Halo: The Master Chief Collection now on Steam

[baud]

I've played most of Halo 4 (I just have the last mission to complete). It's alright, though I played on normal, as I didn't really want to work to win this time, so maybe my feelings about the game would have been different if I had played on harder difficulties.

It doesn't change much compared to reach, adding a sprint key isn't significant (and a better solution would have been to increase the move speed instead). I still find the armor modules not useful (except the turret one), though the jetpack one is fun to use. I don't know if it was the case in the other games, but all the non-warthog vehicles feel slow as molasses.
The new promethean weapons are nice-looking, quite different from either human or covenant, but usage-wise, don't seem any different from their human/covenant equivalents. At least the new human heavy machine gun is fun to use, kinda like a better assault rifle.
The new enemies are ok, the dogs are kinda like grunts, but much more mobile, but with the knights, I've got issues telling them apart, unlike say elites with rifles and elites with energy swords. The little drones that accompany them are a good addition in theory (adding a support-type enemy that's not much of a direct threat), but I found them annoying to fight because they're way too hard to kill (or because they don't have enough hit feedback, so I don't know if I'm missing them or not). Overall I think prometheans are also missing something like the hunters, that can provide a set-piece fight, but in other way than throwing a lot of enemies at the player.

 

[baud]

Finished Halo 4

random thoughts

the last level begin with a segment piloting a plane, it's fun when avoiding the obstacles, but it still controls like a brick; I mean we don't get to fight any flying unit, only turrets, so even the devs knew it wasn't really good. Boss fight was dogshit, the devs shouldn't have bothered to put a QTE in the middle of an EPIC! cinematic. At least we got to play with the gravity hammer in that level, which is always fun, though I'm less sure of how useful it would be on harder difficulties (played on normal) on those maps, which are quite open.
The prometheans were still fun to fight, but I think they are missing some enemy variety (a big enemy, vehicles, turrets that you can use...) to make varied firefights like the covenant can: nearly all firefights against them felt the same (perhaps it changes on harder difficulties, though).

Played some spartan ops, which are coop missions that can be played solo. In theory there's a story with CGI cutscenes linking them all together, but they don't seem to play for me. You get to chose your loadout, so it's nice to be able to start with your favorite weapons, if they are part of those available (no sword, hammer or rocket launcher). One consequence of being a coop campaign is that, even playing solo, when you die you come back immediately, the game doesn't restart at the last checkpoint: it makes those levels easier. I played on Heroic, it was nice seeing prometheans knights teleporting behind you instead of just further back. I think I'll play a few more of them before shelving the game.

On another note, the grav platforms seem borked for me, with the gravity lift preventing me to move when on the platform, which made using them a death sentence.

The new vehicle (a mech equipped with rockets and a machine gun) was a nice power trip, at least the first time I used it, because the second time I faced so many vehicles it wasn't funny anymore. And again it's too slow, both in a straight line or when maneuvering.

The game removes the dual-wielding, which seems odd to me as it was part of the gameplay of the most iconic games of the saga. I'm no purist by any means, but I felt that it added an interesting gameplay tradeoff and gave (some) of the pistol-sized weapons their moments in the sun. Also dual-wielding plasma rifles was really fun.

I won't bother with the MP this time after the trashing I took when I tried last year.

There was a driving sequence like those at the end of Halo 1 and 3 (though at the end of the first third of the game) and I found it superior to the one in Halo 3, more focused, with less distractions going on in the background. Obstacles were better and I never had to look for the way to continue, unlike in 3.

 

[Dayyālu]

Hell, dumb shooters is all my brain can work on nowadays. Finished Halo 2.

Spoiler

Again, it's difficult to properly understand Halo 2. I could not play it at release and Halo 2 Vista was such a disaster that we got no ports for years. It's at the same time a better game than Halo CE and a game that gives the same feeling that they had to rush like madmen.

Graphics both in original mode and in remastered are functional, I'd dare to say that the remastered graphics look prettier than the models we got in Halo CE. The soundtrack is alive this time, and despite losing some of the eerie tunes we had in CE it's at least pumping. There are different tracks between Remastered and Original, and I'm quite puzzled at why. Both work fine as shooter music, and they don't drop randomly as was often in CE. Sound design for enemies is still good.

Weapon roster got both expanded and standardized. Gone are the ultra-powerful pistol and shotguns, and gone are the incredibly generous ammo reserves, and you get the standard Assault Rifle variants both in human and Covenant versions. Common sniper rifles now in Covenant versions. There isn't anything creative in the arsenal, but it works fine and dual wielding/swords give the players another layer of choices. Grenade launcher is incredibly useless. All said, I kinda like the roster but I'd almost preferred if they kept the idiosyncrasies of CE.

Ah, this leads us to the Arbiter. Plotwise I'll sperg later, but hell gameplay-wise it's fantastic. I come from the AvP school, and a quick stealth field makes the Arbiter a lesser cousin of the Predator: quick re deployments, stealth kills, focused grenades, hit&run, starting the fight when you want, melee abuse.... playing the Chief seems boring afterwards. I can understand that people dislike playing a badly-drawn lizard, but the only thing he lacks is a jetpack.

Level design is improved massively from the worst of Halo CE. Sadly, open levels are almost entirely gone, and the best you get are vehicle corridor levels. But everything else is by baseline better than CE: levels have more verticality, more cover, more visual variety, fights are better designed and the expanded enemy roster is excellent. The Earth levels are too short for the amusement of fighting in a Future Africa metropolis, and the usual collapse of Bungie's level design (repetition of entire level pieces) is limited in the latter half of the game, and it's not even too noticeable. Yeah, sure, half of Gravemind-High Charity-Uprising is recycled stuff, but at least it's not blatant.

That said, the enemy roster improved with a caveat. Yes, the Flood now have AI. Yes, you get new covenant foes that add to an already interesting enemy to fight. We have a problem tho, Bungie. The goddamn Brutes. I understand that you need narratively a new monkey to kill or something, but you truly needed to dump a slower elite with heavy bullet sponge problems and that gets ANGRY when he's alone? Brutes are boring to fight and often dying against them feels cheap. It doesn't help that to avoid the bother I started to costantly engage them beyond AI range or grenade them, not exactly exciting ways to fight.

Also, boss battles. Bad boss battles but hurray for the effort, not hurray for having asinine mechanics to kill the bosses. But hey, attempts.

Writing. Yeah, writing on a shooter. First of all, Halo 2 feels cut. I felt like there were entire levels and narrative points missing, and a quick check confirmed that a shitton of levels (and the ending!) got cut because crunch. But the baseline writing goes from "boring as fuck" to "somewhat amusing". The Covenant have now a character and some smug evil leaders, the humans get the best banter with Johnson and random marines quips, even the Arbiter gets grunt quips and a fairly extensive talking role.

Of course, this means ironically that Chief, already a non-character in CE, is now a non-character constantly eclipsed by everyone else. Who is this guy exactly? You give the best 80ies lines to cigar-chomping black man and the development to lizardman, and Chief is....just there.

Also the poetry-spewing necromantic horror is awesome.

.... I'm almost ashamed to amid that Halo 2 is a good game. It can almost fight properly on the gameplay level compared to PC shooters of its era, even if the graphics are mediocre. Hell, I'd take Halo 2 ten times before Doom3 or the endgame of Far Cry 1.

 

[DalekFlay]

.... I'm almost ashamed to amid that Halo 2 is a good game. It can almost fight properly on the gameplay level compared to PC shooters of its era, even if the graphics are mediocre. Hell, I'd take Halo 2 ten times before Doom3 or the endgame of Far Cry 1.[/Spoiler]

Doom 3 is great, if you want what it's offering. You're a mean, mean man. Anyway Halo 2 is a mix of great, okay and terrible levels that average out to... okay. Your summaries mostly reflect that.

 

[Dayyālu]

Doom 3 is great, if you want what it's offering. You're a mean, mean man.

I don't have a hard-on for endless Imps put behind a door as jumpscares, so Doom3 offers nothing to me. I've extensively sperged about it on other threads, and bar graphic design and engine (that are awesome in Doom3 and give it its peculiar ambience) I am not ashamed to admit that Halo 2 is the better shooter. It's even better than Quake IV, an IdTech game that tried (and failed) to do much of what Halo 2 does.

I know there's a minority of people that appreciate Doom3 for its survival horror attempts, but for me it doesn't work. Also there's a Codex minority of retards that praise it without reason because NUDOOM BAD DOOM3 GOOD, but they're contrarians so whatever.

Halo is not CoD or cover based shooters. I'll need to play more, but for now the Halos feel like competent and fun games despite middling presentation: in my brain for long a "console shooter" was a boring slog like FEAR 2 or something.

Onwards to 3!

 

[DalekFlay]

I don't have a hard-on for endless Imps put behind a door as jumpscares, so Doom3 offers nothing to me. I've extensively sperged about it on other threads, and bar graphic design and engine (that are awesome in Doom3 and give it its peculiar ambience) I am not ashamed to admit that Halo 2 is the better shooter. It's even better than Quake IV, an IdTech game that tried (and failed) to do much of what Halo 2 does.

I know there's a minority of people that appreciate Doom3 for its survival horror attempts, but for me it doesn't work. Also there's a Codex minority of retards that praise it without reason because NUDOOM BAD DOOM3 GOOD, but they're contrarians so whatever.

I like fast paced shooters and "boomer shooters" and whatnot, but I'm much more into slower paced System Shock style shooters with exploration, stealth and RPG elements. Doom 3 is not System Shock obviously, but it has a bit of that vibe with a slower, exploratory pace with audio logs and such which is much more up my alley than where the nuDooms have gone (though I enjoy those too, just less so). Yes the endless imp monster closets can get annoying, but that could be said of so, so many videogames in general.

Anyway Halo is a much different game and I was just being snarky. I love the larger levels in all the Halo games that have great combat with unique enemies, but when they do endless corridors of repetitive combat I fucking despise them. I think that's more or less in line with your thoughts.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

I’ve finished the first three levels of Halo 4 and I am liking it so far. The first level was boring, but in that sense was similar to the beginnings of Halo 1 and 3, which were also dull as dishwater.

The visual design and graphics are astounding though - it’s hard to believe it is a port of a 360 game. The music isn’t quite as good as the best of the music in the original trilogy and Reach, but it is passable. The gameplay is very good, though. I’m playing on Heroic, and it is suitably challenging when it needs to be, and eases off a little when you’re sick of the shooting galleries and just want to get to the objective.

I think the new enemies are great and behave very different to the Covenant. The new weapons are a lot of fun to use. I can’t tell you how sick I was getting of fighting the same old Covenant again and again. I understand a lot of Halo purists dislike the new games because they don’t stick to the same formula as the Bungie-developed games. If so, then those people need their heads examined. The first games really were nothing special and needed fleshing out, which it looks like Halo 4 is doing.

Anyway, it is very promising so far, and I’m looking forward to playing more. Still not as good as a classic PC shooter, but it is good for console fare.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

I've completed Halo 4.

Some thoughts: great sound design, nice graphics, good art direction in general. The weapons sound and feel like the best in the series, although it is sad the plasma rifle has been removed. It's also a shame there aren't as many open levels to play through this time around, but they decided to drop some of that in exchange for tighter storytelling.

I'm an out and proud storyfag - I like the direction shooters have taken in the past 15 years to more focus on characters, plot etc, but I feel like with Halo they want to keep things simple (short cutscenes, hurried line delivery, keep the gameplay as "run here and shoot these enemies", while also being serious (the Master Chief/Cortana plotline for example) and that just doesn't work for me. They could have got the writers behind Spec Ops: The Line in to write a really interesting main story but then it wouldn't be Halo. I guess I'm just not their target audience. There's a decent story somewhere in there - mostly to be found in the extra videos, at least three of which I didn't find, making the whole plotline a little incomplete. If they had built this in to the main cutscenes I'd probably have liked and understood things more.

Difficulty wise, I found it challenging because I played on Heroic (knowing the Flood aren't here this time around, therefore no need to speed run their levels), but the Knights are basically bullet sponges so there's still some of that, but I guess a lot of Covenant forces are bullet spongey too when you think about Elites with shields, the Brutes with armour etc.

I would have more to say about the difficulty and mechanics if I was into shooters, but I'm not. The genre just feels dead to me now that I feel I have played its best offerings - Return to Castle Wolfenstein (classic), Half-Life 2 (mixing story and gameplay), F.E.A.R (mechanics), Call of Duty 4 (set pieces).

With Halo 4, the Master Chief Collection is now done. I'll come back to it when I get a better PC, 4K monitor, gaming headset etc. Until then, I'll move back to RPGs. TOCS 4 is waiting.

Obligatory series ranking:

Reach > 2 > ODST > 3 > 4 > 1

 

[wahrk]

I feel similarly about the sound design changes as I do to some game remasters that re-record soundtracks with full orchestras. On a technical level it sounds “better”, but it often loses a lot of the original charm as well. The covenant weapons especially lost their colorful “pew pew” for a chunky, industrial sound that just feels generic IMO.

As far as the storyline goes, I think the core issue is that Halo is not and has never been a vehicle for telling deep character drama. Master Chief is an old-school protagonist who is mostly silent except for the occasional badass line. He’s there to be a window into the world, not an actual character. If they wanted to tell that kind of story, they really should have soft rebooted the series with a new protagonist... but it would be much harder to sell it as Halo 4. So they tried to have it both ways and it doesn’t work.

Anyways, I’ve always felt like 343’s Halo games were made by people who didn’t really care for “original” Halo all that much, for people who didn’t really care for original Halo all that much. From your posts it sounds like you fall into that category as well.

 

[DalekFlay]

I would have more to say about the difficulty and mechanics if I was into shooters, but I'm not. The genre just feels dead to me now that I feel I have played its best offerings - Return to Castle Wolfenstein (classic), Half-Life 2 (mixing story and gameplay), F.E.A.R (mechanics), Call of Duty 4 (set pieces).

I feel this way a lot of the time. Like I'm just not that into straight shooters anymore and should just play RPG type games with shooting in them. Then I play a really great shooter like FEAR though and remember how great the genre can be. I think the real problem is most shooters just suck.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

I feel similarly about the sound design changes as I do to some game remasters that re-record soundtracks with full orchestras. On a technical level it sounds “better”, but it often loses a lot of the original charm as well. The covenant weapons especially lost their colorful “pew pew” for a chunky, industrial sound that just feels generic IMO.

As far as the storyline goes, I think the core issue is that Halo is not and has never been a vehicle for telling deep character drama. Master Chief is an old-school protagonist who is mostly silent except for the occasional badass line. He’s there to be a window into the world, not an actual character. If they wanted to tell that kind of story, they really should have soft rebooted the series with a new protagonist... but it would be much harder to sell it as Halo 4. So they tried to have it both ways and it doesn’t work.

Anyways, I’ve always felt like 343’s Halo games were made by people who didn’t really care for “original” Halo all that much, for people who didn’t really care for original Halo all that much. From your posts it sounds like you fall into that category as well.

I didn’t like the original as much as the subsequent games in the series, that is true, but the only 343 game (except for Halo 2 Anniversary, if that counts) in the series is near the bottom of my list.

I think Bungie made better Halo games as they went on. I appreciate the better sound and graphics but I can’t use those to downrate the older games, as that would be retarded. You have to judge old games by the technology available at the time, so I downrate them on gameplay and story only. I’m definitely not the target audience - as console shooters they work well - but I just want something more.

RPGs ruined every other genre for me. I can’t play other games with friends now because they seem so simple. Pretty much every night I see my friends play coop games, survival games, and shooters and I just can’t bring myself to join in. I would much rather play a game that is more system or story heavy.

 

[wahrk]

I feel similarly about the sound design changes as I do to some game remasters that re-record soundtracks with full orchestras. On a technical level it sounds “better”, but it often loses a lot of the original charm as well. The covenant weapons especially lost their colorful “pew pew” for a chunky, industrial sound that just feels generic IMO.

As far as the storyline goes, I think the core issue is that Halo is not and has never been a vehicle for telling deep character drama. Master Chief is an old-school protagonist who is mostly silent except for the occasional badass line. He’s there to be a window into the world, not an actual character. If they wanted to tell that kind of story, they really should have soft rebooted the series with a new protagonist... but it would be much harder to sell it as Halo 4. So they tried to have it both ways and it doesn’t work.

Anyways, I’ve always felt like 343’s Halo games were made by people who didn’t really care for “original” Halo all that much, for people who didn’t really care for original Halo all that much. From your posts it sounds like you fall into that category as well.

I didn’t like the original as much as the subsequent games in the series, that is true, but the only 343 game (except for Halo 2 Anniversary, if that counts) in the series is near the bottom of my list.

I think Bungie made better Halo games as they went on. I appreciate the better sound and graphics but I can’t use those to downrate the older games, as that would be retarded. You have to judge old games by the technology available at the time, so I downrate them on gameplay and story only. I’m definitely not the target audience - as console shooters they work well - but I just want something more.

RPGs ruined every other genre for me. I can’t play other games with friends now because they seem so simple. Pretty much every night I see my friends play coop games, survival games, and shooters and I just can’t bring myself to join in. I would much rather play a game that is more system or story heavy.

Oh, I see where you’re coming from better now. Yeah I understand completely what you mean about shooters. I don’t know if it’s just genre fatigue or what but they’re much less interesting to me now than they used to be.

The most recent shooter I actually did enjoy quite a bit was Titanfall 2, but even that was barely an 8 hour experience and not one that I’ll probably ever go back to. Same with nu-Doom and others. A friend has been trying to get me into boomer shooters but they don’t do anything for me.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

I feel similarly about the sound design changes as I do to some game remasters that re-record soundtracks with full orchestras. On a technical level it sounds “better”, but it often loses a lot of the original charm as well. The covenant weapons especially lost their colorful “pew pew” for a chunky, industrial sound that just feels generic IMO.

As far as the storyline goes, I think the core issue is that Halo is not and has never been a vehicle for telling deep character drama. Master Chief is an old-school protagonist who is mostly silent except for the occasional badass line. He’s there to be a window into the world, not an actual character. If they wanted to tell that kind of story, they really should have soft rebooted the series with a new protagonist... but it would be much harder to sell it as Halo 4. So they tried to have it both ways and it doesn’t work.

Anyways, I’ve always felt like 343’s Halo games were made by people who didn’t really care for “original” Halo all that much, for people who didn’t really care for original Halo all that much. From your posts it sounds like you fall into that category as well.

I didn’t like the original as much as the subsequent games in the series, that is true, but the only 343 game (except for Halo 2 Anniversary, if that counts) in the series is near the bottom of my list.

I think Bungie made better Halo games as they went on. I appreciate the better sound and graphics but I can’t use those to downrate the older games, as that would be retarded. You have to judge old games by the technology available at the time, so I downrate them on gameplay and story only. I’m definitely not the target audience - as console shooters they work well - but I just want something more.

RPGs ruined every other genre for me. I can’t play other games with friends now because they seem so simple. Pretty much every night I see my friends play coop games, survival games, and shooters and I just can’t bring myself to join in. I would much rather play a game that is more system or story heavy.

Oh, I see where you’re coming from better now. Yeah I understand completely what you mean about shooters. I don’t know if it’s just genre fatigue or what but they’re much less interesting to me now than they used to be.

The most recent shooter I actually did enjoy quite a bit was Titanfall 2, but even that was barely an 8 hour experience and not one that I’ll probably ever go back to. Same with nu-Doom and others. A friend has been trying to get me into boomer shooters but they don’t do anything for me.

Yeah I liked Titanfall 2 but kept thinking while playing it that I'd like it better if I had played something like it 10 years prior.

What are boomer shooters, are they things like Fortnite? I've got to say a lot of the games kids are playing now completely confuse me. Maybe it's a part of getting old but I don't think so. I just think standards have declined in all gaming genres (except action-adventures) and young people these days don't know enough about older games to know better. Gaming 'journalists' have no excuse though.

 

[Ghulgothas]

What are boomer shooters, are they things like Fortnite?

It's a catch-all term people are using to refer to games made similarly to shooters made before the advent of modern military shooters. Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem, Heretic, Shadow Warrior and everything else from that bubble are Boomer Shooters, as well as every recent indie-shooter deliberately adopting their design choices in an attempt to be similar.

 

[wahrk]

Yeah I liked Titanfall 2 but kept thinking while playing it that I'd like it better if I had played something like it 10 years prior.

What are boomer shooters, are they things like Fortnite? I've got to say a lot of the games kids are playing now completely confuse me. Maybe it's a part of getting old but I don't think so. I just think standards have declined in all gaming genres (except action-adventures) and young people these days don't know enough about older games to know better. Gaming 'journalists' have no excuse though.

By boomer shooters I mean the wave of retro shooters that are imitating old 90s classics like Doom or Blood in gameplay and graphics. I guess that includes actual 90s shooters as well but I hear it usually referring to games like Amid Evil or Ion Fury.

 

[DalekFlay]

Genuine question: is Quake 2 a boomer shooter? I feel like it's one of the earliest post-boomer shooters, but I'm not sure. Half-Life would be the obvious line after that, a year later.

 

[Ash]

Hell, dumb shooters is all my brain can work on nowadays. Finished Halo 2.

Yet you can write this post...What, hitting the crack pipe too hard?

.... I'm almost ashamed to amid that Halo 2 is a good game. It can almost fight properly on the gameplay level compared to PC shooters of its era, even if the graphics are mediocre. Hell, I'd take Halo 2 ten times before Doom3 or the endgame of Far Cry 1

Sound like you know your vidja.

Turok
Turok 2
Doom 64
Duke Nukem: Zero Hour
Alien Trilogy
Exhumed/Powerslave
Disruptor

There are quite a few console-first shooters following in the footsteps of the classics. Halo with its two wep limit, regen shields, non-existent level design and slow ass movement ain't it.

 

[JDR13]

Yet Halo is better than any of the shooters you just listed except for maybe Doom 64.

 

[Ash]

Hammer awesome button on the controller to doubt you've completed a single one. You're one of those like Rean that think Goldeneye and Halo are awsum when they're average at best and literally every other halfway decent shooter on any machine at the time was better. The thing is they were too hard for the average dumb as rocks/autistic gamer and so most didn't get past level 1, so we ended up with Call of Duty and Halo. Now there are no shooters on the market I can enjoy except the recent resurgence in the form of low budget derivative indies. thanks.

 

[JDR13]

Hammer awesome button on the controller to doubt you've completed a single one. You're one of those like Rean that think Goldeneye and Halo are awsum when they're average at best and literally every other halfway decent shooter on any machine at the time was better. The thing is they were too hard for the average gamer and so most didn't get past level 1, so we ended up with Call of Duty and Halo. Now there are no shooters on the market I can enjoy except the recent resurgence in the form of low budget derivative indies. thanks.

 

[Ash]

Please explain in analytical prose how fucking Halo is better than a stone cold classic like Zero Hour, Zero Hour being a game that follows classic PC design conventions to the latter albeit with a different camera perspective (which makes minimal difference in the design) - you're basically saying Halo is better than "boomer shooters".

But I expect no less from the average Halo/Goldeneye fan, you're all the same NPCs with fuck all taste and actual experience to back up your claims. Maybe actually play (beyond the first level) the games you claim are worthless and Halo is somehow better than? Fucking laughable. You people are a joke to me.

 

[DalekFlay]

Hating Halo on reflex because it fucked PC shooters over for years by making them console focused is something I understand, but it's really nowhere near as bad as the decline it inspired. If you can move past the butthurt and play the better levels, it's better than most other shit that came out in the 2000s until the renaissance.

 

[wahrk]

...Zero Hour? Are you talking about the early access military shooter on Steam that released last year? You’re trying to compare that to Halo?

 

[JDR13]

He sounds like a butthurt grandpa reminiscing over the "good ole' days" because he remembers them as being way better than they actually were.

"Get off my lawn!!"

 

[Ash]

Hating Halo on reflex because it fucked PC shooters over for years by making them console focused is something I understand, but it's really nowhere near as bad as the decline it inspired. If you can move past the butthurt and play the better levels, it's better than most other shit that came out in the 2000s until the renaissance.

Sure, it's OK at best. Play some co-op or whatever, fun for couch sessions which PC has (or had at the time) difficulty recreating. I just get triggered by the worship and beyond retarded claims it's the only worthwhile shooters on console at the time when...that's not even close to true. I didn't even list the non-PC-like, half-way decent stuff such as Timesplitters (PS2) or Syphon filter (PS1) or Jet Force Gemeni (N64) or Resident Evil 4 (Gamecube) which are also way better shooters.
Well, most of those while better aren't that great, but thinking Halo is on the level of Zero Hour or Doom 64 let alone beyond is a sad joke.

How can kids that only grew up with their xbawks or couldn't get past level 1 in these other, better games be bold as to make such claims about their "nowhere near as bad as some people claim" masterpiece.

I'm also not mad at "console shooters" either, for the record. There wasn't really a distinction; in the 90s PC shooters and console shooters were often the same games, just consoles were downsized versions, or if they were console first, they were PC-like in design as with the games I listed prior. It wasn't until Goldeneye and Halo that there was a distinction in the game design (dumbing down), which makes the claim that they're better than the smarter counterparts even more insulting. Anyhow, not mad at inanimate objects (wait, games are nearly all digital now, maybe I am getting old), once again mad at the shitty people, this time being the PC developers that made those so-called "console shooters" with intent to sell out (in this case being bungie). I kind of give Rareware (Goldeneye) a pass as nintendo machines are supposed to be a kiddie consoles so it makes sense that Goldeneye not be too "boomery", despite nearly every other shooter on that machine being mature, challenging and gory.

He sounds like a butthurt grandpa reminiscing over the "good ole' days" because he remembers them as being way better than they actually were.

"Get off my lawn!!"

Good games are eternal. I play them to date. I played Goldeneye when I was ten also. I sure as shit don't touch it now though.

...Zero Hour? Are you talking about the early access military shooter on Steam that released last year? You’re trying to compare that to Halo?

Like I said, you guys know your vidja.

I'm talking about a shooter, for the N64, made in the classic year of 2000. It's good stuff featuring "boomer shooter" design. Of course you don't know what it is. All I ask is you don't be like the rest of your fellow fans and claim Halo is better despite having little experience with games or the genre you speak of, because that's retarded.