Gaming Metroid Prime or Halo?

[James]

[color=#707875]But again, aren't we somewhat comparing apples and oranges?

I mean, I love both Wind Waker and MP. And it's true that both are adventure games.

But I think that the intent is a critical point here, especially if you go back and compare the Metroid series with the Zelda series. Apart from raw gameplay differences, Metroid has always been a dark game, with a sense of solitude and maybe loneliness.

I think it's true that Zelda is the more expressive game, but I'm wondering what opportunities Metroid has to be expressive in that same way.

I find Metroid Prime to be a highly expressive game, but in different ways to The Wind Waker. The environment in MP itself is highly expressive; just look at those little plants that shake when you get near them (I forget their names). And if you read log entries from both the Chozo and the Space Pirates, you come across noticeable differences in attitude and philosophy.

I know that lately I've been getting into this whole "you can't compare these two games" thing...but I feel that even with Zelda and Metroid Prime, you have two games that are aiming for noticeably different effects on the player (and perhaps different players altogether).

So while I can appreciate what MP does, based on its intention, I can also appreciate that Zelda is going for a certain style/feeling and that it does this very well. But because both games have somewhat different intentions, I find it hard to directly compare them.

But then again, there's always going to be a subjective element, in terms of saying that you like one game more than another, regardless of genre. I mean, I like Metroid Prime a hell of a lot more than Onimusha -- but it would be unfair to actually suggest that the two games are competitors, because they're completely different. People who are into what Onimusha is trying to do, will probably love it more than I do.

[/color]

[BlueYoshi]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']Well that only means the two games you mentioned did a poor job of integrating boss fights. Some games do it well, others don't. Just because R-Type and Lylat Wars did it improperly is no reason for something like Halo to not go for it.[/quote]

[color=teal]You can't guarantee that Halo will be able to execute a pristine boss battle sequence. The action genre is the most competitive when it comes down to things like this, so to speak, it's not the least bit odd that MP was better at incorporating its bosses than R-Type and Lylat Wars was.

Bosses at the end of the level or stage or what have you just won't cut it for Halo's style. If they were to the extent of the way Tony described them then I'd be all for it, however, realistically you won't feel that those sorts of enemies are 'bosses' unless they are big, fat, and hard to kill, which isn't really feasible of a decent analysis because those are merely mind tricks. I'd only truly see a 'boss' for its compatibility and difficulty level, nothing more and nothing less.[/color]

[Brasil]

Okay, I rented Halo again, just to see if I had the same opinion about it, and...it's still only average.

I made sure to try the co-op mode with a friend of mine, and am I the only one who felt like I was playing Duke Nukem 64? Now, granted, the game design is infinitely better, and the presentation is infinitely more polished, but why was Player 2 simply playing as a clone of Player 1? Maybe I'm just being far, far, far too cynical here, but...the co-op in Halo is about as simplistic as Duke Nukem 64's, lol.

Perhaps I'm spoiled by the co-op in Everything Or Nothing, which could have been its own game release entirely (it was [i]that[/i] good), or perhaps I'm spoiled by CounterAgent mode in Perfect Dark (PvP), but everytime I replay Halo, I keep thinking, "So?"

I've got a copy of Halo 2 reserved, simply because I've seen what features they're adding in and such, seen the game in motion, etc, and was very impressed, but Halo 1 continues to turn out to be just another run-of-the-mill combat FPS, lol.

Am I just being unfair? God knows, I [i]don't want to be unfair in my criticism of this game[/i]!!! Do the gamers make the game, not the game make the game?

[Guest Iamcrazyfangirl]

Granted I don't own either game but I've seen bits and peices of both. And by interest: Metroid Prime has interested me. As a matter of fact, I'm saving for a Gamecube and a copy of Metroid Prime right now. It will be my first Metroid experience. (And possibly I chose the best to start out on, no? ~_^ BTW, I'm usually one for a Fantasy setting in games, quite a change of pace, huh?) As for Halo, it just doesn't look like my type of game.

[Ryan]

Definetly Halo. I've played Metroid Prime before, and it interested me a bit, but wasn't something I would play everyday. Halo I guess can get repetitive after awhile, but it is still really fun to play and I still play it all the time. I can't wait until Halo2 comes out.

[Charles]

[QUOTE=Bean]Okay, I rented Halo again, just to see if I had the same opinion about it, and...it's still only average.

I made sure to try the co-op mode with a friend of mine, and am I the only one who felt like I was playing Duke Nukem 64? Now, granted, the game design is infinitely better, and the presentation is infinitely more polished, but why was Player 2 simply playing as a clone of Player 1? Maybe I'm just being far, far, far too cynical here, but...the co-op in Halo is about as simplistic as Duke Nukem 64's, lol.

Perhaps I'm spoiled by the co-op in Everything Or Nothing, which could have been its own game release entirely (it was [i]that[/i] good), or perhaps I'm spoiled by CounterAgent mode in Perfect Dark (PvP), but everytime I replay Halo, I keep thinking, "So?"

I've got a copy of Halo 2 reserved, simply because I've seen what features they're adding in and such, seen the game in motion, etc, and was very impressed, but Halo 1 continues to turn out to be just another run-of-the-mill combat FPS, lol.

Am I just being unfair? God knows, I [i]don't want to be unfair in my criticism of this game[/i]!!! Do the gamers make the game, not the game make the game?[/QUOTE]There's nothing wrong with these opinions, but even still I can't help but to feel slightly amused when reading them, considering how you heralded XIII as the next "Goldeneye." :laugh:

[Brasil]

[quote name='Charles']There's nothing wrong with these opinions, but even still I can't help but to feel slightly amused when reading them, considering how you heralded XIII as the next "Goldeneye." :laugh:[/quote]
I don't see how that fact would amuse you, considering that XIII's plot, singleplayer, and general overall design far outshined the majority of FPS released around that time. It's sad to see the game go virtually ignored when "big-name" titles like Halo dominate the market, because XIII is an infinitely better game, and is far more focused on providing a total package than Halo.

You're just being a :flaming: wiseass. lol

[natetron46]

even so, halo id damned fun man, you have to admit that, the multiplayer alone coul dbe its own game in my mind, i do think there is some clouded vision about fps's after that

and by the way, i did like xiii, i really did, better single player in my mind than halo actually.