View Single Post
Old 12-30-2007, 04:50 PM   #51 (permalink)
TaeketsuFFXI
X3F Member
Points: 4,978, Level: 16
Points: 4,978, Level: 16 Points: 4,978, Level: 16 Points: 4,978, Level: 16
Activity: 3%
Activity: 3% Activity: 3% Activity: 3%
 
TaeketsuFFXI's Avatar
 

Local Time: 02:25 PM
Local Date: 12-02-2008
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: CT
Posts: 1,364
TaeketsuFFXI X3F Neophyte
Quote:
Originally Posted by koopaTroopa View Post
Who said halo 2 was better? I sure as hell didn't. I said if I wanted the same game I would keep playing Halo 2. And your argument was "why fix it if it ain't broke". Why make new consoles then? It's not about ending support. The console manufacturers choose to end support in light of something NEW. If the recipe is to stabilize and stay the same we wouldn't need sequels. We wouldn't need the 360. We wouldn't need blu-ray and hd-dvd. We wouldn't need new anything.
You're still mixing two completely different things up. Why would you even try comparing hardware to software? I won't even waste my time explaining why that comparison is so faulty, you should see it yourself.

The fact of the matter is, people had very little complaints with Halo 2. What could be improved on a new system? Let's see, graphics/live playability/a good ending to the trilogy. Did Halo 3 accomplish all those? I'd say so. I can't go more in depth on that because like I said, I wasn't a fan of Halo before this third one. I liked the co-op on Halo 2, but that was pretty much it. I didn't like the Xbox at all because it had very limited software support, and most of the good games on the Xbox were also on PC.

BTW, some other guy said Halo 2 was "sure as hell" better. I'm not just responding to you, notice I said "you guys?". As in you know, plural.
TaeketsuFFXI is offline