dwarf Posted April 8, 2010 Posted April 8, 2010 Well I agree with you there Cube, but the original point Dan made wasn't really what I had in mind when it came to good examples of linear-games that give the impression of freedom, or indeed of actual freedom within the linearity.
Dan_Dare Posted April 8, 2010 Posted April 8, 2010 urrgh! but I meant that those variables change how fights play out on the fly each time! come on man, at least try and meet my arguments without resorting to pedantry and semantics.
Sheikah Posted April 8, 2010 Posted April 8, 2010 Ok then, varying which weapons you decide to use, when you use grenades and whether you save backup NPCs or not affects fights down the line. :p Just like nearly every FPS there is. :S
Nolan Posted April 8, 2010 Posted April 8, 2010 However, in Halo those variables can be consistent and fights will still vary considerably compared to other games even if the variables change in other games.
Sheikah Posted April 8, 2010 Posted April 8, 2010 (edited) Ok, so: If you come back to the game and start another playthrough, and play the exact same segment of a level as previously, with the exact same types of weapons, number of grenades, and number of NPCs saved you will still have a different outcome. I think we can agree that that is about as exciting as sugared almonds. You're likely never to have the exact same loadout, so things would vary in any game anyway. Just in the off chance that you do replay the same level, somehow with everything else constant, you would see something different. Which to be honest, still happens in a lot of games. Sometimes it's as simple as randomisation of AI actions, so you'll never really see them do the exact same thing. Edited April 8, 2010 by Sheikah
Nolan Posted April 8, 2010 Posted April 8, 2010 Well, the outcome is always going to one of 3 choices, you win (via murdering everything) you die, or you run on through (not always applicable). In Halo, you'll get a checkpoint 10 seconds before you drive into a battle, if you die in that battle and restart at the checkpoint EVERYTHING is the same, then you drive back into the battle and try for one of the outcomes. One time you might drive in and get blown up, another you might drive in and run everything over. It differs on what the enemy does as much as on what you do.
Shorty Posted April 9, 2010 Posted April 9, 2010 The most memorable areas of Halo, one of the things it shone for, were huge expansive areas, not corridors. It couldn't be nothing but big open fields, but remember as soon as you land on the ring, you're in that huge forest area? Later you're out in the middle of a snowy canyon with all those bridges you passed earlier criss-crossing over you. Or there's that part where you have to cross that huge bridge underground. Or that huge elevator where you first bump into the flood. Halo may have had a few corridors, but there weren't that many and they have the intended effect of making you feel claustrophobic, before suddenly emerging to bright light and huge expansive landscape. I can't see how you can say that Halo's level design is poor. It's very different to that of Half Life 2 but I wouldn't say it's worse. HL2 has you sneaking through buildings, making your way accross a city and a beach and through a prison, trying to be subtle, with all these armed forces after you. You're a wanted criminal and so the level design is based around buildings, narrow streets and across rooftops. Halo sends you as a huge and dominating force to tear through the landscape and find your objective. The levels are meant to reflect what they are, mountains and fields and trees... things that you can run through or drive through or whatever. Gah, I'm struggling with my point, but needless to say this only really applies to Halo: CE and Halo 3. Halo 2 and ODST are another matter. Those are examples of where they have tried to create buildings and cities and human environments, and failed. The cities in Halo 2 were blocky and dull, and the streets in Halo ODST failed to capture any sign of life or humanity (past or present).
Dan_Dare Posted April 9, 2010 Posted April 9, 2010 The ODST flashbacks do a much better job than the Mombassa streets. Uplift reserve (The warthog level) and ONI HQ (the fallback defensive line one) both stand out for exceptional use of space and sandbox combat. I'm hoping Reach goes back to the feeling you describe from the 2nd mission of CE. Everything they've shown so far indicates that they're at least trying to. Maybe they can't, though. In the years since CE, all the revolutionary ideas they bought to the genre have become standard so it could just be that it's impossible to recreate that sense of complete awe they managed the first time.
Beast Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 I detest Halo 3 (I liked the single player mode but I can't stand the online) and Fallout 3 (after a while, it gets seriously boring)
dwarf Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 I detest Halo 3 (I liked the single player mode but I can't stand the online) and Fallout 3 (after a while, it gets seriously boring) You lose on both accounts.
Beast Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 You lose on both accounts. I probably do on Fallout 3 but not Halo 3, haha.
Nolan Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 Halo 3 campaign is rather boring alone, although it's always a good time co-op. If you get bored of Fallout 3, just take a break and go back to it after a few weeks. Eventually you'll crave the wasteland again.
Beast Posted May 15, 2010 Posted May 15, 2010 Halo 3 campaign is rather boring alone, although it's always a good time co-op. If you get bored of Fallout 3, just take a break and go back to it after a few weeks. Eventually you'll crave the wasteland again. I doubt I will like Fallout 3 because I like a game much more and people are probably going to be confused by this: I love Oblivion but I don't like Fallout 3. I don't know why but there's something in Oblivion I like much more than Fallout 3.
Charlie Posted May 15, 2010 Posted May 15, 2010 Halo 3 campaign is rather boring alone, although it's always a good time co-op. If you get bored of Fallout 3, just take a break and go back to it after a few weeks. Eventually you'll crave the wasteland again. All the Halo campaigns are boring, even on co-op tbh. Any RPG, I just get bored of them WiiSports Gears of War multiplayer Bioshock
Daft Posted May 16, 2010 Posted May 16, 2010 Street Fighter. I feel like an OAP trying to work a fax machine; I just do not get it.
Mundi Posted May 16, 2010 Posted May 16, 2010 Well it works more like a flowchart then a fax machine.
Nolan Posted May 16, 2010 Posted May 16, 2010 I doubt I will like Fallout 3 because I like a game much more and people are probably going to be confused by this: I love Oblivion but I don't like Fallout 3. I don't know why but there's something in Oblivion I like much more than Fallout 3. I know lots of people who think the same thing, and I know others who dislike Oblivion greatly and really enjoyed Fallout 3. It is odd.
MoogleViper Posted May 16, 2010 Posted May 16, 2010 GTA. It's just rubbish. I spend an hour stealing a few cars and trying to find a prossy and then I'm bored of it. The actual story is rubbish.
Beast Posted May 16, 2010 Posted May 16, 2010 GTA. It's just rubbish. I spend an hour stealing a few cars and trying to find a prossy and then I'm bored of it. The actual story is rubbish. I'm bored of it too. I tried to play it the other day and I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I probably will some other time. I know lots of people who think the same thing, and I know others who dislike Oblivion greatly and really enjoyed Fallout 3. It is odd. I think it could be the era it's set in or something but I just find everything about Oblivion more interesting than Fallout 3.
ipaul Posted May 16, 2010 Posted May 16, 2010 I really didn't enjoy Fallout 3 when I tried to play it, yet I loved Oblivion. I was quite distressed by all the reviews claiming "Like Oblivion, but BETTER!". It just struck me as '...ok I've played Oblivion so why do I need to do this?'. It's likely a stylistic preference over proper gameplay mechanics but still.
dwarf Posted May 16, 2010 Posted May 16, 2010 I really didn't enjoy Fallout 3 when I tried to play it, yet I loved Oblivion. I was quite distressed by all the reviews claiming "Like Oblivion, but BETTER!". It just struck me as '...ok I've played Oblivion so why do I need to do this?'. It's likely a stylistic preference over proper gameplay mechanics but still. It's far more than that. I've only played a bit of Oblivion but Fallout is seriously different, even with subtle things like the atmosphere that make it a far better experience. Plus there was something warmly bleak, yet charming about the narrative and the way things unfolded in it. The sidequests were great too. It is my 2nd favourite game of all time for those reasons besides many others.
Recommended Posts