Poll: Things Halo Wars Needed to Do To Be A Better Game.

[MercurySteam]

Ok Halo Wars really didn't deserve a 6.5 (Gamespot). So I'm here to announce what the game needed to do better. You may think it's too early for me to start a thread like this, but I probably wouldn't need to if it wasn't so frikin short!

What they needed to do was what EA did in C&C3 TW and have campians for both sides, prolonging the campian, and giving more story. (I also need to add that the story was brief, and easy to forget) Skirmishes are the only way you're gonna get to know the Covenant. Also doing Co-op like it was done in RA3 would be better, cause when both of you have control of the same base/s, things can get a bit annoying. It would be great if you had your own bases to deal with.

So. What do you guys think?

 

[Jarc42]

and have campians for both sides, prolonging the campian, and giving more story. (I also need to add that the story was brief, and easy to forget)

I thought the story was very interesting, the cutscenes where great.

I do agree that the covies should have had there own story, oh well.

 

[gamegod25]

I haven't got the game yet

I've played the demo and really think it deserves at least an 8.

 

[Jarc42]

Apparently the difficulty was at times too easy, and at times too hard, and that the game never found the middle point of being 'challenging'.

I don't really agree, but whatever, they gave it a six.

 

[MercurySteam]

I haven't got the game yet

I've played the demo and really think it deserves at least an 8.

That's exactly what i think it should get

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

Well, around here (the US) it hasn't come out yet.

But I believe it could have used more multiplayer flexibility. More than two teams at least, a King of the Hill mode would be nice as well. And I wouldn't object to a Covenant campaign, probably shouldn't be about the Human-Covenant War though.

But this is just establishing the series, and these things are what DLC and sequels are for.

 

[NoDamnNames]

"Poll: Things Halo Wars Needed to Do To Be A Better Game."

Drop the franchise name, have an original idea, and cut itself loose of its established fans.


It has allot of potential, but the most consistent complaint I have heard about halo on every forum I have been on in my entire life is the fan base. I've known more than one Xbox owner who refused to buy halo because they didn't want to be associated with halo fans.

If the design team could do another game similar in quality to halo but not have the franchise attached to it I would predict it to be a great success.

 

[D_987]

"Poll: Things Halo Wars Needed to Do To Be A Better Game."

Drop the franchise name, have an original idea, and cut itself loose of its established fans.


It has allot of potential, but the most consistent complaint I have heard about halo on every forum I have been on in my entire life is the fan base. I've known more than one Xbox owner who refused to buy halo because they didn't want to be associated with halo fans.

If the design team could do another game similar in quality to halo but not have the franchise attached to it I would predict it to be a great success.

It'll sell because of the name Halo...

 

[jakefongloo]

heres what it could do...not be an rts! my personal opinion but the only system that works with rts is computers

 

[bad rider]

Gamespots reviews arent worth the cerdit they once were, christ they fire all the
honest reviewers.

 

[NoDamnNames]

"Poll: Things Halo Wars Needed to Do To Be A Better Game."

Drop the franchise name, have an original idea, and cut itself loose of its established fans.


It has allot of potential, but the most consistent complaint I have heard about halo on every forum I have been on in my entire life is the fan base. I've known more than one Xbox owner who refused to buy halo because they didn't want to be associated with halo fans.

If the design team could do another game similar in quality to halo but not have the franchise attached to it I would predict it to be a great success.

It'll sell because of the name Halo...

I'm talking about broadening their horizons, plus the franchise milking that everyone is doing nowadays. everything has to be sequel or spinoff now.

What I meant was if the developers of halo could make an original game without a franchise label i think it would have the potential to branch into such down the road (and end up at square 1 again).

 

[Hearthing]

How could you make the game better?

Here's an idea: Game Dev's, stop fidning niches in a market and claiming you will make billions from something that DOES NOT WORK on a console.

Developer took these ideas: RTS never done well on consoles... hmmmzzzzz.... Halo = popular game series (don't know why)

Developer then thought: I R TEH SEX I CLAIMZ DIZ BEATS TEH PC RTSES.

Did this beat the PC RTS? No. Where the controls as good as a PC RTS? No. Did this game last long enough to receive a good score? No. Is the multiplayer good? No.

The crucial question though: "Is this another run off the mill Command and Conquer "Look at me I haz teh best tank spammed in production 5967089357968379 times." RTS game with no new innovations?" And the answer is: Yes.

Leave RTS alone where it belongs. The only one that ever worked was C&C Red Alert, on the PS1. It worked because it was a good game. Then they ruined the series.

Greedy dev's looking for niches in markets need to be shot.

And if you are judging the game by a score by a reviewer, it deserves less than 6.3, OP, it deserves about 4. Looks good, terrible to play, terribly boring, terribly dull. Terribly fun to rage about, tho.

 

[ultimatechance]

Gamespots reviews arent worth the cerdit they once were, christ they fire all the
honest reviewers.

while i dont like gamespot, i fucking hate it when people like you complain that they arent "honest" reviewers. let me get this straight then. If they give a really high score for a hyped game, then they are too pussy to give an honest opinion. If they give a shitty score and criticizes a game that is getting generally positive feedback, they are dishonest.....why? If anything, this is the complete opposite of a dishonest opinion, its just still a bad review. Im sure they would have never fired the Kane and Lynch reviewer had they known people would blindly cry about all their reviews being dishonest.

 

[TJ rock 101]

There wasn't a single scenario i couldn't win by spamming scorpion tanks...

 

[Doc Theta Sigma]

Not have the seventh mission. Seriously. That was damn near impossible for me.

 

[Tombaugh]

Not only should the Covenant of had their own campaign but the Flood should of had a side campaign as well, it would have been very interesting to see that made. Although it would make it closer to a Starcraft clone, it would definitely make the game longer and more varied with an additional playable race, especially one that has never been playable in a Halo game before.

 

[Vrex360]

I honestly reckon it was just missing some of the essence that had always made the Halo games endear themselves to me. Not just the fact that it wasn't and FPS. There was just something missing I felt. Maybe part of that came from the removal of the Covenant side of the story. You might think I'm a fanboy but I have to say I always liked the writing in those games where it took it self seriously in a very unserious way.
I think it comes from a Halo game not being made by Bungie.

 

[MercurySteam]

Also doing Co-op like it was done in RA3 would be better, cause when both of you have control of the same base/s, things can get a bit annoying. It would be great if you had your own bases to deal with.

So. What do you guys think?

No the base system in RA3 killed that game and the entire series.

Yes, I'm sure giving each player their own bases and units, plus no population cap, the ability to build near each other's bases, sharing funds and everything else evil would definately make a failure of a game........

I've heard alot of insults about RA3, but yours is by far the least valid.