if this belongs somewhere else then sorry but check this vid out.

I uploaded it to yousendit.com

LINK

comments?

*snore*

Don't feel like downloading.

Is it the announcement trailer from E3?

i've never liked halo

Wrong forum.

___________________

my thoughts about halo:
Halo 1: multiplayer was so much fun; lots of late nights with friends..
single player waaaaaay too repetitive
Halo 2: never played it
Halo 3: preview makes it look amazing, until you realize that its a cutscene...and its halo


look at the preview for half life 2 episode two, and you'll realize that the graphics are better than those in the halo 3 cutscene, and thats regular gameplay...

it must be tough for the xbox...

___________________
TX TA #97

quote:

Originally posted by Sunflower i've never liked halo

That's a shame. It's one of the more solid FPS titles to grace a game console.

quote:

Originally posted by JBDreamerie my thoughts about halo: Halo 1: multiplayer was so much fun; lots of late nights with friends.. single player waaaaaay too repetitive Halo 2: never played it Halo 3: preview makes it look amazing, until you realize that its a cutscene...and its halo look at the preview for half life 2 episode two, and you'll realize that the graphics are better than those in the halo 3 cutscene, and thats regular gameplay... it must be tough for the xbox...

A few things:

- You should play Halo 2. It's a huge improvement in both single player and multiplayer. The addition of the LIVE service is tremendous in and of itself.

- There's a video on Bungie's website that shows that the trailer was processed in realtime. They move about the environment and show the viewer shots that weren't seen in the trailer.

- Last I checked, the XBOX was obsolete. The 360 has been on the market for some time now and that's what Halo 3 will be released on.

- We haven't seen the full power of the 360 yet. Don't expect to see its innards proper utilization till a few years down the line.

quote:

Originally posted by Yan That's a shame. It's one of the more solid FPS titles to grace a game console.

i will agree with this. i think it did a lot better on console than PC

quote:

A few things: - You should play Halo 2. It's a huge improvement in both single player and multiplayer. The addition of the LIVE service is tremendous in and of itself.

don't have xbox...and too many things stacked up to do; i'll wait for 3

quote:

- There's a video on Bungie's website that shows that the trailer was processed in realtime. They move about the environment and show the viewer shots that weren't seen in the trailer.

i'll check it out

quote:

- Last I checked, the XBOX was obsolete. The 360 has been on the market for some time now and that's what Halo 3 will be released on.

i know 3 will be on 360, but an xbox is an xbox for me.

VERY obsolete. 360...no games...not worth it. microsoft, however big they are, are stupid for trying to step into the gaming industry imo.

quote:

- We haven't seen the full power of the 360 yet. Don't expect to see its innards proper utilization till a few years down the line.

a few years down the line means obsolete for a system. especially in this time. by that time i'm sure microsoft will attempt to release a 720...

quote:

Originally posted by Yan That's a shame. It's one of the more solid FPS titles to grace a game console.

yea, I just could never get into it. had a very generic feeling to me.

quote:

Originally posted by JBDreamerie i know 3 will be on 360, but an xbox is an xbox for me.

If you come at the next generation of consoles with a bias like that, you're going to miss out on a lot of great games and possibly even a new gaming experience.

quote:

Originally posted by JBDreamerie VERY obsolete. 360...no games...not worth it. microsoft, however big they are, are stupid for trying to step into the gaming industry imo.

Last I checked, the device was the most powerful on the market. In terms of processing power, it'll be sandwiched between the Nintendo and the PS3 so by those standards, it's far from being "obsolete", let alone very. The original PlayStation is "very obsolete" compared to the current generation of consoles.

While the console might not have an all-star lineup of games, there are quite a few gems on shelves that many people overlook. Plus, don't forget that the device is backwards compatible (for the most part), so that tacks on at least 20 to 30 more must-play titles (and 100-150 that are just meh ).

Why would you say Microsoft was stupid for entering the market? With them they bring a slew of developers (as well as intriguing others to join the industry), a good unified online service which built upon the success of Sega's and a worthy group of surveyists that helped and will continue helping the console to be fine-tuned to the consumer and gamer, respectively (as was seen with the current controller - one of the best I've ever had the chance to play with).

That's not to mention their attracting non-gamers to the video game world. More players = More fun = The industry grows! It's all good.

quote:

a few years down the line means obsolete for a system. especially in this time. by that time i'm sure microsoft will attempt to release a 720...

5 years was the going rate for a while but Sony and Nintendo are releasing their consoles on the 6th (for this generation) and Sony is even promising that their PS3 will have a 10 year shelf life!

The reasoning behind their naming has to do with customer appeal. Many would think that the XBox 2 is inferior to the PlayStation 3. Otherwise, calling it the 360 is just plain cool.

quote:

Originally posted by Yan

Console Gaming 101

Good post

quote:

Originally posted by Yan If you come at the next generation of consoles with a bias like that, you're going to miss out on a lot of great games and possibly even a new gaming experience.

i don't think so. i'm pretty hardcore with my game selection, and so i think that games make or break a system. i feel there's no point to have a console unless you know a myriad number of good games will be released. i feel you shouldn't get a console and hope for a better gaming experience, because you're putting yourself at risk of spending a lot of money for a machine that you might just end up using to play dvds.

quote:

Last I checked, the device was the most powerful on the market. In terms of processing power, it'll be sandwiched between the Nintendo and the PS3 so by those standards, it's far from being "obsolete", let alone very. The original PlayStation is "very obsolete" compared to the current generation of consoles. While the console might not have an all-star lineup of games, there are quite a few gems on shelves that many people overlook. Plus, don't forget that the device is backwards compatible (for the most part), so that tacks on at least 20 to 30 more must-play titles (and 100-150 that are just meh ). Why would you say Microsoft was stupid for entering the market? With them they bring a slew of developers (as well as intriguing others to join the industry), a good unified online service which built upon the success of Sega's and a worthy group of surveyists that helped and will continue helping the console to be fine-tuned to the consumer and gamer, respectively (as was seen with the current controller - one of the best I've ever had the chance to play with).

as i said before, just because a console is powerful, doesn't make it the best. you bring up the playstation, and even though i agree its obsolete just because there are no more games being made for it, there are more better games on the PS than xbox. in addition these games are playable on PS2, and will be on PS3 as well.
and even though certain games depend on the opinion of the gamer, i still feel there are fewer of the "everyone loves this" games on the xbox.

i feel it wasn't a wise move on microsoft's part to enter the gaming market, because they just don't know it. that results in losing time figuring out the market, fine tuning for your customers, and developing business relationships that will inevitably allow you to overtake the market (game developing companies). xbox is behind in that sense...
you also have to think, microsoft really has NOTHING to do with hardware/gaming. they're a software company, that develops OS for 98% of the computer world. you kind of have to wonder, what the hell are you doing in games? what's next? furniture?! (also not mentioned the fact that microsoft was technically losing money for every xbox they sold)

quote:

That's not to mention their attracting non-gamers to the video game world. More players = More fun = The industry grows! It's all good.

all too true if you're looking at the big picture. i was just focusing on microsoft as an individual company and the goals involved.
as a capitalist though, i believe there's no bad involved with another company attempting to enter the market. competition means drive which means better products are released which means more fun for the eventual customer.

quote:

5 years was the going rate for a while but Sony and Nintendo are releasing their consoles on the 6th (for this generation) and Sony is even promising that their PS3 will have a 10 year shelf life! The reasoning behind their naming has to do with customer appeal. Many would think that the XBox 2 is inferior to the PlayStation 3. Otherwise, calling it the 360 is just plain cool.

that sounds about right. although for some consoles it has been considerably less, and some a little more. i still consider the PS2 to be still strong, even with the coming of PS3. major games are still be developed for it...proving its definitely still alive.

re: naming: yea, i agree. it's a weird marketing technique, but it's proven psycologically...

___________________
TX TA #97