This game's existence irks me

#81DelkuraPosted 3/17/2012 12:20:24 PM

After 4 pages of everyone disagreeing with Royic, 2 COD fanboys/haters show up out of nowhere. How convenient.

#82Born_StellarPosted 3/17/2012 12:25:47 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
#83TheSpiduxPosted 3/17/2012 1:24:22 PM
Trolls gonna troll.
---
ANIME-GALAXIES... Returning to your internets -- eventually.
#84StalkerSnDPosted 3/18/2012 8:25:03 AM
Karp Whip posted...
Born_Stellar posted...
CoD may have beaten reach (which isnt much of an achievement since its the least popular installment), but halo 2 MADE xbox live, and halo 3 dominated generic sh** like CoD and battlefield. halo will get back on top again, just you wait. CoD lovin d-bag.

You need to go back and learn your history. When CoD MW came out in Nov 2007, it surpassed Halo 3 on XBLA. And CoD has remained the more popular XBLA dominator ever since.

Also, for the record, I hate CoD. Nice try though.



Actually the Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon series on original xbox made xbox live. Sadly most kids these days only know halo and cod. Rainbow would still poop on both if it went back to its roots.
---
I own nothing more valuable than my Blue Cord and Cross Rifles.
#85Born_StellarPosted 3/19/2012 11:55:10 AM

StalkerSnD posted...
Karp Whip posted...
Born_Stellar posted...
CoD may have beaten reach (which isnt much of an achievement since its the least popular installment), but halo 2 MADE xbox live, and halo 3 dominated generic sh** like CoD and battlefield. halo will get back on top again, just you wait. CoD lovin d-bag.

You need to go back and learn your history. When CoD MW came out in Nov 2007, it surpassed Halo 3 on XBLA. And CoD has remained the more popular XBLA dominator ever since.

Also, for the record, I hate CoD. Nice try though.



Actually the Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon series on original xbox made xbox live. Sadly most kids these days only know halo and cod. Rainbow would still poop on both if it went back to its roots.
---
I own nothing more valuable than my Blue Cord and Cross Rifles.


perhaps "made" was a poor choice of words. it was the most popular game for the original xbox on xbox live overall. i have played both ghost recon and rainbow six, back when they were worth playing according to you, and personally i didn't care for them.

#86StalkerSnDPosted 3/19/2012 6:10:50 PM
Sorry, but Halo 2 never surpassed Rainbow popularity wise on live. You use to be able to check the most popular games on live (not sure if you still can) and Rainbow Six 3 and Black Arrow were still tops up until the 360 started rolling out good games.
---
I own nothing more valuable than my Blue Cord and Cross Rifles.
#87Born_StellarPosted 3/20/2012 9:02:05 AM

StalkerSnD posted...
Sorry, but Halo 2 never surpassed Rainbow popularity wise on live. You use to be able to check the most popular games on live (not sure if you still can) and Rainbow Six 3 and Black Arrow were still tops up until the 360 started rolling out good games.
---
I own nothing more valuable than my Blue Cord and Cross Rifles.


you are wrong. found major nelson's top 20 for 2006: http://majornelson.com/2006/12/30/2006-top-xbox-live-games/ (scroll down to xbox original titles list, its almost at the bottm.) ghost recon 2 is 9th, rainbow six 3 is 11th, and black arrow is 14th. don't understand how you could think either of those games could compare with halo 2.

#88Born_StellarPosted 3/20/2012 9:02:55 AM

which is number 1 ofc.

#89Born_StellarPosted 3/20/2012 9:46:11 AM

oh, and about halo 2 "making" xbox live, consider this, out of the 6 million xbox live in march (roughly) 2007 (halo 3 wasn't released until november, so this is all halo 2) bungie had logged 4.75 million gamertags playing halo 2. thats 79% of ALL xbox live subscriptions. what you should be thinking is "holy S***". this was almost 3 years into its lifespan, rainbow six 3 had nowhere near that sort of popularity... ever. by its third year it was at the bottom of list, so was ghost recon 2 (no wait, GR2 before its second year). rainbow six and ghost recon may have been moderately popular titles, but they were completely eclipsed by halo 2.

#90royic(Topic Creator)Posted 3/22/2012 1:58:46 PM
whew forgot about this...

in what universe is 5 years "right after" something.
One that has decades long years?

aha, so successful and well liked games are generic? i think i see our problem here... you're a hipster.

Successful and well liked isn't what I pointed out, it's the fact that you said most of them all do the same thing, ie, humans being wiped out.



you are needlessly stubborn because you still insist that the story is cheesy because apparently halo 3 and 4 are too close together chronologically... even after you've been told its been 5 years since halo 3. that is what i call needlessly stubborn.


IMO a decades long war with the monumental discovery of an alien race, and then a five year break, and then a monumental discovery of a past alien capitalization know doubt spawning another decades long conflict, that's too short of a down time. IMO.

i'm honestly not sure what you're arguing about anymore. you claim to have accepted that there are credible threats to base a new story arch on, yet you're still putting up a fight. please tell me, what is your problem? it can't just be that 5 years is not enough time. it just can't be.

It is. I've been saying it for days/weeks now.




you really need to get your facts straight. i mean this is just embarrassing.


Just because a game follows a story arch doesn't mean that the game IS the entire story arch. If you have a game about WW2 over the course of three days it doesn't mean that it would be natural for WW3 to occur a few months later, assuming you branch off into a fictional universe after WW2.

clearly it is relevant.

This is from you

they butchered each other for decades

So me saying that Halo's main storyarch -the human/covenant war- is decades long, and therefore me saying that the halo universe should wait a little longer before the next big catastrophe would be you getting facts wrong, not me.
Not to mention you're the one who told me that Halo 4 takes place about a year after Halo 3 initially.

again, thank you captain obvious

Your responses the last few times were "lol you combined your examples" and other things signifying you didn't get what I was saying, so forgive me for trying to put it in easier ways for you to understand.

well what you've said during your argument with me directly contradicts what you've said earlier, and you keep claiming you've NEVER said things that you clearly HAVE said. you're so full of crap its coming out your ears at this point.

I was talking about things I never said during this argument to you. Anything else I've said is irrelevant. Maybe you could find a post from me a couple weeks ago with me saying that 5 years would be the perfect down time between story arches, it doesn't that it's impossible that I've changed my opinion since then.



alright, i think you should pitch your "halo: master chief takes a decade off" idea to 343, and watch them laugh in your face. and then counter with "halo 4s plot is too catastrophic and not enough time has passed since halo 3! thats cheesy! the chief needs a vacation!" i can't decide whether they'd just throw you out or whether they'd laugh even harder... or both.

I'd rather suggest "Halo ____ : Someone Else who Isn't Master Chief Deals with this problem a long time after the Covenant War". Of course they'd laugh me out, they want a game with Master Chief because Master Chief sells and they want money.
---
GT: Ducksaws
going off topic? www.speakeasyclinic.com