Quote: "You're really doing this for the sake of it, aren't you?"
Coming from someone who argues all the time just for the sake of it
.
Quote: "Halo introduced these things for the first time in a smooth combination. If you can tell me any game, for a console, before Halo, that smoothly featured guns, melee, grenades, vehicles and warfare, I'll retract the statement that Halo was special."
Ok, I agree, it introduced all of those in one game for the first time, but not for the first time individually. Then what did Halo 2 and Halo 3 do to innovate? Dual wielding? Woohoo, now we can make the controls even crappier!
. Everything else, other than story and graphics (which really aren't all that good) stayed the same, with the exception of a couple new vehicles that really didn't do anything new. Oh, and the crapped up "forge" concept in Halo 3.
Quote: "CoD4 isn't that great. I'm an avid fragger, and I know most FPS'es. To back that up, I played and beat Halo, Halo 2, Halo 3, Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Doom, Doom 2, Doom 3, Quake, Quake 2, Quake 3, Quake 4, Battlefield 1942, Battlefield 2142, CoD, CoD2, CoD3 and CoD4, Deus Ex, Deus Ex 2, oh, and I also played Counter Strike.
"
Ok, then why do you not like CoD4? Is it the fast paced, completely smooth multiplayer with mind-blowing graphics? Or the great variety in singleplayer missions with great level design? Or maybe the awesome leveling system with unlockables in multiplayer?
Quote: "Now, on the contrary, as far as I know you never played HL1, never beat HL2, nor Halo 1, 2 or 3. I'd love to discuss things with you, but, honestly, how am I to defend a games status against someone with a clear bias towards it?
"
It doesn't take beating a game to know if it's good or not, and I've had enough experience with all of them to make that judgement
.
Quote: "Halo is amazing in what it does, and what it does it does with such style, smoothness and elegance that, although it is not the God of War among the hack & slash games, it's definitely the Diablo II of them. Halo 2 was a disappointment, sure, but still great (kinda like HL2), and Halo 3 was short but sweet. Now, people can disagree about that, and they can. But saying that you think it doesn't deserve what it got, doesn't mean a thing for the world. They deserve it and otherwise it wouldn't have got it."
But see, it's not just ME who thinks that, and I also have support for the fact that it didn't deserve it. The fact is, it's average at what it does, and while the first one combined some already introduced concepts well, the next two show very little improvement or innovation in a sea of great and innovative shooters (CoD4, Bioshock, Battlefield: Bad Company, GRAW1+2, Rainbow Six Vegas 1+2, etc.)