Halo is also better loved, and it goes beyond the name Rpruett... Hype can make you buy a game you don't like. Hype doesn't beat word of mouth or keep people playing over a year after release.

Americas software, KZ2 -> 21k, Halo 3 20k.

MikeB said: @ selnor I hate being mean, but I have never seen you say anything nice for any console other than Sony's. Yes, I did lots of times regarding many consoles, Coleco Vision, 3DO, Snes, DS (which I own), Neo Geo, Atari Lynx, Sega Game Gear, etc. And for your information I didn't think the PS1 was that great, I preferred the Nintendo 64.

Fair point. And I agree with the N64. Although it had the best blockbusters, PS1 had more games. And it's the mainstream that usually chooses what console sells more. But sometimes I think your to hard on many non Sony games THIS gen. There is plenty on both consoles to warrant a purchase.

Cant wait till very soon I'm a dual HD owner. I'll have the best of both worlds. I told my missus a PS3 before a Wii. LOL. To be honest Nintendo have been the ones to piss me off this gen. I have grown up playing all their franchises. Personally as an old avid Nintendo player, their latest editions are all the worst. I would rather play Sunshine or Mario 64 than Galaxy, also Mario Kart Wii has been dumbed down SOOO much. The only game I thought that was great this gen is Twilight Princess. Many Nintendo fans like me are getting towards 30 now, not 15. I want the games I love to grow up with me. Mario Kart used to be about skill. It certainly isnt anymore. They have left people like me out in the lurch.

The only reason me and my wife are getting a wii is because she wants to play wii sports.

 

Squilliam said: Halo is also better loved, and it goes beyond the name Rpruett... Hype can make you buy a game you don't like. Hype doesn't beat word of mouth or keep people playing over a year after release. Americas software, KZ2 -> 21k, Halo 3 20k.

Does it really?   I think Halo is a good game.  A solid FPS with a great multi-player mode.  With that being said the game sold essentially 5 million copies in the first month of it's release.  I mean it's safe to assume that 'fans' of the game gobbled up over half of it's sales in the first month.

It's a good game to keep people playing over a year after release, true.    But games like Warhawk have people still playing? CoD same thing?  Resistance 1 probably still has people playing consistently. So it's certainly not an issue of the game being so great.   It's the amount of addicted people.

The point is, I don't think Halo is much different.  It just has a more rabid fanbase built up.

 

Halo and Killzone 2 offer completely different multiplayer experiences. It's a little hard to compare them. It's almost like trying to compare Quake with Rainbow 6.

I mean, you pick up weapons and power ups in Halo 3. You spawn with a weapon of your choice in Killzone 2 and if you want to switch, well you have to die, or kill someone with the weapon you want.

Halo is more in line with UT, while Killzone 2 is more in line with COD or Rainbow 6. Personally, I've always been a big fan of Rainbow 6/CS:S over Quake or UT. Hence my preference for Killzone 2.

Halo 3 does offer more customization for multiplayer though.

EDIT:  Oh, and I'm not trying to imply that Halo 3 is a mindless fragfest or something, because some people can get touchy on these forums.

How exactly would a game build up a fanbase without deserving to?

Halo
This is the reverse trend of most franchises which get smaller/weaker as time passes.

bobobologna said: Halo and Killzone 2 offer completely different multiplayer experiences. It's a little hard to compare them. It's almost like trying to compare Quake with Rainbow 6. I mean, you pick up weapons and power ups in Halo 3. You spawn with a weapon of your choice in Killzone 2 and if you want to switch, well you have to die, or kill someone with the weapon you want. Halo is more in line with UT, while Killzone 2 is more in line with COD or Rainbow 6. Personally, I've always been a big fan of Rainbow 6/CS:S over Quake or UT. Hence my preference for Killzone 2. Halo 3 does offer more customization for multiplayer though. EDIT:  Oh, and I'm not trying to imply that Halo 3 is a mindless fragfest or something, because some people can get touchy on these forums.

This is actually the smartest post in this thread. :)

 

There aren't many games that can compare with Halo's robust multiplayer.

Squilliam said: How exactly would a game build up a fanbase without deserving to? Halo < Halo 2 < Halo 3. This is the reverse trend of most franchises which get smaller/weaker as time passes.

 

It's just my opinion that they have gone downhill since the original Halo. I never said Halo didn't 'deserve' it's fanbase. It's just a little over hyped that's all.  It has a solid group of 'rabid' fans and beyond that most of it is hype and marketing.

 

 

Well, I actually have both games. So, in my opinion, the one with the best multiplayer features (notice the plural donkeykong88) would be halo. Halo has a completly customizable experience from the map to gametype, players can adapt to basically whatever they can think of. Killzone 2 has some good variety of gametypes, but nothing near what halo 3 is capable of.

@ selnor

IMO Halo 3 and Gears 1, albeit good games were too much overhyped for what they actually delivered.

That has nothing to do with the console they are on, for example I also said I liked Kameo a lot on the 360, which is an exclusive. Or I stated I thought Bioshock looked amazing at a time the company claimed it to be exclusive (I even signed a petition for a PS3 port) or I stated Lost Planet looked great in previews (although sadly it wasn't really as good as anticipated).



Agreed, it would be strange to claim otherwise as the PS3 and 360 share a lot of ports.