Michael-5 said:
zgamer5 said:
jarrod said:
| zgamer5 said:
kilzlone=realistic shooter
halo=arcade shooter
those are two diffrent things. also halo isnt on ps3, when killzone came out it was competiting with cod not with halo.
|
Eh... I don't think any console first FPS can really be considered "realistic". If you want something more sim-y or realistic, you need a PC. Halo, Killzone, COD, etc are all more "arcade" than not.
|
i was talking quality wise. you cant compare halo and killzone since killzone aims for a more realistic feeling, while halo is just plain arcady fun. the console fps which i consider realistic is killzone, because of the weight system(in real life you cant turn 360 degrees) also because if you concetrate your eyes on the screen for a while you will think that you are really in that game, that was one of the complaints my friends had with the game.
|
It doesn't make it a more realistic shooter, none of the plot is realistic, most of the tech isn't, and except for how your gun fires and how you walk around, it's not really a realistic game. Yes playing the game, you feel human, and it simulates how you would move well, but in Halo your a Spartan, your in a mechanically powered suit. Of course you can jump two stories, and turn 360 degrees, I mean the suit weighs over a ton, how would you be able to move that youself?
If anything, a future war is more likely to have suits like this, war would not be like it is today, so by that logic, Halo is more realistic.
:p lol
|
