Hands On: Unreal Championship
 

http://xbox.ign.com/articles/360/360704p1.html

This will be the Xbox Live game to own. :cool:

Sounds like a cheap-ass console version of UT 2003. Basically, you got UT 2003 with less features, far less online ability, a controller setup, and runs much slower.

Xbox Live game to own? Hardly. You'd be much better off getting UT 2003 for the PC. More people will be playing online (a lot more), it will run faster (much much faster), have better graphics (PC video cards this fall will be about 2x as powerful as GF4 Ti 4600, not imagine that wussy little GeForce 3), allow for a lot more customizing (control setup, audio sounds, skins, etc.), you can use a keyboard and mouse (biggest factor. Experience Unreal as it was meant to be played), and it will have expansions (can't get that on Xbox), and the user-created levels (this either).

I'll pass on Unreal Championship.

I knew this was coming...

Gekko, could you please at least wait until the game comes out, and make a fair comparison between it and UT 2003?

I could, but it's easy to compare now. PC hardware is better. FPS on Xbox do, and will continue to suck until someone gives me a keyboard and mouse. Not to mention online play is free.

Unreal is a PC FPS. They are designed to be played with a keyboard and mouse, period. By playing it on Xbox, the game loses what makes it popular in the first place. The fast-action multiplayer game that you get when you have the control of a keyboard and mouse. Halo is a prime example of how things slow down when using a controller. You can't look as fast, and can't aim as precisely.

I'm sorry, but Microsoft needs to release a keyboard and mouse if they expect me to get excited about their FPS-loaded Xbox Live lineup. Does Xbox have any online FPS that aren't on PC, or coming (Halo)? Halo is coming, Ghost Recon is out, Raven Shield, Splinter Cell (online?) are being released later, Counter Strike is out, etc.

And if you look into UT 2003, you'll notice the game is very similar. Look at the modes, and guns and everything. So I can easily say it's UT 2003 with less features.

Yes, but Unreal Championship is designed for use with the Xbox controller. So if you don't even try it, which I know you haven't, then that is not a fair comparison.

Now, Halo has been announced for both the Mac and PC, but online play has not be announced nor confirmed. So that is at this point an exclusive FPS for Xbox Live. Also, during E3 Splinter Cell was announced to be Xbox eclusive, and yes, it will be online.

Just out of curiosity, where are you going to place the keyboard/mouse if/when they release it? :unsure:

That's my problem with the release of a keyboard and mouse. You need a desk. My TV is situated in my computer room near a comfortable lounge. There's no desk except for my PC and Monitor (what I'm using now).

So for me personally, the keyboard and mouse won't be used on a console, unless there's a desk I was gonna buy. Even then, it would be weird.

:banana:

:unsure:

I agree with what Gekko is saying, games like Quake and Unreal are meant for PC. If they port it to console it would be weird. Even if they made it specifically for console.

Like if CS was to come to Xbox, I think it wouldn't be nearly as much fun or satisfying as PC (assuming the person has played the PC version).

I don't have a problem with FPS that are exclusive to consoles and not Pc's such as Perfect Dark, and Halo.

But when games like Half Life, Max Payne and Unreal come to console, to me it's just a waste.

I played outtrigger using one. Just used a TV table.

Also, for PSO I used my computer desk. Most people will need to move their Xbox in order to connect via broadband anyway, so they could use their computer desk. But otherwise, TV tables do just fine.

I guess it would take some people effort to find a place for their new keyboard and mouse, but I really doubt that it would be a deciding factor on whether or not someone buys a keyboard and mouse for their console. Or if Microsoft would release one, for that matter. Personally if I wanted to play a videogame with a keyboard and mouse I would go over to my computer. I play console videogames because they aren't computer videogames.

I don't understand how it is weird... I mean if someone played a FPS first on Xbox and then played it on the PC with a keyboard and mouse then it would be weird to them, or vias versa. If the game was ment to be played on the computer then it should be played on the computer. But if the developers can re-tool some parts of the game to take advantage of a console controller or make it exclusive for a console then I see no problem in it.

Exactly, exlcusive console FPS I like. I can play them and be satisfied with them (depending on the game of course).

Well let's put it this way, first time someone tries the keyboard/mouse setup, they suck major ass at it. But the more you play, the faster you master it.

FPS, or rather, PC FPS are meant for a keyboard and mouse. The mouse allows you to look, but more importantly, you can look quickly, so that you actually turn around. You can also move your crosshair to a presice location quickly, and easily. The keyboard allows you to easily move forward and backward, and strafe. You can also jump with ease, toggle commands (sprint for example), easily hit another key to croutch, tilt to the side, lay down, etc. It also allows you to assign keys to quickly switch to your best weapon, and commonly used items like the translocator for UT. All of this without ever moving your hand, all mid-game.

Now on a console, it's different. Like Halo, turning the joystick to look is much slower, and hard to control. If you want to aim at something, it's hard to hit it exactly, because the precision isn't there. And if you want to be precise, it's slow because no one can quickly move the joystick left 25% of the way. Then both thumbs are used up, and all you have are pushing the sticks, and the shoulder buttons to help you out. So really, you don't have nearly the options that you can have with the keyboard, but more importantly, you can't quickly move around and precisely aim. You also can't run in circles jumping and costantly adjusting your aim. And think of sniping from an elevated position in Unreal. On the PC you just drag your mouse along and follow their movement. On a controller, that's hard. You kinda gotta keep taping the joystick, hoping to score a hit.

Now Halo used some correction. The game seems pretty slow, not nearly as fast-paced as a PC FPS like UT or Q3A. They also allow you to completly miss the guy and still score a hit. But you still can't run and jump in circles without extra hands. Games like GoldenEye are also slow, and have a lot of auto aim correction because of this. But Xbox seems to be getting PC games, not console-exclusive games. Unreal, Ghost Recon, Raven Shield, Splinter Cell, Halo, and Counter-Strike are all PC games. All have better control when using a keyboard and mouse.

If PC and Xbox Halo are allowed to play together, the Xbox players will get killed, even the best ones. If there was a nationwide Xbox Halo tournament, and I played the winner after playing Halo for 30 minutes to get used to the weapons and stuff, I would beat him, hands down, not even a close match. There's that much of a difference. Ask anyone who plays Q3A or UT online a lot, you can't possibly simulate that with a controller, period. It's not even close. Slower, more tactical-based games are better off, still not good. But Unreal is meant to be a fast game. First 100 times you play online you spend learning to play at that speed.

I have nothing against Xbox having these games. Granted they will always be better on PC for various reasons, I'd love to kick Sir Bond's ass in Unreal Championship, but Microsoft needs to realize that there's a need for a keyboard and mouse, for games, and for chatting. Headsets work during games, but not for public chats, or setting up game rooms, sending your friends messages, etc.

It just pisses me off that they don't release one. I've asked Xbox fans, and the best answer I've gotten is they don't want Xbox to be called a PC. Never stopped Nintendo from making Animal Crossing. Hell, DC ran Windows CE and had em, never was called anything but a l33t gaming machine.

Well, that's great. That is why they are called PC FPS. But there are also console First-Person Shooters, they are meant for consoles. Halo was originally meant for the PC, yes, but then Bungie went back and designed it for the Xbox. I, personally have no problem with how fast I could look around. I've also never heard anyone else complain about this, minus you.

Your comparing a PC FPS to a console FPS. Now you know if the only FPS you have ever played were on consoles and then you played one on PC you would be complaining about it because it moved too fast. Again, I have never had any problem like this on Halo, nor have I heard anyone complain about it minus you.

Unreal Championship is Xbox exclusive, Splinter Cell is Xbox exclusive, Halo was first on Xbox, now on PC. Ghost Recon, Raven Shield, Counter-Strike those games have also or will be on other consoles, so if you want to complain about them then I would complain about them in general not just on Xbox. Again, the developers are making these games to fit console controllers, and other games like this have turned out fine to the general public, I don't see why these won't.

If you can't possibly simulate it on the PC then that's why console players and PC players will play online videogames separate. They are different games, but can be changed to fit either platform.

Well, I'd love to kick your ass on Halo online. But without your keyboard and mouse you might just lose. :p

Yeah, that is the 'unofficial' reason for Xbox not having a keyboard and mouse, but I'm not so sure if it's the real reason.

Halo is a PC FPS, hands down. It was well into development before it was moved to Xbox, and the game wasn't redesigned, just altered. They made it work the best it could with the controller, but that's still not good. Halo on Xbox is slow. Halo on PC will be much faster, more exciting. Bungie is going back with Halo and making it take complete advantage of the PC platform, and if it takes that much more than just porting it, you know it was changed drastically when it came to Xbox.

Unreal Championship is as exclusive to Xbox as Silent Hill 2: Restless Dreams is. Fact of the matter is it's a modified PC game, just like Halo. Compare Unreal Championship to Unreal Tournament 2003, and you can easily tell where it's origin is. Unreal Championship is a PC FPS. Splinter Cell is not Xbox exclusive, it's console-exclusive to Xbox. Splinter Cell is coming to PC, and it's the next game in the Rainbow Six series, a PC series. Splinter Cell is a PC FPS. Halo is a PC FPS. Developers can do their best to try to make the games work as good on Xbox, but it will never be the same. It's exactly like porting a game like SSX. EA BIG can try all they want to make it play as well on Xbox and GC, but it's a game designed for the PS2, so it won't be the same no matter what they do.

That wasn't the point. The point is the game changed so much when being ported to Xbox, that even the best Xbox player couldn't beat a rookie (with past FPS experience) PC player. That's how much the game is taken out of its true form on Xbox.

Redesigned, altered, whichever, it was redone to fit the Xbox console and the Xbox controller. Now whether or not the PC version of Halo will be better is a question that can not be answered until the game is released and a fair comparison can be done. But until then, Halo is the best selling Xbox game, and I've heard only a very few negative things about it. So you should just enjoy the game rather then complaining about how 'slow' it is.

Unreal Championship is a Xbox exclusive title. Even if the first Unreal was on the PC, Unreal Championship, the game, is Xbox exclusive. You just can't argue that. And you don't seem to like PC FPS coming the consoles, but let me ask you this: did you mind when Medal of Honor came to the PC?

Not at all. And I've never played Medal of Honor on a console, and after seeing Frontline, I don't have plans to.

My point is that the exact same argument can be made the other way around. I can say that Medal of Honor was designed for consoles and it should never go onto PC. Because on the PC, like you said, it turns a lot faster which I may not like.

Bond, forget about it. Gekko just doesn't get that console online gaming isn't PC online gaming. They are 2 completely different animals. He wants console online gaming to be exactly like PC online gaming, and it never will be, nor does it strive to be.

And by the way, Halo is a console game, not a PC game. Thats why its on a console and its controls were designed specifically for a console and a controller. Just because it is a FPS, that doesn't make it a PC game.

Actually they can be. Sega was smart enough to release a keyboard a mouse.

And Halo is a PC game. Started development for PC (Mac to be specific :p), levels were designed for PC, etc. It's a PC game on a console, just like Unreal Championship. And not all FPS are PC games, look at Bond, TimeSplitters, etc.

I guess if you play PC FPS enough you notice the changes. The way the game plays, the way the levels are designed, etc.

Well, if Halo is a PC game, then it made a SEAMLESS transition to console gaming.

I couldn't imagine it on a PC. It would be too fast, like Quake, and loose all of its realism. What made Halo great was that it WASN'T Unreal or Quake. It was a mix of quick twitch blast 'em action and tactical strategy, with more of an emphasis on tactical strategy. If you wanted to just rush in an blast away, you'd be dead pretty quickly because you weren't as fast as lightning, especially on the harder levels. In this way it was completely a console FPS.

And forget about the damn keyboard and mouse. Ya ain't getting it any time soon. Lets see how they work the headset and cobtroller online before we make unrealistic judgements on something you haven't even experienced yet. Just because it doesn't have a keyboard and mouse, it doesn't mean it won't be good. It means it will be a lot more accessible to people, and thats the only real judgement we can make on it right now.

Just because its different, it doen't mean its automatically bad.

Many PC games have speed governers, so if it's meant to be more tactical, they can slow it down. Still, aiming doesn't slow down. It's much more realistic. And multiplayer is supposed to be fast like Quake and Unreal. It's what deathmatch is.

As for the keyboard and mouse, they are the exact reason why these FPS took off on PC before console. They were designed for it. I've played Halo with the controller, I've played DC games with the controller, and they all suck. No need to wait on that. And the headset, played CS with em. Guess what? They suck too. If someone could actually simulate phone-quality sound using those, they would be nice, but they can't, or haven't yet. And even so, they are only good in certain games, and only in-game. They should be used with a keyboard, not instead of. These headsets are far from a new idea, and they have been avaliable and supported by PCs for years. It never really caught on... and neither did they with DC. Take the hint, they suck major ass.

The keyboard and mouse don't make it less accesible to people. Do what DC did with UT, Q3A, and Outtrigger, design it for a controller, but add support for the keyboard and mouse.

Another thing on the headset, which i hope isn't true, is that Microsoft is being very restrictive with Xbox Live. Only games that support the Live features will be allowed to go online, and that means developers are FORCED to add support for the headset, and for their stat tracking and all that crap. Play by the rules or don't play, exactly the attitude that hurt Nintendo. And developers hate that, so if it's true, it will be the downfall of Xbox Live.

Nintendo and Sony's approach is much smarter, although won't allow the same features... err... I'm not going to go off topic too much.

I think Sony and Nintendo's plans are FAR more stupid. For one reason. No server restrictions.

By allowing developers and publishers to set up their own online gaming systems, they will make it MUCH more complicated and MUCH more expensive.

XBox Live: $50 for a complete start up kit, including head set and one year of online play. $9.95 per year after that, play as much as you want of any XBox online game.

Nintendo and PS2: Game at your own risk. Each developer or publisher will have their own subsciption charges. You may find yourself spending over $50 a month for the right to play a couple great online games. Now for someone that owns 8 DVD players, price may not be an object, but in the real world it is. Cost is prohibitive, especially when you add gaming subscription costs on top of you standard internet connection. What will this mean to Sony's and PS2's online games? It means that their customers will most likely play only one online game at a time to avoid piling up the fees. This is not good for business.

Developers will put up with a slightly more difficult process if they think that thier game will sell better. Bottom line.

As for accessiblity... If the Dreamcast online was so bloody accessible to the public, why did most of the owners not use it and why is it basically dead? Answer: Most console gamers don't want to deal with a keyboard and mouse, thats why controllers were invented. If the keyboard and mouse system were ideal for everyone, they there wouldn't be controllers. Saying that most gamers find keyboards and mice more acceptable that controllers is like saying most wrestling fans would rather see Mitsuharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada and not Nash vs. Hogan. While keyboards and Misawa/Kawada may be better for the hardcore, console controllers and Nash/Hogan will always rule the masses. (Thats my obscure reference for the day)

Now would I like to see a keyboard and a mouse? Sure, why the hell not? I'd love to play Mechwarrior on the XBox (virtually impossible without a mouse/keyboard setup), but once again... NO ONE HAS PLAYED XBOX LIVE YET. AN OPINION MADE ABOUT HOW GOOD IT IS IS INVALID, NOT APPLICABLE, UNEDUCATED AND IGNORANT.

Could it suck? Of course it could. It could revolutionize online console gaming also, as could Nintendo and PS2 online. We don't know yet because they haven't launched.

No server restrictions is a damn good thing. It allows developers to make games how they want them, not how Microsoft does. Look at PSO, if Sonic Team hadn't constantly updated the servers throughout the games life, the cheating would get so bad the game becomes unplayable. They haven't been working on them lately due to GC going on beta tests, but trust me, PSO players are quitting left and right until the new games. And guess what? It'll be a major problem with Xbox PSO.

And I might've read it incorrectly, but it was $50 for Xbox starter kit and one year of service, $9.95 per month after that, not year. And for most games, they will likely be free. Sega never imposed a single charge until PSOv2, and that's because MMORPGs require tons of updates and maintenance. Games like NFL 2K2, just setup and leave it.

And Xbox is far from appealing to the casual gamer. $50 just to try playing online? Not to mention the broadband issue. Microsoft had a poll, and 50% of people who visit Xbox.com have Broadband. Now most people who visit there will be fans, not casual gamers, and most will be spending more time online, where broadband is reasonable. But only half of those people actually have broadband, and even less casual gamers will because it's twice the cost each and every month. DC had the hardcore gamers, it didn't help. PS2, Gamecube, and Xbox will all have the hardcore gamers, too bad it doesn't mean anything. They all need to try to get the casual gamers, because that's what will make the difference.

DC died because too many people believed Sony and didn't buy it. It was by far the best console of this generation. And the keyboard/mouse setup isn't for everyone, most people won't take the time to learn it if they are used to a controller. But the fact that MS isn't making it avaliable is the problem. DC fans played with controller all the time, but if they wanted, they could buy a keyboard and mouse.

And no one has played Xbox Live yet, well, none of us. Still, people play Xbox multiplayer so we can comment on that, and people have used headsets before, so we can comment on that. And since I've done both, it is educated, valid, and pllicable to comment on those features.

Gekko, have you played with MS's headset?

No.

Do you know for a fact how XBox online will play?

No.

Your opinion about something that hasn't even happened yet is NOT valid. Evaluating XBox Live using products not applicable to the XBox is rediculous. Its like me saying I don't like the Gamecube controller because I played with the PS2 controller and I didn't like it.

Just wait until it comes out, is that so hard?

As for the keyboards, you made my point for me. Casual gamers, who make up the vast majority, do not want to "learn" to use a keyboard with games. They also do not put hours upon hours straight into games. They play when they're bored and have nothing else to do, or when they have some friends over. If MS were to release a keyboard for the XBox, developers would design games exclusively for the keyboard because its easier and you can do more, but then you are alienating a lot of casual gamers. Typing of the Dead was a great game, but did it sell well? No. Why? You had to use a keyboard.

MS is trying to avoid this issue by making the developers design games using the controller. This is smart because their games will appeal to a larger audience.

No, I haven't played with Microsoft's headset, but that's like telling me the idea behind telephones changes if I use a Sony or Panasonic phone. A headset is a headset, there is nothing unique about Microsoft's. And I have talked with people who have used the headset, and they too have confirmed it is very hard to understand people talking on it.

Since when have developers designed games exclusively for the keyboard? Typing of the Dead is the only game I can think of, and that's for obvious reasons. Samba de Amigo doesn't require the maracas, FPS don't require the keyboard and mouse, fishing games don't require the controller, racing games don't require the steering wheel. What makes you think developers would design games exclusively for the keyboard?

And I doubt Microsoft would allow a game through that doesn't use a controller. In the same way they won't allow online games without support for the headset, they don't have to allow games that don't support the controller.

There's never been a problem developing exclusively for peripherals before, there won't be now.

It's actually $49.99 for the Xbox Starter Kit. Which includes a on-year subscription to Xbox Live, the Xbox headset, and some Xbox racing game that I forget the name of. The pricing for each month of Xbox Live after the one-year subscription has run out has not been announced yet to my knowledge. Also the Xbox headset is not just a normal headset. If you watched the Xbox Conference at E3 you would have seen the demonstration of it, which was quite impressive in my opinion. It is a second generation headset, you should really read more about it... quite interesting.

Ok, just watched the confrence again, no headset demo. Care to explain?

And I don't hate the headset thing, just I don't care much for it in normal situations. There should still be a keyboard, cause if I wanna send senor Bond a message telling him I'm ready to kick his ass, I wanna type it out via keyboard, not on-screen keyboard. And Microsoft's idea of an 11vs.11 soccer game is great, cept that that many people talking is too much.

1 on 1 games, the headset is nice. But for others, I wouldn't want it. They still need a keyboard. Even signing up for Xbox Live will be a bitch. Ya, like typing my name and password with the on-screen keyboard sound like fun :rolleyes:

My other concearns with Xbox Live are the security of the network, and developers not having control of servers. Like Sega, they won't have the oppertunity to keep patching the servers for PSO players. It would be much better to kinda have a mix, like Sega connects to their own servers, but your character is tracked via XBL account name. Kinda like D2, characters and account names are different. And then if companies wanted to use Microsoft's stuff, they can. You know, allow them to choose? Also allow them to choose whether they want to support the headset or not.

And Microsoft's military-grade security, uh huh. Uh huh, if they were actually that good, they would be using theiur technology on Windows, but that has more loopholes than any other product on the market. And Microsoft has gotten hacked before, they stole the code for Windows before, hehe.

So I believe MS is the ONLY console maker BRAGGING about their online security, so how great do you think the other console's security will be? They'll probably leave that up to the developers and publishers to figure out. Sounds safe to me.

And designing games around peripherals has ALWAYS been a problem. I mean, WOW, Samba De Amigo and SEGA Fishing (whatever the name is) sold like HOT CAKES. Those shooting games built around light guns always tore up the sales charts too.:rolleyes:

You could play those games without the peripheral, sure, but they were made for the peripheral and weren't as fun without them. Trouble is, casual gamers don't care if they need to buy Moraccas that they'll never use on another game. Once again, cost is prohibitive.

MS is not giving you a heyboard to prevent games that will be designed using it. I don't believe I heard Nintendo or Sony were coming out with one either (but I don't know for sure), so I think they are thinking the same thing too. Casual gamers don't want to use a keyboard, they want a controller. Bottom line. Thats why they play almost exclusively on consoles and not PC's, except for may be the occasional game of SNOOD or Minesweeper.

But keyboards have never been that way. Like FPS can be played with the controller, but played much better with the keyboard. It didn't slow sales at all.

And games like Steel Battalion are still being made, being exclusively for the controller and will likely cost the price of a new Xbox, maybe more. Those kind of games aren't meant for casual gamers. And the fishing controller was used 3 times during Sega's life, and a keyboard can be used for every online game.

Sony has plans for one, remember the whole LCD monitor setup they showed before? Nintendo allows them. Remember, Microsoft has their own network, setup their own way. If they don't have chats and the Xbox Live software doesn't support keyboard input, it's useless. Nintendo isn't restricting anything, but MS is.

And guess what? Casual gamers don't have to buy the damn keyboard. MS keeps saying they are making their console for the hardcore gamer, and they are the ones who will buy the keyboard and mouse, not to mention the ones who are online a lot.

MS is making the XBox for the hardcore console gamer, not PC. PC gamers and console gamers are 2 different types of gamers. Because someone is heavy into one, it does not mean that they will be heavy into another.

Myself, I am heavy into both. Shogun: Total War (Warlord Edition of course) is one of my favorite games of all time. Its a PC game. I would not like it on a console even if it had a keyboard. PC games require a different amount of dedication and discipline than console games. For instance, you'll pretty much never see a console users manual that is 200 pages long. The longest console manual I've ever seen was for Wing Commander 3 for the 3DO, and that was a port of a PC game (a GREAT port at that). But the gameplay in that was more console like than PC like.

In my view, online or not, PC gaming and Console gaming should keep as 2 separate entities. If you need to have a keyboard to play the game correctly, than I'd rather see it released as a PC game. But if you can make an indepth title that is fun and easily played with a controller, then bring it to the Box.

Look at PE. Most people would say "Hey, that looks like a PC game.", but it has never even been planned to bve brought to a PC at all. It is being developed exclusively for the XBox.

I think you will be seeing more of that as consoles become more and more powerful. Developers mixing the size and depth of PC games with the gameplay of console games. But make no mistake, they are console games.

Look at all of the FPS games coming to consoles in the near future. This was a genre that has been ruled by the PC world until recently. Now the focus is switching to consoles.

...

What the hell was I talking about?:D

Ya, but hardcore gamers rarely limit themselves to one console. And guess what? A lot of hardcore console gamers play on PC quite a bit, like you said, PC has dominated the FPS genre for years. And they still do.

FPS focus on consoles? Hardly. Unreal Championship is a console version of Unreal Tournament 2003, Halo was ported over, the whole Tom Clancy series (Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear, Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell, Raven Shield) is PC games, Doom III (rumors it might see Xbox) is a PC game, Counter-Strike is a PC game.

FPS dominate on PC thanks to the control setup, and online play. It could do much better on consoles if they released a keyboard and mouse, and gave players the true controls. Sure, I'd rather just see these games stay on PC, but if they wanna port them, at least do it right. And the online gaming aspect, it won't ever dominate in that area, because PCs allow you to host games, configure your own rules, setups, run your own admin software, etc.

Either way, I don't mind seeing Unreal Championship on Xbox. Halo is another story, cause of the long delay. But the rest, by all means, port it. But there are people who might have crappy outdated PCs, and people like me just looking to kick some Bond ass, and we want the keyboard/mouse setup.

And PE, I think it would work better on consoles. Other RPGs, like Diablo II, work so much better on PC.

Lets get this straight: Halo first came out for the Xbox, and is now being ported to the PC. Whether or not it was in development for the PC, it first came out for the Xbox. Doom III will becoming out for the Xbox, it was confirmed a few months ago I believe.

Halo is a PC FPS. I don't care if Doom III comes out on Xbox first (:lol:), it's still a PC FPS. Bungie was developing it for the PC long before they were bought out. It was designed to be played on PC, just they had to change things up for the controller. It's still a PC FPS, no matter what.

It's like Splinter Cell, it's a PC FPS, but it'll be out on Xbox first. Still, it's a game meant for PC, part of a PC series, and that's what makes it a PC FPS. It's no Metroid, TimeSplitters, GoldenEye, or Turok.

And Halo is being redesigned to take advantage of the PC platform. And if it's more than just a port with added online features for PC, you know they messed up the game quite a bit bringing it to Xbox.

Did I just read that? Bungie MESSED UP bringing Halo to the XBox? Now you're REALLY reaching. BTW, Bungie is bringing Halo to the PC, not the other way around, no matter how you rationalize it.

Yeah, Bungie sure messed up making the GAME OF THE YEAR.

:rolleyes:

Bungie BROUGHT Halo to Xbox, from PC.

Oh wait, when was it released on PC?

NEVER?

I guess you're right then.

Who was intended to get Halo? PC.
Who got Halo in the end, first? Xbox.
Where is Halo being ported to? The PC.

Seriously gekko, this is factual information you can't twist and turn to your liking. Halo was released first for the Xbox and will come out to the PC and Mac. Online play has not been confirmed.

Oh yeah, Bungie did not mess up game of the year, rated by EGM the best selling videogame magazine. A game that had an 80% attachment rating in Europe, the highest attachment rating for a game to a console ever. A game that is the best selling Xbox videogame ever.

This one comment brings EVERYTHING you have posted to this point into question.

Halo isn't being ported, last time I checked. It was being designed for Mac, until MS bought them out. Then that game left from there anf finished development on Xbox. Now they're going back and finishing the PC version, from the sounds of it. PC and Mac users haven't waited this whole time for just a port.

And online play was planned from the start with Halo. It was supposed to be online. Also, name the last FPS released on PC without online play?

And messed up from the original version. Not messed up, like screwed it up. They did the best they could with the restrictions Xbox imposed. It's messed up from how it was meant to be.

Glad you're catching on :D

So far online play has not been officialy confirmed for the PC version of Halo. You can speculate all you want, but it has not been officaily confirmed. Although online play has been officialy confirmed for the next installment of Halo on the Xbox.

Also, how can a game be messed up from how it was meant to be if you never even knew what it was meant to be?

Online was mentioned way back before anyone knew who Bungie was. This game was shown and talked about long before any Xbox fans knew what it was.