|
Why do you like Halo?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| RJT |
I just watched the new "demo" for Halo 3, and honestly, I can't see why anyone cares at this point.
Don't get me wrong, I will NOT write off Halo 3 as bad before it's released, as the possibility for innovation is always present in games that aren't finished, but seriously, Halo 1 and 2 were hands down two of the most generic FPS I've ever seen - And the multiplayer was genuinely nothing special, and certainly nothing that hadn't been done to death before.
Am I missing something? Anyone care to enlighten me as to why Halo is so popular? |
|
|
| CONNERMAN2000 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
I just watched the new "demo" for Halo 3, and honestly, I can't see why anyone cares at this point.
Don't get me wrong, I will NOT write off Halo 3 as bad before it's released, as the possibility for innovation is always present in games that aren't finished, but seriously, Halo 1 and 2 were hands down two of the most generic FPS I've ever seen - And the multiplayer was genuinely nothing special, and certainly nothing that hadn't been done to death before.
Am I missing something? Anyone care to enlighten me as to why Halo is so popular? |
How about, instead, YOU name the specific things you DONT like about it.
that sounds like an assholish statement, but really, I'd like to know what you dont like about it. Ill tell you straight up that the single player on both games is boring, repetitive, and uninteresting. I only beat Halo 1 because I was playing co-op with a buddy who demanded I keep playing. Ive only gotten to like...the 3rd level or something in Halo 2.
But the multiplayer is fun as hell. The controls are tightly designed so that you have perfect handling. You can jump slightly higher than you can in most games, which allows for greater mobility. This allows for you to evade getting shot a little easier, which means that its very possible to have great firefights. Melee attacking I think was invented by Halo 1. Dont write that in stone, but I dont think I ever played a game that tied a button soley on melee attacking until Halo. Melee attacking is also a very cool added dimension to the combat, which allows for cooler fights as well.
And also, do you royally suck at Halo 1 or 2? Is that maybe effecting your opinion? :p
tell me what you dont like about it. And saying its 'generic' is a cliche statement to make in and of itself considering roughly 95% of all games released these days are just rehashes and sequels. Saying its generic cant be your reason for hating Halo. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by CONNERMAN2000
And saying its 'generic' is a cliche statement to make in and of itself considering roughly 95% of all games released these days are just rehashes and sequels. Saying its generic cant be your reason for hating Halo. |
Are you kidding me? Of course it can!
Halo does absolutely nothing innovative gameplay wise (It was NOT the first FPS with Melee controls), it's control scheme is just the default "best" for FPS on consoles, and in general, it just feels like a very stripped down FPS.
It's graphically average (even at the time of its release), has a horrid story that is not at all engrossing, and the quality of multiplayer has been either met or beat by countless other games.
Halo to me is just FPS for dummies. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
good things in halo:
enemy AI was pretty good for its time
the open environments were cool
vehicles were fun to use
bad things in halo:
SLOW. like grandma slow. deathmatch halo was the most boring FPS multiplayer experience i have ever ever had.
most of the weapons were gay.
everyone raved about it like it was the second-coming, and wasn't better than any top PC shooter at release time.
after a while it was extremely boring. one of the only FPS games i never finished.
halo 2 and the multiplayer checkpoint system is the worst gameplay addition i have ever ever seen.
wolfenstein 3d had melee combat i hate to tell you, as did all the dooms & quakes ;)
im with RJT. one of the most overated games of all time. had this been a PC release first i really doubt you would have seen the same degree of fanfare.
did i mention it was SLOW? *yawns* |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by spc
n64 bond > * |
thats one of the stupidest statements ive ever read here in the gaming forum. |
|
|
| Magnus |
| I've never liked either Halo. This is probably from playing fast paced FPS like UT which I've loved from the beginning. To me, Halo is too much movie sequence and not enough action. Your guy walks horribly slow like he is in mud. I know they are probably going for the real life effect here but its just too slow for me. The graphics are ty IMO as well. |
|
|
| kid nyce |
RJT great timely thread and I totally agree with you. For once I sense a bonding that was much needed for those who do not generally follow what everyone is hyping up.
Connerman's response is typical, typical to those who do not follow the mainstream. Like OMG you don't like halo, blasphemy, you are an outcast to the gaming society! lol ok a bit overboard but it's true, when conventional gamers do not follow the conventional gaming market, they are seen as those outside opinioners, often categorized as 'not a true gamer' lol wtf? because i don't like halo i'm not a real gamer?
ok enough of the response reactions, more about the game.
i started out with duke nukem and doom then moved to counterstrike. counterstike pc compared to xbox halo, same concept completely different gameplay feels. Counterstrike pc gave me a real guns, real bullets, real life game play that i could relate to. the move with one hand point and shoot with another is what sold it for me, it was a skill set, eye hand coordination game. the jumping was realistic where you didn't FLOAT off like in halo, You don't throw STICKY grenades that stick to peoples back and watch them blow up from a few feet away. The melee in halo is kind of weak imho, knocking someone with a gun, ok I can see that but it's too much Action-Jackson for me, counterstrike offered up "quick switch" to knife to stab or slice someone that to me is a much more superb 'melee' than gun butting someone in the back. Counterstrike is probably the best FPS to me.
Reasons why I didn't like halo, it was unrealistic, too DOOM like with weird canons, gel plasma guns, sticky grenades, and the third dimension of jumping and flying while shooting. it added a third lateral to an already indepth 2 dimension game. horizontal strafing and vertical looking, mix in a floaty jump and you're now playing in a third dimension (virtually 360). The controller still hasn't sold me yet, the aiming with thumbs to me isn't precise, thats why I haven't been completely sold on a 360/GOW, yea i've played it and agree the game play is good, but nothing as good as I'd get on a PC ONLY because you are aiming with thumbs, to me moving my hand with a mouse to a cross hair on a screen is much more realistic then thumb controlling the crosshairs.
Ok to be fair, it's true, it could be that some people prefer that added dimension, to them it makes it more challenging I guess (or easier to evade however you want to look at it). personally it's not for me and that's why i've never really fell for the console market, never was a 'true gamer' compared to everyone else, only because i held this stigma over the console world that there is no real skillset when you play a console game. there is no precision with thumb guided crosshairs in my opinion. i think of it more as me being inside a machine where my hands are not together to play a FPS, more like a mech warrior syndrome where moving functionality and aiming are two seperate functions guided by different parts of the brain. console fps gaming does not do that for me, it simply just doesn't
I think the next best thing to FPS that was emulated in the arcade and something in the teeters in the fantasy world that halo has created is a game called Grid, solely because you move your character with a joystick, and you aim with a rolling ball, even though the canons are a bit weird and the jumping isn't 'out of control'. |
|
|
| zokissima |
A lot of people seem to be comparing halo to PC shooters. Totaly different school of thought IMO, but Halo did bring the console FPS genre a little of the PC refinement. Tighter controls, and pretty good AI.
Admitedly, multiplayer for me was boring as hell, but I really enjoyed the campaign.
Some of the larger outdoor levels of Halo (and to a lesser extent Halo 2) really did have an epic feel, and were just tremendous fun to play.
Plus, this game had co-op, and very well done co-op. I actually played the first one through with almost everyone I know, and with my ex gf. In fact, it was at her urging that we played through Halo 2. That's something to be said for a FPS.
Now, was it innovative, and brought on a whole new breed of gameplay? no, but then again, the whole concept of a FPS hasn't changed in, well since Wolfenstein 3D IMO, and I've played most of them out there. Having said that, it was just a very well done game. Weapons and stages were balanced, and there was a very wide difficulty curve to entice the beginner and the elite. |
|
|
| trunks1022 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
thats one of the stupidest statements ive ever read here in the gaming forum. |
why? i actually have to agree with spc's statement (maybe not the * cuz that'd be the ENTIRE universe), and that's after playing countless hours of both. goldeneye on license to kill made for some hilarious deaths. the replay value of goldeneye multiplayer > halo 1 or 2 imo. you don't have to agree but it's not a stupid statement either.
*edit* maybe the * is a bit overgeneralizing, but maybe the * is for FPS haha |
|
|
| kid nyce |
| quote: | Originally posted by trunks1022
you don't have to agree but it's not a stupid statement either. |
think that would work well for a certain member in our section of the forums, either way though, that is the general concensus, if you don't agree you're stupid...i lawl |
|
|
| CONNERMAN2000 |
I think the problem a lot of people have with Halo is that those same people are too damn used to Unreal Tournament, etc. They are used to INCREDIBLY fast (almost too fast) deathmatch battles that last 3 minutes. Halo is slower, and nyce brought up some good points on added dimensions and how the floatiness of the jumping can make it easier for evasion. See, I LIKE that factor, because its something new. Before Halo, all FPS's just tried to be fast deathmatch machines. Not that theres anything wrong with that; UT2K4 is badass.
Raistlin, I am aware that Doom, Wolfenstein, etc. had melee combat...but NOT in the sense that Halo has it. Read my statement again...I say that Halo was the first to tie a BUTTON to melee attacking. That means that with ANY weapon, you can throw a melee attack (even a frickin rocket launcher). In Doom, you had to SWITCH weapons to your fist in order to do that. Im still of the impression that Halo was the first to do this.
Counter-Strike's quick switch button is similar, but not the same.
And I thought Halo's graphics were pretty damn impressive for 2001. No other console FPS's rendered such huge environments the way Halo did during the time. Some of the levels however were so badly designed that it made me wanna stop playing (im talking about the single player), but I still think they were pretty to look at.
In all honesty, something tells me you guys havent played enough, or played with ty players. Im sounding incredibly ignorant, but I dont see HOW you cant find a 16 player capture the flag match on Blood Gulch to be any fun. I could play Halo 1 with 16 people for days on end. im gonna get for saying this, and Im not saying you guys automatically suck ass at the game, but.... i dunno, to each their own i guess. :) |
|
|
|
|
