Bungie: Halo 3 Beats Out GTA IV, Portal, Wii Fit For Edge Innovation Award
Because if Edge is to be believed, gaming is at a standstill.
Why you should ignore Edge's opinions from now on
Bungie: Halo 3 Beats Out GTA IV, Portal, Wii Fit For Edge Innovation Award
Because if Edge is to be believed, gaming is at a standstill.
Yeah you're missing the point bro, the award was not just for "innovation" but "interactive innovation", in other words the whole part of Halo 3 that Bungie have put together with regards to how their website intergrates with the game with both stat tracking and for the user created content and their constant updates to the game to allow people to create more game types and map varients. Which is fair enough, tbh. No one apart from Kotaku who apparently failed to read the article they linked to said that it was about the "space marine storyline" or gameplay itself.
So as far as giving them an award for their interactivity and user created content and sharing methods, yeah I think that's fair enough because their whole setup for it works pretty much perfectly and I've never encountered any problems with it. You can do pretty much anything you want from the screenshots and videos to the whole creation stuff, and sharing it across the entire base of users is a piece of piss. As far as console gaming goes nothing springs to mind that outdoes Halo 3 in those aspects comprehensively, so I don't really see why this is a problem. Unless of course you're the type of person who falls easily for trash journalism that uses misdirection and leaves out important bits of information!
Last edited by DK; 08-11-2008 at 09:24 PM.
Halo 3 does some new stuff (though very little of it has to do with the actual gameplay) but none of it holds a candle to games like Portal, which actually take risks to do the important stuff differently.
I am not disputing that. But the article from the Edge Website clearly states in gigantic letters that the award was for innovation with regards to interactivity, and the fact of the matter is Halo 3 does it better than or at least as good as any other console game you could care to mention with a game that, on average, reaches around 350,000 unique consoles playing it daily. There's no problem in that award, the only problem that is clearly visible is that Kotaku are smurfing idiots.
You're confusing polish and fluff for innovation.
Sure, the Portal gun is a pretty innovative gameplay mechanic, but it's not going to shape the future development of an entire generation of online games. Halo 3 will.
If you play a shooter in three years that doesn't have Portal puzzles, you're not going to think "Wow, this game sure is lacking because it isn't Portal." But if you play a game that features online multiplayer, but is missing features such as Forge, Theatre mode, comprehensive matchmaking, a reliable party system, stat tracking, etc., it's going to be lacking in comparison to Halo 3. Simply put, it raises the bar for online multiplayer, and anyone who has spent a decent amount of time with it and other competitive online games can attest to that fact.Ultimately it is the integration and coherence of Halo 3’s online content that makes the game stand apart. From its Theater mode to Forge, and the way a party playing through Live can seamlessly manoeuvre between them, here is an experience that demonstrates an unparalleled understanding of the potential for console online play. Outside of the game, Bungie.net has been engineered to become a remarkable resource for Halo 3 stats and communities, providing life for the game even when your Xbox 360 is switched off. Halo 3, just as Halo 2 did before it, presents a roadmap for the way online will be integrated in videogames in the coming years.
Well go ahead and bring up some names of games that provide such a large userbase with a service that has virtually no failings with regards to user created content, sharing, stat tracking and partying in matchmaking that are better than it then. They have created a system for doing all of those things that 8 year olds can and probably do work out easily. Name some games that have matchmaking playlists that use game modes that have been created and submitted by the userbase itself and are now permenant fixtures played by thousands daily. Name some games that provide better interactivity, which is what this thing is all about, and then you can try and moan about how Halo 3 is a waste of time. Until then you just sound like a grumpy old man having a moan because something you don't like is being praised without actually giving a valid argument to why it's not as good as they say it is. So far all you've given us is a link to a shoddy piece of journalism that would shame the Daily Mail with it's blatant disregard for actual truth and valid information.
You're still missing the point. All of that stuff is just extra crap. It's done well. So what? It's polished. Lots of time and money went into making it easy to use. The game, at it's core, is still just Halo 2.5.
Well go ahead and bring up some names of games that provide such a large userbase with a service that has virtually no failings with regards to user created content, sharing, stat tracking and partying in matchmaking that are better than it then. They have created a system for doing all of those things that 8 year olds can and probably do work out easily. Name some games that have matchmaking playlists that use game modes that have been created and submitted by the userbase itself and are now permenant fixtures played by thousands daily. Name some games that provide better interactivity, which is what this thing is all about, and then you can try and moan about how Halo 3 is a waste of time.Originally Posted by Roto13
It's not fluff if it makes up a significant portion of the game's usage.
If all they were commending it for was being able to customize a Spartan for online play, yeah, that's fluff. Being a leader and changing the way online games are played is very different.
You seem to be separating the backend functions of a game from the gameplay itself which is pretty unfair.
(I don't even like Halo, personally, but I find it commendable how they pulled off their online. Now if only someone might pay attention to it *coughNintendo*)
yeah, the award is for INNOVATION WITH REGARDS TO INTERACTIVITY.
It's got nothing to do with Gameplay. Nothing to do with story. Nothing to do with whether or not they've come up with some cool new game mechanics. It was given for making the best interactive experience for gamers with regards to what they can do with their game, what they can create, what they can build, what they can share, how they can do all this with their friends. No one gives aif it is Halo 2.5 or not. That is not what this is about. I don't know how this could be made any clearer to you.
Let others have opinions, just because they don't agree with yours (or most gamers) doesn't mean they made a wrong decision. I personally think Rock Band should of won. I don't care about any of the games they have chosen but what Rock Band did seemed to further gaming more than the other titles.
Last edited by Dreddz; 08-11-2008 at 10:30 PM.
How the smurf is gameplay NOT a huge part, if not THE BIGGEST part, of the interactive part of a game?
If they were going to define it that way then what is the point of even making a disparity in the first place? They may have well have just said "best game" because the gameplay is the most important part of a game. But it's clearly not an award with the merit based on the gameplay, because if it was things like Halo and Wii Fit wouldn't have been there. Just because you're choosing to be ignorant doesn't change anything said in the edge article or in this thread.
It's not supposed to be the "best" anything. That's why Halo doesn't deserve to win. Yes it has a
I would add my two cents but I am scared that if I do my opinion will be disregarded and a response already used will be regurgitated with the possibility of a few words moved around. What I do.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
