Official HALO 2 thread

Originally posted by mm
what genre?

I\'ll leave you to figure it out, if you have too much trouble I\'ll go ahead and help you out.

BTW, I haven\'t played the game myself, perhaps tomorrow, but all the reviews are synonomous in saying it\'s a great game, one of the best FPS.  <--- oops, I just gave it away.  Just as well, wouldn\'t want you to strain yourself.  

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.

Wait, so you really didn\'t favor the first game but you bought into the hype (be it the media, fans, or even Bungie themselves) of the sequel?

Anything else you want me to comment on?

I just don\'t understand someone who buys into the sequel of a game they didn\'t enjoy so much.  I mean, really, the original is a big seller, obviously something worked and Bungie would have been dense not to play off that.  I take it you\'ll be more cautious when Halo 3 comes around...

There were people with sleeping bags in front of Software Etc. at the mall the night before release. ****ing losers.

Guess you can toss them in with the losers who camped out for the Playstation 2.

Almost 2.4 million in 24 hours.

Halo 2 earned $125 million in first-day sales, breaking records for first-day earnings of any entertainment release, including the biggest Hollywood blockbusters. In other words, The Matrix got nothing on Master Chief.

The frenzy for one of the biggest console releases in videogame history moved 2.4 million units in the U.S. and Canada. Says Microsoft\'s Peter Moore: "The first 24 hours of Halo 2 sales have taken our breath away."

Time will tell just how high the figures will climb, but there\'s no doubt -- and no surprise in noting -- that Halo 2 has already made videogame history.
-- David Adams

>>>Link<<<

Originally posted by Ginko
Guess you can toss them in with the losers who camped out for the Playstation 2.

Hey you homo I camped out for PS2, but I am a loser so you win this round.  I got Halo 2 at midnight but waited for only 15min.  PS2 was more or less justified because only 500k were made at launch, I needed a DVD player for my dorm, and I\'m a huge Tekken freak.

lol, I was just drawing the comparison.  I\'m not one to point the finger at anybody, I was at the midnight release of the latest Harry Potter book.:nerd:

[Bobs_Hardware]

Originally posted by Ginko
Wait, so you really didn\'t favor the first game but you bought into the hype (be it the media, fans, or even Bungie themselves) of the sequel?

I just don\'t understand someone who buys into the sequel of a game they didn\'t enjoy so much.  I mean, really, the original is a big seller, obviously something worked and Bungie would have been dense not to play off that.  I take it you\'ll be more cautious when Halo 3 comes around...

I didn\'t buy into the hype at all. My friends and I came to the conclusion that it would have been an excellent game had it not been rushed to meet the XBox launch deadline. I had enthusiasm for this game based on the fact that they would have more time to develop their already good ideas, and couple that with excellent level design and improvements in almost every other area, such as storyline.

I guess in this regard, we could liken it to Killzone. A disappointing game that had so much potential, but it was rushed. Henceforth, my enthusiasm has been transferred to the sequal.

Now, given all this extra development time, and plenty of criticism it received from what is admittedly the minority, one would think that they would indeed put out a game that was devoid of these flaws inherent in the original game. Perhaps they have improved it somewhat, but not enough to make it feel different in any major regard.

I guess perhaps that that is what I bought into, the fact that the game was supposedly so much different to the original. And this had been confirmed by most people. I find it extremely disappointing that with all the extra time they were given, all the experience they had from the first game that they failed to take the major criticisms in stride and make a truely exceptional game. Instead, they played it safe and made a game that was exactly the same, and beefed up the multiplayer. It just feels as though it\'s been rushed, again. Perhaps it\'s because they put so much effort into the multiplayer (which again, I have not played) and not so much into the horrible cut-scenes, or the objectives, or the campaign level design, or the fact that when you melee attack the auto-lock on feature causes you to continually look DOWNWARDS until you\'re lost .

And yes, I am hoping that Halo 3 will fulfill it\'s potential. Only this time, I\'ll rent it. Hopefully it won\'t become another Tomb Raider.

And to remind you, I did enjoy the first game. Particularly in co-op. It just became a bit much at times.

Originally posted by Bobs_Hardware
I didn\'t buy into the hype at all. My friends and I came to the conclusion that it would have been an excellent game had it not been rushed to meet the XBox launch deadline. I had enthusiasm for this game based on the fact that they would have more time to develop their already good ideas, and couple that with excellent level design and improvements in almost every other area, such as storyline.

So you and your friends assumed that given the extra time it might meet your expectations?  Okay.

I guess in this regard, we could liken it to Killzone. A disappointing game that had so much potential, but it was rushed. Henceforth, my enthusiasm has been transferred to the sequal.

Not really, Halo does what it does very well and that transfered to the sequel.  If Bungie changes up the gameplay, what you claim as tedious and repetitive, too much then they risk losing fans.  Considering over 2 million copies of Halo 2 sold in 24 hours their are many fans of what the original did.  If you don\'t like it then perhaps you should look elsewhere for your fps fix.  

Killzone doesn\'t do anything particularly well except the art direction.  Everything else is mediocre at best.    

Now, given all this extra development time, and plenty of criticism it received from what is admittedly the minority, one would think that they would indeed put out a game that was devoid of these flaws inherent in the original game. Perhaps they have improved it somewhat, but not enough to make it feel different in any major regard.

I guess perhaps that that is what I bought into, the fact that the game was supposedly so much different to the original. And this had been confirmed by most people. I find it extremely disappointing that with all the extra time they were given, all the experience they had from the first game that they failed to take the major criticisms in stride and make a truely exceptional game. Instead, they played it safe and made a game that was exactly the same, and beefed up the multiplayer. It just feels as though it\'s been rushed, again. Perhaps it\'s because they put so much effort into the multiplayer (which again, I have not played) and not so much into the horrible cut-scenes.

I take it you didn\'t pick up the Halo 2 LE, or if you did then you didn\'t watch the extra DVD content yet.  They had alot of ideas for the sequel but when it came down to it they had to cut alot of it out due to technical limitations or time.  They admit in the documentary that they didn\'t plan the development out very well and it ended up biting them in the ass.  The last 10 months were extremely busy for them.

And yes, I am hoping that Halo 3 will fulfill it\'s potential. Only this time, I\'ll rent it. Hopefully it won\'t become another Tomb Raider.

But you\'ve already admited to not liking the style to which Halo plays out, particularly the "tedious battles" as you put it.  What makes you think this needs to change for the 3rd installment when so many people think otherwise?

Originally posted by Ginko
They had alot of ideas for the sequel but when it came down to it they had to cut alot of it out due to technical limitations or time.

The game received a major graphics downgrade because of time.

Most of the additional gameplay features:

• Melee Combos
• Sprinting
• Peeking

... were there at one point in time, but were removed because they simply didn\'t find them fun. Because of them, the game didn\'t feel like HALO anymore.

The other feature that was removed; Strategic use of Dynamic Light & Shadow, was axed because the Xbox couldn\'t handle it, by the way.

The game has already alienated a few HALO players because of the changes. It makes me raise an eyebrow every time I see somebody say it\'s too similar to the original.

Originally posted by Nu
The game received a major graphics downgrade because of time.

Most of the additional gameplay features:

• Melee Combos
• Sprinting
• Peeking

... were there at one point in time, but were removed because they simply didn\'t find them fun. Because of them, the game didn\'t feel like HALO anymore.

The other feature that was removed; Strategic use of Dynamic Light & Shadow, was axed because the Xbox couldn\'t handle it, by the way.[/b]

Oh yes, I remember them saying "it\'s just not fun right now" and that was a major low point.  It had them completely rethinking the game.

They didn\'t mention Light & Shadow during the documentary but they did mention something about the graphics downgrade, and the reason being technical limitations.  They were very concerned with having a consistent framerate.  (Guerrilla take note)  

The game has already alienated a few HALO players because of the changes. It makes me raise an eyebrow every time I see somebody say it\'s too similar to the original.

That\'s easy to explain  ----> Can\'t please everybody.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

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

how aren\'t they the official sequels.. GTA VC aka GTA4, GTA SA aka GTA5. You saying they\'re spin offs because they base the games of parts of the city parts... GTA III, 4 and 5 are spin offs of GTA. They\'re based of the citys.  So sorry to tell you, 4 and 5 aren\'t spin offs on 3.

[Bobs_Hardware]

Originally posted by Ginko
Not really, Halo does what it does very well and that transfered to the sequel.  If Bungie changes up the gameplay, what you claim as tedious and repetitive, too much then they risk losing fans.  Considering over 2 million copies of Halo 2 sold in 24 hours their are many fans of what the original did.  If you don\'t like it then perhaps you should look elsewhere for your fps fix.

Sounds like you\'re making excuses for them rehashing the game. I mean come on, [sp]the FLOOD.. AGAIN?! Weren\'t they horrible enough in the first game?? The non-stop shooting is bad enough when you\'re aiming at enemies that can pseudo-think![/sp]. <-- Perhaps you should read that when you\'re a few levels in.  

I take it you didn\'t pick up the Halo 2 LE, or if you did then you didn\'t watch the extra DVD content yet.

Not yet.

They had alot of ideas for the sequel but when it came down to it they had to cut alot of it out due to technical limitations or time.  They admit in the documentary that they didn\'t plan the development out very well and it ended up biting them in the ass.  The last 10 months were extremely busy for them.

Well there you go. Had they organised themselves better, or delayed the game perhaps they wouldn\'t have put out a rehash.

But you\'ve already admited to not liking the style to which Halo plays out, particularly the "tedious battles" as you put it.

 

They weren\'t always tedius. There were moments. In between the non-stop blasting through the exact same levels against the exact same enemies for 8 hours.

What makes you think this needs to change for the 3rd installment when so many people think otherwise?

I\'m sure the same was being said after Tomb Raider 2. And apparently, Bungie think so, too. If they had to omit so many features.

I kind of avoided this thread for the past half hour, but even I can\'t keep away from talking about this game even when it pains me the most.  That may seem melodramatic, but seriously, all I wanted was a good story.  I had high hopes all the secrecy had to do with how great and how awesome it was.  Just imagine, if you will, my dissapointment when I found out so much of the game was either cut or rushed or just plain ditched when I finally saw the ending happened well before it should have.

I actually did enjoy the first Halo -- one of the few people on this board who will admit that it seems.  I for one didn\'t find a lot of the misgivings so many of the people on here have with the game to be too dramatic (framerate, enemy AI, etc).  I did find levels to be tedious, but I also think approaching situations differently with different weapons added a lot of flavor to the game and made those few levels that seemed monotonous to actually feel pretty fun and even moreso with a friend.  In addition, the difficulty level added plenty to that and it balanced out the gameplay a great deal.

Unfortunately, though maybe it\'s just my age or my position as a gamer these days being far less engrossing then it once was, I just didn\'t want to put up with it this time around in Halo 2.  Admittedly, I didn\'t even notice that many changes in the game when I started playing it, but I can easily attribute that to the fact that I pretty much blew through it in a sitting just to get the story aspect out of my system.  I came in, I killed elites, I killed overgrown gorillas and a host of other enemies and vehicles.  Even had a boss fight or two -- though they were utterly dissapointing as they were on the incredibly weak side (something I assume changes on legendary).  I did find myself using some more weapons far more then others in the campaign though as some are just far more lethal then others.

I enjoy jacking vehicles in the game, though I feel having to punch someone several times to just get them out is a little on the lame side for some vehicles.  I found duel weilding to be pretty good early in the game but totaly useless later in the game.  I also think the SMG\'s are really lame and I\'m still astonished they get so much attention.  I miss the old rifle the chief had.  This new one looks cool, but it lacks the constant punch the old one had.  I find myself preferring the zoom and the precision of the covenant carbine more and more.  I also liked outfitting my teammates with weapons and giving them sniper rifles while I take the more concentrated weapons and protect them.  I think they are really stupid drivers though, especially if I\'m in another vehicle and they ram into me -- several times no less.

I don\'t like the fact Bungie addressed level design by making you hold a single position for longer.  True, I\'m not moving through the same corridors, but there\'s lots of times when I\'m just on a single piece of metal or in a single area and I just have to hold my position against the enemy.  I also like doing it with the plasma sword, that\'s a lot of fun, but I think it\'s a bit overused in the game and too readily available.  I also don\'t like how levels are essentially really small, but have large backgrounds to make it seem a lot larger then it actually is.  I don\'t feel that every situation is approachable with different weapons with different avenues of attack as much in Halo 2 as it was in the original.  It\'s true you can do a lot more it seems, but they actually force you to do a lot less with objectives.   I found myself bypassing a lot of battles with a quick vehicle just to hit checkpoints as not to waste any time.  Maybe I do find the game repetetive, but essentially, I did just want to get through the story.

One thing that did impress me, as I always go through options first and foremost before starting any game, was jus thow many options you\'re afforded in the profile character creation.  Lots of colors, lots of symbols, lots of colors for the symbols.  It was all very impressive in my opinion.  It\'s obvious to me that a LOT of work went into the multiplayer and little else.  I\'m not even going to touch the cut scene graphics this time as so many others have.  It\'s painful though, to say the least.  I\'d go online right now if I didn\'t have 4 torrents going so maybe this weekend I\'ll take a crack at it.  Right now though, as it stands, I feel Bungie stole my money and that\'s really sad.

Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
how aren\'t they the official sequels.. GTA VC aka GTA4, GTA SA aka GTA5. You saying they\'re spin offs because they base the games of parts of the city parts... GTA III, 4 and 5 are spin offs of GTA. They\'re based of the citys.  So sorry to tell you, 4 and 5 aren\'t spin offs on 3.

VC and SA ARE spin off\'s as they use the same engine and same gameplay.

The NEXT GTA will most likely be the true sequel to the series, and it will only appear on the next gen consoles.

wait, did ginko really compare camping out overnight for a short supply console and halo 2?

:eek:

here\'s another comparison you might fail

vs