SleepWaking said: ItsaMii that comment is ridicules. if you said this about valve (still the best developer behind nintendo) that statement would be more at its place . the first one was released in 2001 en the third wil be this year which is 2007. 2007 -2001= 6 so on average that would be 6 /3= 2 years and thats not long at all. even if you count only the years between its 3 which isnt long to. |
It is called exaggeration, do not take it literally. What about Duke Nukem Forever that is in the limbo for more than 10 years?
Bungie takes too much time to release their games. How about 3 years to make a port to PC? I know there is all that games for Vista thing, but they delayed the launch for several months. Halo 2 also do not improve that much to take 3 years. HALO is not a game that demands so much time on production (at least in single player) for it to take 3 years. I do not know about their experiments with multiplayer and the time with marketing, but 3 years to make a game like HALO is a lot.
Do you really want to compare Halo to Half Life 2? Lets just say that both games have the same fun factor. Still, Halo is a game that has 4 kinds of enemies coming in various colors, 8 kind of guns, 10 levels of which 3 are just earlier levels backwards and can fit in a tiny CD. I will not go on about all aspects of HL2, but you can not even compare them with Halo. So do you think that the 3 years it take to make Halo 2 is ok? Can you compare the jump that HL made to HL2 and say the same about HALO and HALO 2?
Satan said:
"You are for ever angry, all you care about is intelligence, but I repeat again that I would give away all this superstellar life, all the ranks and honours, simply to be transformed into the soul of a merchant's wife weighing eighteen stone and set candles at God's shrine."