Crysis 2 Writer: Halo is "Full of Bullsh*t"

[CuddlyCombine]

And my point is that it can change if consumers want it to. The fact that Crytek even hired Morgan is a sign that they are beginning (or at least trying) to take the story side of the game seriously. With the rampant success of Bioware and the acclaim they are receiving for their "deep" stories and "character development" devs seem to be starting to see that story is an important part of the game. They've also realized that they aren't skilled enough to do it themselves so they are turning to an outside source. This is good.

Yes, I agree that this is good. And I appreciate your optimism. But I don't think games are going to focus on story anytime soon. Why? Because producers aren't that big on it. Sure, you've got massive success stories such as Mass Effect or Dragon Age, but they pale in comparison to FarmVille or Modern Warfare. Some games just don't need, or benefit from, an intricate plot. I'm a firm advocate of substance over gloss (read: gameplay over graphics), but I know that it would be unrealistic to expect my run-and-gun FPS to bring me to tears with a moral decision.

Morgan's main point in his interview was that games can be all about shooting shit while still having a deep, moving story and complex characters without one having to detract from the other. I think that's great, I don't know whether or not he'll achieve this in Crysis 2 but I appreciate the attempt and the attitude. There seems to be a general idea that you can't have both (one expressed by the interviewer in his questions) but really it's just about looking at it a little differently. Different isn't bad.

It's an industry run solely for the money. Different isn't bad, yes. But different is far too risky. For the same cost of developing a massive epic space opera, Electronic Arts could pump out two Madden games and a Need for Speed.

I'm sorry if I seemed a little harsh, but I've been making this same point to people since 10 AM. No one is listening, they just seem to want to ***** like little school children who've just been told that there's no Santa Claus. Repeating the same thing in the same thread more than five times can be irritating and I'm at the end of my rope.

Then stop repeating and consider the reality. I think that most people, including me, have given up on expecting deep storylines from most games after seeing the rampant success of simple material. After all, we're in the age of the uncanny valley; developers aren't going to be focused on gameplay. They're going to be focusing on creating better gaming experiences. How long do you think it will take for 3D games to start coming out? After Natal comes out, think about how massive the flood of motion-control games will be. None of these things require a storyline; just mind-blowing graphics, which is what people are focusing on.

So, yes, I agree with you in the fact that writing should take priority. Realistically, it won't.

Invention implies, you know, that you discovered something. Someone invented the hex shaped pencil, the Paperclip, the Internet and so on. Hyperbole is a literary tradition that literally predates western civilization. You did not invent it.

A small part of me was scared that you were being serious here, but you can't fool me, sir.

As a personal, quick aside, the powered armor space marine dates back, at least to the 1950s, and as I recall, actually further back.

Exactly. We depend on archetypes like nothing else. You could argue that the whole 'man-in-armor-in-the-presence-of-amazing-things' premise dates back to Grecian myths of men walking amongst gods in Olympus and so forth. Power-armored Master Chefs are just a modernization of that metaphor, though all of the meaning has been stripped from it.

Traditionally, gameplay and tech have been the cornerstones of the industry. However, that really isn't cutting it anymore. Bioware, and for that matter Irrational Games have both had phenomenal success, which gets attributed to their writing. I'm not saying the brainless shooter is going anywhere anytime soon, (for godsake there's another Serious Sam title in near release) rather, we're going to see improved writing. Unless, somehow Crysis 2 crashes and burns spectacularly, which I somewhat doubt will happen.

As I say above, it's the age of the uncanny valley, motion control, and 3D. There's going to be a lot of graphics work in the next few years. I don't see gameplay making a huge rise aside from the laments of a few industry writers who don't have enough influence on things.

 

[Daveman]

And yet Halo had a massive amount of backstory and expanded universe stuff yet apparently that doesn't count to him.

I don't think it counts when it's not actually in the game. Especially when these books were released afterward essentially to patch up the holes.

I do think it's a bit funny when Crysis was probably just as dull story-wise; even though he might only be doing the sequel it is a bit rich to slag Halo off like that.

 

[Starke]

snip

I read the escapist article, forgive me for having things to do (that sounds snarky but I can't think of a way to re-write it, I'm not trying to be snarky). I'm not overly intrested in this story and have no reason to go through the entire interview. I can see that you are intrested in this and so I apologize for my statement if it was based on incorrect information/presentation as you claim.

I no longer hold the opinion that Mr Morgan is a prick, but I no longer care what he has to say, so further discussion would be wasting our time. Sorry.

I appologize for going off on you. A quick skim of the thread shows the sheer number of people who didn't know what the hell they were talking about, like, Mr. Daveman here.

I do think it's a bit funny when Crysis was probably just as dull story-wise; even though he might only be doing the sequel it is a bit rich to slag Halo off like that.

But, yeah, by last night I was getting really tired of people continually posting stuff like that without looking any deeper. That people like Dave here go off on him about how he's bashing on Halo, when the actual quote is this:

I don?t like the Halo series at all. Okay Halo is not actually bad, it?s just, you know, average.

It really gets on my nerves after awhile. You know?

 

[Daveman]

A quick skim of the thread shows the sheer number of people who didn't know what the hell they were talking about, like, Mr. Daveman here.

I do think it's a bit funny when Crysis was probably just as dull story-wise; even though he might only be doing the sequel it is a bit rich to slag Halo off like that.

But, yeah, by last night I was getting really tired of people continually posting stuff like that without looking any deeper. That people like Dave here go off on him about how he's bashing on Halo, when the actual quote is this:

I don?t like the Halo series at all. Okay Halo is not actually bad, it?s just, you know, average.

It really gets on my nerves after awhile. You know?

You do realise the thread title is Crysis 2 writer: Halo is "full of bullshit". Either he didn't say that (which would be the escapists fault) or he did say it in which case I would argue that he is slagging it off. I'm not at all a fan of the any of the Halo series but I think that Crysis was just as much about faceless space marines shooting aliens as Halo; I don't think it developed the characters any better or had a better plot. While I'm uncertain whether he was involved in the making of Crysis he is still attaching himself to it by working on the sequel. I'm not having a go at him, I'm just pointing out what I perceive as a minor hypocrisy.

But yeah, sorry for expressing my opinion. Thank you for using me as an example of "people who didn't know what the hell they were talking about", I don't find that in the least bit insulting.

 

[Starke]

Either he didn't say that (which would be the escapists fault) or he did say it in which case I would argue that he is slagging it off. I'm not at all a fan of the any of the Halo series but I think that Crysis was just as much about faceless space marines shooting aliens as Halo; I don't think it developed the characters any better or had a better plot. While I'm uncertain whether he was involved in the making of Crysis he is still attaching himself to it by working on the sequel. I'm not having a go at him, I'm just pointing out what I perceive as a minor hypocrisy.

But yeah, sorry for expressing my opinion. Thank you for using me as an example of "people who didn't know what the hell they were talking about", I don't find that in the least bit insulting.

Cookie for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

It's a deliberate misquote on the part of the article that the Escapist is referencing. I say deliberate, because it takes two separate independent statements and mashes them together to generate a sensational quote. My sympathies though, because you had no reasonable way of knowing that.

 

[Starke]

You're right, everyone is entitled to their on opinion, the difference is, yours is, objectively wrong.

Again. Accounting for the fact that this is your opinion, it is, objectively wrong. The easiest way to examine this actually comes from Richard Morgan, who observed: "It made no sense. It was totally implausible. It doesn't resolve. Basically, all the things that bad storytelling does. I just think they were way too impressed with themselves and that's always a danger. It's just unfortunate." (He was talking about MW2, but ME2 suffers from the same problems.)

There is no such thing as an "objective opinion".

Nope, there isn't. There are "opinions" that are factually inconsistent with reality. And, that, my dear friend isn't an opinion, it's being an idiot.

You found Mass Effect 2's plot confusing? That would say enough for me to not carry on but I shall say no more about that.

Confusing? No. Poorly written and inconsistent with its own setting.

You are saying that a Sci-Fi set in the future is "implausible", do you have any idea how stupid that sounds?

Only when you look at it from a certain perspective. Mass Effect takes a great many pains to create a plausible universe. Mass Effect 2 fucks a fair amount of that up.

Of course it didn't bloody resolve, it's part two of a trilogy. It's like complaining 'The Empire Strikes Back' didn't resolve, it's not supposed to.

Except it isn't. Quantifiably Mass Effect 2 isn't part two of a trilogy. It's a pointless filler episode that produces nothing.

Given that I know you can't do better, I guess you can expect to be taken exactly that seriously.

Though, on second thought, given that he is, you know, a published author, and you are, you know, not. I would suspect that based on your scale of "being taken seriously" he's a more credible source than you.

Based upon what exactly? What else have I apparently written that has offended you? I am starting to think this is more of a personal jab at me rather than a reasoned argument.

Nothing offended me. You just used a very shitty logical fallacy in your argument. I drew a big red circle around it.

I would also like to know how exactly you came to the logic that I am not an author, I don't recall every saying what my career is on this site.

Your obvious retort would be "The way you write", which is to be expected of you based upon the maturity of your response so far.

It's not "the way you write", it's your use of grammar, and your incorrect usage of a couple homonyms. Whatever you do for a living, I'd wager it doesn't involve writing, at all. Maturity isn't a factor.

Andraste actually makes a pretty good point there. You might want to learn from it, Machines.

My point was exactly the same but with different wording, so I am now pretty certain this is personal rather than you trying to have a proper debate.

Actually Andraste was arguing something substantially different from what you were. It looks similar at a glance, but she was expressing her logical thought process behind the situation.

Andraste is a writer, professionally, for this site. The difference between the way she writes and the way you do, reinforces my earlier assumption.

EDIT: I take that back, it seems from other posts that you are simply trying to be as confrontational as possible, so unless you can actually respond in a civilised manner then I suggest you don't bother.

Civilized has a Z, not an S.

No, it's not confrontationalism. It was my tolerance for self-indulgent idiocy, like yours, deteriorating over the course of the day.

Culturally we've gotten to a point where we say, it's my opinion, it can't be wrong. You used that argument yourself, almost verbatim, in the post I'm responding to. The problem is, opinions should be backed by some kind of facts, or at least a logical underpinning. Otherwise, they're not really even opinions, they're "I wishes" or "I believe on faith". To your credit you did try to back your opinions with arguments. It's just that you did it very poorly.

Partial credit regarding opinions though, you're right. Paradoxically, opinions aren't necessarily objective, but they can be objectively wrong. One can express the opinion that "The USSR had the best government in human history," for example. The opinion is that it's the best, and hopefully the person who makes this argument has a logical thought process that backs up this assessment. They could be of the opinion that it was the most efficient at shutting down dissent. It's still an opinion, it's not objectively correct, but it isn't objectively incorrect. If their litmus test is, it's the best because it promoted human rights, then it is objectively wrong, because it is based on a logical error. If they say it was the best because it was awesome, that's not even really an opinion, at least, not on its face. (Why they think its awesome is another opinion debate).

 

[qbanknight]

yo know andy, I like this guy too

 

[Daveman]

Cookie for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Ah heck, cookies make everything better. It is shameful when media sources do that to spark controversy, you can't really blame somebody who is incorrect because they've been fed incorrect information. We should all bear that in mind in the next "Video games cause children to torture squirrels" debate.

 

[wadark]

I liked Halo's story. It was simplistic, and archetypal, and all those things that can be said with a negative tone, but I liked it. There I said it, flame me if you wish, I'll just ignore it anyway.

 

[Legion]

Nope, there isn't. There are "opinions" that are factually inconsistent with reality. And, that, my dear friend isn't an opinion, it's being an idiot.

While an opinion may or may not be idiotic, that doesn't stop it from being subjective. Also, don't bother referring to me as your "friend" not when you are trying to accuse me of immaturity and pretentiousness.

Confusing? No. Poorly written and inconsistent with its own setting.

Most other people would disagree with you, although no doubt as you disagree with them that probably makes them objectively wrong.

Only when you look at it from a certain perspective. Mass Effect takes a great many pains to create a plausible universe. Mass Effect 2 fucks a fair amount of that up.

In. Your. opinion.

Except it isn't. Quantifiably Mass Effect 2 isn't part two of a trilogy. It's a pointless filler episode that produces nothing.

This is starting to get repetitive. It expands on previous characters, introduces new allies, and motivations and sets up the final battle. The Geth, Quarians, Krogan and potentially the Rachni are all ready to fight the Reapers. The Reapers are personally trying to destroy Shepard for killing Sovereign and they attempted to absorb humanity like the Protheans but failed. It added a hell of a lot really.

Nothing offended me. You just used a very shitty logical fallacy in your argument. I drew a big red circle around it.

Like I said, minus a few words, my sentiments were the same as Andrastes, if my points were so different then I don't think she would have quoted me stating "This", now would she?

It's not "the way you write", it's your use of grammar, and your incorrect usage of a couple homonyms. Whatever you do for a living, I'd wager it doesn't involve writing, at all.

Uh-huh. I guess the fact that I am writing on a forum and not officially would have nothing to do with how I write, it's considerably better than a lot of peoples (more on this later).

Maturity isn't a factor.

Clearly it isn't.

Andraste is a writer, professionally, for this site. The difference between the way she writes and the way you do, reinforces my earlier assumption.

I already stated her point was worded in a better way than mine was. The way I write depends on how quickly I want to reply and for what purpose. You don't seriously think I'd write a real letter like this do you? (don't bother answering that Mr Presumptuous).

Civilized has a Z, not an S.

Not in the English used by people from England it isn't. That'd at least explain why you keep trying to insult my use of the language.

No, it's not confrontationalism. It was my tolerance for self-indulgent idiocy, like yours, deteriorating over the course of the day.

The pot calls the kettle black? "confrontationalism" isn't a real word either.

Culturally we've gotten to a point where we say, it's my opinion, it can't be wrong. You used that argument yourself, almost verbatim, in the post I'm responding to. The problem is, opinions should be backed by some kind of facts, or at least a logical underpinning. Otherwise, they're not really even opinions, they're "I wishes" or "I believe on faith". To your credit you did try to back your opinions with arguments. It's just that you did it very poorly.

That's what opinions are. That doesn't make them good ones and I never stated otherwise.

 

[nightwolf667]

Yes, I agree that this is good. And I appreciate your optimism. But I don't think games are going to focus on story anytime soon. Why? Because producers aren't that big on it. Sure, you've got massive success stories such as Mass Effect or Dragon Age, but they pale in comparison to FarmVille or Modern Warfare. Some games just don't need, or benefit from, an intricate plot. I'm a firm advocate of substance over gloss (read: gameplay over graphics), but I know that it would be unrealistic to expect my run-and-gun FPS to bring me to tears with a moral decision.

And that's not what I'm asking for. I don't want an FPS to turn into an RPG. I'm not looking for a game to make me cry or for someone to develop the Citizen Kane of video games or something. Expecting game plots that make sense is not unrealistic. Expecting characters that behave like individuals isn't over the top. Someday, video game writing is going to have to get above the level of Ascended Fanfic and being a confusing irrational mess. They might as well start now.

I'm one of those people who refuse to shut my brain off when I play a video game. For better or for worse.

It's an industry run solely for the money. Different isn't bad, yes. But different is far too risky. For the same cost of developing a massive epic space opera, Electronic Arts could pump out two Madden games and a Need for Speed.

You mistook my meaning. I live my life in literature, so I seem to be understanding his perspective better than a lot of other people. There's some sort of misconception among fans that good writing means either an RPG with choice or innovation, something new and original. But that's not writing. What I'm saying and what Morgan is saying is that you can tell a good story in an FPS, it probably won't be mind blowing or incredibly impressive, but it'll be solid and it'll be good. Good does not mean great. What everyone here seems to be missing about this guy is that he's an author, he's going to come at writing from a very different perspective than say most Head Writers at most development firms. To him, writing isn't some sort of far off magical thing that can only be achieved in a "massive space opera". Which for the video game industry simply means telling a good story with characters who are not archetypes. By good I mean it has a good foundation, few plot holes, makes sense and has a satisfying conclusion. (No, even this is very rarely being done in the game industry.) It doesn't have to be Blade Runner, it just has to make sense. Hell, you don't even need a good story to have a writer who can do good dialog. (They have to work a lot harder though.)

Then stop repeating and consider the reality. I think that most people, including me, have given up on expecting deep storylines from most games after seeing the rampant success of simple material.

My reason for repeating myself has absolutely nothing to do with optimism and everything to do with the stupidity of others. The vast majority of people on this thread are making assumptions without reading or they're doing what you're doing assuming that good writing will create something epic. This might have something to do with you guys being nerds and an over influence on the culture by Lord of the Rings and Star Wars but quite frankly, I've come to the conclusion that no one here seems to understand what good writing actually is or what it means. This is probably because they've only seen a game poke their head out of mud and get called spectacular and outside the mass population of fans it's laughable. (This isn't true for all games out there, which Morgan himself points out.) Well, Morgan does. It's his job. He comes from a world outside of the video game industry where writing isn't considered some sort of lost magical animal that only means big important things. Now, you could chock up all that rampant success to most people being mindless sheep who just accept what they're given and that might be true. After all, we're in the age of the consumer. The proof of that is in this thread with people mindlessly blithering away about the Halo novels and how the fact that they have novels somehow makes the game more legitimate.

That's the long answer, the short answer is no.

After all, we're in the age of the uncanny valley; developers aren't going to be focused on gameplay. They're going to be focusing on creating better gaming experiences. How long do you think it will take for 3D games to start coming out? After Natal comes out, think about how massive the flood of motion-control games will be. None of these things require a storyline; just mind-blowing graphics, which is what people are focusing on.

So you're saying that a published author who was hired by Crytek to work on the story for Crysis 2 is a sign of technological development? OMG stop the presses!

So, yes, I agree with you in the fact that writing should take priority. Realistically, it won't.

Yes, that explains why several video game companies seem to be trying something new. John Carpenter (however you feel about him) and Richard K. Morgan. It's not all or nothing, Combine. The fact that they're trying is a step in the right direction.

Now, on the subject of what he said about Halo. I'm going to reiterate what I said earlier. In the real world, in every other industry except this one, criticism is more than just accepted, it's expected. Morgan comes from that world. There's no reason for him not to say what he thinks. Honestly, I appreciate his bluntness, especially from a professional perspective and I think a lot of people here are being incredibly immature not to mention thin skinned. There's no unspoken code of honor among game developers guys, it's an illusion. Get past it.

 

[Starke]

Cookie for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Ah heck, cookies make everything better. It is shameful when media sources do that to spark controversy, you can't really blame somebody who is incorrect because they've been fed incorrect information. We should all bear that in mind in the next "Video games cause children to torture squirrels" debate.

If you've got the time, as I said to Templar the original interview is worth reading. Morgan does make some interesting comments. But, the closest we get to the Halo is bullshit quote is "Halo is full of these bullshit archetypal characters."

http://www.nowgamer.com/features/638/crysis-2-richard-morgan-qa?o=0#listing

Anyway, sorry about munching on you because you were the first poster I saw when looking for an example.

 

[wadark]

Either he didn't say that (which would be the escapists fault) or he did say it in which case I would argue that he is slagging it off. I'm not at all a fan of the any of the Halo series but I think that Crysis was just as much about faceless space marines shooting aliens as Halo; I don't think it developed the characters any better or had a better plot. While I'm uncertain whether he was involved in the making of Crysis he is still attaching himself to it by working on the sequel. I'm not having a go at him, I'm just pointing out what I perceive as a minor hypocrisy.

But yeah, sorry for expressing my opinion. Thank you for using me as an example of "people who didn't know what the hell they were talking about", I don't find that in the least bit insulting.

Cookie for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

It's a deliberate misquote on the part of the article that the Escapist is referencing. I say deliberate, because it takes two separate independent statements and mashes them together to generate a sensational quote. My sympathies though, because you had no reasonable way of knowing that.

That would be bad reporting on the level of Fox News. Remember when they ran the Mass Effect sex story? What was their headline? "SEXBOX. Game contains graphic depictions of intercourse." Or something along those lines. Deliberate misquoting for the sake of sensationalism is wrong, because it generates comments like Daveman's that may not be entirely accurate. So I tend to agree with Dave, either he said it or he didn't. If he didn't that's bad reporting regardless of why. If he did say it, then some might construe it as hypocrisy based on their opinion of Crysis. I won't say anything to that effect because I didn't play Crysis.

I did enjoy Halo's story. It wasn't sensational or world-shatteringly incredible, but it was an enjoyable story.

 

[The Bum]

Finally some one agrees with me!!!! Bungie are just money hogs who were so surprised that Halo 1 didn't nose dive they just WON'T STOP MAKING halo games the moral is overmilking for money+fanbase who will swallow anything because the first game was good=Reatrted games

 

[Starke]

Either he didn't say that (which would be the escapists fault) or he did say it in which case I would argue that he is slagging it off. I'm not at all a fan of the any of the Halo series but I think that Crysis was just as much about faceless space marines shooting aliens as Halo; I don't think it developed the characters any better or had a better plot. While I'm uncertain whether he was involved in the making of Crysis he is still attaching himself to it by working on the sequel. I'm not having a go at him, I'm just pointing out what I perceive as a minor hypocrisy.

But yeah, sorry for expressing my opinion. Thank you for using me as an example of "people who didn't know what the hell they were talking about", I don't find that in the least bit insulting.

Cookie for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

It's a deliberate misquote on the part of the article that the Escapist is referencing. I say deliberate, because it takes two separate independent statements and mashes them together to generate a sensational quote. My sympathies though, because you had no reasonable way of knowing that.

That would be bad reporting on the level of Fox News. Remember when they ran the Mass Effect sex story? What was their headline? "SEXBOX. Game contains graphic depictions of intercourse." Or something along those lines. Deliberate misquoting for the sake of sensationalism is wrong, because it generates comments like Daveman's that may not be entirely accurate. So I tend to agree with Dave, either he said it or he didn't. If he didn't that's bad reporting regardless of why. If he did say it, then some might construe it as hypocrisy based on their opinion of Crysis. I won't say anything to that effect because I didn't play Crysis.

I did enjoy Halo's story. It wasn't sensational or world-shatteringly incredible, but it was an enjoyable story.

Yeah, the full quote is here

[/q]Do you think getting that greater depth of character is made more difficult by the faceless nature of Nanosuit 2? Master Chief syndrome, you might call it.

I don?t like the Halo series at all. Okay Halo is not actually bad, it?s just, you know, average. The reason that its fiction doesn?t work has nothing to do with the fact that you don?t get to see Master Chief?s face, it?s because of lines like ?Okay ? I?m gonna get up there and kill those guys?. Halo is full of these bullshit archetypal characters and there?s no real emotional effect.

So we get two quotes. "Halo is not actually bad, it?s just, you know, average" and "Halo is full of these bullshit archetypal characters", and somehow this becomes, "Crysis 2 Lead Writer: 'Halo Is Bullshit'"

As a headline, I could almost forgive them, I mean, BS abbreviated headlines are a pretty common tactic.

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/2906/crysis-2-lead-writer-halo-is-bullshit

But, then, their first two paragraphs from that article:

Award-winning sci-fi novelist and lead writer on Crysis 2, Richard Morgan slams the Halo series...

In an exclusive interview with NowGamer, Crysis 2?s lead writer, award-winning science fiction novelist Richard Morgan has called out Halo?s story as ?bullshit?.

I think we've actually almost passed the Fox News Litmus test for shitty journalism here.

 

[wadark]

The thread is apparently buggin out or something, so I apologize profusely if I spammed my last post because I did click post like 5 times.

In response to Starke, I don't know that I would agree that it surpasses what Fox did. I say this simply because I really can't stand news media and their constant need to fear monger the public into hating video games. In that situation, the headline was not only inaccurately sensational, it was a blatant falsehood. ME's "sex" was no worse that was seen on Fox's own networks that same night. What's worse they had these so-called experts on who had no first, second, or thirdhand knowledge of the subject, and poor Geoff Keighly couldn't even get enough speaking time to string a full sentence together. Some of their experts even recanted their statements later after getting a full picture of ME, but I'm really ranting now, apologies.

This is equally bad because its misrepresenting statements from someone in order to generate, not fear, but an equally sensational headline. I've come to expect far better than this from the Escapist and I think this is a pretty bad error.

Edit: I self-reported my repeated posts, sorry again guys. Won't happen again.

 

[ImprovizoR]

Wow, this guy needs to stop sucking ****, I'm sorry but it's true. Halo has an amazing storyline, and the books (Reach, First Strike, and Onyx) help add to that a lot. I haven't seen Crysis having Halo's success anyways, so he's got no room to talk. Sell more copies than Halo then make your crappy insults, thank you.

First thing, Crysis is a PC exclusive. Not everyone has the hardware required to play Crysis. It's not a money grabbing piece of crap like Halo. Kids just don't get Crysis it's too much for them. Anyone can play Halo on their precious little twee sixty. Crysis 2 will have to be dumbed down for consoles, graphically and gameplay vise and then we'll see how well it will sell on all 3 systems.

Also, even if both Crysis and Halo stories suck (and Crysis doesn't IMO), at least Crysis has the gameplay to compensate, Halo is mediocre in every aspect.

 

[Hussmann54]

"The reason that its fiction doesn't work has nothing to do with the fact that you don't get to see Master Chief's face, it's because of lines like 'Okay... I'm gonna get up there and kill those guys'. Halo is full of these bullshit archetypal characters and there's no real emotional effect."

Clearly he hasnt spent time in the military. Most guys, while there, only want one thing. Do there job and then go home, not sit around for ten hours while waxing political commentary. Maybe the idea of one dimensional characters kinda works in a war game. The juicy action bits of the game are going to occur when guns are going off, not when Johnny McGee is writing home to his special friend of the opposite gender or whatever. If its symbolism and undertone you are looking for, then maybe its just how some people view soldiers, as one dimensional killing machines (Im not saying thats what I think, but it could be somebody elses view)

I think this guy is just pissed Crysis didnt get as much attention as Halo