|
fao: pkc (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
When I said “generation” I meant system generation, given that games takes 3-4 years to make, I consider half life to be in the same system generation as GE, given that it released the following year. |
If we're going on system generations, Half-Life was still next-gen because the Dreamcast was released when it was. The N64 was the PS1/Saturn system generation. And in those days, games did not take 3-4 years to make. Daikatana was slated for being extremely over-due, and that was announced in 1997 and released in 2000. As I said, things moved a lot more quickly in those days.
| quote: | | Which makes you what, an SP noob? I never claimed that quake’s SP was great. It was just a fun distraction. The MP however set the bar for every FPS game to come, and that’s not even mentioning team fortress etc. it was certainly a much better MP game than GE. |
I'd be an "SP noob" if I were taking single-player as a synecdoche of the overall game, which I'm not. In terms of a complete package, GoldenEye was a much better, much more important game than Quake. Quake was a tech-demo, its achievement was its 3D engine and its speed. GoldenEye was a revolution, and even if its multiplayer was not a balanced and competitive experience it was never intended to be, and yet there are still elements from the multiplayer that reoccur in modern shooters. Nothing from Quake's single-player design was remotely relevant within a couple of years of its release.
The point is that the merit of a game lies within its design and its use of a control system. GoldenEye's controls had seven buttons and one analogue stick, and yet it allowed far richer and more interactive gameplay than any previous PC FPS. Halo is certainly not a perfectly balanced multiplayer experience, yet it had a set of features - the health/shield system, the dual-weapon inventory, the integrated grenades and the melee - that made it play very differently to previous shooters, something which holds true even today. If you dismiss quality of design with some misguided snobbery over control systems and an obsession with uber-precise competitve play then you're a stick.
PC gamers are far too used to built-in superiority complexes and the kind of lazy condescension displayed by your man BTG to actually have their views challenged. And I say this as someone who thinks most of the best games ever made were for the PC and the PC only. |
|
|
| BTG |
| and what do games today borrow from goldeneye. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by BTG
and don't call me son. you make it sound like you've just won a debate that has some kind of importance. |
I don't consider anything you have to add to this thread of any importance. You're well known as an utter cretin around these parts, with good reason.
And although it isn't remotely relevant to your point, I played most of those games with other people. That is, the ones that actually have multiplayer modes. |
|
|
| BTG |
lol you're such a prick.
i'm outa this thread. you can keep your nerd crown. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by jupiterone
i have nhl 94 in my genesis as we speak ;)
one of the best games ever made |
nigga yeah!
i loved that game. Wish i still had my nes. |
|
|
| shaw |
| quote: | Originally posted by jupiterone
halo MP just pisses me off so much. every sensitivity setting i assign, all the hours i put i can't do . how in the do those guys snipe so well on a controller? i mean really, it seems so ridiculous. it's rather a butthurt thread from halo mp, but seriously. it's really really aggravating
mid air snipes every round off the propulsion pad on cage. come on |
exactly--it's much harder to be equally as good as you would be on a pc. whether this is a good or bad thing is entirely subjective. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
If we're going on system generations, Half-Life was still next-gen because the Dreamcast was released when it was. |
You make a fair point. But, since the title came out the previous year, I am still going to compare it to HL given that GE’s influence on HL would be negligible unless you’re alleging that valve re-wrote the game mid-stream. Again, I am not doubting its quality, just that the MP did not light me on fire.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I'd be an "SP noob" if I were taking single-player as a synecdoche of the overall game, which I'm not. In terms of a complete package, GoldenEye was a much better, much more important game than Quake. Quake was a tech-demo, its achievement was its 3D engine and its speed. GoldenEye was a revolution, and even if its multiplayer was not a balanced and competitive experience it was never intended to be, and yet there are still elements from the multiplayer that reoccur in modern shooters. Nothing from Quake's single-player design was remotely relevant within a couple of years of its release. |
Well, I do agree that if we’re talking about the entire package GE brought more newness to the table, but as I only ever played the MP, that is all I am able to judge. And with its awkward controls, bland environments, split-screen slowdown etc, it didn’t provide ME with the same feelings of excitement that MP quake did at launch, which despite your protestations, was a massive improvement on doom, in level design, skillset required, balance, player configs etc.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Halo is certainly not a perfectly balanced multiplayer experience, yet it had a set of features - the health/shield system, the dual-weapon inventory, the integrated grenades and the melee - that made it play very differently to previous shooters, something which holds true even today. If you dismiss quality of design with some misguided snobbery over control systems and an obsession with uber-precise competitve play then you're a stick. |
Now now, why that level of abuse? We’re merely having a discussion and a difference of opinion, what have I said/done thus far to warrant that?
anyway, I would hardly call the dual-weapon inventory notable at all. sure, it made you choose which weapons you take on your adventure, but in the thick of it all it really meant was that you were forced to go grab another weapon if your ammo ran out. The health/shield system I agree made the game play differently, and this was a net loss to FPS everywhere. All you need to do is look at the ness of health-recovery systems in just about any title released these days. sure, it was revolutionary, but not in a positive fashion. Melee existed from the times of wolfenstein (possibly before) and was a big part of Q3 so not sure what you’re referring to here.
Halo introduced a bunch of vehicles that were fun to pilot, the outside environments were great and I thought the AI was pretty good. other than that though it was boring, slow, simple and just a whole lot of not-very-much-fun. It provided no challenge in SP or MP and the MP was downright atrocious, at least on PC, where the controller-dumbed-down-speed of the game sucked all the life out of the title. I am surprised you could commend halo’s SP while lambasting quake’s, given that the former’s corridor shooting was fairly average.
as a gamer whose main interest in (traditional) FPS lies in competitive MP, I resent being called a stick for placing greater importance in certain areas, particularly in things like precision, competitive gameplay, speed/skill ceilings etc. these are, after all, part of the fundamental aspects of FPS MP.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
PC gamers are far too used to built-in superiority complexes and the kind of lazy condescension displayed by your man BTG to actually have their views challenged. And I say this as someone who thinks most of the best games ever made were for the PC and the PC only. |
Well, I’ve already accepted most of your arguments about GE, and possibly my remaining criticisms are caused by the fact I didn’t play it until 1999ish or maybe even 2000, when things had moved somewhat. However I take issue with your argument that halo really did anything new (and good) other than what I mentioned above. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaw
exactly--it's much harder to be equally as good as you would be on a pc. whether this is a good or bad thing is entirely subjective. |
Not really true. In Halo you've got three different kinds of built-in help: auto-aim, aim-assist and larger hit boxes. That's without mentioning the slow movement speed relative to a PC shooter. |
|
|
| shaw |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Not really true. In Halo you've got three different kinds of built-in help: auto-aim, aim-assist and larger hit boxes. That's without mentioning the slow movement speed relative to a PC shooter. |
that helps level the cross-platform playing field, so to speak, but certainly doesn't make them equal. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaw
that helps level the cross-platform playing field, so to speak, but certainly doesn't make them equal. |
You’re only considering one side of the issue however (the ‘difficulty’ of using a pad to shoot someone), you’re not considering the issue of the difficulty that person has in shooting you. Yes, a mouse is probably easier to aim with and its definitely more precise, which makes shooting you easier, but it also makes avoiding your enemy that much harder. |
|
|
|
|
