No, seriously. What makes Halo so great?

[Setra]

I am actually very curious.

Having played my fair share of first person shooters, I can honestly say Halo is, to me, one of the more mediocre ones.

What makes it so great?

Because as is it's the friggin FFVII of the FPS world, decent game with enough hype to make Baby Jesus Cry.

The only possibility I can come up with, is the fact you don't need a computer to play it. Which has nothing to do with how good the game is, so it doesn't apply.

[Crilley]

I agree with you. It IS a good game, but hyped so far up everyones asses that it just doesn't live up to it. Its pretty sad to see that now days games are all about how much **** you can kill instead of GOOD gameplay.

That goes for MMORPGs also.

[Jibar]

It's the multiplayer.
Despite being like other FPS multiplayers, because they added in stuff like the sword and plasma grenades which few people had met before, they just all straight jumped onto it.
I'm agreeing with you though, it's overrated, and personally, I don't actually like it that much. It's one of those games that's brilliant fun when you're playing it with a couple friends splitscreen, but otherwise is just generally poor.
When you get online, it actually gets worse. Then you have those people who take it far too seriously, the trash talkers and those annoying guys who are there to sabotage what fun you can have through team killing or kill stealing.
Halo 3 seems to actually be trying to do something new with their multiplayer by adding in that in-game editor thing, but otherwise, it's going to be just as generic, and actually worth missing.

Halo fans, you want a really good FPS with brilliant multiplayer?
Go play Timesplitters 2. Now there was something brilliant.

[tannish2]

who in their right mind would spend months paying a bunch of artists and college educated programmers (some of whom are also artists, but in a different meduim) to make a hopefully great game that MIGHT sell well, when you can spend a month with half as many(some of whom may CALL themselves artists, but none actually are, even the one who makes pretty pictures), get a gauranteed mediocre game, pay an add agency a few _________ dollars and have the game go gold before its even released? seriously, who in their right mind would pick the first one? from an economic standpoint its just ****ing retarded. and really, what other is there to look at it from?[/evilsoullessbastardwhodislikesvideogames]

[Neo]

I can see what you're saying but just gotta up your time scale lol, nobody has been physically able to crank a game out in a month since like the early 1990s.

But generally publishers will ask for incremental releases as they're faster to knock out and cheaper, see any sports game, Halo etc.

But it's also possible to spend years making a mediocre game, just look at Halflife 2, but that's not the point of this thread really.


But the case with Halo is that it's always been a console shooter, play it on a console and it's easy to get into and play split screen. It's never been able to compete with the PC shooter market in any serious way, everything it tries to do has been done before.

[Hermit]

The popularity of the first two was pretty much down to the good multiplayer and the fact that the XBox didn't really have any other FPS games at the time.

That said, the single player campaigns are rubbish (Anyone who played the first knows the moment you get underground its identikit corridors and repeated enemies all the way), and the multiplayer, while good, it outclassed on consoles by the likes of Timesplitters, and on the PC by a huge number of games and mods.

I still wish Bungie had stuck to making Halo a PC RTS rather than being swayed by the cheques of Microsoft (And Halo Wars doesn't count. It's going to be 'Arcade' RTS - in other words, tank rush solves everything).

[Icewalker]

I also agree that it is somewhat overhyped.

One new and special thing is the different health system, which resulted in very unique strategy. Taking a few shots and hiding would return you to full health, so there was a lot more use of cover and the like.

The plot is cool, the weapons are interesting....uh...that's all I got.

[Artemician]

I'll have to go with the crowd here and say it was the multiplayer. The campaign, once played through a few times, loses its lustre, but playing splitscreen deathmatch with friends just doesn't seem to get old.

[Attilargh]

Halo 1 has the best damn pistol I've ever seen in an FPS. Also, the setting is cool, the plot is nice and the enemies are pretty fun to meet. (Except the zombies with the bazookas. I hate those.)

[LordVader]

Pretty much every shooting game and RTS lives off its multiplayer, however.

[Ranis]

Multiplayer. Period.

But seriously, if you have to ask, then you'll never know, nor be able to figure it out. That's something I've discovered about Halo. Either you get it, or you sit back and wonder.

But it's Halo. So Microsoft is going to make more in September than they will in all of the other months of the year combined.

On a side note, I am creating an online community (also known as a clan) where general asshattery and bad sportsmanship will not be tolerated. So if you'd like to step up to Clan Crossfire and just have fun playing the game, we'll be here.

[Gungnir]

The first thing I liked about Halo when I first played it was the presence of regenerating defenses. It seems like in most FPS's, individual fights end up being turkey shoots, and whoever has the better reflexes immediately wins, leaving no room for errors. In Halo, its perfectly normal to wander into a sniper's range, take a shot to the chest, and run back under cover. Then you can recharge your shields and try and figure out where you were shot from and try and fight back.

I really don't see what everyone hates about the campaign so much. Yes, they reused a lot of the individual architecture, but what else would they do? Halo was supposed to be like technological perfection, it wouldn't make sense for the whole thing to be completely random. I don't really see what Hermit means about repeated enemies either. I do, however, agree that Halo 2's campaign was rushed, and wasn't nearly as good as it could have been.

As for Halo 3 being overhyped, you gotta remember that the hype has to come from somewhere, and there is a TON of crazy awesome things coming with it. In how many games are the team bases actually vehicles? How many games have multiplayer map editing? I think it deserves some hype.

[Jibar]

In how many games are the team bases actually vehicles?

Straight off the top of my head, Star Wars: Battlefront II.


How many games have multiplayer map editing?

Almost every multiplayer game on the PC.
However, you are allowed some points for that considering this is the first where it is in game, but that is so far the only new thing Halo has presented to the Video Game world.

[Gungnir]

However, you are allowed some points for that considering this is the first where it is in game, but that is so far the only new thing Halo has presented to the Video Game world.

Not EVERYTHING has be completely brand new to make a good game, or even to make individual features cool. I'm not going to try and list off everything new to Halo 3 because I'm sure a lot of it has appeared SOMEWHERE.

EDIT: Oh, and how could I have forgotten Bungie's gigantor fanbase. Bungie supports their fans quite a bit more than pretty much anyone. Their general attitude towards fans is "Go forth, and kick ass in our name." And now with Forge and saved films, there is going to more fan-made coolness than ever.

[Maxymiuk]

Straight off the top of my head, Star Wars: Battlefront II.

Which came out, not to put too fine a point on it, after Halo. As did the first Battlefront, for that matter (Halo: 2001, SW: Battlefront: 2004). The first FPS to offer that option was, I believe, Operation: Flashpoint, which was released a few months before Halo (and there was also Red Faction that ended up coming out right inbetween the two), though seeing as the games have been made by companies that have little to nothing to do with one another, whether someone "borrowed" the concept from someone else is debatable. I'd personally chalk it up as an idea who's time has come.

What made me stop and go "Oooohhh" in Halo was the scenery. Bigods, that game looked beautiful. The locations, the lighting, the sheer scale...

Other than that, it's indeed a fairly good shooter with a decent storyline, and nothing more. And I ignore the hype and rabid fans. As well as rabid denouncers, for that matter. :smallamused:

[Jibar]

Which came out, not to put too fine a point on it, after Halo. As did the first Battlefront, for that matter (Halo: 2001, SW: Battlefront: 2004).

But the vehicle base has appeared after those games anyway. But that's just nitpicking anyway.


As well as rabid denouncers, for that matter. :smallamused:

I dislike Halo as I dislike Gears of War and the PS3, and am prepared to make it my duty to denounce them, like science does my hair brained schemes.

[Adghar]

Which came out, not to put too fine a point on it, after Halo. As did the first Battlefront, for that matter (Halo: 2001, SW: Battlefront: 2004).

Uh, after Halo 3? Or do you really mean the first Halo? In that case, I never knew you could have moving bases in Halo. Or Halo 2. Also, Battlefield 2142 was capitalizing a bunch on the Titan Mode, in which, if you're a commander, you command a giant spaceship(hovership?) with guns that can rain havoc down on the ground if players man the guns.

[Maxymiuk]

I dislike Halo as I dislike Gears of War and the PS3, and am prepared to make it my duty to denounce them, like science does my hair brained schemes.

I respect your right to an opinion, m'am, even if I don't care much for it. :smallwink:

[blackout]

Gentlemen, and ladies! Calm yourselves! If you don't like Halo, don't buy it. But don't try to persuade anyone who wants to play Halo to NOT buy it.

That is all.

[Ranis]

I dislike Halo as I dislike Gears of War and the PS3, and am prepared to make it my duty to denounce them, like science does my hair brained schemes.

Reasons for disliking Halo and Gears?

[Maxymiuk]

Uh, after Halo 3? Or do you really mean the first Halo? In that case, I never knew you could have moving bases in Halo. Or Halo 2. Also, Battlefield 2142 was capitalizing a bunch on the Titan Mode, in which, if you're a commander, you command a giant spaceship(hovership?) with guns that can rain havoc down on the ground if players man the guns.

I believe the appropriate emoticon for this situation is >_<

I've misread Gungnir's post as being about team-manned vehicles. If we're talking about team bases being vehicles, then Star Wars: Battlefront takes the cake with the AT-AT being the spawnpoint on the Hoth map.

I apologize for the confusion. :smallfrown:

[Jibar]

Reasons for disliking Halo and Gears?

I feel that they aren both as painfully generic as each other yet both recieved the same kind of hype.
It's not like, "Oh, X Men III will be good" hype, where you can largely ignore it, it's front of gaming news, you must play this game kinda hype.
It was just worse with Gears of War, when most of the praise went towards the graphics.

Ahhh... oh well. Gears of War has faded from most people's minds deservedly, and I'll just have to put up with the many many months of Halo 3 afterwards.

[Hoggy]

I torrented it a few days ago. Halo is good, but onyl good. it's not the be all and end all of FPS by any means. I'm still playing it though.

Killzone was far better. I prefer gritty to bright flashy lazer any day. :smalltongue:

[Tom_Violence]

Gentlemen, and ladies! Calm yourselves! If you don't like Halo, don't buy it. But don't try to persuade anyone who wants to play Halo to NOT buy it.

That is all.

What on earth are you talking about? Seriously, does that actually make sense to you?

If I know of a game that interests me, I may think about buying it. If I then see a review that says "Really really really don't buy this game, it is redefining dire", then you can bet your ass that I'm going to rethink my decision. I not going to throw down the magazine and scream "Don't you dare tell me how to think! I hate you! Who do you think you are?!?! I'll teach you to try and educate me!"

Since when did frank discussion become something that people feared so very much? Grow a backbone.

[blackout]

Fear the guy that derails conversations.

But, really, alot of Halo's appeal comes from the plot and storyline. To me, anyways. I appreciate a good story.

[Belteshazzar]

Because it was no where near as buggy or over-complex to multiplay as Counterstrike or the Rainbow series. Finding a good online match takes much less time and there is no need to join a clan just to play a decent game without people lagging out or glitching their way to victory.

Besides I always loved the character of the enemies. It is damn near impossible to think the Grunts aren't hilarious as the cuss and whine at you in a pitch reminiscent of certain twelve year old players. The Elites with their honor and fanatically righteous brotherhood. The cowardly Jackels whose sniping and shield tactics will drive you mad in packs. And finally the Hunters whose silent demeanor hides a rage only released when you kill one of their pair.

[Crispy Dave]

Because When Halo First Came Out There Was Nuthing Like It Ever And It Defined The Genra Of Fps

[Gungnir]

Because When Halo First Came Out There Was Nuthing Like It Ever And It Defined The Genra Of Fps

Sigh. :smallfrown:

[Jibar]

Because When Halo First Came Out There Was Nuthing Like It Ever And It Defined The Genra Of Fps

Goldeneye?
Perfect Dark?
Timesplitters?

Aaaaaany of these ringing a ball here dude?

[Semidi]

I always found the halo series to be a moderately good FPS multiplayer experience, but it in no way deserves the hype. This is coming from a PC player who has been playing games similar to Halo since Wolfenstien 3D and Doom. In all I saw the series as nothing special, but I also recognize that the console platforms don't have any half-decent FPS other than Halo(No one plays Goldeneye anymore, another moderately good FPS). That and I don’t think you can really play a FPS well without a mouse; I’ve always found people who were “good” at halo to still have clunky looking controls. Though that's just me speaking as an elitist.

The only new thing it did that I had not seen was vehicles, and now every fps is doing them. Though many games already had vehicles and were in mid-development before halo was actually released. For instance Battlefield 1942 and UT 2004.


Because When Halo First Came Out There Was Nuthing Like It Ever And It Defined The Genra Of Fps

Quake I, II & III
UT, Unreal
Half-life
Team Fortress Classic
Wolfenstein
Doom
Counter Strike

That's just thinking about it for under twenty seconds. FPS had been around since the early 90's.

[Hermit]

I don't really see what Hermit means about repeated enemies either. I do, however, agree that Halo 2's campaign was rushed, and wasn't nearly as good as it could have been.

As for Halo 3 being overhyped, you gotta remember that the hype has to come from somewhere, and there is a TON of crazy awesome things coming with it. In how many games are the team bases actually vehicles? How many games have multiplayer map editing? I think it deserves some hype.

My prime example was one of the Flood levels. There was a round room, in which 50 or so Flood attack you. Then a corridor, where the game saves. Then another round room, identical to the last, with the same 50 enemies spawning. Then the same corridor, where the game saves. Its so ludicrously dull.

Timesplitters had multiplayer map editing from the first game, and it's definately a feature more console FPSs need to have.

Moving bases sounds an interesting mechanic as well, though I wouldn't exactly say its original (Apart from the obvious in Starcraft, BF2 and 2142 are all about mobile spawn points.).

Edit: Also, the last Level of Halo 1, driving the jeep through the ship, goes down in my book as one of the most pointless/stupid end levels to any game, along with that Gun turret one in Enter the Matric (Where you didn't actually have to do anything to win).

[Arang]

That's just thinking about it for under twenty seconds. FPS had been around since the early 90's.

Wikipedia claims the first ever FPS, Maze Wars, came out in 1973.

Claiming that there was nothing like Halo when Halo came out is like claiming that the Harry Potter books are the only books ever to have magic in them.

I played Halo (a bit) and found it to be a fairly "meh" experience, especially once you had to move inside and my friend and I tried to find each other in the ridiculously repetitive rooms.

"Where are you?"
"In the room with the futuristic monocoloured metal pillar thingie."
"But I'm in there too!"

The multiplayer might be fun, though. I've really never tried.

[Setra]

I can understand people like the multiplayer.. I suppose.

But I've PLAYED Multiplayer, for Halo, Halo on PC, and Halo 2.

It's decent fun, I'll admit, but nowhere NEAr "OMGROFLPLAYHTISGAMENAO" that it's getting. It annoys me that half the internet is saying it's gonna be the best game ever, when I doubt it could even compete with the most of the other shooters I play.


Edit: Also, the last Level of Halo 1, driving the jeep through the ship, goes down in my book as one of the most pointless/stupid end levels to any game, along with that Gun turret one in Enter the Matric (Where you didn't actually have to do anything to win).
That was the best part of the campaign, to me. At least I didn't have to walk around shooting everything mindlessly.

Because When Halo First Came Out There Was Nuthing Like It Ever And It Defined The Genra Of Fps
The ONLY thing I can think of that Halo did that wasn't generic was limiting your weapons, which I thought was annoying, and the shields, which made the game less challenging.


As for Halo 3 being overhyped, you gotta remember that the hype has to come from somewhere, and there is a TON of crazy awesome things coming with it. In how many games are the team bases actually vehicles? How many games have multiplayer map editing? I think it deserves some hype.The latter points have already been addressed, so I will comment on the former.

With the amount of hype Halo 3 is getting, you think playing it for five minutes would give you an orgasm.

[Gungnir]

My prime example was one of the Flood levels. There was a round room, in which 50 or so Flood attack you. Then a corridor, where the game saves. Then another round room, identical to the last, with the same 50 enemies spawning. Then the same corridor, where the game saves. Its so ludicrously dull.

That just goes to show how differently people can see things like this. I liked the Flood levels because between either you were being ambushed by what seemed like hundreds (and probably is, on Legendary) of reanimated mutants, or by a few stragglers from behind, or wandering through rooms covered with blood, scorchmarks, and destroyed equipment. I was either sneaking, or running around blasting wildly with my shotgun going "Ohsh**ohsh**ohsh**ohsh**"

[LordVader]

You want to know the secret to why it's so good? <_< >_>


It's Halo.

<_< >_>

[tannish2]

As for Halo 3 being overhyped, you gotta remember that the hype has to come from somewhere
yes. it does. i think that place is called "microsoft's marketing department"
i would show you how ton sell someone literally, a peice of crap (not crap as in useless, crap as in food that has been digested and excreted) but i really dont think thats something anyone irresponsible should know how to do. not saying the game is crap, im just saying that it DOESNT have to be based on something.

[Cybren]

Halo is popular because it took a Hollywood approach to storytelling in a single player FPS, supported death matches with LAN'd consoles, and was the original Xbox'es Killer App.

[blackout]

Plus, storyline.

Seriously, it's actually a good story.

[Malic]

You people are lucky you get let down by it. I have a freind who has it writen deep within his mind that the Halo series is th best thing to happen...ever.

He never shuts up about Halo 3 and contantly annoys me that my family is getting a Wii instead of an X-Box 360. Honestly I played the game and its pretty average. Especially compared to things like battlefeild and all. Now don't get me wrong its a good game but far from the best. I wouldn't go so far to say it is the most popular though.

[Cybren]

I would argue that a lot of what Halo did, Half-Life did first, but Halo did it for consoles and reached a larger audience. Plus, Bungie can weave a story a lot better than Valve, whom I'm pretty sure conceived of Half-Life 2s story about six weeks before release.

[Morrandir]

It was also a game designed for consoles. Switching right from games like Half-Life, Unreal Tournament, etc. straight to Halo (for PC), I notice 2 things.

1. Movement is DEATHLY SLOW. It takes forever to get anywhere, even in a vehicle.

2. Weapons are stupidly inaccurate, and fire insanely fast. (Seriously, let's see someone shoot an actual sniper rifle, accurately, as fast as MASTOR CHEEF does.)

I assume these are to compensate for the lack of utter precision a mouse can give the average gamer.

Regardless, it's entertaining, and I would probably get the sequels, just not for $50, or for the console. I'll happily wait for the PC port and subsequent not-Vista running patch.

[Mr._Blinky]

I definitely think the first one is overrated, though still quite fun, but I think the second is actually slightly underrated. You can't blame the game for having such a bunch of crappy people playing it. Every time someone is a jackass on the multiplayer, it's the player's fault, not the games. A lot of people can't seem to tell the difference.

If you can get creative with the gametypes, it can actually be a lot of fun, especially with a good group of people. The only thing that really pissed me off about H2 is the moronic way they had you find multiplayer matches. Hello, if I want to play, I want to choose my own damn map and gametype, thank you. At least give me a list, not shunt me into one.

As for complaining about Halo 1, you've got to remember that most though not all of the games that people compare it to are also more recent games. And the single player wasn't that bad. A couple of the missions did suck a lot, but there's also a few on there I'm willing to play over and over again. And H2s Legendary difficulty is hard enough on co-op that my friends and I will occasionally boot it up for the soul purpose of seeing how far we can get in a few hours.

[Gungnir]

(Seriously, let's see someone shoot an actual sniper rifle, accurately, as fast as MASTOR CHEEF does.)

What, so it's completely normal for him to be strong enough to flip a tank, but not resist the recoil on a sniper rifle using recoil dampeners made 500 years in the future?

[Ranis]

I feel that they aren't both as painfully generic as each other yet both recieved the same kind of hype.

Okay, I will admit that Halo keeps in reserve a LOT of the more...unsavory kinds of people that play games on the internet, but Gears is actually really, really, really, really worth the hype. Did you actually play it?


It's not like, "Oh, X Men III will be good" hype, where you can largely ignore it, it's front of gaming news, you must play this game kinda hype.
It was just worse with Gears of War, when most of the praise went towards the graphics.

I don't remember most of the hype going to Gears' graphics. I remember mostly it coming from the fact that we actually had an extremely good multiplayer game on the 360 that wasn't another Rainbow Six game.


Ahhh... oh well. Gears of War has faded from most people's minds deservedly, and I'll just have to put up with the many many months of Halo 3 afterwards.

I still play Gears, and it hasn't "deservedly" disappeared from my mind. Because it is a good game and continues to be so, and apparently so do the 300,000 people that still play it, and will continue to do so after Halo 3 comes out. I just don't get it, Jibar. So does a game have to be completely revolutionary for you to even look at it? I know you got a 360 for Bioshock. That was a good move. But if you don't like the two biggest games that Microsoft has pushed out, then why didn't you just upgrade your PC instead?

[Setra]

What, so it's completely normal for him to be strong enough to flip a tank, but not resist the recoil on a sniper rifle using recoil dampeners made 500 years in the future?
I think the flipping of the tank was a gameplay mechanic that wasn't supposed to be taken seriously. I don't think Master Chief could actually do that.

[averagejoe]

When I was younger, I used to play Halo I. A lot. This was back in the day where getting 4 TV's, 4 X-boxes, and 16 friends together was a revolutionary and cool new concept in multiplayer, and it was a lot of fun, because frankly it's a lot more social than non-console shooters.

However, it goes beyond that. Some of it was the little things. I liked how you could only have two weapons; uber gun carrying ability has always been something that has annoyed me about other FPS, and it adds another dimension of strategy to the game. I liked the single player mode; it was an undiluted shooter experience. I never had to worry about pickups, or spotting some well-camoflaged switch, or get stuck on some part where I have to jump from a moving box onto a ledge just to progress, or any of a multitude of other things that annoys me about shooters. In fact, besides walking to the next part of the level, there was never really anything you "had" to do. They'd give you weapons or vehicles, but you never needed to use them in order to progress. Also, I never had to worry about running out of ammo for my only decent weapon and having to resort to that really crappy but infinitely ammo-ed weapon that they always put in every shooter. The closest thing was the plasma pistol, but even that had its use in the early levels on legendary, where a charged shot would stun an eliete and knock out his shields, giving you time to smack him around or get him with another weapon.

Now, to this day I think Halo is a great game. Maybe I'm the wrong person to say so, as I don't generally like shooters. It definitely doesn't deserve the hype it gets. However, it's still a good, solid game, and the best shooter I've played.

[Beleriphon]

The popularity of the first two was pretty much down to the good multiplayer and the fact that the XBox didn't really have any other FPS games at the time.

Or rather consoles didn't have an good FPS games. Halo in and of itself is a pretty standard FPS with an above average story about why you're FPSing stuff. The multiplayer is loads of fun, I've spent many an hour blowing away my friends on splitscreen.

You really have to keep in mind that the Halo games are well above average for FPS games on consoles. They are entirely average when compared to the FPS games you can get for a home computer.

[Jibar]

Okay, I will admit that Halo keeps in reserve a LOT of the more...unsavory kinds of people that play games on the internet, but Gears is actually really, really, really, really worth the hype. Did you actually play it?

Yes, at one point. Granted, it was a demo version of those Game store stands, but I did get round to it.



I don't remember most of the hype going to Gears' graphics. I remember mostly it coming from the fact that we actually had an extremely good multiplayer game on the 360 that wasn't another Rainbow Six game.

I know people hyped the multiplayer, and I allowed that. It's the social aspect of the game, and I fully endorse that.
But if I had to walk into another game shop/gaming website/forum, and find some bunch of god damn kids talking about the graphics making it the "Best game evar" I would have killed somebody.


I still play Gears, and it hasn't "deservedly" disappeared from my mind. Because it is a good game and continues to be so, and apparently so do the 300,000 people that still play it, and will continue to do so after Halo 3 comes out. I just don't get it, Jibar. So does a game have to be completely revolutionary for you to even look at it? I know you got a 360 for Bioshock. That was a good move. But if you don't like the two biggest games that Microsoft has pushed out, then why didn't you just upgrade your PC instead?

No, it doesn't have to be completely revolutionary, but it has to bring something new to the table. If I wanted the same thing year in, year out, I would be playing EA games.
I saw Gears of War, and saw things I'd already seen in other games. Alien invaders. The Last Defence Force. Crouching for cover. Different guns yet always a shotgun and machine gun. The enemy AI. But I had already seen it before.
Halo, God bless it, did bring some new stuff to the table, but unfortunately, were just stuff from previous games. The Covenant weapons where really just fancy guns, and while I thought about the plasma grenade being new, I realised other games already had me with sticking explosives.
And then, it gave me the same thing actually. Alien invaders. The Last Defence Force. It even threw in zombies with the Flood. Where many would praise the story, I find it to be generic, but at the very least, interesting.
The only shame is that both games took a winning formula, the Space Marine character, but did nothing else with it. They were just complacent with it being a win, instead of going that extra mile.
And, by the by, despite what I may have said, BioShock was just the thing to seal the deal so to speak, Crackdown, Viva Pinata, Dead or Alive 4 and Assassin's Creed have left me wanting a 360 for ages. And I can't get those on PC.
Well, I can Assassin's Creed, but I prefer console gaming.


I would argue that a lot of what Halo did, Half-Life did first, but Halo did it for consoles and reached a larger audience. Plus, Bungie can weave a story a lot better than Valve, whom I'm pretty sure conceived of Half-Life 2s story about six weeks before release.

Fun fact, Half-Life was released on consoles the day before Halo: Combat Evolved.

[Shadow of the Sun]

>>
<<

System Shock 2 kicks it's ass!

[Destro_Yersul]

I think the flipping of the tank was a gameplay mechanic that wasn't supposed to be taken seriously. I don't think Master Chief could actually do that.

Funny thing is, he can. With his natural strength plus the insane strength boost provided by the armour and the fact that most of the weight is resting on the ground he can, in fact, flip a tank. The scorpion, at least, which weighs about a ton less than an M1 Abrams.

[Demented]

No, it doesn't have to be completely revolutionary, but it has to bring something new to the table. If I wanted the same thing year in, year out, I would be playing EA games.

It did bring something new to the table, but that was because it took all the excellence that had been slowly gathering on one table and moved it to another table, and it did so fashionably, suitably, and loudly.

It was the right game at the right time at the right place, and that's always more important than anything else.

Not to mention that, all facets summed together, Halo was Fun. Other notable games might always have some small thing that they've raised to an eccentric level of excellence, but Halo chose to have a decent portion of everything, and do it in a way that was the most pleasurable, no matter how you played it. It was an excellent game in total, for the same reason that Vanilla is the most popular flavor of ice cream.*

*Though we all know Tobacco Mint Chip is the best flavor. Right?

[JabberwockySupafly]

Because when Halo first came out there was nothing like it ever, and it defined the genre of FPS.


Fixed for punctuation, spelling, and because the only things that should be capitalised in the entire sentence should be Halo, Because, and FPS.

Anyways. Let's see here... an FPS with a gripping storyline set in a science fiction universe with amazing weapons and laser swords?... Two words: Jedi Knight.

Star Wars Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II had all of those (and Force powers!), and it came out in 1997. The only thing Halo has over JK to this day is prettier graphics, and well, that means all of about nothing.

[Prustan]

Someone said that the weapon limit was annoying, and I do agree - it was too limited. I mean seriously. 4 grenades of each type, fine, but only being able to carry two guns? One in your hands and one on your back? The weapon limits for 50 Cent: Bulletproof seemed much more realistic, even if it never worked properly. Carry one, strap one to your back, and strap two sidearms to your hips. Much better.

[FrostXian]

Halo is pathetic, the only reason it is liked is because it's a fps on a CONSOLE,[scrubbed]

[Timberwolf]

>>
<<

System Shock 2 kicks it's ass!

QFT.

I've played Halo and I can't say I was impressed. I've played Halo multiplayer and found it extremely ordinary. I thought the enemies looked likr Watto from Star Wars Ep1, the tanks and warthog and all that were not that much fun and thoroughly detracted from the multiplayer. The story I will have to take Blackout's word on because I couldn't actually be bothered once I'd run around the planet for a bit. Yeah, nice graphics but that does not a good FPS make. Sure it's nice to have eye candy but that's secondary for me.

I felt that Goldeneye and Perfect Dark on the N64 and indeed, System Shock 2 had Halo beat in every way that they are comparable (ie everything except graphics). But that's just me.

[Cyrano]

Halo was not great because it was great, it was great because it was good and didn't really have anything wrong with it. I mean, the two weapon system annoys some people, but it works out fine in the game mechanic. There were pet peeves experienced by all, but none of them horrendously unbalanced the game. It was not as good as Half Life, but it had vehicles, and fanboys. Meh.

[JabberwockySupafly]

Halo is pathetic, the only reason it is liked is because it's a fps on a CONSOLE, [scrubbed]

Wow. Never try to become a motivational speaker. Seriously, if you're going to call everyone on the forums [scrubbed], your best bet is to simply start running now and never look back. Your basic video game/ D&D geek (such as myself) tends to be fiercely independent of thought and deed. Implying we (I am a geek, and very very proud of it) are weak of will or in any way stupid, is about as intelligent as giving Darth Vader the bird. Also, please note that you too post on these forums. Which in turn makes you one of the "most of you here" crowd. Again, just a bit of advice, but don't try writing any books on how to win friends or influence people. For that matter, just don't write anything at all. Anymore. Period. Just sit in a dark cave somewhere without electricity and bang two blunt rocks together, because frankly, I wouldn't want to trust you with anything sharp.



Aaaaaaannnnyyyways. Halo's a pretty mediocre FPS in the end. As I said previously, DF2:Jedi Knight pretty much did what it did much better and earlier on. Someone mentioned System Shock 2 as well, which is still pretty top-dog for it's age. Let's not forget we have better new FPSes (FPS's? Point of controversy, this spelling) out as well. FEAR & Bioshock both come to mind. The only thing Bioshock doesn't win on is no multi-player which can (not-so-)easily be fixed with either a patch or a mod. I'm not going to rag on people who like it. It's some people's cup of tea, and that is their prerogative, but I just simply cannot see what makes it such a great game. I guess the fact I haven't cared for the multi-player aspect of an FPS since Goldeneye may have something to do with that, though.

[valadil]

Like everyone has said, Halo is great because it's for a console. Here is why that matters.

Playing games in a LAN party environment is almost always preferable to playing alone. There's nothing quite like playing capture the flag with your whole team together in one room strategizing together. Yes, you can play counterstrike like that, but it's just too much effort for everyone to take down their PCs, lug them to a common place that somehow has enough room for 8 computers, set them up, and then take them down at the end of the night. Even if I'd rather play CS than Halo, being able to play Halo on a console let's me get involved in LAN party games on a regular basis.

So in other words, as a game Halo ain't nothing special but it makes for a great experience.

[Were-Sandwich]

That just goes to show how differently people can see things like this. I liked the Flood levels because between either you were being ambushed by what seemed like hundreds (and probably is, on Legendary) of reanimated mutants, or by a few stragglers from behind, or wandering through rooms covered with blood, scorchmarks, and destroyed equipment. I was either sneaking, or running around blasting wildly with my shotgun going "Ohsh**ohsh**ohsh**ohsh**"

That describes my experience with the Flood very well. I was really taken off guard the first time one of them shot me.
"WTF?? ZOMBIES DON'T HAVE GUNS *composes self enough to make Sci-Fi quote* 'well thats not fair. whatever happened to just clawing you to death'"

[Cubey]

I only played the demo of 1st Halo, but I liked it. Games like System Shock (which IS NOT an FPS! It's an RPG!) or Half Life try to, quite succesfully I might add, win you with their mood or plot. Halo - at least the demo, got to me with its brand of fun. Driving that jeep thing (warthog?) was fun, the inclusion of other soldiers who were trying to help you was fun, shooting at the enemies was fun and the enemies themselves were fun too. Games before might have had the same elements, and might have done it even better, but it doesn't change the fact that Halo did it in the way that was very fun to play. At least in the demo. It MAY get boring later, didn't play the full game so I didn't know.

But I have an impression that many people who dislike Halo really dislike the hype around the game. Like Final Fantasy 7, which IS (in my opinion) really that good, but people see that it's so widely popular and go "OMG, so many guys like it, it must be an overhyped piece of crap!".
Posts like this:

Halo is pathetic, the only reason it is liked is because it's a fps on a CONSOLE, [scrubbed]
Are just fuel for my reasoning.

[Gungnir]

I thought the enemies looked likr Watto from Star Wars

Really? Watto? Hows that work? Maybe if you made some infernal combination of grunts and jackals, but Elites are like 7-8 feet tall, with 3-hinged shark jaws!


the tanks and warthog and all that were not that much fun and thoroughly detracted from the multiplayer.

Clearly, friend, you are not familiar with the Warthog Joust. The lack of bouncy vehicle physics was one of my greatest disappointments in Halo 2.


Now that I've been thinking about this for a day, I occurs to me that probably the biggest reason Halo is so popular is probably the Bungie makes the game disks out of magical distilled pixie dust and crack cocaine.

[NEO|Phyte]

pay an add agency a few _________ dollars and have the game go gold before its even released?

Nitpick, ALL games go gold before release, its the term used when development is over and they start printing CDs.

[SurlySeraph]

Hmm. Yesterday I made a very long, detailed post about why Halo was very good and almost unique, when it came out, but has since been surpassed by other games and therefore no longer is worthy of hype. Unfortunately, the Internet Gnomes seem to have kidnapped it. Oh well, I'll just summarize what I wrote.

First, Halo was highly immersive. It's like why the original Half-Life was so special: weapons and healthpacks were always in plausible places, not hovering in random corners. The architecture made sense, it wasn't just a series of random mazes. The ships looked like places that humans (or aliens, as the case may be) actually lived in and used - consider the message board in the Pillar of Autumn, or the unpacked crates and vehicles in the warehouse-like areas on the Truth and Reconciliation. The two-weapon thing a) felt more realistic and b) forced players to think tactically.

Second: It was well-balanced. All of the weapons were good in specific situations (well, except maybe the Needler) and bad in others (well, except maybe the Pistol) and none were redundant, so you had to really put some thought into which weapons you were going to take. Vehicles were useful, but not overpowering; it was really your choice whether to use them or not. Besides, vehicles were integrated into the game very well; vehicle use in FPSes had been done before, but never as smoothly as in Halo.

Third, it took familiar, old ideas and made them interesting again. Lone space marine vs. alien hordes had been done before. However, casting the aliens as religious fanatics was unusual - and remember, Halo came out not too long after 9/11. Of course, given that the aliens had vastly superior technology, relied on air/ space strikes, and were vulnerable to guerrilla warfare on the ground, you could see the game as a political metaphor from both sides. The "sleeping menace" idea (the Flood) had been done, but usually it's the player character's fault that some ancient terror gets awakened, and usually the player character is responsible for cleaning it up. In Halo, you basically just run away from the ancient menace. The "unstoppable superweapon that is our only hope against the Evil Ones" had been done before, but the twist that the Halo rings would stop the Flood by killing everything else in the galaxy, and that you therefore DO NOT want to activate the ancient superweapon that is the only hope of stopping them, was unique. Zombies had been done before, but fast zombies created by alien parasites that used weapons and attacked your enemies just as much as they attacked you? Hadn't been done before, and, though it's common now, virtually no FPSes had three-sided battles when Halo came out. Eccentric ancient guardian who tells you how to stop the Evil Ones? Done before, but 343 Guilty Spark was unique in that he was trying to save the world by destroying it, and wasn't actually truly good - or truly bad, for that matter. Fairly sexualized female character who advises you? Done in countless games, but Cortana was unique in that she actually acted intelligent, had an independent personality, and had a friendly but completely non-sexual relationship with the main character. Lots of stuff was borrowed from Aliens (dropships, badass black sergeant, space marines in gray armor), but it was integrated seamlessly.

The characters were two-dimensional, but at the time that was pretty good for characters in an FPS, especially for a console FPS. The plot was less predictable than most FPS plots and turned a lot of clichés on their heads.

Halo had very few bugs, rarely slowed down, and had no in-level loading screens and very short out-of-level loading scenes. The graphics matter. They're outdated now, but for the time they were excellent, and that really does matter to people.

The music was excellent, which made every aspect of the game feel better.

The enemies were fairly unique, had a lot of personality, and were fun to fight against.

And, of course, the multiplayer.


Halo is pathetic, the only reason it is liked is because it's a fps on a CONSOLE, and that it's so hyped that weak minded idiots feel that they NEED TO like it, and thus they fool themselves so.
And most people, specially young ones, even most of you here, are weak minded idiots.

Durr! He's is right, youse knows! Me mind no strong, even though me spends all day lifting weights! Ahhhhh! I like Halo, meaning that I've wasted my life! Curse you, FrostXian, for showing me the truth about the meaningless and foolishness of my existence! Would that I could have slumbered in ignorant bliss forever! Fate is so unkind! *sobs, runs off to hang self*

[Gungnir]

Oh well, I'll just summarize what I wrote.

That was the summary...? Damn.

[blackout]

*clapclapclap*Bravo! Well said, my fellow playgrounder!

[Were-Sandwich]

I really like the Halo enemies. They make me smile every time I replay the first level (because I like it). "Its him" "Run away!" and the the Eiltes trying to scare them back into the fight. Two things struck me as retarded though:

"I don't keep it loaded, so you'll have to find some ammo." Why carry a gun around if you're not going to put bullets in it?

And the invisible elites. Whilst I like the gun-using ones, as I find them nice challenging fights, I think the sword-wielding ones are just stupid. "Lets get rid of our shields, so we can have a cloaking device. We're very vulnerable, but we're invisible! Now, lets use a big glowing energy sword that lets everyon know exactly where we are."

[blackout]

"I don't keep it loaded, so you'll have to find some ammo." Why carry a gun around if you're not going to put bullets in it?

THANK you. AND IT'S LOADED WHEN HE GIVES IT TO YOU.


And the invisible elites. Whilst I like the gun-using ones, as I find them nice challenging fights, I think the sword-wielding ones are just stupid. "Lets get rid of our shields, so we can have a cloaking device. We're very vulnerable, but we're invisible! Now, lets use a big glowing energy sword that lets everyon know exactly where we are.

Bingo, that always made me think 'dude, you're cloaked. You have the element of surprise. Don't use the swords until you're right behind us.'

[Timberwolf]

Really? Watto? Hows that work? Maybe if you made some infernal combination of grunts and jackals, but Elites are like 7-8 feet tall, with 3-hinged shark jaws!

Clearly, friend, you are not familiar with the Warthog Joust. The lack of bouncy vehicle physics was one of my greatest disappointments in Halo 2.

It's they way they move, the skin colour and, as I remember it, the little droopy snouts, etc etc. Seriously, I was very much reminded of Watto, sorry. And I have never experienced the Warthog joust, no. But I got what you are mentioning out of my system with Gran Turismo 2 and it wasn't much fun then.

[Logic]

I choose to defend Halo, because it is a fun experience. Like most console shooters with system link capability, it is easy to set up for a random deathmatch with your friends, and requires little planning to set up a game that could be replicated by a PC shooter.

I do agree that it is the 2nd most overhyped game ever, the 1st being FFVII (which I did not care for) however it is the community that makes the game seem more unnappealing to me.

[Gungnir]

But I got what you are mentioning out of my system with Gran Turismo 2 and it wasn't much fun then.

From what I can remember, when you crash in Gran Turismo, you stop. This is not the case in Halo 1. Depending on the angle that two warthogs hit, generally one will bounce off and go flying, sometimes almost high enough to get off the map. Add a Scorpion, and you've got yourself a party.

[blackout]

One time, I actually got a few friends from my gaming group and had a Warthog demolition derby.

[Setra]

I never said I disliked Halo..

I suppose in the end, I just hate the amount of hype Halo 3 is getting.

If you were to take all the positive things about Halo, remove ALL negatives, and turn it into what every bit of potential there could be, into a good game.

It STILL wouldn't deserve that much hype. NO GAME deserves that much hype.

And I'm annoyed when people consider Halo 'teh best thing evar'. Especially since, as a gamer, I have my own ego, and I hate being told the games I like are "nothing in the face of Halo". However I don't want to be a hypocrite and tell people that the game they like sucks...

I forgot what I was saying. In any case, the next time someone tells me that Half Life 2 sucks compared to Halo 2 I'll kick them in the teeth.

That's actually the reason I started this topic.

[blackout]

It all depends on preferance. Halo is good. Half Life is good. It all depends on what someone likes.

[Setra]

It all depends on preferance. Halo is good. Half Life is good. It all depends on what someone likes.
Oh I realize that.

I just have the horrid luck of always preferring things that others do not prefer.

So I tend to be edgy about certain things.

Edit: My second favorite numbered Final Fantasy is VIII (I try to hide this fact most of the time)

And my favorite Suikoden game is IV.

Also, I like Dominic Deegan.

90% of the time I'm "not supposed to like them" or am looked down upon because I do.

[blackout]

Understandable. Same thing with me sometimes.

[Tengu]

Oh I realize that.

I just have the horrid luck of always preferring things that others do not prefer.

So I tend to be edgy about certain things.

Edit: My second favorite numbered Final Fantasy is VIII (I try to hide this fact most of the time)

And my favorite Suikoden game is IV.

Also, I like Dominic Deegan.

90% of the time I'm "not supposed to like them" or am looked down upon because I do.

Don't worry, man.

Those who like things because they are popular are sheep.

Those who don't like things because they are popular think they are cool and individualistic by doing so, but they are also sheep, just another kind.

Real individuals follow their own tastes, not the sheep - they don't care is the thing they like popular or not, and how its reputation does look like, as long as they like it.

[Tom_Violence]

Setra, I think you need to put a lot less stock in the opinions of others. Whenever I see someone say something to the effect of "X is the best, nuff said" I immediately disregard everything else they have to say. If people want to give reasons for their preferences, then more power to them. If not, then I just assume there are no reasons.

My current favourite litmus test to this effect is to see if I can replace the names of whatever someone is talking about with ice cream flavours, and then see what I end up with. For example, your "Half Life sucks, Halo is by far the best" becomes "Chocolate is rubbish! Vanilla is way better!". And if anyone takes an argument like that to heart, well, I dare say they've got much bigger problems then. :smalltongue:

[Setra]

Setra, I think you need to put a lot less stock in the opinions of others. Whenever I see someone say something to the effect of "X is the best, nuff said" I immediately disregard everything else they have to say. If people want to give reasons for their preferences, then more power to them. If not, then I just assume there are no reasons.

My current favourite litmus test to this effect is to see if I can replace the names of whatever someone is talking about with ice cream flavours, and then see what I end up with. For example, your "Half Life sucks, Halo is by far the best" becomes "Chocolate is rubbish! Vanilla is way better!". And if anyone takes an argument like that to heart, well, I dare say they've got much bigger problems then. :smalltongue:
I suppose so.

Also.

LIEZ.

Chocolate is way better =p well to me anyways.

[averagejoe]

"I don't keep it loaded, so you'll have to find some ammo." Why carry a gun around if you're not going to put bullets in it?

Pistol whipping his bridge officers into efficiency. :smallbiggrin:

[Belteshazzar]

I think the flipping of the tank was a gameplay mechanic that wasn't supposed to be taken seriously. I don't think Master Chief could actually do that.

Someone doesn't take power armor and genetic tinkering seriously. He can indeed flip tanks. He also happens to be somewhere around 8 foot tall or so, seriously, the grunts (little blue guys) are all 5 foot tall and they can almost headbut his crotch. Spartan Marines have a disturbingly good chance of taking on Warhammer Marines.

[blackout]

Darnit, now I HAVE to run that by my GM. :smallbiggrin:

[Belteshazzar]

I always thought that they needed to insert some more hand to hand combat into the Halo series. I know that if i could flip tanks you would not see me pistol whipping my enemies. I would simply use grunts as shotput and throw boulders and such at people.
Even a simple punch could jelly someone inside armor. But then Elites use shielded power armor too so the point would be moot there (and brutes are some kind of psychotic so that could be a good reason as well)

[blackout]

I know! Screw going in with an energy sword! Melee combat ftw!

[Lord Iames Osari]

Someone doesn't take power armor and genetic tinkering seriously. He can indeed flip tanks. He also happens to be somewhere around 8 foot tall or so, seriously, the grunts (little blue guys) are all 5 foot tall and they can almost headbut his crotch. Spartan Marines have a disturbingly good chance of taking on Warhammer Marines.

But Spartans are part of the Navy, not the Marines. :smalltongue:

[Stoneburr]

Forgive me if i'm wrong, but aren't the Marines part of the Navy?

[blackout]

I have no idea. :smallconfused: But, yeah, SPARTANS vs Space Marines = Seriously awesome time.

SPARTAN 1: Dude, check out this gun I looted off those 'For the Emperor' whackos!

[Setra]

Forgive me if i'm wrong, but aren't the Marines part of the Navy?
At first I was gonna say I dunno, but Wikipedia says so.

[Belteshazzar]

Marines are the boarding/landing/ close combat section of the Naval Equation. The Navy proper is the "Get there, drop off the crazy bastards, and shell the place from so far away we have to watch the results on the nightly news" part of the equation.

[Lord Iames Osari]

Forgive me if i'm wrong, but aren't the Marines part of the Navy?

"The U.S. Marine Corps is a department of the Navy.....THE MEN'S DEPARTMENT" :smallbiggrin:

Yes, the Marines are technically part of the Navy. But not all Navy personnell are Marines (obviously). The Master Chief simply happens to be a Naval NCO who can perform many of the same functions as the Marines without actually coming under the authority of the Marine Corps.

[Gungnir]

Pistol whipping his bridge officers into efficiency. :smallbiggrin:

A legitimate tactic, as MC's ridiculous score in Strength actually causes more damage than the bullets themselves, save for hits to the central nervous system.

[Setra]

A legitimate tactic, as MC's ridiculous score in Strength actually causes more damage than the bullets themselves, save for hits to the central nervous system.
What WOULD his strength score be?

Has anyone statted Master Chief?

[Gungnir]

What WOULD his strength score be?

Has anyone statted Master Chief?

Someone made the Halo d20 Modern setting in the homebrew boards a while back. SPARTANs were a template, and I think they had anywhere from +2 to +8 in all their scores.

EDIT: Found it.
Spartan II (Template)
"Spartan II" is a template that can be added to any human with Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution scores of at least 14.

Appearance: Increase height to 7 ft. (recalculate weight as needed), triple the character’s recalculated weight.
Challenge Rating: As character level +4
Level Adjustment: +6
Speed: Changed to 40 ft. (+10 ft. if it was higher then 30 ft. originally)
Attacks: Same as character
Special Qualities: A Spartan II retains all the special qualities of the character and gains the additional special qualities listed below.
Low-light Vision (Ex): Spartan II’s have low-light vision out to 60 ft.
Carbide Skeleton: Character receives +3 Massive Damage Save and –1 die to all falling damage (minimum of zero).
Enlarged Form: The Spartan II counts as being size Large whenever it is advantageous to him (ex. Carrying Capacity, Wielding Large Weapons, etc.) excluding Reach and Space. He still counts as being size Medium for all other purposes (ex. for Hide checks).
Saves: Same as character
Ability Scores: Spartan IIs gain the following ability score increases: +6 Str, +8 Dex, +4 Con, +2 Int, +2 Wis

Skills: Same as character, +8 species bonus on Spot checks.

Feats: Spartan template feats-Bonus Feats: Spartans receive the following feats upon completion of the Spartan project, if a Spartan already possesses a given feat they gain no additional benefits. The Spartan must possess all prerequisites to gain the bonus feat.
AP (Light), AP (Medium), AP (Powered), Combat Martial Arts, Endurance, Improved Initiative, Lightning Reflexes, Personal Firearms Proficiency, Advanced Firearms Proficiency, Burst Fire, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Quick reload, Run, Two Weapon Fighting,


Augmentations: As part of the Spartan II program, the trainees were augmented by both genetic engineering and sophisticated cybernetics. The process was excruciating; only half of the trainees survived the initial experiments. A character who wishes to become a Spartan II must make a succession of 25 successful Fortitude saving throws (DC 20). Each failed throw deals 1 point of Constitution damage to the subject, although it may be remade.

The above scores represent a condensed version of the template. The flavor text below describes which processes gift the Spartan II’s with their superhuman abilities. Also, even though several of the augmentations below are cybernetics, they are an intrinsic part of the Spartan II and therefore do not count against his maximum number of allotted cyberware augmentations.

1. Carbide ceramic ossification: Advanced material grafting onto skeletal structure to make bones virtually unbreakable. Recommended coverage not to exceed 3 percent total bone mass because of significant white blood cell necrosis. Specific risk for pre- and near-post pubescent adolescents: skeletal growth spurts may cause irreparable bone pulverization.

Benefit: Subject’s weight triples and gains the benefit of +3 MDS, and –1 to all falling damage die (minimum of zero).

2. Muscular enhancement injections: Protein complex is injected intramuscularly to increase tissue density and decrease lactase recovery time. Risk: 5 percent of test subjects experience a fatal cardiac volume increase.

Benefit: Subject receives a +6 bonus to Strength, and a +4 bonus to Constitution. It is with conjunction of the catalytic thyroid implant that the subject receives similar benefits to those provided by the Enlarged Form mutation; only that the Spartan II counts as being size Large whenever it is advantageous to him (ex. Carrying Capacity, Wielding Larger Weapons, etc) excluding Reach and Space. He still counts as being size Medium for all other purposes (ex. for Hide checks).

3. Catalytic thyroid implant: platinum pellet containing human growth hormone catalyst is implanted in the thyroid to boost growth of skeletal and muscle tissues. Risk: rare instances or elephantiasis. Suppressed sexual drive.

Benefit: Subject grows to a massive 7 feet in height, and his increased muscular strength improves his speed to 40 ft. (+10 ft. if it was higher). Weight is recalculated as needed. This augmentation acts in tandem with the muscular enhancement injections to provide most of the Spartan II template’s benefits.

4. Occipital capillary reversal: submergence and boosted blood vessel flow beneath the rods and cones of subject’s retina. Produces a marked visual perception increase. Risk: retinal rejection and detachment. Permanent blindness.

Benefit: Subject receives low-light vision 60 ft. and a +8 species bonus on Spot checks.

5. Superconducting fabrication of neural dendrites: alteration of bioelectrical nerve transduction to shielded electronic transduction. Three hundred percent increase in subject’s reflexes. Anecdotal evidence of marked increase in intelligence, memory, and creativity. Risk: significant instances of Parkinson’s disease and Fletcher’s syndrome.

Benefit: Subject receives +8 Dexterity and +2 Intelligence +2 Wisdom.

Note: We seem to have drifted off course.

[Demented]

It STILL wouldn't deserve that much hype. NO GAME deserves that much hype.

I consider reviews and forum threads to be hype.
Thus, Bioshock Hype > Halo 3 Hype.
Everywhere I go, Bioshock is there, guaranteed.
Maybe I just don't visit the right corners of the internet?

[Fury1671]

I'm joining the Halo isn't really that good camp. To me Halo is just another generic FPS. The story was alright, but the Single Player wasn't really all that. It is true that Halo shined because of Multiplayer. It brought a good Multiplayer to the masses.

The problem is, I've been playing UT, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and CS for a good amount of time before then. Halo did not stand near those games in Multiplayer. Sticky Grenades? See Remote Mines/Proximity Grenades. Vehicles? Alright, none of those games had Vehicles, but vehicles are hard to balance. I'm sorry, I'd rather Karate Chop (Goldeneye FTW) people in the groin than shoot someone with a tank. What can I say, I'm childish.

Halo 3 isn't going to be that good. The only games I want anymore Bioshock (PC), UT3(PC), Starcraft 2(PC), Sam & Max (PC)

[banjo1985]

Never found anything to keep me interested in Halo. Played the first one and found the levels bland and the story a non-entity. The controls and system worked, I'd just much rather play Quake, Unreal or Bioshock, and I don't think that will change with the new one coming around.

I can understand why a lot of people like it, though it does amaze me how much interest it get's when it's not much different from anything else on the market.

[Samiam303]

Because When Halo First Came Out There Was Nuthing Like It Ever And It Defined The Genra Of Fps

http://static.dropline.net/cats/images/i-lold.jpg

[Joran]

Nitpick, ALL games go gold before release, its the term used when development is over and they start printing CDs.

This really annoys me, since games have "gold editions", probably a relic from the music industry, when an album will be gold when it sells a certain number of copies. However, video game companies almost always use "gone gold" to denote that the game is in production. When I see "gone gold" though, I almost always think the first, not the second =P

/end thread de-rail.

Anyway, Halo to me is akin World of Warcraft. It's a very good representation of a genre, but is not a revolution or evolution of the form.

[Tom_Violence]

This really annoys me, since games have "gold editions", probably a relic from the music industry, when an album will be gold when it sells a certain number of copies. However, video game companies almost always use "gone gold" to denote that the game is in production. When I see "gone gold" though, I almost always think the first, not the second =P


For those not in the know about general software release stuff, here's Wiki!:

The term gold anecdotally refers to the use of "gold master disc" which was commonly used to send the final version to manufacturers who use it to create the mass-produced retail copies. It may in this context be a hold-over from music production. In some cases, however, the master disc is still actually made of gold, for both aesthetic appeal and resistance to corrosion.

[Actana]

I consider reviews and forum threads to be hype.
Thus, Bioshock Hype > Halo 3 Hype.
Everywhere I go, Bioshock is there, guaranteed.
Maybe I just don't visit the right corners of the internet?

Well I disagree. Halo 3 is more hyped than Bioshock.*

This doesn't prove anything about Halo 3's hype, but:
Halo 2 hype>>>>>>>>[Insert any other game except for Gears]'s hype.

I mean, commercials on TV, geez....

*: Said by a Bioshock fanboy

[Triaxx]

Edit: My second favorite numbered Final Fantasy is VIII (I try to hide this fact most of the time)

Which is a great game if you can get around the syrupy storyline.

---

Halo didn't bring anything new to the Genre. But it's not what it brought, so much as how it brought it that made it so much fun. Vehicles were great, but they always made you more vulnerable than walking around in multiplayer.

But it was the close, frantic nature of the multiplayer, unlike the more considered styles of open, team based shooters like CS, or battlefield that made it so much fun. The best game I ever played was four players, with nothing but swords and plasma grenades.

[Jibar]

Well I disagree. Halo 3 is more hyped than Bioshock.**: Said by a Bioshock fanboy

Oh no seriously, you're right.
You're absolutely right.
Halo 3 is easily the single most hyped game ever. No other game has ever been played up in this way, with every single minute part screamed to the heavens about in almost every single game news.
Now, BioShock was hyped, and rightfully so. It did bring something new, but it also did something amazing with it. While regular gamers would have been disappointed, it was the system shock that FPS really can be something, and really can deliver on plot, that left gamers knowing that those months of waiting were totally worth it.

I also really feel I should respond to SurlySeraph's post, but frankly the amount of thought put into it, I just don't have the heart.

[Murongo]

HALO is famous for the same reason as Counter-Strike. It's a very basic, fun, solid, digestible game. Extremely easy to understand but impossible to master. I think it's unfair to say HALO brought nothing new. It didn't have any revolutionary things you could do like pull slugs out of little girls but some things it did were:

-Balanced weapons so that a rocket launcher wasn't necessarily better than a sniper rifle which wasn't necessarily better than an SMG. Unlike other console games like Unreal that made bigger guns better all the time. Even getting in a vehicle in HALO doesn't make you better than someone with any kind of gun. Playstyles change, but there's no wrong or right way to do it.

-Intuitive controls. The first time I played HALO it felt right. I didn't have to ask any one how to move or shoot or throw grenades, because it all felt like it should. Even driving vehicles felt easy to pick up. Some would say that's because it's very simple controls, but as far as I'm concerned you can do anything you'd want to do and if it's easy to do so that's all the better. HALO has absolutely no learning curve, so elite gamer bias aside that's a plus.

-Good online match-making. The game would set you up with people who were of your skill level, quickly. CS actually does the polar opposite and just gives you a list of all the servers to choose from. Personally I like both systems, but I hate anything in between. Like SOCOM. Blech.

So no, you can't turn your hand into a beehive (which IMO is overhyped, you do realize it's just another weapon, right? The fact that thematically it's shown as bees doesn't change the fact that it's a weapon. And freezing/electrocuting/setting things on fire are nothing new to video games.) But the game is extremely solid.

By the way I compared it to bioshock for argument's sake since there seems to be a lot of HALO-hate going around, but I loved bioshock I played it through to get both endings. It had awesome atmosphere. (Although the second time I played it on easy instead of hard because I was sick of hacking and wanted to just blow everything up.)

[Indon]

I liked Halo for these reasons:

-Co-op was fun.

-Multiplayer was okay too.

-The game pulled off a 'military' feel, without being one-shot-youre-dead realistic (which I hate, because I'm not very good at not being shot in FPS games).

[Doey]

Ok, I just finished reading this thread. I finally made an account just so I can reply to this.


Plus, storyline.

Seriously, it's actually a good story.

Thank you. I have read all the book (cept second which was a walk through of the game) and the main reason I'm getting Halo 3 and a xbox is so I can find out what happens. (yes, I did not buy a 360 until about a week ago)



It was also a game designed for consoles. Switching right from games like Half-Life, Unreal Tournament, etc. straight to Halo (for PC), I notice 2 things.

1. Movement is DEATHLY SLOW. It takes forever to get anywhere, even in a vehicle.

2. Weapons are stupidly inaccurate, and fire insanely fast. (Seriously, let's see someone shoot an actual sniper rifle, accurately, as fast as MASTOR CHEEF does.)

I assume these are to compensate for the lack of utter precision a mouse can give the average gamer.


1) I agree, anyone that read the books will also probably feel that he should be faster. Reasons Spoiler Tagged Below. (you dont get these from the games)

2) Spoiler Tags Below for why he is able to



Oh well, I'll just summarize what I wrote.


Bravo.


One time, I actually got a few friends from my gaming group and had a Warthog demolition derby.

Rules (honor based) Not allowed to shoot, and warthogs / ghosts only. Flip the person out, then run em over. was it the same for you?


I always thought that they needed to insert some more hand to hand combat into the Halo series.

Was Supposed to be in Halo 2, but was pulled, prolly to stop it from getting delayed. That is one of the reasons I like the Plasma Pistol, you dont hit them with the gun, you actually punch them.


Spoiler of Books / Backstory

Master Chief is a member of an eliete covert ops group. origionally he did not have the shields for his armor, however by capturing / reverse engineering the technology, he was able to get shields.

The reason he is so stron is because since the age of 6, he has been trained in the military. He has recieved augmentations such as increased muscle mass, reinforced skeleton, and the like. Roughly half of group died in this process. He is able to run roughly 60Km/h (so should be faster in game) and has massive stregnth. At the age of...12 I think, he was able to beat armored exosuits with guns completely unarmed.

His armor also amplifys his stregnth and reflexes. An OSDT (equilivent of a navy SEALS member) was put in a prototype, and attempted to move his arm. His arm flashed up to his chest, breaking its bones, which cause him to react... and as you can guess, he died.


Basically: I feel that this game is in fact over hyped as a game. However, I know there are others like me who feel that dont just look at it as a Game, but as a story.

Af far as games go, yes it is prolly on the lower end. However if you compare it to something else, like the harry potter books, then it begins to make more sense. Harry Potter is just a book, so all you get from it is a story. Unreal is a game, you mainly get gameplay from it (i cant think of any real story). Halo is somewhere in between those to me.

From where the first game starts off, if you havent read the first book, then you might have felt a bit loss. However the general backstory for this was:
The Covent attack the human's main base: Reach. You were on a highly classified mission, but was forced to be recalled to defend. There were roughly 20 Spartans, 3 went to a Unsecured Database in space (location of every human planet on it) and rest went to defend generators. The planet was loss, and so were the spartans. You are the lone survivor. You escape into hyperspace, and are put into cryogenic sleep for the time. When you awake is where the first game starts.

What makes Halo so great to me is the fact that it isnt just an FPS, but its also a Sci-Fi Story. If it was just the game, then I probably wouldnt give it too much thought. However I have been drawn in by the Story behind the game.

Please Excuse all Typos / Grammer Errors.

Note: For everyone that thinks Halo and Halo2 are easy, give Halo2 a try on Mythic Mode. Legenday + Mythic Skull.
Rough Damage Calculation: 8 headshots with a sniper rifle to kill a white elite

[Hermit]

Af far as games go, yes it is prolly on the lower end. However if you compare it to something else, like the harry potter books, then it begins to make more sense. Harry Potter is just a book, so all you get from it is a story. Unreal is a game, you mainly get gameplay from it (i cant think of any real story). Halo is somewhere in between those to me.


You know I'd never really thought of it like this, but this might be exactly the reason I don't reallly 'get' Halo. As a game there's vastly superior products out at the time, and since. As a story, its borrows rather heavily from Banks' and Niven's works, among others. I think really, whenever I think of Halo, my thoughts tend to be "If I want a Sci Fi shooter, I'll go play UT or Half Life. If I want a great story, I'll go read a sci-fi novel"

Perhaps the reason it's so popular is it simply took a good line between story and gameplay on a console lacking in titles with either excellent gameplay or a great story at the time. I still think if Halo had been a PS2 game it would have been swamped by other, better titles. But although I'm really not a Halo fan (The games were boring, multiplayer fun is better had elsewhere, and the books were not exactly great), I'll at least admit Microsoft knew what they were doing when they got Bungie onboard with Halo. It's not too far from the truth to say that Halo was one of the few titles in the XBox's early days that saved it from being a flop.

[Triaxx]

Most people seem to forget, in an FPS, the story is there only to give you an excuse to shoot things.

[Doey]

Most people seem to forget, in an FPS, the story is there only to give you an excuse to shoot things.

As true as that may be, with Halo I feel more like I'm playing through part of a book. Maybe thats the allure of it.

Does anyone know if there have been any other games that actually released a Prequel book to the game before the game's release? That could be the source of all this. Some people just play the game, so they feel it is overhyped, others read the book so they are excited about the game. Three of my friends that have read the books are also effected by the "Halo Complex" if you will. One of my friends hasnt read the books, and he seems to not be as excited about it.

Book Game

Fall of Reach > Halo > First Strike > Halo 2 > Ghost of Onyx > Halo 3

Seems that before each game, a prequel book to the game is released. Does anyone knows of any other game that released a book prior to its release besides halo?

[Setra]

As true as that may be, with Halo I feel more like I'm playing through part of a book. Maybe thats the allure of it.
Well if you ever want to play through a movie, try Xenosaga. :smalltongue:

[Winterwind]

Or Wing Commander III (and IV, too, I was told).
A friend of mine says those are amongst the best sci-fi movies he knows - and little beyond that. :smallbiggrin:

[Beleriphon]

A legitimate tactic, as MC's ridiculous score in Strength actually causes more damage than the bullets themselves, save for hits to the central nervous system.

Which was why my favourite Elite killing tactic is to blast them with the shotgun and then club them to death. Take that you fugly bastards!

[Hermit]

Seems that before each game, a prequel book to the game is released. Does anyone knows of any other game that released a book prior to its release besides halo?

I remember Stonekeep, a little known CRPG in the mid ninties came with a prequal book packaged with it. "Thera Awakening" I believe. I know there's been other games with books released, but I can't think of any which hada book released before them.

That said of course, I really couldn't get into the books at all. I'd hoped by reading them I might understand the game's popularity a bit more, but in the end I gave up about 3/4 of the way through the first book. Which is a really bad sign, cause usually I'll read anything through to the end even if it's pretty bad. Still got books 2 and 3 sat around and I've never even opened them.

[Prustan]

I remember Stonekeep, a little known CRPG in the mid ninties came with a prequal book packaged with it. "Thera Awakening" I believe. I know there's been other games with books released, but I can't think of any which hada book released before them.



I still have my copies of Stonekeep and book. Fun times. Not sure if it would work on current computer though.

[Hermit]

I still have my copies of Stonekeep and book. Fun times. Not sure if it would work on current computer though.

It doesn't. I tried recently because it's been too long since I've heard those goblin songs (All the hits from "How come, Khuul Kum, how come?" to "I'd rather be a Dwarf"), but alas, no dice.
Might be able to fix something with DOSBox, but its far too much effort trying to work stuff on that program.

[BrokenButterfly]

I'm just going to pop in a quick post because I've been replaying Halo at the moment on my PC due to all the hype of H3, so I could assess how I think of it again.

I played a demo of it in shops when it first came out, and I thought it was alright, but not stunning or FPS defining. I knew I wasn't going to buy an Xbox for it, that's for sure. But I did pick it up for a small price when I saw the PC port about a year ago, I figured I'd play it through and see what the hype was about.

I enjoy parts of it, and I'm certainly enjoying it more now that I'm playing on Legendary mode for the first time. Other than the repetition, and some of the other elements mentioned, I didn't really like the weapons. For me the Covenant guns were a bit lame, the plasma lacked the weight that the Marine armoury had. I just stuck with the Assault Rifle and Shotgun for most of the game.

I do like the enemies, the Covenant and Flood, but I would have liked a tad more enemy variety. I do agree that they have more personality than most of the foes you fight in a bog-standard FPS though.

I have never played Halo multiplayer for any real length of time, so I can't comment on it.

To round off, I do feel that Halo is over-hyped, but I definitely don't think it's a bad game. I don't go for that sort of shiny sci-fi shooter anyway. My favourite console shooter series has been Timesplitters, without a doubt. TS multiplayer is fantastic imo.

[Gungnir]

Halo 3 Hype Hoedown. (http://www.sarcasticgamer.com/2007/09/halo-3-hype-hoedown.html)

Figured it was relevant.

[Thrawn183]

It's hyped, but its still good clean fun. Great games.

[Hungry Kobold]

As with all things it's a matter of taste. I like the story, some people think it's rubbish. I love Shakespeare, some people think he's incomprehensible. I'm not comparing the content of the two, just comparing the respective differences in tastes. I can't really convince someone to enjoy Halo any more than I can teach somebody to appreciate Shakespeare. Just tastes.

[Shovah]

I never really 'got' halo either. I've played 1 and 2, I've played halo on both PC and Xbox and I've played alone, online and with a bunch of friends splitscreen on a 40" TV and really I don't think its anything special.
I just found the gameplay rather bland and un-interesting.

[Zakama]

Just to put the hype into perspective, I'm amped about Halo 3 and I don't even have an xbox. My friend does, so I will play it a little, but still.