Official HALO 2 thread

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

hit a nerve, no. bore me, yes.

[Living-In-Clip]

Worst come back ever.
You think some kid stole it therefor MS loses? Can you prove it? Honestly, what is the point of all this? You are trolling as much as oOseven and making just about as much sense.

Why bother with a game if you didnt like the previous? It is like me buying MGS2 or Twin Snakes, even tho I hate the previous MGS\'s. It  is friggin pointless.

i liked halo, untill i beat it

halo 1.5 is just not what i expected, and i\'m far from alone.  aside from what the money hungry magazines tell you, alot of people didn\'t get what they expected in the single player game.

oh, and co-op rocks, aside from the framerate and untill my buddy and i  beat it

[Bobs_Hardware]

I think mm has stated numerous times that he did like the original Halo.. until he beat it. [edit] You beat me to it, mm[/edit]

I have to say that the more I play the single player campaign the more disappointed I become. Even in co-op I\'m just not finding that my enjoyment is sustained for long periods of time. As fun as using twin-needlers while your friend runs up ahead with the energy sword is, it just doesn\'t last long. Even battling it out in the vehicles feels remarkably similar.

As far as the single player is concerned, I would go as far as to call it a rehash. It feels just like an extension pack with a few little features added. It makes me smile thinking about all the zealots on TeamXBox who used to bag Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (and most likely San Andreas) for not being a complete sequal, relative to how much of a sequal Halo 2 would be.

I\'m genuinly surprised that Kasavin didn\'t tear this game to shreds.

Having said all this, I still have not played the game multiplayer (other than co-op) and have already commenced plans with a friend at work for a fairly large LAN game.

It makes me smile thinking about all the zealots on TeamXBox who used to bag Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (and most likely San Andreas) for not being a complete sequal, relative to how much of a sequal Halo 2 would be.

I\'ve never seen anyone argue it, and if they do then they\'re just ignorant to the fact that Vice City and San Andreas are spin-off\'s of GTA3.  GTA4 is still in the works.

[Bobs_Hardware]

Really? It was all the rage a while back. I guess it\'s stopped.

From what I\'ve heard though, the features added in San An... ahh forget it. Back to Halo!

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

my idea of spin offs isn\'t games based on the same engine.

its games that are using the same map, story line etc but with things added....  both vc and sa aren\'t spin offs.

I just started lurking around TXB in the past two months so could have missed it.

Just out of curiousity, what is it that you guys were expecting Halo 2 to be?  Obviously the game is an improvement over the original, even if it is slight by what you guys are saying, but it\'s none the less an improvement and new levels.  

From what you guys are saying I\'m reminded of the Ratchet & Clank series, and, to a lesser extent, the Zelda series...basically the same game every time with a face lift and a few additions, doesn\'t stop them from being awesome.

Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
my idea of spin offs isn\'t games based on the same engine.

its games that are using the same map, story line etc but with things added....  both vc and sa aren\'t spin offs.

Call it what you want but they aren\'t the official sequel to GTA3.  I\'ll stick with spin-off.

what is it that you guys were expecting Halo 2 to be?

i already stated what i (and everyone else) expected

mm, I can guarantee that not one person on this forum would be comfortable with you speaking for them.  You may proceed in talking out of your ass.

[Bobs_Hardware]

Originally posted by Ginko
I just started lurking around TXB in the past two months so could have missed it.

Just out of curiousity, what is it that you guys were expecting Halo 2 to be?  Obviously the game is an improvement over the original, even if it is slight by what you guys are saying, but it\'s none the less an improvement and new levels.  

From what you guys are saying I\'m reminded of the Ratchet & Clank series, and, to a lesser extent, the Zelda series...basically the same game every time with a face lift and a few additions, doesn\'t stop them from being awesome.

At the very least, I wanted them to rectify the problems that were present in the first game. Even the most staunch Halo fan admitted that the game got a little repetitive. I for one felt the game was EXTREMELY repetitive. And not just the level design, but every battle felt the same. I\'ve read some people claim that the enemy AI is so good that no two battles are the same. This seems an outrageously silly thing to say. Unless you sit back and strategize every move (which I\'ll more than admit, if I did, I enjoyed it), but the battles were just neverending and so frequent that doing that also became tedius.

Toward the end of the game I ended up getting in my warthog and driving past dozens of battles, dozens of enemies purely because I didn\'t want to go through all the crap again.

That\'s how repetitive I thought the first game was.

Now this game starts with a level almost identival to the first level in the original game (except you get to go outside the ship). The first level on earth starts nicely, the new rifle is a fun weapon, but soon the novelty wears off and it just starts to feel like the same old stuff. The Warthog tunnel run felt like nothing new. And you know what? About 3/4\'s of the way through the level, I got in my Warthog and drove past dozens of battles/enemies.

After all the previews, all the fan hype, and even posters on this forum who had played the game were saying how different this game was to the first one.. I was expecting the sequal to a game that was TOO REPETITIVE to NOT FEEL EXACTLY LIKE THE ORIGINAL GAME.

Improved and engaging indoor combat would have been great, too. And hell, if it weren\'t for the fact that I paused the game to turn the brightness up on my television, I wouldn\'t have even known that there were objectives.

Perhaps it\'s just the First Person Shooter genre in general. Looking back at FPS\'s that I\'ve had a genuinly engaging single player experience in, the numbers aren\'t that large. Doom (years ago), Half-Life, Alien Trilogy.. the original Red Faction was fun, but again got repetitive and tedius in places. Medal of Honor on Playstation was great for it\'s time, Frontline was ok for a while, but after the initial battle it too became tiresome. Perhaps I should just stick to multiplayer.

Originally posted by Bobs_Hardware
At the very least, I wanted them to rectify the problems that were present in the first game. Even the most staunch Halo fan admitted that the game got a little repetitive. I for one felt the game was EXTREMELY repetitive. And not just the level design, but every battle felt the same. I\'ve read some people claim that the enemy AI is so good that no two battles are the same. This seems an outrageously silly thing to say. Unless you sit back and strategize every move (which I\'ll more than admit, if I did, I enjoyed it), but the battles were just neverending and so frequent that doing that also became tedius.

Toward the end of the game I ended up getting in my warthog and driving past dozens of battles, dozens of enemies purely because I didn\'t want to go through all the crap again.

That\'s how repetitive I thought the first game was.

And you played it how many times?

Now this game starts with a level almost identival to the first level in the original game (except you get to go outside the ship). The first level on earth starts nicely, the new rifle is a fun weapon, but soon the novelty wears off and it just starts to feel like the same old stuff. The Warthog tunnel run felt like nothing new. And you know what? About 3/4\'s of the way through the level, I got in my Warthog and drove past dozens of battles/enemies.

After all the previews, all the fan hype, and even posters on this forum who had played the game were saying how different this game was to the first one.. I was expecting the sequal to a game that was TOO REPETITIVE to NOT FEEL EXACTLY LIKE THE ORIGINAL GAME.

DO NOT play the hype card,  mm and ooseven I expect it from, you are better than that.

Improved and engaging indoor combat would have been great, too. And hell, if it weren\'t for the fact that I paused the game to turn the brightness up on my television, I wouldn\'t have even known that there were objectives.

Perhaps it\'s just the First Person Shooter genre in general. Looking back at FPS\'s that I\'ve had a genuinly engaging single player experience in, the numbers aren\'t that large. Doom (years ago), Half-Life, Alien Trilogy.. the original Red Faction was fun, but again got repetitive and tedius in places. Medal of Honor on Playstation was great for it\'s time, Frontline was ok for a while, but after the initial battle it too became tiresome. Perhaps I should just stick to multiplayer.

I still dont\' understand why this game isn\'t good by what you\'re saying.  All hype and expectation bs aside, how does the game stand on its\' own?  From what I hear it\'s still one of the very best examples of the genre.

what genre?

From what I hear

ouch
:nerd:

[Bobs_Hardware]

Originally posted by Ginko
And you played it how many times?

Too many. It only compounded the whole notion of being \'repetitive\'. Perhaps, 3 times? Once co-op, once on nomarl/heroic, and once on legendary. Then occasionally I\'d play it some more in co-op when my friends and I were bored and looking for something to play.

DO NOT play the hype card,  mm and ooseven I expect it from, you are better than that.

What? You asked us what we were expecting. I told you what I was expecting, and why I was expecting it. To shorten it for you:

What was I expecting? Something different.

Why would you expecting that? Because I was told it would be different.

Had I been told it would be the same game with recoil, and the ability to dual wield, I would not have bought it.

I still dont\' understand why this game isn\'t good by what you\'re saying.  All hype and expectation bs aside, how does the game stand on its\' own?  From what I hear it\'s still one of the very best examples of the genre.

If the first game had not existed, I would probably think of it as quite good. I don\'t care for the atmosphere, the story, the repetitive battles (but I would not think they were so repetitive if I hadn\'t played the original..) the horrible cut-scenes (which surprisingly wreak of cheap production values) but the enemy AI is quite good if you take your time to observe it, rather than kill them. The vehicular battles are quite good, and having a friend on the turret of the Warthog in co-op is good. Friendly AI I don\'t pay much attention to. I see them drive on ahead and cause some havoc, and they\'ll occasionally crash into me, but it\'s nothing to write home about. The new dual wield is fine, but occasionally annoying. Recoil is fine, albeit annoying sometimes. Anything else you want me to comment on?

I\'ll also admit this, had I enjoyed the first game more, I certainly would not mind the fact that it\'s so similar.

Also, I still can not comment on the multiplayer. Which has apparently been the focus this time around.