Question of the Day, September 4, 2010

[ArmorArmadillo]

It wasn't Half-Life. I really really really WISH it was Half-Life, but unfortunately it's Halo.

 

[zombie711]

Halo made regenerative health
golden eye made multiplayer
half life did well nothing.

Wrong
Wrong
Wrong again
=3

Halo did not make regening health, it was beaten long ago.
Goldeneye did not make multi, it made CONSOLE multi =3
Halflife was the first FPS to show that you could have a brilliant story with your pwnage FPS

^^

[Edit] You best be trollin!

when does a person need a story to shoot something. I dont even know whats going on in call of duty besides there some people who are about to get a more than unhealthy amount of lead in their diet, complements of yours truely.

 

[deth2munkies]

Doom made FPSs what they are. It was the first big name FPS and kick started the genre. Along with Wolfenstein 3D and Quake (other iD titles) they established the core of all FPSs, and Quake also set up how multiplayer was supposed to work.

The other notable is Goldeneye, which popularized the console shooter.

 

[Danpascooch]

It was probably Doom, that's so obvious it shouldn't even really be a poll option, but second to that I'd say Goldeneye 007, sure Halo perfected the template, but Goldeneye first invented it (maybe not invented, maybe popularized, but that's just as important)

 

[Azure Sky]

Moved because I'm lazy.

Nice Crusade, bravo, really.

Seeing as I am lazy, I shall do this my way.

What a cop-out. [I'm copping out? news to me.] Normally, I'd have stopped at the first sentence fragment, but since you decided to contradict me with absolutely nothing to back up what you're saying, [That really is a whole lot of huff and puff in an effort to try and justify your existence in response to me pointing out you were being a jackass.] I'm going to thoroughly explain why you're wrong. [This shall be quite amusing.]

I see your sense of irony is about as strong as a snake's ability to applaud. [Do you always act like a high and mighty elitist with his nose in the air?] If you need me to elaborate, here's an explanation: you come to the defense of another user [You noticed? Have a cookie.] with nothing more to offer than "you're making assumptions" [Which, lets face it, only a moron wouldn't see that you were.], with absolutely nothing substantial to explain why it would be reasonable to say that I was doing so in the first place. [Welcome to life, not everything happens the way you want, you did something and got called out on it, man up.] A deliberate misinterpretation [Accurate reading.] of my post would, indeed, allow [Most people.] one to accuse me of making the assumption of "HURR DURR, YOU HATE HALO, THEREFORE YOU HATE COD TOO, LOL I FIGGERD U OUT" [Which you were], but anyone with the ability to number all their fingers and toes would be able to understand that it was a denouncement of the smug, hipster mentality of "if I publicly say I hate popular things without any solicitation whatsoever, people will see how cool I am," [Which turned out to be not the case. it's a real ***** when a baseless assumption comes back to bite you in the ass, ain't it?] which was so blatantly being displayed in a setting that is notorious for it. [And you felt compelled to play the part of "If I ridicule this person for hating popular things, people will see how big I am." That sound right to you?]

You then assert that I'm making an ass out of myself while in denial [Want another cookie?], but leave the reasons for such declarations conspicuously absent [See: "Normally, I'd say "I'm not following you, here", but I know exactly where you're coming from: you're just using this as an excuse to take a shit on a franchise you don't like, instead of actually considering the question." So, this kind of arrogant assumption requires explaining to you?](again; y'know, I think I'm beginning see a pattern, here) [As am I.], which makes it clear that you're setting yourself up to argue with an absolute gem of circular reasoning that is as follows:
10. My statement is more correct than yours because you're an idiot.
20. You're an idiot because nothing you can say will have any credence, because you're in denial.
30. You're in denial, because you're trying to argue with me when (go to 10).
[Welp, I must give you credit for one thing, you described my opinion of you better then I ever could, cheers, you saved me effort. <3]

Resorting to such childish tactics is a clear demonstration of a lack of substance [So, I saw it and called it doesn't happen in your little fantasy world then? Bugger.], because you don't throw wiffle balls when you have grenades. And for the record, no, that last part doesn't count as an assumption, it counts as calling you on it before you run with it. [See previous.]

In short: you're accusing me of making baseless assumptions [Why yes, yes I am. Oh so glad you noticed.], completely oblivious to the fact that your accusations are infinitely more baseless and arbitrary than my own. [Oh, so you finally admit it? Well that makes my job easier. If you are actually wondering, the difference between our comments is your baseless assumption fell through and was proven wrong where as mine stands as correct. Yes, you indeed made an ass of yourself with a baseless assumption.] The dictionary assures me that this can be described as "irony" [And it is sometimes oh so sweet.]. Despite the fact that I have completely explained not only that which you call "assumptions", but also the reasons why your accusations are preposterous to begin with [Um.. Right back at ya?], I'm sure I can look forward to another "you're wrong because I say so" reply. [This is seriously sounding like some sort of complex...] Don't worry, I'll make time to tear that one apart, too. [Take all the time you want, I intend to sleep, I assume you can wait till morning for me to bother reading your so called 'tear apart'?]

Have a nice day.
[If by day you mean sleep? Then sure. Arguments at 4:30 in the morning arn't exactly my forte. =3]

Enjoy.

-Balmung

 

[superbatranger]

If anything, we should look to the forefathers of the FPS. Games such as Doom and Wolfenstein.

 

[Azure Sky]

Halo made regenerative health
golden eye made multiplayer
half life did well nothing.

Wrong
Wrong
Wrong again
=3

Halo did not make regening health, it was beaten long ago.
Goldeneye did not make multi, it made CONSOLE multi =3
Halflife was the first FPS to show that you could have a brilliant story with your pwnage FPS

^^

[Edit] You best be trollin!

when does a person need a story to shoot something. I dont even know whats going on in call of duty besides there some people who are about to get a more than unhealthy amount of lead in their diet, complements of yours truely.

May I suggest that story driven FPS are not for you? There are plenty that do not have or even require one. Painkiller is a prime example, I would suggest more, but I am too tired to concentrate.

I take back the trolling comment though. But might I ask that it is a better idea to not drop such definite answers on something that may not fully grasp you interests?

Saying you don't like them is all well and good, but it would be nice if statements such as the above had reasons behind them, at the very least they will be received in a less offensive manner.

[Hmm, it seems my wording turned out quite elitist, probably residue from my previous argument, no offense meant.]

 

[OneOfTheMichael's]

Most say that halo is and i have to agree since it was one of the most famous shooters of its time.

 

[Trogdor1138]

No Wolfenstein 3d? I am disappointed, my vote was for that.

I'd have to say a tie between Doom/Quake/Goldeneye then, with the runner up being Half Life... And Halo (for better or worse).

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

A wonderful demonstration of ad hominem fallacies [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem].

I think my point of you being a hypocrite truly came to fruition when you said "that sure is a lot of huff and puff to justify your existence", and then replied to every other line of my post. You're being deliberately inconsistent in a very shoddy attempt to evade everything that you can't refute. While I'm plainly stating my case in no uncertain terms, you're trying to dance around everything I say by replying with "I know you are, but what am I?"

It brings to mind the saying "never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"; I'm going to heed the wisdom in that phrase, and stop replying, because you've shown that your idea of legitimate debate is to perpetually respond with a shallow "NO U", even when it's obvious that you're brazenly contradicting yourself.

 

[Trogdor1138]

Halo made regenerative health
golden eye made multiplayer
half life did well nothing.

Wrong
Wrong
Wrong again
=3

Halo did not make regening health, it was beaten long ago.
Goldeneye did not make multi, it made CONSOLE multi =3
Halflife was the first FPS to show that you could have a brilliant story with your pwnage FPS

^^

[Edit] You best be trollin!

when does a person need a story to shoot something. I dont even know whats going on in call of duty besides there some people who are about to get a more than unhealthy amount of lead in their diet, complements of yours truely.

May I suggest that story driven FPS are not for you? There are plenty that do not have or even require one. Painkiller is a prime example, I would suggest more, but I am too tired to concentrate.

I take back the trolling comment though. But might I ask that it is a better idea to not drop such definite answers on something that may not fully grasp you interests?

Saying you don't like them is all well and good, but it would be nice if statements such as the above had reasons behind them, at the very least they will be received in a less offensive manner.

[Hmm, it seems my wording turned out quite elitist, probably residue from my previous argument, no offense meant.]

Might I say I'm quite impressed with the way you present yourself on gaming forums, I don't often see this. Clearly a person looking at it from both sides.

 

[zombie711]

Halo made regenerative health
golden eye made multiplayer
half life did well nothing.

Wrong
Wrong
Wrong again
=3

Halo did not make regening health, it was beaten long ago.
Goldeneye did not make multi, it made CONSOLE multi =3
Halflife was the first FPS to show that you could have a brilliant story with your pwnage FPS

^^

[Edit] You best be trollin!

when does a person need a story to shoot something. I dont even know whats going on in call of duty besides there some people who are about to get a more than unhealthy amount of lead in their diet, complements of yours truely.

May I suggest that story driven FPS are not for you? There are plenty that do not have or even require one. Painkiller is a prime example, I would suggest more, but I am too tired to concentrate.

I take back the trolling comment though. But might I ask that it is a better idea to not drop such definite answers on something that may not fully grasp you interests?

Saying you don't like them is all well and good, but it would be nice if statements such as the above had reasons behind them, at the very least they will be received in a less offensive manner.

[Hmm, it seems my wording turned out quite elitist, probably residue from my previous argument, no offense meant.]

I was afraid that someone may take offense to me saying half life did nothing but what I should have said it that it didnt do anything that remained a constant in fps games. stories can be in a fps or they can be nonexistent. The fps genre doesnt need story to survive. regenerative health and multiplayer and staples in the genre. But the most important fact is that story should not be compared to gameplay. Thats like comparing a driver to the race course. To get a winner, they have to mash, but you cant compare them because their not the same thing.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

I voted for Halo. And no, I'm not ignorant, an idiot, a child, a moron, a stupid 12 year old, or someone who just doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[Lazarus Long]

As a fan of technicalities, My "Other" vote goes to Catacomb Abyss. First person shooting (or fireballing, whatever), colour coded keys, secret areas, all the foundations of the genre.

I don't understand the whole Halo kerfluffle. Granted, I only played the first one, but I utterly fail to see how it revolutionized the genre, or cheapened it, or whatever the counter-argument is. It's like saying Armageddon revolutionized or destroyed the film industry.
Either you had fun with it, or you didn't.

I mean, really. Is regenerating health any better or worse than medpacks? That is what the cool kids hate, right?

 

[Sexbad]

Half-Life. Doom made shooters popular, but it only influenced the horde shooter genre. There are a lot more polished shooters today influenced by the scripted design of Half-Life than there are games like Vivisector or Left 4 Dead.

 

[new_age_reject]

I've never seen so many ignorant people poo poo halo in my whole life.
You guys do realise that if it wasn't for that series, console based shooters with an emphasis on multiplayer wouldn't exist as they do now right?
Regenerating health, only being able to hold two guns/4(ish) grenades, proper use of vehicles, condensed game pad controls, balanced online multiplayer.
Halo brought these things to the console properly first. This series gets too much needless hate.

 

[tehroc]

I'm one of the few who votes for UT. Assault modes rocked my socks off, UT was the earliest game I can remember that had this game mode.