Author Topic: CONFIRMED: Halo 3 to be Wii-killer... (Read 12022 times)

UERD · « **on:** July 19, 2007, 04:37:45 PM »

...says another idiot executive.

Dave Perry says gamers will drop Wiimotes for Halo 3

I think one of the commenters said it the best:

Quote
Well of course I'll drop my Wiimote when Halo 3 comes out. I can't play on my 360 with my Wiimote. I'll pick it right back up again when I'm through, though.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #1 on:** July 19, 2007, 05:29:54 PM »

Why does everyone say Halo is the greatest thing ever? I haven't played it so that's probably why I don't really get it, but aren't there other FPS games out there? What is so special about Halo?

And yeah, Halo might be great without wiimote control, but imagine how great Halo would be WITH wiimote control... the gaming world might be turned upside down if MP3 turns out well. Maybe then this Halo-hype will cool down.

Kairon · « **Reply #2 on:** July 19, 2007, 06:17:17 PM »

Why all the Halo hate? By all accounts, you'd think that Counter-Strike isn't a big deal either...sheesh...

mantidor · « **Reply #3 on:** July 19, 2007, 06:25:12 PM »

but... it isn't. I've played Counter Strike as opposed to Halo actually, and it bored me to tears.

I don't think is hate, is simply shock, the game has to be good or it wouldn't have such mainstream presence, bad games can sell, like that fifty cent game, but that game is considered a joke. Halo sells and is constantly mentioned, there has to be something about it.

But honestly with halo theres just isn't anything special about it, the more I read about it and the more I see gameplay footage the less I see anything original, fun or interesting, at this point I'm going to end up playing the game trying to find out what the hell is supposed to be so amazing.

that Baby guy · « **Reply #4 on:** July 19, 2007, 06:25:18 PM »

Who is Dave Perry again? I keep wanting to relate him to David Schwimmer for some reason.

Edit: I know why! David Schwimmer and Matthew Perry were costars of Friends. It's like this guy is their twisted love-child or something.

Kairon · « **Reply #5 on:** July 19, 2007, 06:35:07 PM »

*sigh* Halo is... it's like Mission Impossible 2. But with a little more artistic merit.

Chozo Ghost · « **Reply #6 on:** July 19, 2007, 07:55:08 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
but... it isn't. I've played Counter Strike as opposed to Halo actually, and it bored me to tears.

I don't think is hate, is simply shock, the game has to be good or it wouldn't have such mainstream presence, bad games can sell, like that fifty cent game, but that game is considered a joke. Halo sells and is constantly mentioned, there has to be something about it.

But honestly with halo theres just isn't anything special about it, the more I read about it and the more I see gameplay footage the less I see anything original, fun or interesting, at this point I'm going to end up playing the game trying to find out what the hell is supposed to be so amazing.

That's what I mean... I honestly don't doubt it is a great game, but what is there about it that makes it 100x better than other FPS games?

If there isn't anything then it must be doing so well because of hype and the bandwagon effect. I must confess that hearing everyone else raving about it makes me want to try it, but there are no doubt other FPS games that are just as good that don't get that hype and you just never hear about...

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #7 on:** July 19, 2007, 08:24:38 PM »

Halo is a poor man's FPS, but since console fans don't know any better they eat it up.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #8 on:** July 19, 2007, 10:23:19 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: thatguy
Who is Dave Perry again? I keep wanting to relate him to David Schwimmer for some reason.

Edit: I know why! David Schwimmer and Matthew Perry were costars of Friends. It's like this guy is their twisted love-child or something.

Dunno but I associate that name with Shiny Entertainment. You know, Earthworm Jim and MDK. And Messiah and Enter The Matrix... I think he really went off the far end when they were pushing Enter the Matrix like it would be held among the best games ever.

Nick DiMola · « **Reply #9 on:** July 20, 2007, 02:17:53 AM »

Halo is terrible. It's generic, bland and boring as hell. I'll take a PC shooter any day over Halo. I'd rather play Perfect Dark on the N64 with it's 10 FPS before terrible Halo.

Sir_Stabbalot · « **Reply #10 on:** July 20, 2007, 02:51:57 AM »

Halo's main pull is that it doesn't screw anything up and its simple to get online. Now, I agree there are better FPS games, but anyone who says that playing Halo with eight of your buddies isn't a blast is a dirty liar.

couchmonkey · « **Reply #11 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:40:44 AM »

Ha ha. I like Halo but I've always thought it was overrated. There are a couple of great ideas in the series, but there are also plenty of flaws.

Umm...but on Perry's comments about beautiful graphics enticing people away from Wii...DS and PSP have already proven this guy wrong. I don't doubt some core gamers will buy 360s and PS3s in a few years when they're a lot cheaper, but they're not necessarilly going to abandon Wii (how many times have people said they would not go back to golf games that use a regular controller?) and the new gamers simply aren't interested in what those other systems have to offer.

vudu · « **Reply #12 on:** July 20, 2007, 07:14:49 AM »

The single greatest contribution of Halo was mapping the ability to throw grenades to a unique button. Grenades are completely useless in any game where you have to put down your regular weapon in order to select them.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #13 on:** July 20, 2007, 07:54:06 AM »

Team Fortress says hello!

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #14 on:** July 20, 2007, 08:04:44 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu
The single greatest contribution of Halo was mapping the ability to throw grenades to a unique button. Grenades are completely useless in any game where you have to put down your regular weapon in order to select them.

The 2nd greatest contribution was to lazy game design by using rechargeable health.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #15 on:** July 20, 2007, 09:34:36 AM »

I love rechargable health. I think that game element is brilliant. It allows for players to have intense fire fights, and not have to worry as much about being taken out by an interpoler later. Oh big fire fight, I can quickly get a kill on the survivor.

It also means you can have alittle more strategy in your fight. If you are out gunned you have a good chance of fleeing and setting up an ambush or find support in your allies. Or if you have the big guns, you can push your luck and storm into battle...knowing you can find cover and regenerate your shield.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #16 on:** July 20, 2007, 09:39:30 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
I love rechargable health. I think that game element is brilliant. It allows for players to have intense fire fights, and not have to worry as much about being taken out by an interpoler later. Oh big fire fight, I can quickly get a kill on the survivor.

It also means you can have alittle more strategy in your fight. If you are out gunned you have a good chance of fleeing and setting up an ambush or find support in your allies. Or if you have the big guns, you can push your luck and storm into battle...knowing you can find cover and regenerate your shield.

Not to mention making the game infinitely easier and dumbing down the gameplay!

denjet78 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 20, 2007, 09:56:22 AM »

When I first heard that in Halo your life automatically regenerated I thought it was a joke... But it's serious? It really does that? What in the hell kind of game does that??? Might as well just give you infinite health and amunition!

And everyone says Nintendo's the only one making non-games.

SHEISH!

SixthAngel · « **Reply #18 on:** July 20, 2007, 10:09:34 AM »

Rechargeable health was a great idea. It is copied by so many games now as well, call of duty, gears of war and redsteel coming to mind immediately. While it shouldn't be the only way for health it has plenty of great options. It certainly doesn't make the game easier but allows for new options with strategies, enemies and weapons since they are now able to hit you far more in the long run but not the short run without you being killed. It also avoids the need for a medpack every ten feet.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #19 on:** July 20, 2007, 10:16:19 AM »

Denjet: Your health regenerates if you don't take any hits for a while. That won't happen in mid-battle unless you find some cover to stay behind so it's only infinite health over the long term.

vudu · « **Reply #20 on:** July 20, 2007, 10:31:28 AM »

You health doesn't regenerate, you shield does. Since your shield is basically half of your life bar it means that as long as you can find a spot to rest for a few seconds between fights you'll never be with less than half a life bar. While it does make the game pretty easy, it lets you enjoy the game more because you're not so worried about constantly saving and there will never be a point where you're screwed because you saved with an almost empty life bar and no health packs around.

The ability to only carry two guns had a similar effect--since you're constantly switching weapons and leaving others behind you're not so worried about wasting ammo.

However, none of this excuses the fact that the game is overly generic and that the level design is absolutely horrid (in the first game, at any rate).

Kairon · « **Reply #21 on:** July 20, 2007, 10:38:24 AM »

In Halo your HEALTH does NOT regenrate. Your shield does. There are still health packs in Halo games... but that doesn't really matter, because the game gives you free ammo when you die and respawn and a plethora of checkpoints EVERYWHERE in the levels, meaning it's basically the most forgiving FPS single player game out there. Oftentimes in co-op, you and your partner kill each other because you want to stock up on more free ammo, and because death is so inconsequential.

Also, Halo has a BEAUTIFUL loading screen. Just gorgeous.

UltimatePartyBear · « **Reply #22 on:** July 20, 2007, 12:14:42 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Also, Halo has a BEAUTIFUL loading screen. Just gorgeous.

Wow. That's quite the backhanded compliment.

Kairon · « **Reply #23 on:** July 20, 2007, 12:21:36 PM »

No! Hey! I mean it!

That loading screen was... it was sublime. And Cliffy B. agrees with me on this! I mean, we're Nintendo fans, right? We appreciate the little things, the little touches, the way that we can play around with Mario's face in Mario 64, the way we can fly around cursor on the Star Fox title screen! The Halo 3 loading screen is a little like that: a nice touch, a little thing that adds to the game more than you think it would! It's the sort of thing that get's overlooked 99% of the time, but when it's there, it's contribution is inestimable!

UltimatePartyBear · « **Reply #24 on:** July 20, 2007, 12:44:23 PM »

I'm sure you meant it nicely, but that sounds just like something someone would say about a really bad game when stretching for something positive to say.

Kairon · « **Reply #25 on:** July 20, 2007, 12:49:04 PM »

LOL, I know... oh geez.

bustin98 · « **Reply #26 on:** July 20, 2007, 04:10:48 PM »

I have such found memories playing CounterStrike on LAN.
I also just got done playing a round of Halo2 Team Slayer. Its a great feeling when a team sticks together and pulls out from behind after getting whooped on. I haven't finished the single player game, online is where its at.

People can attack those games all they want and while I won't defend the shortcomings, there's still reasons for their popularity.

That said, I don't understand why these games executives say these dumb comments. Ok, so I might put down my Wii controller for some Halo3, but its not like the Wii is going in the trash. But this isn't the first idiotic comment from Dave so I find it hard to be convinced he knows what he's talking about. Maybe his studio put up the money to invest in computers that can handle the HD games and is trying to justify the purchase.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #27 on:** July 20, 2007, 04:16:14 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu
You health doesn't regenerate, you shield does. Since your shield is basically half of your life bar it means that as long as you can find a spot to rest for a few seconds between fights you'll never be with less than half a life bar. While it does make the game pretty easy, it lets you enjoy the game more because you're not so worried about constantly saving and there will never be a point where you're screwed because you saved with an almost empty life bar and no health packs around.

The ability to only carry two guns had a similar effect--since you're constantly switching weapons and leaving others behind you're not so worried about wasting ammo.

However, none of this excuses the fact that the game is overly generic and that the level design is absolutely horrid (in the first game, at any rate).

You can lower the difficulty of a game with skilled game design without taking the cheap way out, which is what health regeneration is.

bustin98 · « **Reply #28 on:** July 20, 2007, 04:24:33 PM »

I would say the health regeneration puts a different focus on the game. When I play a Resident Evil game, there are points that I am panicing looking for that one green herb. And I'm sure its intentional. So when playing Gears or Halo, the focus isn't on health so much and the strategy of gameplay takes that into account. And when it comes down to it, whats the difference between having improbable health packs (or herbs) laying around the area or taking cover until you can pop out to do some more damage?

I disagree with the assesment of returning health as a cheap game element.

Kairon · « **Reply #29 on:** July 20, 2007, 05:03:41 PM »

Regenerating health isn't cheap. I think it's a very good addition to games...

I mean, it lets players take calculated risks. It allows them to be hit and feel like they're in actual danger, while not penalizing them long-term for that. It invites players to be closer to the action. It really brings that feeling of "I'm under fire!" closer. Especially in war FPS games, you want to feel like you're getting pummeled and dirtied up. Regenerating health let's that happen a lot, but without the nasty consequences of you're alays being dependent on "health pack" drops. That's another thing that regenerating help fixes: no longer are levels strewn around with health packs that seem strangely out of place... and no longer do you need a health-bar HUD, as seen in Call of Duty 3!

The point of regenerating health is to tell the player "you're in trouble." It goes You'reInTrouble You'reInTrouble You'reInTrouble and then the player has to get away. If they stay in trouble too long, THEN it kills them. If they get away, then they need to stay out of trouble awhile, and then they catch their breath, they're no longer in trouble, and they keep on playing.

oohhboy · « **Reply #30 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:33:56 PM »

The problem with that is it reduces the game to a series of short sprints. It makes it that every time you stop and recharge a save point. It didn't remove the problem of save scumming, only hides it. The simple presence of bullet flying through the air should be enough to convey danger. Not a .45 slug deposited in your chest.

The funny thing is that at the end of the day, Halo still used health packs. If the game was as well designed as a lot of people believed, it wouldn't have needed health packs. Unfortunately, health packs will be here to stay as lot as we make levels as long and as connected as they are now. Black, had a far better use of the recharging health mechanic (On a side note, a far more fun game). It only kicked in at the last couple of points of health. It made long term progression on so little health unpleasant, but it made come backs far more possible than otherwise.

that Baby guy · « **Reply #31 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:48:08 PM »

Heh, Mario 64 had regenerating health. That whole water/lifebar thing was just idiotic, though. They messed up on that part, IMO.

Kairon · « **Reply #32 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:52:52 PM »

OMG... HALO COPIED MARIO 64!!!

Mashiro · « **Reply #33 on:** July 20, 2007, 07:20:51 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
OMG... HALO COPIED MARIO 64!!!

Mario FPS CONFIRMED!?

Stogi · « **Reply #34 on:** July 20, 2007, 07:28:22 PM »

There's a lot of animosity in this thread. Who would have that people hated Halo on a Nintendo forum. (It's like fanboys are just pussy gangsters!

)

I won't lie, I loved Halo. I use to play it online with GameSpy (worse network ever) all the time. I can see where all the complaints are valid, but that game was a lot of fun multiplayer. Let's see, the grenades were awesome; maybe not original, but well done. The vehicles had solid physics. And finally the co-op was dope on legendary, though I only ever played a few certain level.

To be fair, I only played it while intoxicated. So.......yeah........

I don't like Halo 2 though. It's way to easy and not much was different than Halo.

denjet78 · « **Reply #35 on:** July 20, 2007, 08:01:20 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KashogiStogi
There's a lot of animosity in this thread. Who would have that people hated Halo on a Nintendo forum. (It's like fanboys are just pussy gangsters! )

I suppose I should be honest and come clean then.

Hello. My username is denjet78 and I'm a Nintendo fanboy. I also hate FPS. I hate Hate HATE THEM with a passion. When they first announced that Metroid was going first person I was ready to walk my ass to Retro and firebomb the hell out of the studio myself. None of this wimpy pay someone else to do the deed for me. To me FPS = HATE!!!!! Oh look! An alien! Shoot it! Oh look! Another alien! Shoot it too! ad nauseam. And as for online play? Don't EVEN get me started! I think the only thing that I hate more than FPS is online. It's such a looser addition to games. It's as if all the gamer nerds were tired of getting picked on and so decided to figure out a way that they could coalesce into one gigantic super nerd.

*URK!*

Don't throw up!
Don't throw up!
Don't throw up!

It just makes me sick how everyone seems to think that throwing an online feature into a game will make it infinitely better. Or even better at all. Lies... ALL LIES!!!

And games trying to cash in on current cultural trends. Just shoot me now. Actually, can any Halo players do it please? Yeah, I'd like to see you try. You'd probably get bored and wander off in search of something shiny after my SHIELD (it's still health you nimrods) regenerates itself for the 50 millionth time.

...

Was that sufficiently insulting for everyone? Oh... um... Sega sucks? I know, I know. that's an easy one but there are still Sega fans, all two of them, and I'd feel bad if I left them out.

Mashiro · « **Reply #36 on:** July 20, 2007, 08:20:12 PM »

I liked Goldeneye 007 on N64 and Timesplitters Future Perfect but I couldn't get into Halo =/

Kairon · « **Reply #37 on:** July 20, 2007, 10:51:41 PM »

Halo has co-op story mode. Therefore, I'm contractually obligated to love it. Otherwise Denis Dyack would sue me.

Gamebasher · « **Reply #38 on:** July 23, 2007, 11:07:55 PM »

While I seriously doubt that Halo 3 will become a Wii-killer, I like Halo for it´s awesome story, the feeling of being part of something really big, the huge environments to explore and fight in, and the cool audible radio communication to and from Master Chief. If it wasn´t first-person, I would have never played it. Once I would have disliked FPS games, but now I only want to play like that when I engage in virtual warfare. Halo 3 is probably going to be the greatest FPS to ever come out on any console, for sheer scale alone, but also for it´s touching story about humankind going up against alien agressors in one huge final fight.

Shift Key · « **Reply #39 on:** July 24, 2007, 02:35:29 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Halo 3 is probably going to be the greatest FPS to ever come out on any console, for sheer scale alone, but also for it´s touching story about humankind going up against alien agressors in one huge final fight.

Best part of the story is how everyone jumps into the multiplayer at launch and starts complaining about balance. EPIC!

Mashiro · « **Reply #40 on:** July 24, 2007, 02:51:52 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Shift Key
Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Halo 3 is probably going to be the greatest FPS to ever come out on any console, for sheer scale alone, but also for it´s touching story about humankind going up against alien agressors in one huge final fight.

Best part of the story is how everyone jumps into the multiplayer at launch and starts complaining about balance. EPIC!

Wait . . .

Halo has a story?

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #41 on:** July 24, 2007, 03:32:28 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
Quote
Originally posted by: Shift Key
Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Halo 3 is probably going to be the greatest FPS to ever come out on any console, for sheer scale alone, but also for it´s touching story about humankind going up against alien agressors in one huge final fight.

Best part of the story is how everyone jumps into the multiplayer at launch and starts complaining about balance. EPIC!

Wait . . .

Halo has a story?

Yep it also has some great repetitive, shoot aliens all day gameplay!

Mashiro · « **Reply #42 on:** July 24, 2007, 03:36:02 AM »

Craziness!

nitsu niflheim · « **Reply #43 on:** July 24, 2007, 04:58:32 AM »

Halo was there for the XBox when the system had nothing of any value, it doesn't mean the game is any good.

UERD · « **Reply #44 on:** July 24, 2007, 11:07:42 AM »

You have to wonder...would the XBox have died if Halo had come out as an RTS for the Mac as originally planned?

Mashiro · « **Reply #45 on:** July 24, 2007, 11:08:53 AM »

Probably.

Kairon · « **Reply #46 on:** July 24, 2007, 12:59:40 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
Quote
Originally posted by: Shift Key
Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Halo 3 is probably going to be the greatest FPS to ever come out on any console, for sheer scale alone, but also for it´s touching story about humankind going up against alien agressors in one huge final fight.

Best part of the story is how everyone jumps into the multiplayer at launch and starts complaining about balance. EPIC!

Wait . . .

Halo has a story?

*sigh* Yes, I agree that Halo has very little in way of story. However, it DOES have LORE.

Mashiro · « **Reply #47 on:** July 24, 2007, 01:04:26 PM »

Is it world of warcraft style lore? Cause we all know what happens with that kind of lore . . .

I wanted an excuse to link that . . . =}

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #48 on:** July 24, 2007, 08:50:00 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Quote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
Quote
Originally posted by: Shift Key
Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Halo 3 is probably going to be the greatest FPS to ever come out on any console, for sheer scale alone, but also for it´s touching story about humankind going up against alien agressors in one huge final fight.

Best part of the story is how everyone jumps into the multiplayer at launch and starts complaining about balance. EPIC!

Wait . . .

Halo has a story?

*sigh* Yes, I agree that Halo has very little in way of story. However, it DOES have LORE.

Generic, take over the galaxy lore.

cubist · « **Reply #49 on:** July 25, 2007, 06:59:30 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: UERD
...says another idiot executive.

Dave Perry says gamers will drop Wiimotes for Halo 3

I think one of the commenters said it the best:

Quote
Well of course I'll drop my Wiimote when Halo 3 comes out. I can't play on my 360 with my Wiimote. I'll pick it right back up again when I'm through, though.

David Perry is a HAS-BEEN game maker. He had some success with Cool Spot (7up Mascot Game) and really good exclusive version of Disney's Aladdin for the Sega Genesis (the SNES had Capcom's version). He took that success and created Earthworm Jim with the same engine. Ever since the jump to 3D, he's had little success. He had some hype surrounding some of his projects (like Messiah); however, those never panned out. His last attempt at greatness was when the Wachowski Bros. handed him the Matrix...and he bricked with that game. There were some moments, but its gameplay was outshined by Ubisoft's Prince of Persia at that E3...and had his ass handed to him in my opinions. Hell...the ATARI booth and the Ubisoft booth neighbored each other that year.

David Perry can talk when he's making great games throughout his career...like Miyamoto...2D...3D...creating games while gardening and hanging out with his family...

David Perry...no credibility.

David Perry shouldn't talk when his success was

Kairon · « **Reply #50 on:** July 31, 2007, 10:08:00 AM »

Woah awesome-tons MS and Bungie ::thumbs-up::.

4-player co-op ONLINE Halo 3 confirmed.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #51 on:** July 31, 2007, 10:59:17 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Woah awesome-tons MS and Bungie ::thumbs-up::.

4-player co-op ONLINE Halo 3 confirmed.

The single player mode but really be dumbed down to handle 4 people now.

SixthAngel · « **Reply #52 on:** July 31, 2007, 11:12:34 AM »

While I loved the co-op play in the other Halo's, 4 players is pushing it. It is going to be insanely easy with so many people unless they have the horrible idea they did with legendary on Halo 2 and have all players respawn when one dies. I never played co-op legendary in Halo 2 because of that horrible new feature. You can be doing great and your friend takes a bullet since he isn't quite as good and you have to start all over. I can't really picture anything difficult enough that could actually kill all 4 players.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #53 on:** July 31, 2007, 06:56:03 PM »

Perhaps they'll do it like Serious Sam and add "more enemies" and "enemy HP boost" options to the game setup?

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #54 on:** July 31, 2007, 07:09:23 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Perhaps they'll do it like Serious Sam and add "more enemies" and "enemy HP boost" options to the game setup?

That is a good design choice, Serious Sam, that will help Halo become the epic they exclaim it to be!

Urkel · « **Reply #55 on:** September 27, 2007, 07:32:15 PM »

Dave Perry is batsh*t crazy.

Quote
GI: What do you think about the development situation on the Wii, in that a lot of publishers are jumping in late to the party and they’ve also got to compete with Nintendo’s first-party titles?

DP: That’s the bottom line. Do your homework. You have to allow for that. You can’t assume it is going to be like the other platforms, because you are going to have Nintendo taking most of the sales. And if Nintendo really sees you as a threat, they will take the moves to wipe you out. They are not going to let you win.

Meaning, if you sell your game and you are charging USD 60 or 50, or whatever price you choose, they will sell their games at USD 39.99 and they will kick your ass. So, the bottom line is, whatever you thought your business plan was, they can shake your world at a moment’s notice and they have a track record of doing that. So I would be very concerned with wanting to bet the farm on a Nintendo platform.

While it's certainly a legitimate concern that 3rd parties have to compete against Nintendo games, Perry is convinced Nintendo is deliberately trying to screw them over.

Where in the holy hell is he getting this nonsense about Nintendo selling their games for less? When did this ever happen?

Mashiro · « **Reply #56 on:** September 27, 2007, 08:04:54 PM »

Quote
Dave Perry was the founder of Shiny Entertainment and now operates GameConsultants.com. He is working with Acclaim on MMOs and is also on the GDC advisory board.

Wait. . . why should we care what this guy says?

Oh and yes, agreed that he has no clue what he is talking about.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #57 on:** September 27, 2007, 11:53:39 PM »

What's that idiot doing asking for 50-60$ for a Wii game? Of course Nintendo is going to undercut him if he's going for a price above the average. 50-60 may be a good idea on the 360 or PS3 but on the Wii the prices are going down, not up!

Also I don't think he had any real business with Nintendo since the SNES days so I expect his knowledge is from back then, too.

vudu · « **Reply #58 on:** September 28, 2007, 07:12:29 AM »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most third party games on 360 sell for $60, while most first party games sell for $50?

Arbok · « **Reply #59 on:** September 28, 2007, 07:23:14 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most third party games on 360 sell for $60, while most first party games sell for $50?

Shhhhh!!!

Stogi · « **Reply #60 on:** September 28, 2007, 06:26:42 PM »

Actually no that's not true. They all sell for 60 bones.

I know, because I recently bought a 360. *crowd gasps*

It was a halo edition. *crowd gasps again*

I'm a shady person when it comes to businesses. I bought it with the sole intention of returning. Why did I buy it you ask? Well to play Winning Eleven for 7 days of course. *crowd sighs with relief*

Yes I know I'm shady. Winning Eleven is the best sports game I've ever played though, so it's worth the trouble.

EDIT: I should probably add a disclaimer. I only done this (this is my third time) to companies I hate (i.e. Wal-mart; Microsoft).

that Baby guy · « **Reply #61 on:** September 28, 2007, 06:32:31 PM »

Gasp!

ReverendNoahWhateley · « **Reply #62 on:** October 10, 2007, 10:33:45 PM »

I actually prefer Doom 3 to any of the Halo series. Seriously!

ShyGuy · « **Reply #63 on:** October 10, 2007, 11:47:58 PM »

Note to self: Never do business with Kashogi

News:

Author Topic: CONFIRMED: Halo 3 to be Wii-killer... (Read 12022 times)