holyium 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 halo isnt that good at all even thought critics say alot of things just to create controversy. microsoft thnks that they all pro and just coz they dominate the operating systems area doesnt mean that they can produce quality games. not alot of ppl play halo with majority of gamers prefering to stick with counter-strike because it can be run on practically any computer and doesnt require an expensive upgrade to play it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spectre 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 Halo is a fantastic game, period. Counter-Strike is good as well, and has a huge following (assuming you mean the original Counter-Strike, not Condition Zero or whatever it's called) - but Halo is obviously much more advanced in the areas of graphics, artificial intelligence, and most other general aspects of the game. The difference between CS and Halo is that one has a fantastic single-player mode (although obviously, multiplayer is still more fun). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
odomike 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 even though halo requires some upgrades before you cn play it, it is still a good quality game. apart from that, the upgrades are given by microsoft for free cos you are not required to pay any additional charges for upgrading your WINDOWS OS. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iGuest 3 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 I agree Halo is crap. Counterstrike is one of the best online games. Check out cs source from the steam site!Doom 3 has the best graphics engine and is better then halo in my opinion!Play doom 3! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spectre 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 How can you even compare Counter Strike, Halo, and Doom 3? CS and Halo are nothing alike - sure, they are both FPS, but they are still very different games. And of course Doom 3 is going to be better than Halo, in terms of graphics, the engine, and other technologically-influenced aspects of the game - Halo is over two years old, and Doom 3 was only released this month. When comparing games, you can't just judge them on face value - you have to take into consideration every aspect of the game, as well as what was the standard, and the capability of technology at the time (I don't know how many times I've said this). For example, if you compare the original Doom and say, the soon-to-be-released Half-Life 2, you can't just say that Half-Life 2 is better because it has better graphics, faster gameplay, etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Too_Hot 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 exactly sauron ive got halo, call of duty and counter strike and i think they're all brilliant i love all of them and i play them all the time. and u say doom 3 is good all it is, is a bog standard fps with next gen graphics. its nothing new except for it does bring fear i thought it was pretty crap and returned it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bash 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 i played halo single-player (co-operative mode only), and a bit of multiplayer (not onlinE), and i seriously didn't see why everyone thinks it's so good.even tho i haven't played halo online, i think UT2004 is waaaaay better Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blia 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 u cant really compare halo and cs.. they're pretty different... i feeel that they're both great games in their own right... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Too_Hot 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 u cant say that then bash as u havent played multiplayer online and COD RULES Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bash 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 yes, but i've played offline multiplayer, and that's basically the same thing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ICE-XG 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 Halo is an awsome game. At Nov. 9, 2004 Halo 2 will be coming on XBOX. That dosen't mean CS isn't good either. CS is great game also. But something about you is true. Like Halo require a good computer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bash 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 btw, in case u thought i said CS is better, i didn't, i said UT2004 is better Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LunchBox 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 so, um yeah, but if you ask me, I like to think Chrono Trigger is better than all of the above mentioned games. Why? Because of opinion. That's the only thing that keeps this "controversy" moving, is everyone has their own opinions.Spectre said it best, in that you can't compare them evenly. I'd reather bust out my old snes, and play a classic rpg, than sit through countless hours of fps monotony. Again, my 2 pennies... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
madgamer01 0 Report post Posted August 20, 2004 Yeah, but there's a big difference between popping in a classic and playing Halo. Halo, IMO. is the game of this generation. It is the only console FPS to have gameplay up to snuff with PC FPSs like Half Life, Battlefield, and Call of Duty. And its story is beyond most other FPS games. But classic games have a different feel. They don't have all the cool stuff that Halo has, but it has an extremely solid and amazing core gameplay that stands the test of time. I still whip out an NES every now and then to play SMB3 because it is just plain fun. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dundun2007 0 Report post Posted August 22, 2004 I think halo is a really good game and i cant wait till halo 2 comes out pretty soon. The one for the x box is better than the one for the computer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites