Current Gen war who's the winner

[sKin]

Have you even played Counter Strike?

Yes, I played 2 years in CAL actually. I was quite good at that game. And I fail to see what Counters-Strike had to do with my quote...

The fact of the matter, is that Halo wasn't particularly innovative. Sure, the graphics were good, but if improved graphics were innovation, then the PS3 will be boasting more innovation. It isn't.

Eh. You're not reading what i'm posting. I didn't say Halo was only innovative for one reason, but for mulitiple reasons:

But thats not why it was sooo innovative! Never in an FPS had there been amazing graphics, STUNNING music, an awesome storyline with a huge twist, the ability to ride any vehicle you choose, kick-ass multiplayer, and fluid gameplay with controls that matched it perfectly.

Perfect Dark didn't have any of that. The graphics were on a goldeneye level which everybody had already seen before, the music was blah, the storyline was confusing, the controls were crap (man did I hate the n64 controller...), but I do have to admit the multi-player was pretty fun. I just don't see anything innovative about it im afraid now, and when it came out.

 

[Squall7]

Eh. You're not reading what i'm posting. I didn't say Halo was only innovative for one reason, but for mulitiple reasons:

I did read it. You picked out the wrong part:

Better graphics, clearer sounds and bigger games do not constitute as innovation. It's merely improvement.

Which are some of the reasons why you thought Halo was innovative.

Perfect Dark didn't have any of that. The graphics were on a goldeneye level which everybody had already seen before, the music was blah, the storyline was confusing, the controls were crap (man did I hate the n64 controller...), but I do have to admit the multi-player was pretty fun. I just don't see anything innovative about it im afraid now, and when it came out.

Well that's all opinion really. But fact still remains, Halo is not as innovative as Perfect Dark. Perfect Dark put more into things than previous FPS than Halo did. I'm not saying Halo is a bad game (although I personally think it's over-hyped), all I'm saying is that I would have more fun with Perfect Dark.

P.S. You can't stand a N64 controller but you're fine with an Xbox one? :scared: What kind of Bizzaro-world have I slipped into?:lol:

 

[sKin]

Which are some of the reasons why you thought Halo was innovative.

I could simply say that all Perfect Dark was was just an improvement over Goldeneye. Does that make it right?

Well that's all opinion really. But fact still remains, Halo is not as innovative as Perfect Dark. Perfect Dark put more into things than previous FPS than Halo did. I'm not saying Halo is a bad game (although I personally think it's over-hyped), all I'm saying is that I would have more fun with Perfect Dark.

No no no, that is where you are wrong. That is just your opinoin, not fact, and thus you shouldn't pass it off as fact. If I were to say its a fact that Halo is much more innovative than Perfect Dark, does that make it? There are three types of people who call Halo over-hyped: Nintendo/Sony fans, RPG lovers, and people who have never played Halo. I'm pretty sure you fall into one of those categories.

P.S. You can't stand a N64 controller but you're fine with an Xbox one? :scared: What kind of Bizzaro-world have I slipped into?:lol:

Well back in the day it wasn't so bad, but eh, I just hated how uncomfortable that one analog stick was. Sue me.

 

[Squall7]

I could simply say that all Perfect Dark was was just an improvement over Goldeneye. Does that make it right?

JUST an improvement? No, you're wrong for the simple fact that it introduced certain things, rather than expanded on them. For example, the different personality types for the simulants, the "counter-operative mode" and the dizzying effect when you get hit by certain weapons/punched. Those were completely new, rather than simply improved upon.

No no no, that is where you are wrong. That is just your opinoin, not fact, and thus you shouldn't pass it off as fact. If I were to say its a fact that Halo is much more innovative than Perfect Dark, does that make it? There are three types of people who call Halo over-hyped: Nintendo/Sony fans, RPG lovers, and people who have never played Halo. I'm pretty sure you fall into one of those categories.

My opinions are based on facts. I have played both extensively, and have come to this conclusion based on evidence and a clear understanding and definition of "innovative". I'm not saying it's "better", what I am refuting is that Halo is as innovative as you say it is. There are loads of different types of people that refer to Halo as over-hyped. For example, the non-gamer. How about the anti-microsoft people? If I wasn't a Nintendo fan, I wouldn't be here on this forum. I'm not particularly a fan of RPG (mainly the Final Fantasy series), and I have played the game extensively. Your specific use of words are trying to make out that it's "not normal" for someone to dislike Halo (or think it's over-hyped), and that they must belong to certain catagories, whereas people who don't fit into those catagories automatically think that Halo's reputation is deserved, and not in the least hyped up.

Well back in the day it wasn't so bad, but eh, I just hated how uncomfortable that one analog stick was. Sue me.

Wasn't trying to miff anyone off. To me, the shape and size of the Xbox controller are awkward. I could very easily get on with the N64 controller.

P.S. I think this debate has gone on long enough. If you have more to back up your ideas that Halo is innovative, then please feel free to post them. If it's just gonna be a "I'm right, you're wrong" kind of rant/post, please research before hand and back up your ideas.

 

[Lord Haku]

Thank you squall this guy obviulasy will not shut up about Halo even though you can telling him what innovative is alright skin change the topic man your getting old fast

 

[sKin]

JUST an improvement? No, you're wrong for the simple fact that it introduced certain things, rather than expanded on them. For example, the different personality types for the simulants, the "counter-operative mode" and the dizzying effect when you get hit by certain weapons/punched. Those were completely new, rather than simply improved upon.

Eh eh and another eh. I don't consider a new mode and some dizzying effect to be "innovative", no matter how cool they are. And the counter-operative mode was just a variant of other modes from other previous shooters on the N64, so it wasn't totally fresh.

My opinions are based on facts. I have played both extensively, and have come to this conclusion based on evidence and a clear understanding and definition of "innovative". I'm not saying it's "better", what I am refuting is that Halo is as innovative as you say it is. There are loads of different types of people that refer to Halo as over-hyped. For example, the non-gamer. How about the anti-microsoft people? If I wasn't a Nintendo fan, I wouldn't be here on this forum. I'm not particularly a fan of RPG (mainly the Final Fantasy series), and I have played the game extensively. Your specific use of words are trying to make out that it's "not normal" for someone to dislike Halo (or think it's over-hyped), and that they must belong to certain catagories, whereas people who don't fit into those catagories automatically think that Halo's reputation is deserved, and not in the least hyped up.

I've played both extensively as well, and that still doesn't make my opinoins facts. I understand innovative moreso then you believe (i've argued in Halo's favor MANY many times before this), and I know why it is innovative. I never said Halo was better than Perfect Dark, I was just arguing on the basis of innovativity (word?), which Halo definately has more of. Many people hate Halo. I know this. But it just makes me mad when they have no reason to say it's over-hyped because they usually don't know what they are talking about it.

Wasn't trying to miff anyone off. To me, the shape and size of the Xbox controller are awkward. I could very easily get on with the N64 controller.

The original Xbox controller was terrible, yes, but the Controller S when it first released blew the N64 out of the water.

P.S. I think this debate has gone on long enough. If you have more to back up your ideas that Halo is innovative, then please feel free to post them. If it's just gonna be a "I'm right, you're wrong" kind of rant/post, please research before hand and back up your ideas.

I never said I was right, and I never said you were wrong. I was just trying to emphasize that your opinoin, no matter how vaild it maybe, can not be played off as fact in an argument. Halo was just such an amazing game to me... it sucked me in, absorbed me for hours and hours, and to be honest it has never let go of me. I love that game to death and i'm willing to argue with anybody who says otherwise about it.

Thank you squall this guy obviulasy will not shut up about Halo even though you can telling him what innovative is alright skin change the topic man your getting old fast

Because you guys won't shut up about Halo

 

[ssbb_lover]

I say u'r both making very good points...but i'm going to have to go w/ sKin because he made the last point and it sounded good

THE RANKING:
1.Counter Strike
2.Halo
3.Perfect Dark

Remeber this is just my opinion...not fact...don't u guys flame me...

P.S. I have played all of them so that's not just a n00b's ranking

 

[Squall7]

Eh eh and another eh. I don't consider a new mode and some dizzying effect to be "innovative", no matter how cool they are. And the counter-operative mode was just a variant of other modes from other previous shooters on the N64, so it wasn't totally fresh.

So you accept that it is new and original (even if you don't like it)? What do you define as "innovative" (please don't use examples, use definitions).

I've played both extensively as well, and that still doesn't make my opinoins facts. I understand innovative moreso then you believe (i've argued in Halo's favor MANY many times before this), and I know why it is innovative. I never said Halo was better than Perfect Dark, I was just arguing on the basis of innovativity (word?), which Halo definately has more of. Many people hate Halo. I know this. But it just makes me mad when they have no reason to say it's over-hyped because they usually don't know what they are talking about it.

I have just as much reason to say that Halo is overhyped as much as you have the right to say Perfect Dark is. What I was picking out were features - actual things that backup up my opinions. What you were doing was describing why Halo was "better" (graphics, sound and non-linear gameplay), not innovation. And the reason I think Halo is overrated - is because it does exactly what Quake did, exactly what Doom did, exactly what Perfect Dark did, exactly what Duke Nukem did and exactly what Half-life did. If you were to explain to me in the different methods of rendering screens/new methods of throwing more polygons on the screen, I will gladly accept your explanation, and agree with you. You're just not giving me something "innovative".

The original Xbox controller was terrible, yes, but the Controller S when it first released blew the N64 out of the water.

Looks like a chunky Gamecube controller. It also looks (button positions and such) as the PlayStation controller. I see nothing special about it.

A friend of mine say "You cannot get past the orgasmic experience of the Dreamcast Controller. It pwns all others."

I never said I was right, and I never said you were wrong. I was just trying to emphasize that your opinoin, no matter how vaild it maybe, can not be played off as fact in an argument. Halo was just such an amazing game to me... it sucked me in, absorbed me for hours and hours, and to be honest it has never let go of me. I love that game to death and i'm willing to argue with anybody who says otherwise about it.

I already got that you were hot for Halo. I presented my opinions with backup from facts - innovative game features which weren't implemented before (or even thought of). What you were doing was saying "Halo is innovative because of great visuals, amazing music and non-linear gameplay".
I'll say "it's my opinion", if you do the same:

But thats not why it was sooo innovative! Never in an FPS had there been amazing graphics, STUNNING music, an awesome storyline with a huge twist, the ability to ride any vehicle you choose, kick-ass multiplayer, and fluid gameplay with controls that matched it perfectly. What Halo did to FPS's was nowhere near what Final Fantasy did to RPGS - Halo's on another level in that matter.

- You never indicated that this was "just" your opinion there. A little bit of double standards there methinks...

Because you guys won't shut up about Halo

I'm just pointing out that "innovative" is not the right word for Halo. Saying it's good, exciting, it gets you hot, I don't care - it's just not innovative though.

say u'r both making very good points...but i'm going to have to go w/ sKin because he made the last point and it sounded good

THE RANKING:
1.Counter Strike
2.Halo
3.Perfect Dark

Remeber this is just my opinion...not fact...don't u guys flame me...

P.S. I have played all of them so that's not just a n00b's ranking

You went with Skin because he made the last point? :scared: Meh, I've heard of worse ways of deciding stuff...

 

[Lord Haku]

Alright enough of this argument lets just say they were good game they did somethig brand newe and whatever stop ranking games Halo is just a game a common FPS but a good one at that so is Perfact Dark and Counter Strike we all know that Doom is the best becuase it introduced to that genre that is a fact so lets us praise the fact the doom was the first FPS that spawned them all. Plus what funnier than shooting a pixalted German sherpard? :lol:

 

[sKin]

So you accept that it is new and original (even if you don't like it)? What do you define as "innovative" (please don't use examples, use definitions).

You're over-exaggerating the defination of innovative to adapt it to your needs. I saw nothing new with Perfect Dark, just an improvement over Goldeneye, and once again I still don't understand why your saying it's a fact that Perfect Dark was much more innovative than Halo. Because it's not.

I have just as much reason to say that Halo is overhyped as much as you have the right to say Perfect Dark is. What I was picking out were features - actual things that backup up my opinions. What you were doing was describing why Halo was "better" (graphics, sound and non-linear gameplay), not innovation. And the reason I think Halo is overrated - is because it does exactly what Quake did, exactly what Doom did, exactly what Perfect Dark did, exactly what Duke Nukem did and exactly what Half-life did. If you were to explain to me in the different methods of rendering screens/new methods of throwing more polygons on the screen, I will gladly accept your explanation, and agree with you. You're just not giving me something "innovative".

I never said Perfect Dark was over-hyped, just that it wasn't as innovative as you claim it to be. And the sad thing is you're missing out on what made Halo so awesome and new, and no matter how much I argue you still won't understand. Halo defined FPS's for me in a sense. It took a lone hero, stranded him on a Ring, and set him off on a mission to survive. It was MASSIVE, it was REAL, and most importantly it was FUN. Everything Halo did was perfect, which in itself is amazing and innovative because while most FPS's did somethings right, 99.9% of the time they did something wrong (i.e. Perfect Dark's case). But Halo was a rare exception, which in itself was a pure joy to watch. I still stand by its side: Halo's innovation > Perfect Dark's innovation.

Looks like a chunky Gamecube controller. It also looks (button positions and such) as the PlayStation controller. I see nothing special about it.

A friend of mine say "You cannot get past the orgasmic experience of the Dreamcast Controller. It pwns all others."

Eh. It's all a matter of opinoin. The first Controller S felt amazing in my hands and it's still one of my favorite controllers. ARG, I hated the dreamcast controller! It felt plasticy, cheap, and extremely easy to break. It was bulky, ugly to look at, and it just hurt to hold it for a hours at a time. No way Jose.

I already got that you were hot for Halo. I presented my opinions with backup from facts - innovative game features which weren't implemented before (or even thought of). What you were doing was saying "Halo is innovative because of great visuals, amazing music and non-linear gameplay".
I'll say "it's my opinion", if you do the same:
- You never indicated that this was "just" your opinion there. A little bit of double standards there methinks...

Of course it was just my opinoin, but once again it was based around fact just as much as you claimed your arguement to be. We'll just leave it at that.

I'm just pointing out that "innovative" is not the right word for Halo. Saying it's good, exciting, it gets you hot, I don't care - it's just not innovative though.

Halo is a bunch of words, and Innovative is definately one of them in my book. It took console FPS's to a whole new level, and it set the bar for FPS's to come. Now if that isn't as innovative as some new mode and dizzying effect, I don't know what is.

 

[Squall7]

You're over-exaggerating the defination of innovative to adapt it to your needs. I saw nothing new with Perfect Dark, just an improvement over Goldeneye, and once again I still don't understand why your saying it's a fact that Perfect Dark was much more innovative than Halo. Because it's not.

Exagerating the definition? You're not even following the definition. Saying Perfect Dark is JUST an improvement over Goldeneye is like saying the Wii is JUST an improvement over the Gamecube. I think many people here feel differently about that.

I never said Perfect Dark was over-hyped,

- Quote from earlier -

I disagree. I thought Perfect Dark was a terribly over-rated game when it first came out and I still think so today.

Over-hyped/over-rated meh, it means pretty much the same thing...

just that it wasn't as innovative as you claim it to be. And the sad thing is you're missing out on what made Halo so awesome and new, and no matter how much I argue you still won't understand.

Unless you've missed my post earlier:

I have played both extensively, and have come to this conclusion based on evidence and a clear understanding and definition of "innovative".

Halo defined FPS's for me in a sense. It took a lone hero, stranded him on a Ring, and set him off on a mission to survive. It was MASSIVE, it was REAL, and most importantly it was FUN.

Opinion, but fair enough.

Everything Halo did was perfect, which in itself is amazing and innovative because while most FPS's did somethings right, 99.9% of the time they did something wrong (i.e. Perfect Dark's case). But Halo was a rare exception, which in itself was a pure joy to watch. I still stand by its side: Halo's innovation > Perfect Dark's innovation.

In what way was Halo "right" and Perfect Dark not so perfect? Don't say graphics/bigger game/sound and that shizzle, because Halo will be beaten in those departments in next gen, making it imperfect.

Eh. It's all a matter of opinoin. The first Controller S felt amazing in my hands and it's still one of my favorite controllers. ARG, I hated the dreamcast controller! It felt plasticy, cheap, and extremely easy to break. It was bulky, ugly to look at, and it just hurt to hold it for a hours at a time. No way Jose.

Different strokes...

Of course it was just my opinoin, but once again it was based around fact just as much as you claimed your arguement to be. We'll just leave it at that.

Where's your quotes from other sources? Where are you saying that it's innovative in gameplay? (not just longer/less linear levels). I stand by my question: What do YOU consider to be innovation?

Halo is a bunch of words, and Innovative is definately one of them in my book.

I can see the opinion...

It took console FPS's to a whole new level, and it set the bar for FPS's to come. Now if that isn't as innovative as some new mode and dizzying effect, I don't know what is.

...Nah, that last part is too easy.

Where have you gone Lord Haku?

 

[sKin]

Exagerating the definition? You're not even following the definition. Saying Perfect Dark is JUST an improvement over Goldeneye is like saying the Wii is JUST an improvement over the Gamecube. I think many people here feel differently about that.

How am I not following the definition? For the gagillionith time, I didn't see anything new in Perfect Dark, just some improvements over previous games. Everything Perfect Dark did so did Goldeneye, just not as good. The Wii techically is an improvement over the Gamecube... right?

Over-hyped/over-rated meh, it means pretty much the same thing...

No it does't. Over-hyped: To promote or publicize to excess. Over-rated: To assess or think too highly of something or someone; to overestimate it or them. Two very different words.

In what way was Halo "right" and Perfect Dark not so perfect? Don't say graphics/bigger game/sound and that shizzle, because Halo will be beaten in those departments in next gen, making it imperfect.

Everything about Halo mashed together prefectly. The controls, the music, the graphics, the story-line, the levels, the multi-player, etc. I can go on and on. Perfect Dark on the other hand had very touchy controls, blah graphics, and it just reused the same sound effects from Goldeneye for the most part. Perfect Dark was a good game, don't get me wrong, but it was flawed to a certain extent. And to be honest I don't think any game can ever beat the orignal Halo for me. Halo 2 proved that.

Where's your quotes from other sources? Where are you saying that it's innovative in gameplay? (not just longer/less linear levels). I stand by my question: What do YOU consider to be innovation?

Eek. If your idea of "basing your opinoins around fact", is using a single definition from a definition site, well we have a problem. Innovation is something that is incredibly new, fresh, and makes you look at things in an entirely different light. Halo did this for me. Perfect Dark did not.

...Nah, that last part is too easy.

I don't follow you...

 

[Squall7]

How am I not following the definition? For the gagillionith time, I didn't see anything new in Perfect Dark, just some improvements over previous games. Everything Perfect Dark did so did Goldeneye, just not as good. The Wii techically is an improvement over the Gamecube... right?

I've already explained what new features Perfect Dark has, just because YOU didn't like them, doesn't make it any less innovation. Likewise, the Wii is innovation AND improvement.

innovation n 1something newly introduced, such as a new method or device

From what I've seen of Halo, and from the "improvements" you've described, it doesn't fit that definition. Would you like me to get out another dictionary?

No it does't. Over-hyped: To promote or publicize to excess. Over-rated: To assess or think too highly of something or someone; to overestimate it or them. Two very different words.

They go together. What was the last thing that you though was over-hyped but not over-rated when it comes to a media product? And vice versa?

Everything about Halo mashed together prefectly. The controls, the music, the graphics, the story-line, the levels, the multi-player, etc.

That isn't innovation. Those are features, but they're not new.

I can go on and on.

Please do, and give an example of something that actually is innovative.

Perfect Dark on the other hand had very touchy controls, blah graphics, and it just reused the same sound effects from Goldeneye for the most part.

What does that have to do with being "innovative"? Some of the chips inside the Wii are said to have been used in the Gamecube, does that make irrelevant the difference in it's actual usage?

Perfect Dark was a good game, don't get me wrong, but it was flawed to a certain extent. And to be honest I don't think any game can ever beat the orignal Halo for me. Halo 2 proved that.

Ok, fair enough. I understand how you feel, but the thing is, is that it's not innovation.

Eek. If your idea of "basing your opinoins around fact", is using a single definition from a definition site, well we have a problem.

When was the last time you looked in multiple dictionaries to get a second opinion on what a word means? This is the link I posted earlier

Innovation is something that is incredibly new, fresh, and makes you look at things in an entirely different light. Halo did this for me. Perfect Dark did not.

The notable words: "Did this for me". Innovation doesn't mean that you as a person need to see it in a different light. Otherwise, you could say that nothing is innovative because somebody always sees something in the same light as something else. If that were the case then "innovation" as a word would become meaningless, as it's based on everyone thinking the same thing.

I don't follow you...

Never mind then.

P.S. If this thread is annoying anyone, then you're welcome to contact iOn and close it.

 

[sKin]

I've already explained what new features Perfect Dark has, just because YOU didn't like them, doesn't make it any less innovation. Likewise, the Wii is innovation AND improvement.

Eek... once again they are not totally new features, just improvements over past ones. And just because you didn't like any of Halo's features, doesn't make it any less innovative either. Tu chey! (lol sp?)

They go together. What was the last thing that you though was over-hyped but not over-rated when it comes to a media product? And vice versa?

Hmm, great question. I thought San Anderas was WAY over-hyped, but when it came to the game itself it was rated highly like it should have.

That isn't innovation. Those are features, but they're not new.

It all depends on how you look at it, and unfortuantely the same thing can be said for Perfect Dark.

Please do, and give an example of something that actually is innovative.

Okay, had there ever been a game before Halo that only allowed you to hold two weapons at a time, to up the realism? Nope. You could hold a gagillion different guns in Doom, Quake, Perfect Dark, etc. And let me tell you, it added a whole new depth of realism and strategy to the game. Okay and want more? What game before it utilized both in-game checkpoints and in-game cutscenes to such a point where you didn't realize it happening anymore? And what game gave you a shield generator that if it went down, you still had a chance to take cover to wait for it to recharge again? And for that matter what game before Halo played AMAZING music at certain points, unlike looping the same crappy song over and over again? Want me to go on?

Ok, fair enough. I understand how you feel, but the thing is, is that it's not innovation.

I understand how you feel about Perfect Dark, and once again it isn't innovation.

If that were the case then "innovation" as a word would become meaningless, as it's based on everyone thinking the same thing.

EXACTLY. Different people's have different interpreations of "innovation", as you and I have proved here. For example, if you went to a Rare message board and asked "which is more innovative, Perfect Dark or Halo?" What would they tell you? And now imagine if you posted that question on a Bungie message board. What would they tell you? All inovation is is perspective, and just because I don't share the same mindset as you, doesn't mean that everybody agrees that Perfect Dark is more innovative then Halo. That is just what you as an indivdual think. Nothing more, and nothing less. For you to say Perfect Dark is more innovative than Halo IS A FACT is pushing it.

 

[Squall7]

Eek... once again they are not totally new features, just improvements over past ones. And just because you didn't like any of Halo's features, doesn't make it any less innovative either. Tu chey! (lol sp?)

What new features in Halo? Where before have you seen the dizzying effect when hit? Where before have you seen simulants with adjustable personalities? Where before have you seen a weapon that can be thrown and used as a sentry gun? Where before have you seen a game where one person plays as the baddies, while the other is the protagonist?

Hmm, great question. I thought San Anderas was WAY over-hyped, but when it came to the game itself it was rated highly like it should have.

How can it be over-hyped (as in gets more attention than it deserves) and you still think it deserves the ratings it gets?

It all depends on how you look at it, and unfortuantely the same thing can be said for Perfect Dark.

Obviously you're not looking at the right things...

Okay, had there ever been a game before Halo that only allowed you to hold two weapons at a time, to up the realism?

Technically Perfect Dark had a primary and secondary function weapons - therefore you can fire rapidly and use it as a grenade launcher without changing weapons. Ok, here's one for ya: What game before Perfect Dark allowed you to shoot people with a gun and turn them on your side? What weapon allowed you to guide a fly-by-wire rocket wherever you like? What kind of weapon made people instantly drop all their weapons? What weapon can shoot through walls AND home in on unsuspecting targets? Oh, and there was a game called "Blood" in 1997 that used a voodoo doll (one hand holding a teddy bear, the other holding a needle).

Nope. You could hold a gagillion different guns in Doom, Quake, Perfect Dark, etc. And let me tell you, it added a whole new depth of realism and strategy to the game.

Oh, I'm sure two handed weapons added something AMAZING to the game (sarcasm overdose there)

Okay and want more?

Go for it!

What game before it utilized both in-game checkpoints and in-game cutscenes to such a point where you didn't realize it happening anymore?

Well, for the checkpoints, Time Crisis used them (on rails shooter I know, but still a 1st person shooter technically). And I'm sorry, but I don't think we've even got to the point whereby we can't tell if something is cutscene yet.

And what game gave you a shield generator that if it went down, you still had a chance to take cover to wait for it to recharge again?

Rechargable shield? On it's own? Ok. 1 point for Halo, for rechargable shield. Now you've just got to get about 10 more for it to beat Perfect Dark! (Oh, and I was generous, techincally you could sit in the place where a shield pops up in a game like Goldeneye or Perfect Dark, in effect being rechargable).

And for that matter what game before Halo played AMAZING music at certain points, unlike looping the same crappy song over and over again?

This is all opinion. "Amazing" music does not constitute as innovation. Now if it came out of the controller, that'd be new...

Want me to go on?

Please do, and bring some better examples.

I understand how you feel about Perfect Dark, and once again it isn't innovation.

What is it? Improvement? Shouldn't things be BASED on something to be improvement? Where was the basis for counter-operative? Where was the basis for going dizzy when hit?

EXACTLY.

Okay, read it again:

If that were the case then "innovation" as a word would become meaningless, as it's based on everyone thinking the same thing.

Ok, should have used the words a little better, but it should be "it would" instead of "it's". I can see how you could get confused though.

Different people's have different interpreations of "innovation", as you and I have proved here.

I'm not using an interpretation, I'm using the definition. "a new method of device" as said by me.

For example, if you went to a Rare message board and asked "which is more innovative, Perfect Dark or Halo?" What would they tell you? And now imagine if you posted that question on a Bungie message board. What would they tell you?

Hopefully facts. For example "They designed a new AI system for computer opponents in the Combat more", rather than "They had better music than..."

All inovation is is perspective, and just because I don't share the same mindset as you, doesn't mean that everybody agrees that Perfect Dark is more innovative then Halo. That is just what you as an indivdual think. Nothing more, and nothing less.

You should really think about the words you use: "just" what you think indicates that I'm alone in thinking Perfect Dark is more onnovative than Halo. That's just gonna make me disagree with you, as it makes me sound like my opinion is not the same (and therefore not the same value) as others'.

For you to say Perfect Dark is more innovative than Halo IS A FACT is pushing it.

Ok, to settle the arguement, I consider Perfect Dark to be more innovative than Halo because of it's unique features such as secondary weapon functions, never before seen weapon (and usage), the counter operative mode, the specialised AI personalities for the multiplayer, the customisable players (switching between different heads/bodies allows greater customisation), the Pop A Cap mode on multiplayer, the voice acting in a FPS, the random reaction of computer players when someone is shot (like one computer player saying "Ahh, I never liked him anyway"), the ability to play as one of the "Bad guys" (Mr Blonde's revenege - secret level) and the ability to practice with all the weaponary/gadgets outside of missions.