We'll just have to agree to disagree. To me bots are a big deal. I don't care about tanks and other vehicles. I just want people on foot with guns in my deathmatches. If I wanted to blow people up in vehicles I'd play Twisted Metal, which I wan't because I hate vehicular combat games. Also you shouldn't have to be creative to make up a good deathmatch. You should just have to pick a couple options in a menu just like in PD.

This is the way I see it. Halo sets the bar for single player, or co-op, console FPS's and likely won't be topped for some time. Where as PD has set the bar for multiplayer deathmatch console FPS's and likely won't be topped for sometime.

Feel free to disagree, that's what opinions are for. Halo is the best singleplayer/co-op console of all time bar none, but is simply mediocre in the multiplayer (in the same room, not online crap) department IMO.

I agree its multiplayer isn't the strongest part of the game. But I guess my problem is people saying it's not very good. It is pretty good just because of cool things like the vehicles. Of course you can get out of them and go sniper someone if need be

ScandalUMD, you don't need a broadband connection to enjoy the X-Box just like you don't need a broadband connection to enjoy the PS2. There isn't even an official network setup yet. It will just be icing on the cake for X-Box users when it comes out. It's really nice for those of us with broadband, who don't have to go buy an adapter in order to use it.

I agree. I never meant to imply that the multiplayer isn't good. I was just saying it wasn't phenomenal or anything like Halo's incredible singleplayer/co-op game or PD's deathmatch mode. I was mainly dissappointed just because I expected more. When it came out, PD was the best single player console FPS of all time and the best console deathmatch game of all time IMO. I was expecting the same out of Halo, and it only delivered in the single player mode IMO, as I said it is easily the best singleplayer/co-op console FPS of all time. Unfortunately the deathmatch mode is just good, above average, but not great.

Totally agree with what you said here. Sorry for misinterpreting your earlier post.

I nomally don't play online games either. My broadband is for web browsing and mp3 downloading. Halo just happens to be a perk.

And snideness is my trademark. I wouldn't have it any other way. Thanks for the compliment.

It's about how much your time is worth. If you prefer to spend lengthy amounts of time for a connection 1/50th the speed of broadband just because it costs half as much, be my guest.

offensive remarks removed. -namja

Didn't you just say that above? Deja Vu.

And I prefer playing with my friends in the same room playing over the net at the same time.

PD does have a lot of options in setting up a deathmatch, I'll give ya that one.

LOL! That's a good one. Why would I want to play a stimulant when I can take on several guys over the net?

And If I needed extra practice, I would just bump the level to legendary and play through the single player game.

Without getting into the options argument, multiplayer modes, or any of that, I would like to say that I personally believe GoldenEye and Perfect Dark are far superior to Halo in fun factor. That's me. I can't wait until PD Zero drops...

Really? Was it the last Maw level that bugged you? What didn't you find fun about the game? You have to admit that last level was pretty damn cool and fun

Thank you joshhinkle, and the others that got my points,I am in complete agreement with you, Someone understood!!!

I have no Problems with Single and Co-op they are great. The facts are that I want replay value. And without SIMULENTS, IMO there isn't much, after I play single player just once, In my personal experience I will remember the story and remember what's around that next corner, it just isn't as fun.

Starting up an ME vs. 8 mix and match with normal - dark SIMULENTS in PD. I can do that at anytime. I know it will be fun, so I will continue to do that instead of halo multi.

Broadband.... I have a job. thanks. the fact is that all i can get in my area is 144/144 PacBell DSL, i did sign up, and they came out and looked around and said i needed some more lines or something, said they would be back on a date to install and they didn't show up I called and there was 2 story's at there office one that said i had already had it installed and another that they still needed to come out, I canceled then. + number one I shouldn't have to have broadband to enjoy any game, unless it is made only for multiplayer, IMO that isn't a good excuse why halo is better or not.

Game Development..... On the contrary I Probably know more about game development than most of you posting here, this is not a flame, just a fact. I used to work for EA, Nuff said.

Game Release... IMO i wouldn't have minded waiting longer for halo to be released, IF Bungie would have added any of the features I have mentioned, ESPECIALLY in game Audio controls!!!

Game Size... Granted Pretty graphics are nice, so this may account for the lack of game options, although I doubt it considering how many options PD has with a little cartage compared to these 1gig PLUS X-box disc's. How many PC games dose anyone know of that are more than one gig in size or even 600 megs. Diablo 2 LOD is all I can think of, witch is a much different game. IMO time must have been a vary big factor in the development of this game, even though it has been in development for 2+ years

so.. superior disc size (1gig+), 2+ years of work, Plenty of FPS before to take notes from, NO AUDIO CONTROL!!!!! IMO bad multiplayer options leaving much more to be desired.

So for now i will play the single player game and beat it, then i will sit, i can't play multi by myself, and the game is repetitive enough as it is, so i won't be going through it over and over again, BORING

Halo is a great game but I still completely agree with joshhinkle here, I'll give it the single player, but PD's multi is still far superior and with much more replay.

Do you have any buddies who will come over and play multiplayer with you?

Hey, by the way, you seriously deprived yourself of a longer gaming experience by playing through it on normal. Heroic is the only way to go. You'll find the game gets a lot more enjoyable and rewarding in Heroic. Let us know how the Legedary levels go, like I said you won't get past the second level if you are playing in single player mode.

yes... but it's going to be a tough one, between GE, PD, and halo

I'll agree that the addition of bots and additional multiplayer modes would have made Halo a better overall package. But as someone who worked at EA (is EA developing any games? I thought they were just a publisher ), I'm sure you are aware of the pressure that a publisher can put on a developer to get a game out a certain date. I am sure this was the case with Halo. Here you had an unproven system (XBox) that needed a marquee title to go with it to move systems. Therefore I'm sure Bungie had to trim some features to get the game out on November 15th.

The situation was different with Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. They were developed for an established system by a second-party developer which probably could have taken all the time they needed to complete the game.

I didn't mean to write this much, but I think we're being a little too hard on Halo. Given the timeframe Bungie had to work with, I believe Halo is about as good as could have gotten.

I think, however, that's it's valid to be disappointed in the multiplayer options.

The games I buy are almost always games that have tons of replay value. Either multiplayer, or fighting/racing games that can be different every time. I hate buying a game that is linear, beating it, and having that be it.

To say that Halo multiplayer is great over the net, fine. But my wife and I bought a home that doesn't have broadband available. So I am stuck with 56k until Qwest/AT&T get off their asses and hook me up. It's not too much to ask that the multiplayer be better.

I would rather play full screen multiplayer, so bots would be nice. No split or quartered screens. My preference is the whole television screen, so the lack of bots is a serious disappointment to me. Personally, that adds a lot, so I feel the game is somewhat lacking.

Maybe they can address this with an "upgrade" later on. Utilize that hard drive a bit.

draven-x: do you own an X-Box or Halo? I got the feeling from your "One and Only Which Console do you Own and Why" post you don't. If you don't own it, did you defeat the game?

Sorry, but I take any opinions on a game by someone who doesn't own said game with a giant grain of salt. If you are basing your entire opinion off of a game review, that's extremely fanboyish to me.

I've played the game indepth, and I think it's really fun, actually. I can't say that I've ever gotten to the last level (or PD's for that matter), but from what I've played it certainly is an excellent game that I'd rate somewhere around a 9.0. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark just are more my type of FPS, that's all.

No, I don't own an X-box. But I don't think that means I can't say that I am less excited about getting one now that I hear the multiplayer options are "lacking" in it's flagship title.

I have to own a game to have an opinion on it? Since when? The lack of bots is, to me, a serious reason to not get the game. Once the single player is beaten, even on Legendary, is there anything else to offer for the single player?

All I said was that I preferred my multiplayer full-screen, and the lack of a broadband connection where I live means that no bots means no full-screen multiplayer. That's disappointing to me. I have to own the game to have that opinion?

1. Yes, you have to own a game to have an opinion on it. That's if you want people to take you seriously.

2. If you did own Halo, you would know beating Legendary is the reason bots aren't needed. It took me 36 hours to beat Halo on Heroic. Since the AI is much more advanced in Legendary, I'm guessing it will take at least double the time it took me on Heroic.
And it's just as fun playing it the second time through due to increased and random enemy placement.

So for me, I'm looking at a kickass 108 hours of total playtime with even touching multiplayer. At least that's the opinion I have formed after actually playing the game.

I KNOW for a fact that people don't own every single system and every single game, yet still offer their opinions on said games.

Flay, I KNOW you've offered opinions on Gamecube games that you don't own.

Did I say anything about the single-player experience being bad? I don't think I did...let's check...nope, I didn't.

Does the game lack bots in multiplayer? Yup. Do I think that bots add a lot of replay value to a game? Yup. Do I like buying games that offer a great single player experience? Nope, not really. I would rather rent a game like that.

and lastly, this:


That's great. That really is. I'm glad the game offers that much time. 95% of games nowadays offer only 10 to 20 hours of gameplay. Halo deserves all the accollades it's gotten for an engrossing single player experience. I would never argue with that.

But you know what? I don't usually buy games like that. Most of the games I've purchased in my life offer something beyond single player. I probably spent HUNDREDS of hours playing Mortal Kombat 2 for SNES with my roommate in college. I've spent at least 108 hours playing Unreal Tournament, agains bots, and I don't think I'll ever stop playing it.

So, I guess that I have to buy a game and system to be able to say that the lack of bots is a detriment to an otherwise spectacular game? I can't be familiar enough with my tastes to know that I will be disappointed with the lack of computer-controlled opponents to deathmatch with? Whatever...

I find some serious flaw in the logic here. Serious. You can't have an opinion on something you've never experienced, but I don't see why one can't have an opinion on a game that you've played at a friend's house or even rented. I respect draven's opinion on this game and agree that the lack of bots in the arenas seriously hurt the 1-player replay value on this game. I haven't played Halo for weeks since I beat it on Legendary.

I beat Legendary in about 20 hours after beating normal in about 16 and at this point I really wished there were bots to keep me interested in this game and since I don't have broadband there really isn't much more to do with it in terms of playing solo.

Actually I don't offer an opinon unless I actually play the game. For instance, I didn't judge LM, ST:RL, or WaveRace until I actually played them in a kiosk. Look at my post history if you don't believe me. Have you ever played Halo at all?

I didn't say you badmouthed the single player experience. But you assume that replay value is depleted due to lack of bots. I'm telling you that Legendary makes up for the lost replay value.

Fine. Whatever. I will play Advanced AI in Halo. You can play with bots. No difference to me. Huge difference to you. To each his own.

You had me up to this point. You are completely full of sh*t.

It took Chris Butcher, the programmer of the AI at Bungie, 60 hours to complete the game on Legendary. His name is in the credits in Halo. Just play your imaginary copy.

Here is the proof:

http://forums.bungie.org/halo/archive3.pl?read=75848

If I judged games from playing them at a kiosk, then my views would be all messed up. PLaying at a kiosk does not give a great representation of the game. Going by this standard, I would say that Fusion Frenzy is a worthless waste of money, even with 4 players, and Halo is a Quake ripoff with lip-syncing(I started at the beginning) and poor controls, Luigi's Mansion is a Ghostbusters clone(which it is) with poor controls, and Rogue Leader is like Star Fox ...

By actually playing the games for a while, meaning not standing at a store, does one get a true feel for the game.

I too have played Halo at a kiosk. I didn't mention it because I was sure it would be ripped apart because I didn't get "the full experience" or something.

I guess we agree to disagree. I think that once the single player is beaten, no matter how long it takes, then the game is more or less over if you don't have friends who can regularly come over to play or a fast internet connection. That's it, that's all I was trying to say.

So in other words, my opinion (hang on, let me quote myself from an old thread):

"SWRL gets a well deserved 10 out of 10. The game is just that much fun!"

is worthless because I only played the kiosk demo?