|
|
Whoops
Pope is discovered to be a Catholic
Family of bears accused of defecating in forested areas
Microsoft product crashes:
"There have been several postings over at Xbox-scene complaining of crashing Xbox's on new games, with default settings on single player. Crashes on Xbox Live and on startup have been reported too, and Project Gotham Racing 3 crashes before finishing the first lap. Screenshots and Video are available showing the crash."
Nice thing is, since I think they all have built-in networking, it should be possible to quickly get a patch out. Assuming it's not just a bunch of gorillas beating down their poor little systems.
maybe it's time to wait for the Xbox 360.1.1.1 version. Then, time to hook it up to an LCD projector and start another Halo-a-thon. With everyone on the smallest map, with nothing but plasma grenades and rocket launchers.
hmmmm..... carnage....
Posted by: ronaprhys on November 23, 2005 10:48 AMI still don't get what was so great about Halo. I've played video games since Space Invaders came out, but I just can't get into Halo. It's just so... BORING. Even the multiplayer is boring; I'd rather play Counterstrike or Tribes or especially World of Warcraft than Halo. Hell, even Quake was a more fun multiplayer experience, to me, than Halo.
And yet, it's far and away the most popular video game ever among people who would rather jam hot needles in their eyes than be seen in a video arcade.
I don't understand normal people, and I don't even know WHY I don't understand normal people. It's goddamn frustrating.
To me, it was two things... a decent story, and comparatively intelligent, and consistent, bad guys. Ringworld is one of my favorite SF novels, and so it was a real hoot to actually see what one might look like on screen. There was definitely a narrarative, and it was even consistent.
The bad guys could be intelligent... the "elites" are a monstrous PITA on the highest difficulty. The bad guys can also be stupid, as anyone who's messed with grunts can tell you. The flood were supposed to be robotic and so they were. The rest would duck & cover at the most inconvenient times, and you never got an easy shot twice at anything.
I've played most of the highly rated shooters that have come out in the past ten years or so. Of those, and in my opinion, Halo is probably 3rd, behind the original Half Life and the earlier Star Wars-based shooters. Others may disagree, but hey, that's how the world works.
On-line, I'm probably a top 10% player. I won't lead, but you probably want me on your team. But that's not what I'm about. I just don't want to put in the effort to get really good at on-line games. Too many people with far too little life will always be able to drop me like a hot rock.
I'd much rather play a really "meaty" single-player campaign that is challenging, has just enough puzzles to keep it fresh, and is long enough to keep me playing for six weeks or so. I can pick it up when I want, and put it back when I've got other things to do, and I don't have to worry about the bad guys getting WAY better than I am in the meantime.
I can see why some folks wouldn't like Halo or its sequel. Good as they are, they're still pretty derivative if you've been current on PC shooters all this time. Still, I thought it was a hoot, and the halo parties we throw are a far different multiplay experience than you'd get with a garden-variety internet-based game. Nothing like being able to throw cold pizza at the bastard that just fragged you!
YMMV, etc.
Posted by: Scott on November 23, 2005 07:14 PM