i find this thread rather funny. everyones just stating their faveorite games and saying its revolutionary. most of them aren't especially halo. halo brought nothing new to gaming its just an average shooter with a decent multiplayer that got incredibly popular so all u fanboys can STFU
most modern games are not revolutionary in any way whatsoever. im not so sure about older games as i haven't played half of them. there are some games that are not viewed as revolutionary but may well be viewed as revolutionary some day. littlebigplanet 1 and 2 and minecraft. the reason i feel that thes games are revolutionary is that it proves to developers that u don't need fancy story lines and graphics to make a good game. all u need is to perfect a simple game concept.
i feel that over the last few years gaming has went downhill. in terms of technical achievement its got better but in terms of creating a game which fulfills its purpose; for u to enjoy playing it. recently theres been a massive increase in FPS's like halo, COD, and GOW where the nature of the game causes players to become obsessed and way too serious and newcomers are ridiculed. i see people completely flip out at games all the time and yet persist that they are enjoying themselves. the games i mentioned and many more are not designed for fun they are designed so that people can waste away their lives sat infront of the game whilst getting pissed at it. i don't see the point.
i sorta went off on a tangent a bit there =D
most modern games are not revolutionary in any way whatsoever. im not so sure about older games as i haven't played half of them. there are some games that are not viewed as revolutionary but may well be viewed as revolutionary some day. littlebigplanet 1 and 2 and minecraft. the reason i feel that thes games are revolutionary is that it proves to developers that u don't need fancy story lines and graphics to make a good game. all u need is to perfect a simple game concept.
i feel that over the last few years gaming has went downhill. in terms of technical achievement its got better but in terms of creating a game which fulfills its purpose; for u to enjoy playing it. recently theres been a massive increase in FPS's like halo, COD, and GOW where the nature of the game causes players to become obsessed and way too serious and newcomers are ridiculed. i see people completely flip out at games all the time and yet persist that they are enjoying themselves. the games i mentioned and many more are not designed for fun they are designed so that people can waste away their lives sat infront of the game whilst getting pissed at it. i don't see the point.
i sorta went off on a tangent a bit there =D
[Pure], wanna join?
Originally Posted by T0ribush
And yes Halo is revolutionary in a sense, actually more evolutionary than revolutionary.
We have our gay ass standard fps with your standard controls, Jump, shoot, sprint, crouch which appears in Call of Duty, Red mercury, black hawk down, Battlefield, and many others. Now we have Halo Reach, which has Low-grav, Jumps, shoot, sprint, and crouch, Loadouts, that completely changes up combat, from small weapons to large vehicles. The fact that the physics are completely different compared to any other fps is quite revolutionary itself.
Congratulations, you just added 3 different things that you attribute to Halo Reach, yet were around way before it.
Low grav could be seen in Unreal Tournament with the grav boots, changing gravity etc. etc. Only need to list one example to render your argument invalid so moving on.
Loadouts have been around since the fucking dark ages of fps gaming. Heck, Call of Duty already had loadouts, BF2 has loadouts that affect vehicle gameplay as well as small arms fights, and it came out before Halo Reach, your argument is invalid.
And oh look, I make a shitty game based on Flash engine limitations, nobody else has this physics system, I'm revolutionary. No. Also, how is that any different than say the CryEngine, or the Quake Engine (which more games are based on than Halo's engine). There's nothing revolutionary about coming up with a new physics system if nobody uses it, or it doesn't cause any change. All Halo's engine has done is leech off other engine's properties and repackages it.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Ultima Online. It sparked every MMORPG. And from that the most popular of all WoW.
Originally Posted by T0ribush
And yes Halo is revolutionary in a sense, actually more evolutionary than revolutionary.
We have our gay ass standard fps with your standard controls, Jump, shoot, sprint, crouch which appears in Call of Duty, Red mercury, black hawk down, Battlefield, and many others. Now we have Halo Reach, which has Low-grav, Jumps, shoot, sprint, and crouch, Loadouts, that completely changes up combat, from small weapons to large vehicles. The fact that the physics are completely different compared to any other fps is quite revolutionary itself.
Halo: Reach did NOT have any extraordinary physics, did NOT bring loadouts to the genre and there is absolutely NOTHING special about low gravity.
And yes, since Halo 3 Halo has been one of those "gay ass standard fps".
Last edited by Ostakex; Mar 10, 2011 at 01:00 AM.
Halo was definitely a step foreward in gaming, for xbox people.
Now before the hater (fanboys?) descend upon me;
Yes halo did not bring anything new to shooters, you guys seem to have fun pointing that out. It did bring a fps's to the Xbox with rather comfortable controls and a comfortable backstory. It also pretty much invented Xbox live as well because people liked it so much they created there own networks or something, I don't really know how it worked.
Also in todays rant. Games from the 80's-90's does not automatically make them revolutionary, or classic. People like to think that the first super mario was some sort of god-send, or that Final Fantasy was the first rpg. The truth is many things had already been done on the computer and Nintendo was just bringing it to the masses.
There are not really any games that completely shook things up, game's since there begining have just been polished every year.
To be honest, I can't come up with any games that truly deserve the title 'revolutionary' because I grew up with what most people grew up with.
How about tennis for 2? first game to have multiplayer. There, the end Period.
Now before the hater (fanboys?) descend upon me;
Yes halo did not bring anything new to shooters, you guys seem to have fun pointing that out. It did bring a fps's to the Xbox with rather comfortable controls and a comfortable backstory. It also pretty much invented Xbox live as well because people liked it so much they created there own networks or something, I don't really know how it worked.
Also in todays rant. Games from the 80's-90's does not automatically make them revolutionary, or classic. People like to think that the first super mario was some sort of god-send, or that Final Fantasy was the first rpg. The truth is many things had already been done on the computer and Nintendo was just bringing it to the masses.
There are not really any games that completely shook things up, game's since there begining have just been polished every year.
To be honest, I can't come up with any games that truly deserve the title 'revolutionary' because I grew up with what most people grew up with.
How about tennis for 2? first game to have multiplayer. There, the end Period.
My seniority means you should probably just agree with everything I say
