The GHZ Forum

What exactly is gonna be so great about Halo 2?

everything

Bungie's got a good track record and all (Marathon trilogy is the sex, Myth series is all right, Oni was sort of neat) but I don't really see what'll be so great about Halo 2, considering Half-Life 2'll probably do it better.

Half-Life 2 isn't beautiful though.

Half Life 2'll almost certainly look better -- it's very beautiful, by the way -- and be the better single player game.

Halo 2's single player seems to go from "excellent" to "pretty good", wavering between the two so far (oui, oui *cough*). I'm buying Halo 2 mainly for Live though. That's one place where HL2 won't beat Halo 2. Until Valve release Team Fortress 2.

I'm going to get Halo 2. Then I'm going to get Half-Life 2.

Then I'm just going to sit back and be happy about it.

It may have better graphics, but that doesn't make it beautiful.

HL2 has one of the best-looking gaming worlds ever created, man. Halo 2 is well-put together, but it ain't beautiful.

Your opinion doesn't invalidate mine as much as you want it to.

But when it comes right down to it, that's all it is.

I'm siding with Dache here. Halo was a finely-crafted game and I'm looking forward to the sequel a lot, but I'm expecting Half-Life 2 to be the first really amazing video game in a long while.

Your opinion doesn't invalidate mine as much as you want it to.

wow thats the best argument ever

chriscaffee wrote:Your opinion doesn't invalidate mine as much as you want it to.

Considering I've played at least 80% of Halo 2 so far and fucked about a lot with the alpha of HL2, I'd say it does, personally.

1) Halo 2 is beautiful regardless of Half-Life 2.

2) Having a different opinion (even a more informed one) does not invalidate mine, when said opinion is completely subjective.

3) My computer sucks.

1) I disgaree. I don't think Halo 2 is beautiful. It's well-made, but not beautiful.

2) I don't necessarily think my opinion invalidates yours. I do, however, think you like to bum men. In the ass.

3) Ha-ha.

1) Okay.

2) If by "men" you mean "women" and by "ass" you mean "pussy."

3) :(

2) Having a different opinion (even a more informed one) does not invalidate mine, when said opinion is completely subjective

What are you trying to say here? That the entire purpose of reasoned debate is pointless, because people have an opinion that they won't ever change?

Halo 2 and the hype that surrounds it, is what is wrong with everything in the world of video games.

What are you trying to say here? That the entire purpose of reasoned debate is pointless, because people have an opinion that they won't ever change?

I'll evade this question for the moment: I haven't seen much reasoned debate in this topic. I've seen sales mentioned. I've seen the gameplay mechanics compared and I've heard the superior graphics that Half-Life 2 has. Very little has had to do with whether Halo 2 is beautiful or not. The few that have pretty much say "because HL2 will be better, Halo 2 cannot be beautiful."

To elaborate on the point of graphics versus beauty, I would submit that VOOT is a very beautiful game. It is colorful, artistic and stylish. MechAssault, however, has superior graphics to VOOT but they aren't as beautiful. While the particle effects are amazing and put VOOTs to shame, there is something divine about Raiden opening up his twin Binary Loti and flooding the stage with those almighty dual lasers. Firing a salvo of Warhammer missiles or charging up level 3 PPCs just isn't the same.

No one has said how Halo 2 isn't beautiful. You cannot say a woman is unnattractive simply because there are hotter women that exist. I could see you arguing with the topic title because that is quite a bold claim but to say that Halo 2 cannot be beautiful because more beautiful games exist is a bankrupt argument in my opinion. If you want to play relativity I can just bust out The Grinch and Halo 2 is instantly orgasmic even to those that despise the FPS genre.

Now to actually address your question. No I don't think there is anything wrong with a reasoned debate about whether a particular game is better then another. I think arguing over a core conviction of a game is, however, pointless. If blue is my favorite color and all we are talking about is color palletes in Mortal Kombat, then I will prefer Sub Zero to Scorpion in a comparison that deals solely with colors. You cannot exactly argue that I should like Scorpion because yellow is a superior color to blue. You also cannot argue that Scropion is better because he is a higher tier character. That is irrelevent to the fact that I like how Sub Zero looks because he is blue.

Halo 2 and the hype that surrounds it, is what is wrong with everything in the world of video games.

This remark really makes no sense. Within the Sonic community, Sonic Adventure and Sonic Adventure 2 were very hyped. They were also solid games and were sequals many times over. The only difference between them in Halo 2 is the genre and the level of hype. If the qualities that are wrong with the gaming industry are hype and sequals then SA and SA2 are offenders as well. If the problem is the level of hype then (how is that a problem?) that would exclude SA and SA2 but it would bring about another question.

You used the word "and" between Halo2 and hype, implying that even if no hype existed for Halo 2 it would still be everything or at least something wrong with the game industry. There are only a two ways you can hold this veiwpoint: you don't like this genre or that Halo 2 is a bad game in your opinion. If you don't like the genre then I would submit that isn't a problem with the industry since plenty of other people like it. I would say that majority rules and you can go play a different game if you want. There are plenty obscure, non-hyped, non-mainstream games out there and the release of Halo 2 will not change that.

If you believe that Halo 2 is shit and not the shit, then your point is valid. Bad games are the bane of the industry but the problem is that some people don't think Halo 2 is a bad game. Therefore it is a hard problem to pin on specific games. The vast majority of Sonic fans do agree that Sonic Heroes sucks balls. There are people that like it however. Who is right? No one is. Therefore if it is just your personal opinion that Halo licks a sweaty ballsack then that isn't a problem with the industry. How is it a problem with the industry that not every game caters to your exact taste? It isn't.

I'm sorry I had to make so many assumptions here in my "reasoned debate" but I had such a vague "point" to address that I couldn't help it. Perhaps if someone elaborated then I would be able to better form my arguments without becoming long-winded and overly broad.

You could argue about why you like one colour more than another. It's exchange of views.

It's difficult to analyze likes and dislikes the more elementary there are. It is more difficult to break up the individual aspects of blue that one likes versus the aspects of a video game as a whole. Now that analogy is more simplistic level then the beautimousness of Halo 2, but I still think it would be more difficult to debate that then say, whether the physics are solid or not or what the hell is going on with the camera.

However, since you have indicated that I should defend my statement I will say this: I think an M1 Garand-style clip loaded alien grenade launcher with a big-ass blade for slicing opponents into bloody slabs of meat is a beautiful thing. Seeing the OICW in Half-Life 2 is not the same thing.

Apart from it being the sequel to one of my favourite games ever, I'm mostly excited about HL2 because of its environment, and the way in which you can interract with it. This isn't a case of pressing the 'use' button next to items the developers have prescribed as 'useable' anymore-- it's a consistent, natural rule system that can be applied to any object in any circumstance. I think it's the most believable environment I've ever seen, and I don't just mean in terms of plain realism: the thing just drips soul. I've watched hours of footage from the game, and it almost seems a shame that it's still mainly combat-driven, because I don't think I've seen a world I've so desperately wanted to just explore since Shenmue came out.

Halo 2, on the other hand, just looks like a lot of fucking fun. Apart from the undeniable visceral thrill, I don't think there's anything particularly inspiring about shooting an Elite with a Brute Shot.

chriscaffee wrote:

What are you trying to say here? That the entire purpose of reasoned debate is pointless, because people have an opinion that they won't ever change?

To elaborate on the point of graphics versus beauty, I would submit that VOOT is a very beautiful game. It is colorful, artistic and stylish. MechAssault, however, has superior graphics to VOOT but they aren't as beautiful. While the particle effects are amazing and put VOOTs to shame, there is something divine about Raiden opening up his twin Binary Loti and flooding the stage with those almighty dual lasers. Firing a salvo of Warhammer missiles or charging up level 3 PPCs just isn't the same.

Similarly, Doom 3 is graphically better than both Halo 2 and Half Life 2, but both of the latter games look better than it.

Half Life 2 just has the dubious honour of being better than Halo 2 on both a technical level and an aesthetic level.

What's so great about Halo anyway? It seems like another co-op shooter to me.

I'm looking forward to getting Halo 2.