I'm not talking about crap like GUN), they look pathetic at best, and that's to be expected.

In this generation of consoles (PS2, GC and xbox) only one game imo has come close to looking like a 360 title, and that's Resident Evil 4 on the GC.

And actually, the fact that it "sold well in the US" is not what matters most. What matters most is that it failed to earn some developer support, and it only sells well because it's "better visuals" to mainstream casual gamers. Take away EA games and the Xbox is left with only Halo fans. EA helped put the Xbox where it is, no doubt about it.

I play games to have fun, not to argue which console makes your the "1337357".

 

[Solid Lifters]

Famitsu conducted a survey with developers, dealers and consumers regarding to current and next-gen consoles.

Which next-generation console will you be most satisfied with in 2006?

Developers:
# PlayStation 3 - 53.7%
# Revolution - 41.4%
# Xbox 360 - 2.4%

Dealers:
# PlayStation 3 - 56.9%
# Revolution - 43.9%
# Xbox 360 - 1.7%

Consumers:
# PlayStation 3 - 46.3%
# Revolution - 43.9%
# Xbox 360 - 7.9%

Which console will be No. 1 in 2006?

Developers:
# Nintendo DS - 49.9%
# PlayStation 3 - 16.7%
# Revolution - 10.0%
# PSP - 5.0%
# Xbox 360 - 1.7%

Dealers:
# Nintendo DS - 38.3%
# PlayStation 3 - 31.5%
# Revolution - 12.3%
# PSP - 1.7%
# Xbox 360 - 1.7%

Consumers:
# PlayStation 3 - 40.3%
# Nintendo DS - 32.6%
# PlayStation 2 - 11.8%
# Revolution - 11.5%
# Xbox 360 - 2.5%
# PSP - 0.3%

What is the expected retail price of PlayStation 3?

Developers: 40,000 yen (US$339) average
Retailers: 40,000 yen (US$339) average
Consumers: 50,000 yen (US$424) average

What is the expected retail price of Revolution?

Developers: 20,000 yen (US$170) average
Retailers: 25,000 yen (US$212) average
Consumers: 30,000 yen (US$255) average

Source: The Magic Box

 

[code_kev]

Which next-generation console will you be most satisfied with in 2006?

This survey shows only one thing in particular, that non Japanese machines do not sell in Japan (though I'm sure someone is gonna show me an example proving me otherwise ). Also 2 of the machines aint even out/ finished, and the other has been out for about 5 minutes, it's just speculation. Hell why not add the xbox 7 and the PS12 to that list.

I personally think that the xbox 13 will be more satisfying then then playstation 8.

(This is where you flap about accusing me of being a racist)

 

[Drillah]

Haha, XBOX 7, I pre-ordered mine yesterday.

 

[KENJIusa]

Which next-generation console will you be most satisfied with in 2006?

If you ask me, I will say that the PlayStation 3, bluetooth wireless, 1080P, BD player out of the box, and hell a lot of power...you can't beat that

 

[livemusic]

For me it will be Playstation2. I won't get a next gen console before 2007.

 

[tha_con]

...Doom 3 didn't suck.

Add Halo 2, Riddick, Time Splitters 1 through 3, Battlefield, oddworld (shooty one), Various incarnations of UT, and the up coming black. Pretty okay list if you ask me. Xbox has better FPS games, PS2 has better racers, simply because of GT4 though.

I'll agree to give you Riddick, (halo is included in the franchise, don't try to 'add titles' like that, it's pathetic, it's still halo).

TimeSplitters is on all other consoles, and IMO, the controls are lightyears better on PS2, becasue that's what it was created for in the first place, and the button placement is much better.

Defiantely can't agree with UT titles and Oddworld. UT is MUCH better on PC any given day...and oddworld? Stretch of the imagination there.

Black though. Black is amazing...only because of the fact that it looks so good. I'm sure you haven't played it yet, still funny for you to list it, but I've played both PS2 and Xbox versions and they are amazing. Defineately titles that are wroth picking up...but again...the difference isn't anything to write home about between the two versions.

Wrong. The ps2 was famously difficult to develop for.

Common consumer misconceptions amuse me. It's not that the PS2 was hard to develop for. What made it 'hard' was that it was new hardware with little to no information provided. Sony used all these great techniques to make astounding technical demonstrations, and provided very little information to the developer side. For the first 2 years, pretty much only First Party developers got top of the line developer support.

But, following this drought, Sony began to ship much more advanced SDK's, that included more literature and more development app's. It streamlined development.

It wasn't that PS2 was hard to develop for, this is something the media and everyone else will resort to when given certain statements and sentences. THe fact is, it was new hardware, and no one knew how to use it, so it took learning. But after the new SDK's were shipped, many developers (Zipper interactive, Criterion, etc) came out with games that were far ahead of anything else on the PS2. It wasn't it's difficulty, it was just learning to ride a bike all over again.

Sega bought it on themselves for being crap. Seriously, Sega could **** ANYTHING up. This is coming from a Sega fanboy in his youth.

Sega made a wonderful console, the DreamCast. Their problem always lied in two areas. One, their controller design. Two, their marketing campaign. THey couldn't market water to a plant, let alone a console to a parent or child.

If your talking graphics wise, I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to say your talking out of your arse. Compared to proper 360 games (and I'm not talking about crap like GUN), they look pathetic at best, and that's to be expected.

In this generation of consoles (PS2, GC and xbox) only one game imo has come close to looking like a 360 title, and that's Resident Evil 4 on the GC.

Agreed, though I do think if it weren't for HD resolutions, most 360 games still don't amaze me much. Kameo being one exception.

I play games to have fun, not to argue which console makes your the "1337357".

Good, I do to. But that doesn't mean I don't like to have a good debate Especially when other users are stretching truths and skewing facts, it's just enjoyable for me to do that.

 

[tha_con]

This survey shows only one thing in particular, that non Japanese machines do not sell in Japan (though I'm sure someone is gonna show me an example proving me otherwise ). Also 2 of the machines aint even out/ finished, and the other has been out for about 5 minutes, it's just speculation. Hell why not add the xbox 7 and the PS12 to that list.

I personally think that the xbox 13 will be more satisfying then then playstation 8.

(This is where you flap about accusing me of being a racist)

iPod. Now anything you said there is irrelivant.

 

[code_kev]

iPod. Now anything you said there is irrelivant.

I knew someone would say that. Get back in to context man, we are talking GAMES MACHINES, nothing else. I could list, I dunno, a clothing brand that's american and sold well in japan. Consoles, that's it.

I'll agree to give you Riddick, (halo is included in the franchise, don't try to 'add titles' like that, it's pathetic, it's still halo).

I wasn't being pathetic, I was mentioning it. I don't hear you moaning when people list GT3 and Gt4 as some of the best PS2 games do I? No. nerrr! I personally rate both games quite highly, thus they both deserve to be mentioned.

TimeSplitters is on all other consoles, and IMO, the controls are lightyears better on PS2, becasue that's what it was created for in the first place, and the button placement is much better.

I never said it wasn't on other consoles. Better on the xbox imo, though I'm not a fan of the series tbh, crappy aiming, dull levels, though I aint played TS3.

Defiantely can't agree with UT titles and Oddworld. UT is MUCH better on PC any given day...and oddworld? Stretch of the imagination there.

Once again, I never said the pc versions wasn't better, but that doesn't make the xbox ones any worse. And Oddworld Strangers Wrath is a pretty fine game.

Notice I didn't list Unreal 2

Black though. Black is amazing...only because of the fact that it looks so good. I'm sure you haven't played it yet, still funny for you to list it, but I've played both PS2 and Xbox versions and they are amazing. Defineately titles that are wroth picking up...but again...the difference isn't anything to write home about between the two versions.

I listed black because it looks great. Yes I KNOW it's on both machines. I never said it wasn't.

Common consumer misconceptions amuse me. It's not that the PS2 was hard to develop for. What made it...BLAH BLAH BLAH... were far ahead of anything else on the PS2. It wasn't it's difficulty, it was just learning to ride a bike all over again.

So in short is was hard to develop for, and I'm fully aware it was an SDK and developer info problem, I wasn't aware I had to explain everything I said in such detail.

Sega made a wonderful console, the DreamCast. Their problem always lied in two areas. One, their controller design. Two, their marketing campaign. THey couldn't market water to a plant, let alone a console to a parent or child.

Agreed.

Agreed, though I do think if it weren't for HD resolutions, most 360 games still don't amaze me much.

You know what, pretty much nothing amazes me now. Fight Night 3, MGS4, and PGR3 are about the last few games that really impressed me. Why? Because out pcs are so bloody fast, consoles struggle to keep up, or impress us.

 

[Jump_Ace]

For me it will be Playstation2. I won't get a next gen console before 2007.

Agreed. I wont buy a PS3 until GT5 comes out as it WILL be the ONLY game I'll want to play on it. At least initially. Hell I've been playing GT4 NON-STOP since it came out in April, I'm on my 2nd time thru usin the DFP and with NO B-Spec B.S. and I dont see myelf stopping except to play the new Zelda for Gamecube in June. Plus maybe by the time GT5 is out, the PS3 price drop will have happened. And honestly I dont mind paying what $10 more for a ps3 game if its something I want. 2nd, HALO blows my @$$, its the same as ANY other 1st person shooter, its just something for the Non-Sony types to brag and boast about. The Box is better than the PS2, why? Because Sony released it WAY before MS did, so what is MS going to do release a worse system? NO! Its slightly better on a few accounts. The same will happen with the PS3 I GUARANTEE it, Sony is now the last of the 2 to release and it will TRUMP XCrack360 badly. (Revolution will be nice but it gets the bronze medal).

Jerome

 

[code_kev]

Jump Ace, that's a pretty silly ranty post.

Saying that Halo 2 is like anyother fps game is like saying Gt4 is like any other racing game. Dumb. Also re-inventing console names into something "funny" got boring about 10 years ago.

 

[tha_con]

Jump Ace, that's a pretty silly ranty post.

Saying that Halo 2 is like anyother fps game is like saying Gt4 is like any other racing game. Dumb. Also re-inventing console names into something "funny" got boring about 10 years ago.

Thinks about all the batarang jokes code_keb has posted over the last 6 months....


riiiiiiight.


BTW, Halo and Halo 2 did little to "re-invent anythign" Again, at best, both titles were just good FPS titles that were on a console. In fact, the only thing revolutionary about them at all was that they were on console.

One feature, and the only feature, that stands out to me from Halo, is the regenerating shields. Other than that, I cannot think of one single thing that makes it stand out from any other FPS I've ever played.

 

[code_kev]

Thinks about all the batarang jokes code_keb has posted over the last 6 months....

I said it looked like a banana, not a batarang.

BTW, Halo and Halo 2 did little to "re-invent anythign" Again, at best, both titles were just good FPS titles that were on a console. In fact, the only thing revolutionary about them at all was that they were on console.

What exactly did Gt4 do?

One feature, and the only feature, that stands out to me from Halo, is the regenerating shields. Other than that, I cannot think of one single thing that makes it stand out from any other FPS I've ever played.

The only thing that makes Gt4 stand out is the fact it has lots of cars. See I can play this game too.

Your ignoring the big picture, Halo came out in 2001, and for it's time it really was something special. Yes it had it's flaws, what doesn't. It made up for these by giving gamers the best console multiplayer experience since golden eye.

 

[LaBounti]

You know what, pretty much nothing amazes me now. Fight Night 3, MGS4, and PGR3 are about the last few games that really impressed me. Why? Because out pcs are so bloody fast, consoles struggle to keep up, or impress us.

Man I could have sworn the gameplay arguement always wins aginst graphics. But code it sounds like you are comparing PC hardware VS console games. Console are the best platform for playing games bar none. PC's now seem to be like cars, always modding them to keep up with new trends. Give me a list of great PC games that dont envole someone dying and thats not a racing game. Unless you are a graphics whore ignore what i said.


And to me Halo has always been 'Auto aim Evolved" It was the first fps i ever played that had no option to turn it off that i know of.

 

[tha_con]

I said it looked like a banana, not a batarang.



What exactly did Gt4 do?



The only thing that makes Gt4 stand out is the fact it has lots of cars. See I can play this game too.

Your ignoring the big picture, Halo came out in 2001, and for it's time it really was something special. Yes it had it's flaws, what doesn't. It made up for these by giving gamers the best console multiplayer experience since golden eye.

Sorry, I seem to have missed the post where I said that GT4 was anything revolutionary.

Also, in 2001, there were other FPS games that were better than Halo, halo was not "ahead of it's time" by any means, nor something special.

Again, it was one feature, and that was sheilds. Nothing else stands out, not even the "multiplayer experience". You want a multiplayer experience play SSB:Melee, now THAT is multiplayer fun.

But please, Halo is about as revolutionary is any racing game...hold gas and break. The core elements never change. It's just the same recycled concept with a new story in a shiney new box.

 

[KENJIusa]

Halo has always been 'Auto aim Evolved" .

lol

 

[code_kev]

Give me a list of great PC games that dont envole someone dying and thats not a racing game.

Considering that MOST games on any machine have something dying, that's a list that's impossible to make. Even point N click games have deaths in em, not just FPS games.

But please, Halo is about as revolutionary is any racing game...hold gas and break. The core elements never change. It's just the same recycled concept with a new story in a shiney new box.

If you read what I said, you'd see that what I was getting at was that Halo did alot of things better. That's all. I'm not pretending it's the best game ever, I don't even play it anymore, I'm just saying that in it's day it was great.

You want a multiplayer experience play SSB:Melee, now THAT is multiplayer fun.

If you like cartoony platform fighting stuff. I don't. I like to blow the crap out of my mates. Actually, I lie. I like SSBM, but I still prefer to shoot people...

 

[livemusic]

What's SSB:Melee?

And I was playing Black's demo last night, it seems to be a must have.

 

[code_kev]

What's SSB:Melee?

Smash Bros Melee. (not as good as VF4 evo )

 

[tha_con]

FatAssBR: SSB:Melee is Super Smash Bros. Melee. Probably the best beat em up fast paced multiplayer fighter ever created. To the beginners, it's fun. The the casuals, it's exciting. To the die hard, it's technical, it's challenging, and it's speedy.

Black doesn't seem to be a must have. It will be, trust me on that.

Code: Again, there was nothing that "halo" did better. Not better than any PC shooter at least. Sure, I will give it credit for acheiving great status on a console, as many FPS on console suffer from bad control layout, slow response, and bad level design.

Understand I'm not trying to say that Halo is a bad game by any means, or that it's not fun. I am, however, saying that it did not reinvent any portion of the genre.

I will also tell you that because it is a console FPS, to avoid frustration from the gamers perspective, it was givin the rechargable shields. Had they been absent, many gamers would be upset due to the lack of capability to adjust accordingly and shoot accurately with a controller. That element alone helps propel it the status is has among console shooters.