Features - Best Games Of The Last Decade: The Nicest of the Noughties

[.havoc]

Halo... dear god...

"Why won't you RUN? Just RUN you stupid, stupid masterchief. What, are your ankles broken? Look, I'm pressing 'shift' and everything. Just... please... speed... up..."

It sucked.

Knock it all you like BUT it was Halo that spawned a generation of what is now (unfortunately) console superiority. Im a PC gamer so consoles domination and now bastardasidation of PC gaming (see MW2) is really dissapointing. However it wasn't one of the highest grossing games series without a good reason. (and it was probably one of a few console FPS games that had a control system that actually felt natural on a console...if that makes sense...)

"On its release Halo broke sales records; by April 8, 2002, one million units had been sold: this pace was faster than that of any previous sixth-generation console game.[77] During the two months following Halo's release, the game sold alongside more than fifty percent of Xbox consoles.[78] Halo's retail price remained at US$49.99 until November 30, 2003.[79] By July 14, 2003, the game had sold three million copies worldwide,[80] and by January 28, 2004, it had reached four million copies.[81] As of November 9, 2005, Halo has sold over five million copies worldwide."

Don't forget - this was before the massive boom in gaming that we have now.


"Halo was estimated as the second to top game of the twenty-first century, behind Grand Theft Auto: Vice City.[89]"

Taken from wikipedia - and not alone in my opinion - the lowest *sigh* critic score...hate them...is 83% and that was for the crappy PC port...console version I dont think got below 95.

I agree that the third was lacking that something, and the second was essentially just a lot prettier, BUT it was a good game and if your only knocking it to make it seem like your above the "teen l33t halo r0x0rz" group then thats your loss. I hate the fanboism that goes with Halo, but name a game nowadays that doesn't have it?

Im not saying it didn't have its flaws, especially compared to games of today, but thats just an unfair comparison. Yeah levels looked the same etc etc but for its time - it was pretty amazing. Shame they didnt evolve the series which I think was its downfall - after the first, it brought nothing new to the table.

but you are entitled to your opinion obviously...i would like to know why you think it sucks though...?

[DeludedGuy]

Fallout 3
Civ 4
NeverWinter Nights 2
Resident Evil 4
World of Warcraft
Half Life 2
GTA Vice City

[Shooty*]

i would like to know why you think it sucks though...?

*Zoolander moment*

Are... are you serious? I just told you. The fact that you have to lumber through the game like a pensioner with a broken hip, ostensibly in charge of this super human Master Chief who's meant to be saving the human race, but can't even by bothered to work up the enthusiam for a jog.

That's my problem with it. You have to crawl through the levels controlling a character who steers like a cow. And it's not an age thing: Doom and Quake had "run" ability.

The speed spoilt the game. And, as you say, that's my opinion.

In your learned opion, when did the "massive boom" in gaming occur?

[.havoc]

for me - twas around the time of manhunt, '03 - when the press started giving the gaming scene alot more media coverage. it was also roughly the same timescale - 2002-4 - in which world of warcraft, GTA3 and the sims was released and gave it a more open market from casual gamers.

But you really found 1 aspect of the game to ruin the ENTIRE experience for you? Granted my nan could probably run faster (bless her), but I don't just let an aspect like that completely taint my opinion on something, especially if there are other aspects of the game which overshadow the negative(s).


but hey ho as has already been said - each to their own eh?