Thread: BioShock
View Single Post

Default 

July 28th, 2008, 17:36
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
Since when is close to 10 hours considered short for a FPS? Most FPS are well under 10 hours, and to be honest, Halo seemed to be a bit longer than that.
Since before 2001 Actually, they were pretty short in the 'early days', got much longer in the 'golden era', and got shorter again in the 'set piece and cinematic' days.

Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
I must admit that I don't think I've ever played any of Bungie's other games, I've heard a lot of good things about Marathon. As far as comparing Halo to the games you mentioned, I can't argue about that, even though you must admit that releaseing it on PC years later was obviously not a good idea on the part of Microsoft.
That (releasing late) is a real issue - because while I tend to take the view (for example) of Halo 2 against other 2004 games, others would be right in comparing it to 2007 games. I have that problem all the time as a Mac gamer (Fable *just* released for the Mac in May!)

Same for the first Halo, but I think that does better because it came out early in the technology cycle for the XBOX and was a game in development for years (originally for the Mac and later for the PC before MS bought Bungie and made the game a XBOX exclusive … in case you needed more reasons for PC gamers to *hate* Halo, Microsoft, and Bungie But anyway, because of that development cycle it didn't feel quite as ancient when it came out. Halo 2 actually surprised me - I mean, I have played some really bad FPS games (Groove Games couple of WWII Combat games and Kreed come to mind), but the action and gameplay in Halo 2 were really not very good at all.

— Mike
txa1265 is offline

txa1265

txa1265's Avatar
SasqWatch

#65

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Corning, NY USA
Posts: 11,410