Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

some reasons why Halo 2 stinks

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 1:12:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.




quote:

"Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
reference my original post because it has since been removed.

The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.

Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
convenant invasion of earth.

Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
"god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?

The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
conspiracy.

Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
between may 2003 and november 9th?

Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
"promised" to us.

Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
half-assed version that we got.

In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
the godliness of what they had in store for us.

Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
(now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
wouldn't."


welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 

maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.

More about : reasons halo stinks

November 15, 2004 1:12:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

I'm with ya mate, there's some pretty strong statements there that have a
strong case.
ie. earth needs your help, for 1 level?



"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>
>
>
>
> quote:
>
> "Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
> close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
> forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
> Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
> mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
> appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
> to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
> reference my original post because it has since been removed.
>
> The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
> intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
> worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
> cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
> you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
> notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
> carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
> reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
> exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
> chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
> What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
> explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.
>
> Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
> New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
> the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
> earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
> buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
> mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
> Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
> around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
> lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
> convenant invasion of earth.
>
> Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
> "god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
> covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
> There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
> end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
> and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
> went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?
>
> The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
> minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
> the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
> with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
> pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
> same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
> shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
> same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
> except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
> at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
> where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
> How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
> cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
> seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
> the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
> information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
> this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
> last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
> the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
> or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
> rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
> but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
> year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
> missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
> spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
> not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
> humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
> complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
> point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
> conspiracy.
>
> Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
> direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
> ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
> was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
> Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
> filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
> check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
> buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
> yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
> from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
> covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
> level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
> vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
> models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
> scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
> level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
> design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
> and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
> campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
> things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
> there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
> thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
> implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
> between may 2003 and november 9th?
>
> Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
> its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
> focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
> focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
> intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
> earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
> dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
> what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
> we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
> believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
> one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
> "promised" to us.
>
> Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
> almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
> mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
> the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
> as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
> a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
> was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
> half-assed version that we got.
>
> In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
> think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
> have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
> easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
> because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
> that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
> game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
> vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
> ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
> that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
> the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
> everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
> the godliness of what they had in store for us.
>
> Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
> are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
> (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
> reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
> catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
> would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
> they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
> certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
> their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
> would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
> finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
> wouldn't."
>
>
> welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
>
> maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 9:47:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.

I'd debate whether or not its interesting with you. To me it seems that this
dude is clearly off his meds.
Related resources
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 10:04:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...

Yawn.
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 10:08:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>
>
>
>
> quote:
>
> "Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
> close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
> forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
> Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
> mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
> appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
> to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
> reference my original post because it has since been removed.
>
> The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
> intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
> worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
> cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
> you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
> notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
> carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
> reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
> exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
> chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
> What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
> explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.
>
> Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
> New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
> the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
> earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
> buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
> mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
> Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
> around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
> lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
> convenant invasion of earth.
>
> Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
> "god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
> covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
> There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
> end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
> and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
> went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?
>
> The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
> minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
> the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
> with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
> pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
> same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
> shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
> same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
> except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
> at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
> where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
> How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
> cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
> seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
> the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
> information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
> this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
> last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
> the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
> or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
> rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
> but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
> year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
> missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
> spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
> not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
> humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
> complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
> point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
> conspiracy.
>
> Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
> direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
> ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
> was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
> Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
> filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
> check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
> buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
> yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
> from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
> covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
> level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
> vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
> models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
> scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
> level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
> design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
> and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
> campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
> things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
> there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
> thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
> implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
> between may 2003 and november 9th?
>
> Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
> its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
> focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
> focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
> intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
> earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
> dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
> what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
> we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
> believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
> one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
> "promised" to us.
>
> Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
> almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
> mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
> the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
> as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
> a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
> was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
> half-assed version that we got.
>
> In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
> think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
> have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
> easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
> because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
> that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
> game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
> vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
> ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
> that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
> the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
> everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
> the godliness of what they had in store for us.
>
> Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
> are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
> (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
> reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
> catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
> would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
> they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
> certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
> their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
> would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
> finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
> wouldn't."
>
>
> welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
>
> maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.
November 15, 2004 10:08:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

and the content of your reply is.... where?



"Donald Richter" <GrGoblin@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:6CYld.21350$7i4.20414@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
> > FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> > shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > quote:
> >
> > "Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
> > close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
> > forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
> > Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
> > mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
> > appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
> > to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
> > reference my original post because it has since been removed.
> >
> > The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
> > intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
> > worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
> > cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
> > you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
> > notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
> > carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
> > reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
> > exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
> > chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
> > What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
> > explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.
> >
> > Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
> > New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
> > the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
> > earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
> > buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
> > mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
> > Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
> > around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
> > lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
> > convenant invasion of earth.
> >
> > Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
> > "god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
> > covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
> > There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
> > end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
> > and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
> > went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?
> >
> > The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
> > minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
> > the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
> > with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
> > pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
> > same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
> > shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
> > same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
> > except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
> > at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
> > where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
> > How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
> > cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
> > seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
> > the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
> > information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
> > this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
> > last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
> > the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
> > or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
> > rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
> > but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
> > year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
> > missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
> > spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
> > not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
> > humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
> > complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
> > point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
> > conspiracy.
> >
> > Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
> > direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
> > ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
> > was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
> > Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
> > filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
> > check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
> > buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
> > yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
> > from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
> > covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
> > level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
> > vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
> > models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
> > scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
> > level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
> > design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
> > and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
> > campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
> > things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
> > there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
> > thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
> > implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
> > between may 2003 and november 9th?
> >
> > Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
> > its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
> > focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
> > focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
> > intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
> > earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
> > dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
> > what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
> > we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
> > believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
> > one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
> > "promised" to us.
> >
> > Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
> > almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
> > mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
> > the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
> > as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
> > a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
> > was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
> > half-assed version that we got.
> >
> > In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
> > think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
> > have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
> > easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
> > because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
> > that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
> > game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
> > vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
> > ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
> > that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
> > the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
> > everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
> > the godliness of what they had in store for us.
> >
> > Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
> > are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
> > (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
> > reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
> > catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
> > would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
> > they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
> > certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
> > their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
> > would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
> > finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
> > wouldn't."
> >
> >
> > welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
> >
> > maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.
>
>
November 15, 2004 10:19:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo (More info?)

"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
>> Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
> are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
> (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
> reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
> catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2

New Mombasa is about my favourite level for multiplayer. Zanzibar is fun
but not as good as Mombasa for game play because I like symetrical levels
for all team based variants. And I won't be getting Halo 2 either, I'll
stick with Halo CE.

-Russ.
November 15, 2004 11:35:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

I think the story is stronger than in the first game, in terms of
being developed, complex and rich. I think that a lot of people are
elevating the first game unrealistically due to sentimental reasons.

Let's get down to brass tacks:

The story of the first game is that you find a mysterious ring world,
you land on it, you fight Covenant, the Flood get released, and you
blow up the ring world to kill them all. That's it.

The majesty of Halo comes from its simplicity, its understatement and
its maturity. Those things are typical of decent movies but are not
typical of video games. Example: at the end of Halo 1, Cortana's voice
is defensive and conflicted as she says "we did what we had to do ...
for Earth! A whole Covenant armada ... and the Flood ..!" The reason
is because Cortana and the Chief know that they probably blew up some
Marines along with the enemy.

Halo 2 is rich in many of those same ways. I could give examples, but
they would be spoilers. Here's one from very early in the game,
though: "People need heroes. So, smile, Chief! ... While we've still
got something to smile about."

Halo 1 is more original, in the same way that Star Wars was more
original than The Empire Strikes Back - Halo 1 created the world, and
Halo 2 is just living in it. But aside from that, I think that the
elevation of Halo 1's story over Halo 2's is emotional rather than
rational. I think the fundamental reasons are that people want to be
amazed and stunned as they were in 2001 by Halo, and that's not
feasible with a sequel; also, I think people don't completely
appreciate what Bungie is doing with the Arbiter portions of the game.

"Adam" <adam.anderson@ozonline.com.au> wrote in message news:<eJuXHLvyEHA.2752@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
> I'm with ya mate, there's some pretty strong statements there that have a
> strong case.
> ie. earth needs your help, for 1 level?
>
>
>
> "Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
> > FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> > shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > quote:
> >
> > "Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
> > close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
> > forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
> > Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
> > mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
> > appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
> > to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
> > reference my original post because it has since been removed.
> >
> > The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
> > intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
> > worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
> > cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
> > you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
> > notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
> > carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
> > reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
> > exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
> > chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
> > What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
> > explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.
> >
> > Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
> > New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
> > the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
> > earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
> > buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
> > mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
> > Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
> > around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
> > lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
> > convenant invasion of earth.
> >
> > Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
> > "god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
> > covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
> > There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
> > end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
> > and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
> > went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?
> >
> > The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
> > minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
> > the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
> > with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
> > pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
> > same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
> > shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
> > same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
> > except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
> > at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
> > where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
> > How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
> > cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
> > seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
> > the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
> > information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
> > this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
> > last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
> > the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
> > or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
> > rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
> > but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
> > year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
> > missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
> > spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
> > not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
> > humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
> > complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
> > point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
> > conspiracy.
> >
> > Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
> > direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
> > ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
> > was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
> > Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
> > filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
> > check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
> > buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
> > yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
> > from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
> > covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
> > level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
> > vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
> > models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
> > scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
> > level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
> > design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
> > and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
> > campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
> > things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
> > there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
> > thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
> > implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
> > between may 2003 and november 9th?
> >
> > Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
> > its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
> > focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
> > focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
> > intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
> > earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
> > dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
> > what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
> > we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
> > believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
> > one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
> > "promised" to us.
> >
> > Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
> > almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
> > mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
> > the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
> > as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
> > a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
> > was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
> > half-assed version that we got.
> >
> > In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
> > think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
> > have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
> > easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
> > because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
> > that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
> > game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
> > vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
> > ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
> > that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
> > the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
> > everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
> > the godliness of what they had in store for us.
> >
> > Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
> > are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
> > (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
> > reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
> > catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
> > would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
> > they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
> > certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
> > their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
> > would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
> > finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
> > wouldn't."
> >
> >
> > welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
> >
> > maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.
November 15, 2004 1:20:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:47:34 -0000, "Chowny A.K.A. Mr 6000 SUX"
<sdchown@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
>> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>
>I'd debate whether or not its interesting with you. To me it seems that this
>dude is clearly off his meds.
>
Really? You don't see *anything* interesting in what he's written? My
initial reaction to the game after a few levels was "Hang on, where's
all the stuff from the E3 demo?" While his explanation is a little
long on conspiracy and short on facts, it wouldn't surprise me if
there was a germ of truth there. M$ will definitely want Halo 3 as an
Xbox 2 launch title. If it contains a modified New Mombassa level will
you be coming back to apologise...?

Lee.
--
Founder, DVD Debate
http://www.dvddebate.com
lee at dvddebate dot com

If you told a joke and someone died laughing, could you be found guilty of a mans laughter?
November 15, 2004 1:20:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Lee@DVDDebate" <lee@nospamdvddebate.com> wrote in message
news:fi0hp01o10kc57heicpd5iqp6etkjrq4dr@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:47:34 -0000, "Chowny A.K.A. Mr 6000 SUX"
> <sdchown@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> >> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
> >
> >I'd debate whether or not its interesting with you. To me it seems that
this
> >dude is clearly off his meds.
> >
> Really? You don't see *anything* interesting in what he's written? My
> initial reaction to the game after a few levels was "Hang on, where's
> all the stuff from the E3 demo?" While his explanation is a little
> long on conspiracy and short on facts, it wouldn't surprise me if
> there was a germ of truth there. M$ will definitely want Halo 3 as an
> Xbox 2 launch title. If it contains a modified New Mombassa level will
> you be coming back to apologise...?

It will be very old news by then, it's been out for Halo CE for months.

Zanzibar from Halo2 has been out for several weeks also, and it's very
popular. It was funny looking at the trailers and seeing stuff that I had
already played, before H2 was even released.

-Russ.
November 15, 2004 1:20:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Lee@DVDDebate" <lee@nospamdvddebate.com> wrote in message news:<fi0hp01o10kc57heicpd5iqp6etkjrq4dr@4ax.com>...
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:47:34 -0000, "Chowny A.K.A. Mr 6000 SUX"
> <sdchown@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> >> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
> >
> >I'd debate whether or not its interesting with you. To me it seems that this
> >dude is clearly off his meds.
> >
> Really? You don't see *anything* interesting in what he's written? My
> initial reaction to the game after a few levels was "Hang on, where's
> all the stuff from the E3 demo?" While his explanation is a little
> long on conspiracy and short on facts, it wouldn't surprise me if
> there was a germ of truth there. M$ will definitely want Halo 3 as an
> Xbox 2 launch title. If it contains a modified New Mombassa level will
> you be coming back to apologise...?

I take it you've never been to an industry trade show like E3. Many
times the 'demos' they have on display there (even the playable ones)
have little in common with the final product. Those demos are usually
thrown together at the last minute with a lot of oomph and the kitchen
sink as well to generate interest in the game with important industry
press. Very rarely do you actually a see real WIP (Work In Progress)
on the show floor, and in the time it takes to set up and tear down
for the show (and the actual show itself) the real WIP version of a
game may have changed dramatically. I'm not surprised at all that
Halo 2 turned out to be different that what it was marketed as, those
ad campaigns have to made up to year in advance of the game -- Blame
the ad agency and not Bungie and M$.

Case in point: At E3 '98 in Atlanta I was pretty stoked at the
Playstation Asteroids remake that Activision was showing in their
booth, it played well and was a solid single and two player
experience. I was pretty shocked to find that the final retail
product that surfaced later was completely unlike the demo I played in
Atlanta, and in IMO took a turn for the worse.

As for their being more vocal tracks existing for Halo 2 than what you
heard in the final product -- well, of course there are! There are
always multiple takes, adlibs, etc and they get the most they can out
of the actors in the studio time budgeted. It can be quite costly to
loop (redub) voices after the fact due to conflicts in the actors
schedules and booking studio time to redo one line is not very cost
effective. I had the pleasure of playing a prerelease version of
Playstation Soul Reaver that had *a lot* of the original lines left
in, with some really good and dramatic monologues form Raziel. Most
of these were cut because it broke up the action and didn't fit with
the pacing of the game. This is the reason why in movies the editor
and the director need to be two different people. A director left to
his own devices will nbaturally want to leave everything in, sometimes
to the detriment of the entire film. The same thing happens in video
games.

The OP's diatribe was probably locked because all he was doing was
pointing out stuff that HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN THE GAME INDUSTRY,
with practially every game. I don't blame Bungie for locking it
because all it was serving to do was incite other people and was not
productive.

There's no big conspiracy going on.
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 1:49:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

It seems that you don't know MS, what they presented at the E3 was,
precisely a *DEMO*. Nothing to do with the real thing.

--
Sal 9000
sal9000mx@hotmail.com


"Lee@DVDDebate" <lee@nospamdvddebate.com> wrote in message
news:fi0hp01o10kc57heicpd5iqp6etkjrq4dr@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:47:34 -0000, "Chowny A.K.A. Mr 6000 SUX"
> <sdchown@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
>>> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>>
>>I'd debate whether or not its interesting with you. To me it seems that
>>this
>>dude is clearly off his meds.
>>
> Really? You don't see *anything* interesting in what he's written? My
> initial reaction to the game after a few levels was "Hang on, where's
> all the stuff from the E3 demo?" While his explanation is a little
> long on conspiracy and short on facts, it wouldn't surprise me if
> there was a germ of truth there. M$ will definitely want Halo 3 as an
> Xbox 2 launch title. If it contains a modified New Mombassa level will
> you be coming back to apologise...?
>
> Lee.
> --
> Founder, DVD Debate
> http://www.dvddebate.com
> lee at dvddebate dot com
>
> If you told a joke and someone died laughing, could you be found guilty of
> a mans laughter?
>
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 2:02:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>
>
> quote:
>
> notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
> carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
>
> Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
> are called new mombasa.
>
>
> welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
>

While there are some good points, if you took into consideration how much
changed in the original Halo from the first showing on the mac it would fill
a book at this detail level.


The disturbing part is this - why does it read like you got this from
bungie.net forum, yet it was clearly not from the forum? After all, if it
was from the forum, there would be no expletives still showing ("blam"
instead), and it would not refer back to the forums itself.
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 2:18:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo, microsoft.public.xbox.halo, microsoft.public.xbox, alt.games.video.xbox, uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Maurice S. Villarreal wrote:
> It seems that you don't know MS, what they presented at the E3 was,
> precisely a *DEMO*. Nothing to do with the real thing.

Huh!? WinME crashed during the demo and it still crashes everywhere.
Pretty real demo I would say...

To stay onTopic:
Yes, Halo2 is an expansion pack..(" Play Halo on Live(tm) Now") Is it
really that surprising that they did not give you 3 years of work in
Halo2 and wanted to save something for (Halo3 only on xbox3, yeah I
think they will skip '2' and have something that rhymes with PS3)

Frankly I do not mind (did not pay full price for halo2 also) I just
hope they give us a good starting lineup, and I am maybe more concerned
about TopSpin2.. at least the ability to play male Vs female. So that I
can play against my wife's avatar and put all the debates to rest.
Currently I win with mine and she wins with hers :) 
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 2:22:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

On 11/15/2004 10:27 AM, Ocelot spake thusly:

> Case in point: At E3 '98 in Atlanta

Dude! You are OLD SCHOOL!

> As for their being more vocal tracks existing for Halo 2 than what you
> heard in the final product -- well, of course there are!

Bungie has said in the past they spent a LOT of time working on the E3 2003
demo, basically as though it were a side project to the game itself.
Apparently that included making demo-specific cutscenes, V.O. (Cortaana's
audio outtakes from the E3 demo are or were on Bungie's website at one time)
and whatnot.

I wish there had been more levels set on earth. But the E3 2003 level would
have been impossible for a player to do the way it was shown. What if you
decided to go it on foot, or drive the Warthog instead of getting in the
turret position? How would the player know how to lead the Phantoms away
from the Marines? It was a HEAVILY scripted demo that was clearly never
meant for the game itself. I found the Outskirts street fighting and the
tunnel run to be a decent substitute.

> The OP's diatribe was probably locked because all he was doing was
> pointing out stuff that HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN THE GAME INDUSTRY,
> with practially every game.

Oh, WHATEVER. Everyone KNOWS that M$ made Bungie change the game and then
sent briefcases full of money to each and every game reviewer so that they'd
give it positive reviews. Don't try to cloud the issue with your "logic" and
"reality".

-Z-
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 2:25:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo, microsoft.public.xbox.halo, microsoft.public.xbox, alt.games.video.xbox, uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

xTenn wrote:
>
> The disturbing part is this - why does it read like you got this from

> bungie.net forum, yet it was clearly not from the forum? After all,
if it
> was from the forum, there would be no expletives still showing
("blam"
> instead), and it would not refer back to the forums itself.

You missed this bit:
"I'll try to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I
can't reference my original post because it has since been removed."
Someone wrote it again.. felt quite strongly maybe..
November 15, 2004 3:05:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Radeon350 wrote:
> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.

<snip>

There are alot of good points there and certainly alot of the content we
were led to believe would appear in the game is missing. New Mombasa did
look like the kind of city-based fighting that would kick arse in the
context of single-player and sadly it's not there.
I certainly won't post spoilers but the use of characters and locations in
this game is just all over the place and is not held together by a
convincing story IMO. I read a good, and fair, review that stated how the
level design emphasised the game's corridor-based structure. We always knew
that, and had no problems with it. But there should have been more of an
effort to design levels that disguised this to complement the improvement in
the combat and new weaponary.

Not sure where the poster is going with the Microsoft angle or what the
so-called conspiracy is. Fact is people were going to buy this game
regardless of the story. And people will still buy Halo 3 regardless of
whether the best levels were included in the sequel.

Underwhelming then in single-player (still better than most other FPSers of
course) but quite excellent with Xbox Live. It's definitely been a worthy
purchase but I don't think Bungie have produced another masterpiece here.
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 5:32:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"DNA" <susenets2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1100546738.995164.156210@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> You missed this bit:
> "I'll try to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I
> can't reference my original post because it has since been removed."
> Someone wrote it again.. felt quite strongly maybe..


Yep, saw that. Which again shows that it did not come from bungie.net...
No big deal, but interesting.
Anonymous
November 15, 2004 5:54:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...

> would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
> they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
> certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
> their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
> would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
> finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
> wouldn't."

There are other issues as well - Halo 2 HUD is cut-off on a very large
number of TVs when run in 480p - tons of posts on this issue. My particular
TV - Sony kp53hs10 has the image cut-off in both 480p AND 480i so the game
is worthless to me.

As far as the game being cut to hell...that's nothing new when MS is
involved - take a look at what happened to Fable.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 2:29:12 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Whatever, Buck Naked.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 5:25:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

<snip>

If I remember rightly there is a quote from a Bungie employee out there
somewhere that states 100% of the game takes place on Earth and ONLy on
Earth. Can anyone please explain?
November 16, 2004 5:25:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"*****General" <*****General@j.invalid> wrote in message news:<Gydmd.378$Y51.35@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net>...
> <snip>
>
> If I remember rightly there is a quote from a Bungie employee out there
> somewhere that states 100% of the game takes place on Earth and ONLy on
> Earth. Can anyone please explain?

Explain what? I would say it's pretty obvious that the Bungie employee
was wrong, if he did say that. Whether he's wrong because the
direction of the game changed, or he's wrong because he heard a false
rumor or misinterpreted something, who knows/who cares? The game is
better than if it had taken place on Earth.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 9:53:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

pezoids wrote:
> Whatever, Buck Naked.
>

Mystery solved. Excellent work!


--
Scott

Game Pilgrimage
http://users4.ev1.net/~sheath
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 10:18:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

That may have been their original plan, but if I remember correctly, that
was shortly after the game's announcement, which gives plenty of time for
Bungie to have come up with new ideas.


On 11/15/04 8:25 PM, in article Gydmd.378$Y51.35@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net,
"*****General" <*****General@j.invalid> wrote:

> <snip>
>
> If I remember rightly there is a quote from a Bungie employee out there
> somewhere that states 100% of the game takes place on Earth and ONLy on
> Earth. Can anyone please explain?
>
>
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 5:35:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

They really should have impressed upon the public that what they saw at e3
was only a demo. Those who know e3 well, and those who've been there, would
know this, but the general population who saw it wouldn't.


"Ocelot" <rob_ocelot@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:36249131.0411150927.55c37999@posting.google.com...
> "Lee@DVDDebate" <lee@nospamdvddebate.com> wrote in message
> news:<fi0hp01o10kc57heicpd5iqp6etkjrq4dr@4ax.com>...
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:47:34 -0000, "Chowny A.K.A. Mr 6000 SUX"
>> <sdchown@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
>> >> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>> >
>> >I'd debate whether or not its interesting with you. To me it seems that
>> >this
>> >dude is clearly off his meds.
>> >
>> Really? You don't see *anything* interesting in what he's written? My
>> initial reaction to the game after a few levels was "Hang on, where's
>> all the stuff from the E3 demo?" While his explanation is a little
>> long on conspiracy and short on facts, it wouldn't surprise me if
>> there was a germ of truth there. M$ will definitely want Halo 3 as an
>> Xbox 2 launch title. If it contains a modified New Mombassa level will
>> you be coming back to apologise...?
>
> I take it you've never been to an industry trade show like E3. Many
> times the 'demos' they have on display there (even the playable ones)
> have little in common with the final product. Those demos are usually
> thrown together at the last minute with a lot of oomph and the kitchen
> sink as well to generate interest in the game with important industry
> press. Very rarely do you actually a see real WIP (Work In Progress)
> on the show floor, and in the time it takes to set up and tear down
> for the show (and the actual show itself) the real WIP version of a
> game may have changed dramatically. I'm not surprised at all that
> Halo 2 turned out to be different that what it was marketed as, those
> ad campaigns have to made up to year in advance of the game -- Blame
> the ad agency and not Bungie and M$.
>
> Case in point: At E3 '98 in Atlanta I was pretty stoked at the
> Playstation Asteroids remake that Activision was showing in their
> booth, it played well and was a solid single and two player
> experience. I was pretty shocked to find that the final retail
> product that surfaced later was completely unlike the demo I played in
> Atlanta, and in IMO took a turn for the worse.
>
> As for their being more vocal tracks existing for Halo 2 than what you
> heard in the final product -- well, of course there are! There are
> always multiple takes, adlibs, etc and they get the most they can out
> of the actors in the studio time budgeted. It can be quite costly to
> loop (redub) voices after the fact due to conflicts in the actors
> schedules and booking studio time to redo one line is not very cost
> effective. I had the pleasure of playing a prerelease version of
> Playstation Soul Reaver that had *a lot* of the original lines left
> in, with some really good and dramatic monologues form Raziel. Most
> of these were cut because it broke up the action and didn't fit with
> the pacing of the game. This is the reason why in movies the editor
> and the director need to be two different people. A director left to
> his own devices will nbaturally want to leave everything in, sometimes
> to the detriment of the entire film. The same thing happens in video
> games.
>
> The OP's diatribe was probably locked because all he was doing was
> pointing out stuff that HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN THE GAME INDUSTRY,
> with practially every game. I don't blame Bungie for locking it
> because all it was serving to do was incite other people and was not
> productive.
>
> There's no big conspiracy going on.
November 16, 2004 5:38:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Maurice S. Villarreal" <msvillarreal@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2vs4vrF2o1l0cU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> It seems that you don't know MS, what they presented at the E3 was,
> precisely a *DEMO*. Nothing to do with the real thing.
>
> --
> Sal 9000
> sal9000mx@hotmail.com
>

Well if it was nothing to do with the real thing there sure were a lot of
similarities. I beleive the point is, if it was going to be the same why
wasnt it ?, if it were going to be different, why wasnt it ?

Why was it a hotch potch of the two and not a very good one at that. I
really do think he has some valid points. Im sure Bungie said there would be
no Halo 3. I would suggest Microshaft has put pressure on to have Halo3 for
the Next box and they have done a re jig and kept the earth based storyline
for that. After Halo 2 its hard to see how there couldnt be a Halo 3.

Si
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 5:44:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

The story itself was good, I enjoyed it and wasn't that upset at the ending.
However, the story wasn't told very well. It's messy. Real messy. Halo 1's
story was also not that original, but it was good, the difference is that
halo 1's was told very well, when you played it you felt like you were
working with the story. Yet, in Halo 2, the story seems more of an excuse to
move you about the place, rather than making you feel an extension of it,
because it doesn't flow very nicely.

It's not because of the arbiter either, plenty of games/movies/books have
switched point of view, changed completely, and still kept the flow well
where, eventually, the two or more points of views begin to combine. Bungie
did an awful job of integrating the arbiter properly into the story. I think
they should have got Eric Nyland, who authored the first and third halo
books (which are really brilliant books in themselves), to write the story.
If he did, he was restricted greatly, or bungie didn't understand what he
was saying, because he would never have written a story that was terribly
conveyed.


"Keith" <kjordan1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:82de20b3.0411150835.776a4a45@posting.google.com...
>I think the story is stronger than in the first game, in terms of
> being developed, complex and rich. I think that a lot of people are
> elevating the first game unrealistically due to sentimental reasons.
>
> Let's get down to brass tacks:
>
> The story of the first game is that you find a mysterious ring world,
> you land on it, you fight Covenant, the Flood get released, and you
> blow up the ring world to kill them all. That's it.
>
> The majesty of Halo comes from its simplicity, its understatement and
> its maturity. Those things are typical of decent movies but are not
> typical of video games. Example: at the end of Halo 1, Cortana's voice
> is defensive and conflicted as she says "we did what we had to do ...
> for Earth! A whole Covenant armada ... and the Flood ..!" The reason
> is because Cortana and the Chief know that they probably blew up some
> Marines along with the enemy.
>
> Halo 2 is rich in many of those same ways. I could give examples, but
> they would be spoilers. Here's one from very early in the game,
> though: "People need heroes. So, smile, Chief! ... While we've still
> got something to smile about."
>
> Halo 1 is more original, in the same way that Star Wars was more
> original than The Empire Strikes Back - Halo 1 created the world, and
> Halo 2 is just living in it. But aside from that, I think that the
> elevation of Halo 1's story over Halo 2's is emotional rather than
> rational. I think the fundamental reasons are that people want to be
> amazed and stunned as they were in 2001 by Halo, and that's not
> feasible with a sequel; also, I think people don't completely
> appreciate what Bungie is doing with the Arbiter portions of the game.
>
> "Adam" <adam.anderson@ozonline.com.au> wrote in message
> news:<eJuXHLvyEHA.2752@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
>> I'm with ya mate, there's some pretty strong statements there that have a
>> strong case.
>> ie. earth needs your help, for 1 level?
>>
>>
>>
>> "Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
>> > FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
>> > shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > quote:
>> >
>> > "Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
>> > close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
>> > forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
>> > Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
>> > mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
>> > appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
>> > to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
>> > reference my original post because it has since been removed.
>> >
>> > The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
>> > intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
>> > worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
>> > cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
>> > you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
>> > notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
>> > carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
>> > reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
>> > exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
>> > chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
>> > What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
>> > explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.
>> >
>> > Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
>> > New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
>> > the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
>> > earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
>> > buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
>> > mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
>> > Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
>> > around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
>> > lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
>> > convenant invasion of earth.
>> >
>> > Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
>> > "god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
>> > covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
>> > There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
>> > end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
>> > and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
>> > went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?
>> >
>> > The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
>> > minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
>> > the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
>> > with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
>> > pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
>> > same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
>> > shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
>> > same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
>> > except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
>> > at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
>> > where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
>> > How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
>> > cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
>> > seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
>> > the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
>> > information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
>> > this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
>> > last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
>> > the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
>> > or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
>> > rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
>> > but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
>> > year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
>> > missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
>> > spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
>> > not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
>> > humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
>> > complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
>> > point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
>> > conspiracy.
>> >
>> > Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
>> > direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
>> > ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
>> > was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
>> > Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
>> > filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
>> > check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
>> > buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
>> > yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
>> > from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
>> > covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
>> > level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
>> > vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
>> > models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
>> > scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
>> > level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
>> > design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
>> > and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
>> > campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
>> > things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
>> > there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
>> > thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
>> > implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
>> > between may 2003 and november 9th?
>> >
>> > Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
>> > its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
>> > focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
>> > focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
>> > intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
>> > earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
>> > dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
>> > what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
>> > we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
>> > believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
>> > one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
>> > "promised" to us.
>> >
>> > Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
>> > almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
>> > mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
>> > the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
>> > as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
>> > a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
>> > was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
>> > half-assed version that we got.
>> >
>> > In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
>> > think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
>> > have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
>> > easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
>> > because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
>> > that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
>> > game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
>> > vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
>> > ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
>> > that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
>> > the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
>> > everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
>> > the godliness of what they had in store for us.
>> >
>> > Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
>> > are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
>> > (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
>> > reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
>> > catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
>> > would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
>> > they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
>> > certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
>> > their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
>> > would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
>> > finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
>> > wouldn't."
>> >
>> >
>> > welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
>> >
>> > maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 5:50:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

but all pr stuff went through the content manager (frankie) so i really do
doubt that. If it were true, everyone would have posted it by now (unless
you got it from a secret source that no one knows about/doesn't exist).


"*****General" <*****General@j.invalid> wrote in message
news:Gydmd.378$Y51.35@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
> <snip>
>
> If I remember rightly there is a quote from a Bungie employee out there
> somewhere that states 100% of the game takes place on Earth and ONLy on
> Earth. Can anyone please explain?
>
>
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 9:24:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 at 16:02 GMT, <xTennRemovePart@tds.net> wrote:

> The disturbing part is this - why does it read like you got this from
> bungie.net forum, yet it was clearly not from the forum? After all, if it
> was from the forum, there would be no expletives still showing ("blam"
> instead), and it would not refer back to the forums itself.

Perhaps it was written offline and pasted into the forum.



--
L.V.X., brother mouse
http://cbsrmt.mousetrap.net/RMTdb/ CBS Radio Mystery Theater database
http://greyhound.mousetrap.net/altus/ retired racing greyhound
http://www.mousetrap.net/~mouse/cs.html How to get good phone support

Riffing on Hanns Johst: "Whenever I hear the word 'values' I release
the safety-catch on my pistol."
November 16, 2004 9:27:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

as correct as you might be, how is this halo? I mean, theres no halo above
earth so either the bungie dude screwed up and told fibs or..... umm.. yeah
you get the point.


"*****General" <*****General@j.invalid> wrote in message
news:Gydmd.378$Y51.35@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
> <snip>
>
> If I remember rightly there is a quote from a Bungie employee out there
> somewhere that states 100% of the game takes place on Earth and ONLy on
> Earth. Can anyone please explain?
>
>
November 17, 2004 12:11:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

ScoopeX wrote:
> "Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
>
> <SNIPPED RUBBISH>

<MORE SNIPPED RUBBISH>

Nice subject line change but... Halo 2 is not a great game. It's a very
good game and I like it but's certainly not great.

I think some people are naive to think that MS wouldn't strong arm
Bungie into making changes that would be advantageous to both companies
down the road. Halo 2 was a guaranteed money maker from the start (all
the pre orders and good feelings about the original Halo insured that)
so to monkey with the plot line a bit to insure big hype for Halo 3 is
probably not beyond belief. The cliff hanger ending feels tacked on (as
does the teaser at the end of the credits with Cortana and the God-like
flood tentacle creature left on that deserted Covenant base). What
better way to insure that people buy Xbox 2 than to have Halo 3 as an
Xbox 2 only title and have all of us Halo fans dying to know how the
story ends (or continues)? From a business standpoint it's worth it to
MS to have Bungie do what needs to be done.
Anonymous
November 17, 2004 11:04:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>
>


Banninated? Good lord--that's as touchy as these MS groups. FWIW, I agree
with about 95% of what this fellow says--to a large degree. I could have
written most of it myself. The multiplayer *is* great, but New Mombassa is
*DEAD*. D-E-A-D, dead.

"From point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
conspiracy."

ooooooh, snap!

Dr.z3n
Anonymous
November 18, 2004 12:21:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

*SPOILERS*


"FenceSitter" <ucphenom82@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:71b335e.0411151116.2c01d5a0@posting.google.com...
>
> I haven't seen anybody talk about this, so I'll throw it out here: I
> think the Arbiter sequence could have been a separate game entirely.
> In fact, I would love to play a game in which I am one of those former
> arbiters. The way the prophet and the arbiter talked about the
> preceding arbiters made it sound like there would be a good story
> behind each one. I suppose it doesn't have to actually be an arbiter,
> though. I would love to play an elite commander sent to a new world
> to assimilate the inhabitants (the brutes, perhaps?) into the
> Covenant. Something like that, anyway. As long as there is no flood,
> of course!

Ya, I agree. "The taming of the Hunters, and the "Grunt rebellion" omg.
Imagine mowing down hundreds of feral grunts while they all screamed like
little bitches!


Dr.z3n
Anonymous
November 18, 2004 12:24:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Ocelot" <rob_ocelot@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:36249131.0411150927.55c37999@posting.google.com...
> "Lee@DVDDebate" <lee@nospamdvddebate.com> wrote in message
> news:<fi0hp01o10kc57heicpd5iqp6etkjrq4dr@4ax.com>...
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:47:34 -0000, "Chowny A.K.A. Mr 6000 SUX"
>> <sdchown@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
>> >> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>> >
>> >I'd debate whether or not its interesting with you. To me it seems that
>> >this
>> >dude is clearly off his meds.
>> >
>> Really? You don't see *anything* interesting in what he's written? My
>> initial reaction to the game after a few levels was "Hang on, where's
>> all the stuff from the E3 demo?" While his explanation is a little
>> long on conspiracy and short on facts, it wouldn't surprise me if
>> there was a germ of truth there. M$ will definitely want Halo 3 as an
>> Xbox 2 launch title. If it contains a modified New Mombassa level will
>> you be coming back to apologise...?
>
> I take it you've never been to an industry trade show like E3. Many
> times the 'demos' they have on display there (even the playable ones)
> have little in common with the final product. Those demos are usually
> thrown together at the last minute with a lot of oomph and the kitchen
> sink as well to generate interest in the game with important industry
> press. Very rarely do you actually a see real WIP (Work In Progress)
> on the show floor, and in the time it takes to set up and tear down
> for the show (and the actual show itself) the real WIP version of a
> game may have changed dramatically. I'm not surprised at all that
> Halo 2 turned out to be different that what it was marketed as, those
> ad campaigns have to made up to year in advance of the game -- Blame
> the ad agency and not Bungie and M$.
>

You make a good point, but it doesn't address his most damning statements:
that the urban scenes are dead, and obviously *unfinished*.

Dr.z3n
November 18, 2004 6:34:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Keith wrote:
> THIS POST CONTAINS SPOILERS. DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED THE
> CAMPAIGN OR DON'T MIND SPOILERS.
>
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>


> - We have learned that the Earth is known as "the Ark" to the
> Forerunners and that it contains the mechanism for activating the
> rings. Of course, this very strongly implies a human-Forerunner
> kinship, which was only hinted at in the first game.

You know, this whole Halo thing seems more and more like a rip from
Ringworld and The Ringworld Engineers by Larry Niven, particularly when you
mention a Forerunner/human link. In Niven's books it was The Pak who would
be the equivalent of the Forerunners.
Not that I care greatly but no one seems to give credit where credit is due.


> Our knowledge of the Forerunners, humans and Covenant have all become
> enormously richer from the first game. Yes, there's a cliffhanger, but
> so what?

Personally I think cliffhangers are lazy and an easy way to end something.
It's appealing to writers because it's harder to tell a good story that
feels complete in itself yet compels you to want more. This story was a bit
of a yawn if you ask me. Hardcore fans would probably be foaming at the
mouth but the average player like me just found it wanting. More of the
story should have been on earth, as the hype clearly indicated it would be -
maybe next time. Oh and no more Arbiter please.


--

Deano
Gamertag: buckskin
Anonymous
November 18, 2004 11:13:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

On 11/17/04 9:34 PM, in article
419c17c6$0$68967$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net, "Deano"
<martin.deanN@gmail.com> wrote:

> Keith wrote:
>> THIS POST CONTAINS SPOILERS. DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED THE
>> CAMPAIGN OR DON'T MIND SPOILERS.
>>
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>>
>
>
>> - We have learned that the Earth is known as "the Ark" to the
>> Forerunners and that it contains the mechanism for activating the
>> rings. Of course, this very strongly implies a human-Forerunner
>> kinship, which was only hinted at in the first game.
>
> You know, this whole Halo thing seems more and more like a rip from
> Ringworld and The Ringworld Engineers by Larry Niven, particularly when you
> mention a Forerunner/human link. In Niven's books it was The Pak who would
> be the equivalent of the Forerunners.
> Not that I care greatly but no one seems to give credit where credit is due.
>
>
>> Our knowledge of the Forerunners, humans and Covenant have all become
>> enormously richer from the first game. Yes, there's a cliffhanger, but
>> so what?
>
> Personally I think cliffhangers are lazy and an easy way to end something.
> It's appealing to writers because it's harder to tell a good story that
> feels complete in itself yet compels you to want more. This story was a bit
> of a yawn if you ask me. Hardcore fans would probably be foaming at the
> mouth but the average player like me just found it wanting. More of the
> story should have been on earth, as the hype clearly indicated it would be -
> maybe next time. Oh and no more Arbiter please.
>

What' wrong with the Arbiter? He's really cool! I hope you can choose which
character you play as in the next game, like separate human and Covenant
campaigns.
November 18, 2004 5:22:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Devala Rees wrote:
> On 11/17/04 9:34 PM, in article
> 419c17c6$0$68967$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net, "Deano"
> <martin.deanN@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Keith wrote:
>>> THIS POST CONTAINS SPOILERS. DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED
>>> THE CAMPAIGN OR DON'T MIND SPOILERS.
>>>
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>>
>>
>>
>>> - We have learned that the Earth is known as "the Ark" to the
>>> Forerunners and that it contains the mechanism for activating the
>>> rings. Of course, this very strongly implies a human-Forerunner
>>> kinship, which was only hinted at in the first game.
>>
>> You know, this whole Halo thing seems more and more like a rip from
>> Ringworld and The Ringworld Engineers by Larry Niven, particularly
>> when you mention a Forerunner/human link. In Niven's books it was
>> The Pak who would be the equivalent of the Forerunners.
>> Not that I care greatly but no one seems to give credit where credit
>> is due.
>>
>>
>>> Our knowledge of the Forerunners, humans and Covenant have all
>>> become enormously richer from the first game. Yes, there's a
>>> cliffhanger, but so what?
>>
>> Personally I think cliffhangers are lazy and an easy way to end
>> something. It's appealing to writers because it's harder to tell a
>> good story that feels complete in itself yet compels you to want
>> more. This story was a bit of a yawn if you ask me. Hardcore fans
>> would probably be foaming at the mouth but the average player like
>> me just found it wanting. More of the story should have been on
>> earth, as the hype clearly indicated it would be - maybe next time.
>> Oh and no more Arbiter please.
>>
>
> What' wrong with the Arbiter? He's really cool! I hope you can choose
> which character you play as in the next game, like separate human and
> Covenant campaigns.

Nothing per se, but where do you draw the line? Why couldn't I play as
Sarge? He seems to have a big role that we hardly see explored. Should it
be a squad-based game or summat? Should there be puzzles? Oh dear...
slippery slope and all that.

Personally just keep it all MC. Other viewpoints can be expressed in the
cutscenes. It would have been alot simpler and less confusing. Mind you it
was cool being on the side of the Hunters. Now that i've finished it I must
say the levels with the Brutes at the end were quite good and probably the
high point for me.

--

Deano
Gamertag: buckskin
November 18, 2004 8:56:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Deano wrote:

> Keith wrote:
>
>>THIS POST CONTAINS SPOILERS. DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED THE
>>CAMPAIGN OR DON'T MIND SPOILERS.
>>
>>
>>>.
>>>.
>>>.
>>>.
>>>.
>>>
>
>
>
>>- We have learned that the Earth is known as "the Ark" to the
>>Forerunners and that it contains the mechanism for activating the
>>rings. Of course, this very strongly implies a human-Forerunner
>>kinship, which was only hinted at in the first game.
>
>
> You know, this whole Halo thing seems more and more like a rip from
> Ringworld and The Ringworld Engineers by Larry Niven, particularly when you
> mention a Forerunner/human link. In Niven's books it was The Pak who would
> be the equivalent of the Forerunners.
> Not that I care greatly but no one seems to give credit where credit is due.

I agree with you. From the first time I played H1 I said to myself "who
ever wrote this loved reading Niven". I mentioned this to a few of my
fellow Halo Heads and they all went "who?"
November 18, 2004 11:05:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Buster wrote:
> Deano wrote:
>
>> Keith wrote:
>>
>>> THIS POST CONTAINS SPOILERS. DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED
>>> THE CAMPAIGN OR DON'T MIND SPOILERS.
>>>
>>>
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> - We have learned that the Earth is known as "the Ark" to the
>>> Forerunners and that it contains the mechanism for activating the
>>> rings. Of course, this very strongly implies a human-Forerunner
>>> kinship, which was only hinted at in the first game.
>>
>>
>> You know, this whole Halo thing seems more and more like a rip from
>> Ringworld and The Ringworld Engineers by Larry Niven, particularly
>> when you mention a Forerunner/human link. In Niven's books it was
>> The Pak who would be the equivalent of the Forerunners.
>> Not that I care greatly but no one seems to give credit where credit
>> is due.
>
> I agree with you. From the first time I played H1 I said to myself
> "who ever wrote this loved reading Niven". I mentioned this to a few
> of my fellow Halo Heads and they all went "who?"

The Pak were the scariest thing ever :) .

It does make me wonder how there can be sunlight on Halo when there's no sun
in the middle...



--
Anonymous
November 18, 2004 11:05:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

On 11/18/04 2:05 PM, in article
419d0025$0$13854$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net, "Deano"
<martin.deanN@gmail.com> wrote:

> Buster wrote:
>> Deano wrote:
>>
>>> Keith wrote:
>>>
>>>> THIS POST CONTAINS SPOILERS. DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED
>>>> THE CAMPAIGN OR DON'T MIND SPOILERS.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> .
>>>>> .
>>>>> .
>>>>> .
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - We have learned that the Earth is known as "the Ark" to the
>>>> Forerunners and that it contains the mechanism for activating the
>>>> rings. Of course, this very strongly implies a human-Forerunner
>>>> kinship, which was only hinted at in the first game.
>>>
>>>
>>> You know, this whole Halo thing seems more and more like a rip from
>>> Ringworld and The Ringworld Engineers by Larry Niven, particularly
>>> when you mention a Forerunner/human link. In Niven's books it was
>>> The Pak who would be the equivalent of the Forerunners.
>>> Not that I care greatly but no one seems to give credit where credit
>>> is due.
>>
>> I agree with you. From the first time I played H1 I said to myself
>> "who ever wrote this loved reading Niven". I mentioned this to a few
>> of my fellow Halo Heads and they all went "who?"
>
> The Pak were the scariest thing ever :) .
>
> It does make me wonder how there can be sunlight on Halo when there's no sun
> in the middle...
>
>

It's at an angle. It shines past one side of the ring and lights the other,
making half of the ring's interior day and half of it night at a time. Same
goes for the exterior, though you're never on it because its spin would
fling you into space :) 
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 11:31:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

While playing H2 I always have a little niggling feeling at the back of my
mind that something aint quite right with the game. And this is inspite of
the fact I like the game. This post - wherever it was made - seems to have
revived those feelings in me, and made them more real. Whatever the game's
pros and cons, you have to consider the *possibility* that we have been had,
folks. But having said that, game demos can't and don't always bare any
relation to the final product. Even so, Bungie are at fault for not making
that more clear to the public for the E3 demo. For some reason we were all
lead to believe it was an actual snippet of H2 gameplay, and *not* a concept
movie. If there is to be a Halo 3, how do we know the same controversy
wouldn't happen again?

Anyhow, even as I play H2 I will be having doubts, and suspicions about the
goings on behind the scenes, and they are unlikely to go away. :(  And for
what it's worth, the "Arbiter" level is my favourite level. Ironically,
playing as MC just doesn't seem the same. It almost seems - dare I say -
boring?? Playing as MC boring! Jeez Bungie have reeeeeeeeeally ****** up.
"Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>
>
>
>
> quote:
>
> "Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
> close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
> forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
> Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
> mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
> appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
> to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
> reference my original post because it has since been removed.
>
> The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
> intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
> worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
> cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
> you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
> notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
> carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
> reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
> exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
> chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
> What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
> explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.
>
> Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
> New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
> the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
> earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
> buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
> mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
> Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
> around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
> lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
> convenant invasion of earth.
>
> Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
> "god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
> covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
> There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
> end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
> and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
> went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?
>
> The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
> minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
> the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
> with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
> pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
> same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
> shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
> same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
> except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
> at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
> where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
> How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
> cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
> seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
> the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
> information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
> this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
> last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
> the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
> or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
> rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
> but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
> year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
> missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
> spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
> not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
> humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
> complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
> point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
> conspiracy.
>
> Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
> direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
> ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
> was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
> Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
> filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
> check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
> buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
> yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
> from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
> covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
> level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
> vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
> models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
> scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
> level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
> design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
> and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
> campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
> things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
> there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
> thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
> implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
> between may 2003 and november 9th?
>
> Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
> its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
> focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
> focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
> intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
> earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
> dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
> what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
> we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
> believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
> one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
> "promised" to us.
>
> Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
> almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
> mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
> the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
> as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
> a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
> was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
> half-assed version that we got.
>
> In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
> think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
> have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
> easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
> because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
> that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
> game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
> vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
> ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
> that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
> the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
> everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
> the godliness of what they had in store for us.
>
> Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
> are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
> (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
> reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
> catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
> would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
> they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
> certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
> their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
> would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
> finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
> wouldn't."
>
>
> welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
>
> maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 11:31:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

I definitely think that the final product wasn't what Bungie intended from
the beginning. After all we were shown, like earth flaming and surrounded by
a blockade of Covenant warships and all that, it's obvious that something
got changed in mid-development. I agree to the Arbiter level being the best.
I love the dogfight in the storm. Playing as the MC isn't quite as rewarding
as in the first game, I agree. It seems that he's a little less cool.

On 12/4/04 2:31 PM, in article u3GqZAk2EHA.2592@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl,
"Tim.T" <jblack 2001 at btopenworld dot com> wrote:

> While playing H2 I always have a little niggling feeling at the back of my
> mind that something aint quite right with the game. And this is inspite of
> the fact I like the game. This post - wherever it was made - seems to have
> revived those feelings in me, and made them more real. Whatever the game's
> pros and cons, you have to consider the *possibility* that we have been had,
> folks. But having said that, game demos can't and don't always bare any
> relation to the final product. Even so, Bungie are at fault for not making
> that more clear to the public for the E3 demo. For some reason we were all
> lead to believe it was an actual snippet of H2 gameplay, and *not* a concept
> movie. If there is to be a Halo 3, how do we know the same controversy
> wouldn't happen again?
>
> Anyhow, even as I play H2 I will be having doubts, and suspicions about the
> goings on behind the scenes, and they are unlikely to go away. :(  And for
> what it's worth, the "Arbiter" level is my favourite level. Ironically,
> playing as MC just doesn't seem the same. It almost seems - dare I say -
> boring?? Playing as MC boring! Jeez Bungie have reeeeeeeeeally ****** up.
> "Radeon350" <Radeon350@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ab1f5a92.0411142212.866783e@posting.google.com...
>> FYI I didn't write this, it was someone at bungie.net who got banned
>> shortly afterwards. It's and interesting read though.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> quote:
>>
>> "Make of this what you will, but maybe I said something a little too
>> close to the truth and someone nervous. My original post on the bungie
>> forums got 42 replies within 50 minutes and then the topic was locked.
>> Shortly after that I was blacklisted (banned) from the forums. Keep in
>> mind the bungie forums are automatically censored, so curse words
>> appear as "-blam-", so I know I wasn't banned for language. I'll try
>> to restate this word for word as best as possible, but I can't
>> reference my original post because it has since been removed.
>>
>> The game of Halo 2 as it exists now is not what bungie initially
>> intended for it to be, nor is this close to the final product they
>> worked three years on to complete. Lets start with the Halo 2
>> cinematic trailer (released in september of 2002). MC is on a ship and
>> you can hear random chatter over his comm as he walks down a corridor:
>> notice you'll hear things like "that's not enough to stop an assault
>> carrier" and "its like the god damn apocolypse". They have called for
>> reinforcements and the reinforcements are MC alone -- one man,
>> exciting enough that it still gives me goosebumps. So then master
>> chief ejects from the ships air lock and makes his dive towards earth.
>> What do you see? A whole continent saturated with fire and nuclear
>> explosions. That does seem pretty apocolyptic.
>>
>> Now lets move on to the E3 demo (released in may 2003). MC flies into
>> New Mombasa on a pelican with the sarge and a few ODSTs. When he exits
>> the pelican, yes, it would appear to be a full-scale invasion of
>> earth. Wounded soldiers all around, huge covenant artillery blasting
>> buildings, etc... exciting! He makes his run through the city and then
>> mans the gun on the back of the gauss hog. He rolls through New
>> Mombasa with a couple marines, you see a few other hogs rolling
>> around, streets intersecting in and out of one another, passages that
>> lead to other areas... its a battle on a pretty large scale. A
>> convenant invasion of earth.
>>
>> Compare these situations to the actual game of Halo 2. Where is the
>> "god damn apocolypse"? Earth isnt even being invaded. A few small
>> covenant platoons go to earth for one reason or another and thats it.
>> There isnt even a hint of earth being invaded in halo 2 until the very
>> end, then the game ends. You can see earth from space station cairo
>> and its untouched. When it comes to all this missing storyline, what
>> went wrong? What changed? Who intervened?
>>
>> The -single- level that does take place on earth is -OBVIOUSLY- a last
>> minute change. Notice some similarities between this earth level and
>> the new mombasa level from the E3 demo. MC still flies in on a pelican
>> with the sarge and some marines, not ODSTs this time. If you really
>> pay attention you can see the marines in the pelican doing the exact
>> same movements as the ODSTs in the E3 demo -EXACTLY-. one marine
>> shoves a clip into his rifle while another puts on his helmet, the
>> same as the ODSTs in the E3 demo. Sarge even says the same stuff
>> except this time he has a little monologue about 'regret'. Also notice
>> at the start of this level, there is no text on screen telling you
>> where you are headed. No mention of the city name, date or location.
>> How odd is that? When the game starts and you see the opening
>> cinematic, you get a date and you are told exactly what you are
>> seeing; the covenant high charity. Even in the new mombasa level on
>> the E3 demo, you are given the same information. Strangely enough this
>> information is missing in the actual game. Minor inconsistencies like
>> this can only mean a handful of things. This level was added at the
>> last minute to replace the new mombasa level because the direction of
>> the game had taken a serious change in direction because of something
>> or someone. Load up the outskirts level and point your view to the
>> rooftops and tell me what you see. You might not be looking for them
>> but you'll see power lines. You have got to be kidding me. Its the
>> year 2552... Power lines?! Things like this, the inconsistencies and
>> missing -important- cinematic information just do not happen when you
>> spend three years developing a game. It simply does not happen. You do
>> not "hype" a game up to be an awesome showdown on earth between the
>> humans and covenant and then make the -single- earth level in the game
>> complete garbage. My god is that level ever so linear and boring. From
>> point A to point B. Its not the "god damn apocolypse" its a god damn
>> conspiracy.
>>
>> Simply put, Microsoft is greedy. Microsoft made bungie change the
>> direction of the game and gave it that awful cliffhanger ending. They
>> ran out of time because they had to take out a lot of the content that
>> was already in the game and replace it with whatever they could.
>> Propbably why you end up playing as the arbiter so much. Its all
>> filler for the missing content. Watch the limited edition DVD and
>> check out the segment on the mongoose (the human atv). They say it was
>> buggy and didnt handle properly, watch the video and decide for
>> yourself, it was perfectly fine. There are a few misleading statements
>> from bungie employees in this dvd. Its not their fault, they are just
>> covering for microsoft. Like when they say that the new mombasa E3
>> level was the first thing they worked on. That is utter BS. All the
>> vehicles had their physics and mass properties already. The character
>> models and animations were finished. There were cinematics and
>> scripted dialogue from all the real voice actors. There was an entire
>> level designed. Don't tell me they spent the next year and a half to
>> design the 6 other awful levels we got. Even with all the bug testing
>> and all that, is not reasonable. 60+ people were working on the
>> campaign mode while 4 people worked on the multiplayer. Too many
>> things just dont add up. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. If
>> there is truth in the fact that the E3 new mombasa level was the first
>> thing they worked on... which already had so many features already
>> implemented, what in the **** did they do with all that time in
>> between may 2003 and november 9th?
>>
>> Read any publication online or in real life dealing with halo 2 before
>> its release. Whenever someone from bungie spoke about the game, the
>> focus was earth. The cinematic trailer, focus: earth. The E3 demo,
>> focus: earth. It was all supposed to be about earth. Would bungie
>> intentionally mislead us to think that is was going to be all about
>> earth and then smack us in the face with an awful game like this? I
>> dont think so. You cant say that what i expected halo 2 to be was just
>> what i had in my head. It is what we were -lead- to believe and what
>> we were told it would be. This isnt me being disappointed because I
>> believed too much hype -- this is me being disappointed because for
>> one reason or another, "we" didnt the the game of halo 2 that was
>> "promised" to us.
>>
>> Think about it... the E3 gameplay demo was released in may of 2003,
>> almost a full year a half before the release of the game. The new
>> mombasa level was brilliant. They didnt have to keep the scripting for
>> the level, just the level itself. Why take it out? Why not put as much
>> as you can into halo 2 including that level, because it definitely had
>> a place in the game. Oh, im sorry. It had a place in the game as it
>> was originally conceived, but not the greedy stripped down micro$oft
>> half-assed version that we got.
>>
>> In conclusion... what do you think went wrong? You're a fool if you
>> think they just couldnt fit one more level into the game, they could
>> have put the game on two discs and added 20 (we wish) more levels very
>> easily, and microsoft has the money for that. Don't tell me it was
>> because of hardware issues, because its only a map. And dont tell me
>> that you cant include a rocket hog or a personnel transport hog in the
>> game because of hardware issues either, if you can support one
>> vehicle, you can support another. You're being mislead in a number of
>> ways to hide the fact that you've been shafted out of $55 for a game
>> that is shorter than the original and far less enjoyable (aside form
>> the multiplayer which is spectacular). Bungie wanted to give us
>> everything we had hoped for, its just a shame we'll never get to see
>> the godliness of what they had in store for us.
>>
>> Go to www.bungie.net and look at the title for the halo 2 forums. They
>> are called new mombasa. A level that doesnt even exist in the game
>> (now). What kind of reasoning is there for that? Should that be
>> reserved for halo 3 *cough* when you -might- actually get a chance to
>> catch a glimpse of the city. Rubbish. Bungie said many times halo 2
>> would bringe closure and there would be no halo 3. Bungie also said
>> they would "never specify a release date for halo 2 until we are
>> certain we could release a finished product." That statement was on
>> their main website the day that the release date was accounced. So why
>> would they set a date for themselves where they knew they wouldnt
>> finish in time and be forced to take out all kinds of content? They
>> wouldn't."
>>
>>
>> welp, that's it, I'm not getting Halo 2 :p 
>>
>> maybe I'll wait for the deluxe Xbox 2 version.
>
>
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 11:54:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

> And for
> what it's worth, the "Arbiter" level is my favourite level. Ironically,
> playing as MC just doesn't seem the same. It almost seems - dare I say -
> boring?? Playing as MC boring! Jeez Bungie have reeeeeeeeeally ****** up.


Joseph Staten knows why [playing as the MC is boring].
Anonymous
December 5, 2004 12:44:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,microsoft.public.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,uk.games.video.xbox (More info?)

> Playing as the MC isn't quite as rewarding
> as in the first game, I agree. It seems that he's a little less cool.


Joseph Staten knows why.
!