BackFire
Blood. It's nature's lube
Originally posted by stingray005
If any of you have noticed Halo got the game of the year award, and it got the highest rating in xbox magazine, which right their states that it is a historical game, and if thats not enough than I'll prove myself again.
Halo has...great gameplay
better graphics than doom, mortal combat, or call of duty
great music
great story (oh wait I forgot none of the other games mentioned have a story)
And heres a tip for TPTmann-if you actually want to see how great of a game halo is than buy it, play it, and beat it.
Just because a game gets a high rating and is popular doesn't make it historical. What is the actual IMPACT that the game has had on the industry? What new aspects of gameplay did it bring to the industry? What makes it historical? Getting a good rating in a second rate video game magazine does not make it a historical game, just a good game.
Better graphics then doom and MK? Too hell you say! Doom and MK was made about 10 years before Halo, of course it has better graphics. What a stupid argument. Comparing Halo to games a decade older then halo, and say "well halo has better graphics and AI then these decade old games, thus it's a more historical game" is blatantly stupid and invalid. You have to look at games made at the same time if you're going to compare.
What makes doom and MK historical is the impact they had on the industry. If it weren't for Doom, Halo wouldn't exist, if it werent' for MK, it's arguable that GTA and other violent games wouldn't exist. MK pushed the envelope of what is acceptable in a mainstream game. It's these types of things that make a game historical. A game that changed the industry, created a genre, added new gameplay the likes of which have never been seen. Not simply scoring good in a shitty magazine.