Halo 3

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Yes, it was.

Have the Halo franchise EVER claim to be other than a FPS? Unlike Mario which got into the car racing area and provided nothing but cute and fun game but nothing original.

And that's ALL it needs. Mario on the other hand....Mario Kart....which is all fine. But really, it only have the Mario image. Remove it and you have nothing but a cute car racing game. That's not innovative.

So that's your agrument now? Halo never claimed to be anything other than a FPS? Congrats; you have just shown me that you are infact a Halo fanboy.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Yes, it was.

No, there wasn't, because what you said was untrue and unneeded. I was requesting, civilly, clarification for your claims. Your reply was petty and unnecessary, but moving up and over...

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Have the Halo franchise EVER claim to be other than a FPS? Unlike Mario which got into the car racing area and provided nothing but cute and fun game but nothing original.

Is Mario Kart the same as Galaxy in any way similar to the way that Halos are all similar? The answer is no.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
And that's ALL it needs. Mario on the other hand....Mario Kart....which is all fine. But really, it only have the Mario image. Remove it and you have nothing but a cute car racing game. That's not innovative.

So what? What's your point here?

My point is that you are wrong when you say Halo AND Mario games are all the same shit, Halos are for very obvious and factual reason, Mario games aside from one and two, really started to change from the third one onward. Super Mario 3 laid the groundwork for world maps in anything other than RPGs, Mario World was the first platformer (Or one of) to have one that size, and the game content continued to change from there. Halo haven't in any way close to that.

As I said; "Played one, played 'em all." cannot be applied to Mario games. Being good at one doesn't mean you'll like or enjoy another, or even be good at it, as they're mostly different.

Halo isn't like that, it's the Coldplay of games, which I know you can definitely appreciate.

-AC

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The premises are pretty much establish in the original game. Halo is still a new franchise. Mario, Zelda and FF have had their fair amount of sequels. After all Halo Wars is coming so something different is coming.

Final Fantasy has lots of sequels? News to me.

In other words, no it does not. Every game in the franchise, with VERY few exceptions, is completely different. Even the very very few sequels/prequels that do exist are very different from the original game.

Exactly.

There's a difference between having more than one game in a franchise and having lots of actual sequels.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Exactly.

There's a difference between having more than one game in a franchise and having lots of actual sequels.

-AC

I mean, I don't know about you, but I've never heard anyone say that FFX and FFX-2 are the same, or even similar. Or FFVII, Dirge of Cerberus, and Crisis Core. Or FFXII and Revenant Wings. You can't at all compare them because while they may be a sequel/prequel (and funny that, 3 games of the main 12 have sequels), they still stick with the usual FF tradition of changing up everything.

Halo, though...the third is the same as the second is the same as the first.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So what? What's your point here?

My point is that you are wrong when you say Halo AND Mario games are all the same shit, Halos are for very obvious and factual reason, Mario games aside from one and two, really started to change from the third one onward. Super Mario 3 laid the groundwork for world maps in anything other than RPGs, Mario World was the first platformer (Or one of) to have one that size, and the game content continued to change from there. Halo haven't in any way close to that.

As I said; "Played one, played 'em all." cannot be applied to Mario games. Being good at one doesn't mean you'll like or enjoy another, or even be good at it, as they're mostly different.

Halo isn't like that, it's the Coldplay of games, which I know you can definitely appreciate.

-AC

To me they feel the same. But that's not a negative nor compliment. I just don't see the reason to label it as innovative or worse...."New".

I'll throw in a different franchises....Mortal Kombat, or better yet Metal Slug. This applies to "Played one, blah, blah, blah"

Basic point: The Franchises we've mention are good at what they do best. Whether is shooting aliens, swinging a sword, gathering a bunch of orphans to fight some monsters, jumping on top of mushrooms whatever. Some franchises may try to jump into a different area (i.e. Mario Kart or Mario Puzzles etc...) But they succeed at what they do originally...not just becasuse it's new.

The only franchise that trully step out of themselves is Resident Evil. For me Resident Evil 4 change everything that was previously establish. That's what I consider innovative even if all the elements were the same...shooting zombies.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
To me they feel the same. But that's not a negative nor compliment. I just don't see the reason to label it as innovative or worse...."New".

That's up to you, if you feel there isn't enough difference to enjoy in Mario, that's entirely reasonable. I don't enjoy all the FFs, but they're entirely different games, as different as you're gonna get in a franchise, Mario more so, arguably, as there's no real set mood or whatever.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'll throw in a different franchises....Mortal Kombat, or better yet Metal Slug. This applies to "Played one, blah, blah, blah"

As does Halo.

Mario doesn't, hence my point.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Basic point: The Franchises we've mention are good at what they do best. Whether is shooting aliens, swinging a sword, gathering a bunch of orphans to fight some monsters, jumping on top of mushrooms whatever. Some franchises may try to jump into a different area (i.e. Mario Kart or Mario Puzzles etc...) But they succeed at what they do originally...not just becasuse it's new.

How is that relevant? We're not discussing who does what best, we're discussing the rather odd, incorrect claim that Mario games are all the same shit, as much as Halo, because they contain Mario. That's just not true.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The only franchise that trully step out of themselves is Resident Evil. For me Resident Evil 4 change everything that was previously establish. That's what I consider innovative even if all the elements were the same...shooting zombies.

That's as different to the rest as Mario Galaxy is to traditional Mario games, though. Same with Sunshine.

-AC

Originally posted by Lana
You might have a point if those things you said were all that there was to playing Mario, Zelda, and Final Fantasy 😛 However, they aren't.

But shooting is about the only thing there is to Halo.

It's really not a fair comparison.

Anything can be designed to be moved, but that's not the graphics but the game engine. Graphics covers how things look and that's it. Not interactivity with said things.

And I know it takes a lot of resources to create huge backgrounds. And I covered this already. The majority of the time one piece is actually created and then repeated over the area, thus creating a large detailed area without taxing the graphics engine.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
With regards to the debate, I'm right. With regards to your shameless continuation of "You said this! Despite explaining otherwise, you did!", you're the fool.

Swell, glad you know you were wrong. Anything to say on Halo?

I never said anything of the sort. Factually better graphically and dynamically, which is a contributing factor to my OVERALL SUBJECTIVE OPINION of the WHOLE GAMES.

No, no, no, no, no.

It IS better graphically, it IS better dynamically. It is not better overall FACTUALLY, THAT is my opinion. The overall verdict is my opinion.

No I haven't, you are deciding what my posts mean, then when I tell you, and they go against what's in your mind, you take it as contradictory. If you had read and accepted what I said in the first place, instead of making your own posts up that I had "said", you'd not be in this mess.

PARTS can be factually better without the OVERALL PRODUCT being factually better. What car has the more advanced parts is fact, whether you like the car or not is opinion, SAME with the game. Graphic superiority is fact, opinion of the game is not.

Type that again, without pulling gigantic pieces of crap from your behind and typing with them.

I've said nothing of the sort.

Stop telling me what I mean and what I've said, this is how it factually is:

"PARTS can be factually better without the OVERALL PRODUCT being factually better. What car has the more advanced parts is fact, whether you like the car or not is opinion, SAME with the game. Graphic superiority is fact, opinion of the game is not.".

That is it, that is what I said and what I mean.

Gears does; everything else except lighting and frame rate, better.

Environment interaction, etc. It's the factually better gaming graphics.

Who said dominating? I said it's better graphically, cos it is.

I wish I can say it was fun, but you are one of KMC's worst debators who has to resort to sticking fingers in his ears and going "Lalalalalalalala" to debate. You cannot actually debate, just reply.

-AC

If that is what great debating is I find it funny 😆

Seriously all you've said is because Gears Textures and Character Models are better therefore it must be better Graphically when what you are saying is only a small section of the puzzle

Originally posted by Newjak
So you are resorting to the same old things you always do. Change what you said even though I quoted exactly what you said different only a few pages ago and then when someone calls you out on it Insult them.

If that is what great debating is I find it funny 😆

Seriously all you've said is because Gears Textures and Character Models are better therefore it must be better Graphically when what you are saying is only a small section of the puzzle

Do me a favour, ok? If you're gonna come back after the debate as moved on, discuss Halo. Don't tell me what I've said or not said when YOU got it wrong.

Everything you've ever quoted proves me right, cos all that's happened is you intentionally ignoring and misreading.

I know what I said, you are choosing to believe otherwise, which isn't up to you, cos it's not what I said or meant, and after many pages of explaining it to you, you still come back because you know it's the only thing left you can reply to, and cos you can't let go, you HAVE to defend Halo.

Deep down, you're a fanboy.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Do me a favour, ok? If you're gonna come back after the debate as moved on, discuss Halo. Don't tell me what I've said or not said when YOU got it wrong.

Everything you've ever quoted proves me right, cos all that's happened is you intentionally ignoring and misreading.

I know what I said, you are choosing to believe otherwise, which isn't up to you, cos it's not what I said or meant, and after many pages of explaining it to you, you still come back because you know it's the only thing left you can reply to, and cos you can't let go, you HAVE to defend Halo.

Deep down, you're a fanboy.

-AC

Anyways you obviously didn't know what you were saying if you were so willing to cotnradict yourself at every turn 😉

Originally posted by Newjak
Your right I have to defend Halo with my life. I also seem to note that you don't stop replying to me as well 😉

Anyways you obviously didn't know what you were saying if you were so willing to cotnradict yourself at every turn 😉

Because every time we debate the game, not even me, the game, you use that false stance that you've made up, against me, and I have to keep explaining how and why you are wrong, because you either ignore it for fun, or you're that stupid. We cannot debate Halo because you intentionally pin things on me that are false, if you stopped doing that and accepted you were wrong in your interpretation and then subsequent intentional misreading, it's be more enjoyable for us both.

I don't mind discussing Halo, or debating it, but there's no point if you're just gonna see what you wanna see. If it didn't get in the way of our discussing Halo, I'd have brushed it off ages ago.

I personally think you're joking, now, but there we go.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Because every time we debate the game, not even me, the game, you use that false stance that you've made up, against me, and I have to keep explaining how and why you are wrong, because you either ignore it for fun, or you're that stupid. We cannot debate Halo because you intentionally pin things on me that are false, if you stopped doing that and accepted you were wrong in your interpretation and then subsequent intentional misreading, it's be more enjoyable for us both.

I don't mind discussing Halo, or debating it, but there's no point if you're just gonna see what you wanna see. If it didn't get in the way of our discussing Halo, I'd have brushed it off ages ago.

I personally think you're joking, now, but there we go.

-AC

Hmmm nice way to put things.

Honestly though I'm not the one contradicting myself all over the place.

I'm also not the one pretending to know things like "Graphics" to try and amke my stance stronger. It is obvious you have very little knowledge on the subject and how it works and had to wait for Backfire to post before you even understood what Gears does do better Graphics wise than Halo 3.

That is what I find funny but hey what do I know I'm stupid and should just accept your opinion as fact. 🙂

Originally posted by Newjak
So let me get this straight if I were to agree with you then we would be good but because I do not agree with I am therefore wrong and stupid.

Hmmm nice way to put things.

Honestly though I'm not the one contradicting myself all over the place.

I'm also not the one pretending to know things like "Graphics" to try and amke my stance stronger. It is obvious you have very little knowledge on the subject and how it works and had to wait for Backfire to post before you even understood what Gears does do better Graphics wise than Halo 3.

That is what I find funny but hey what do I know I'm stupid and should just accept your opinion as fact. 🙂

I don't care if you disagree with me about Halo, I'll debate the graphics with you because I'm factually right, and people here have said it too. So disagree all you want, I don't actually need you to agree cos do or don't, you're wrong, but if we debate Halo it's at LEAST on topic. THAT I can tolerate.

I was typing my reply as Backfire posted his, and unless you didn't notice, it was a long post, but as always, you will believe what you want. No matter what is explained to you.

What I have issues with is you continuing to tell me what I said and believe what you want after I have explained my position to you. That isn't cool, funny or smart, it's pedantic, ignorant and stupid. So at least stop that and debate the game and whatever else you wish to discuss, but honestly, civil request; stop telling me what I said, meant or didn't mean. I know what I said and meant, and you are wrong in your perception of it. That's MY word over ME. Can you at least do that? Or are you so out of Halo arguments that I am the only thing keeping you in this thread?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I don't care if you disagree with me about Halo, I'll debate the graphics with you because I'm factually right, and people here have said it too. So disagree all you want, I don't actually need you to agree cos do or don't, you're wrong, but if we debate Halo it's at LEAST on topic. THAT I can tolerate.

I was typing my reply as Backfire posted his, and unless you didn't notice, it was a long post, but as always, you will believe what you want. No matter what is explained to you.

What I have issues with is you continuing to tell me what I said and believe what you want after I have explained my position to you. That isn't cool, funny or smart, it's pedantic, ignorant and stupid. So at least stop that and debate the game and whatever else you wish to discuss, but honestly, civil request; stop telling me what I said, meant or didn't mean. I know what I said and meant, and you are wrong in your perception of it. That's MY word over ME. Can you at least do that? Or are you so out of Halo arguments that I am the only thing keeping you in this thread?

-AC

And why does it matter that you were posting a long post then you still were unable to come up with any reasons why Gears is better Graphics wise until you saw what Backfire wrote.

It's not me putting words into your mouth it is what you put in posts. And I wouldn't mind actually talking with you about Halo but is obvious you are already biased and want nothing more to prove then Halo 3 is a mediocre game.

Heck in your very first post you claim I was making excuses for what you saw as shortcomings for the game.

Everything you have said is opinion and even your ideas on what make good Graphics is opinion.

Thus what point is there to debate opinions with you.

Wow, I guess everyone else is actually out playing the game huh.

Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Seeing as just one part of your post was relevant, and about Halo, that's what I'll reply to.

Originally posted by Newjak
Actually your not factually right and even if you were oddly enough you are not. You don't understand why you would be right and that is a problem. You just keep saying which areas most of whom I named off for you you think Gears is better in without actually knowing or even giving a reason as to why they are better in certain areas.

And why does it matter that you were posting a long post then you still were unable to come up with any reasons why Gears is better Graphics wise until you saw what Backfire wrote.

Wait, that first bit makes zero sense. I'm not factually right...but even if I was....I wouldn't be? That's what I got from this quote;

"Actually your not factually right and even if you were oddly enough you are not.". Very stupid.

A) Believe what you want. I was typing the same thing before Backfire, and even in Backfire's case, he said what he could see I MEANT. I'm telling you I didn't do that, but that means nothing to you. Not that I care, it's a fact I wasn't doing that. I was typing that stuff when Backfire replied, I didn't see it then start replying, but you obviously have already made your little mind up, and you're biased toward ignoring what I say.

B) You are pissed because you feel I couldn't answer until Backfire did, that's not true but whatever. He's right, I'm right, Lana's right. You're not, you're wrong. Whether it was me or someone else first, you were proven wrong. Don't ignore the fact of what Backfire said just because he got there first and you wanted it to be me.

So in that case, Backfire, Lana and I are all wrong? Is that what you're saying? We're all wrong about the graphics being technically better?

-AC

Originally posted by InnerRise
Wow, I guess everyone else is actually out playing the game huh.

Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Yep. durw00t

What makes a games graphics technically better than another games graphics considering Halo 3 and Gears of War?

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
What makes a games graphics technically better than another games graphics considering Halo 3 and Gears of War?

A gamers taste?