Halo Wars is important.

[Khuutra]

windbane said:

Khuutra said:
I'm to going to argue that the Xbox wasn't a better consoles for first person shooters, because it was - though the Battlefront games and Splinter Cell were not first person shooters and I don't know why you list them.

The statement was that Halo legitimized console first person shooters. It didn't. I have acknowledged that it made it the center of the public eye in terms of video games, at least for a while, but it did not show that a first person shooter could be done well on consoles. Goldeneye did.

You're not going to win an argument based on pedantry when the operative word around which the argument is based is ignored.

until dual stick controls, which goldeneye didn't use, the control scheme for FPS was terrible.  Halo 1, with lan, and Halo 2, with online, showed that console FPS can work just like PC FPS.  Goldeneye didn't.

As I noted, Pandora Tomorrow included FPS in the multiplayer with the merc.  Spys vs merc was a hugely popular multiplayer mode at the time.  I wasn't sure if that mode was still in for Chaos theory.

Your personal opinion on the matter has exactly nothing to do with the fact that Goldeneye legitimized consoles first person shooters as their own medium in comparison to PC first person shooters. If you wwant to talk about the emulation of what could be done on the PC, Turok is actually closer than Halo was, since it had analog aiming and digital movement ala mouse and keyboard. And Turok came out in 1997 anyway, so Halo loses out even by that definition.

You can pretend, all you like, that Goldeneye was in some way deficient, but that won't change the reality that it showed that console first person shooters could be done right, in a way uniquely inherent to the consoles.