I'm guessing you aren't much of a Halo fan?
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PrettyCoolGuy
Halo - What's the big deal?
- Thread starter AlphaMan
- Start date
I'm guessing you aren't much of a Halo fan?
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PrettyCoolGuy
I'm guessing you aren't much of a Halo fan?
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PrettyCoolGuy
Repeating something stupid doesn't make you a Halo fan.
Bungie to Leave Microsoft: Our Long National Nightmare is Over
(Sorry about the Google cache. CARS just switched over to a new system, and they haven't gotten to that story in their restoration yet)
I have high hopes for their new IP, especially that I might be able to play it without borrowing a friend's console. I especially want there to be something to the fact that Reach had almost all the in-joke Marathon logos removed from it.
Yeah, I remember the news that they had left MS. That must have been quite a relief for Mac users. I do wonder if it means they'll have more freedom again to do what they want.
New IP? Nice. I hadn't heard. I always had a soft spot for the Myth games and the exploding dwarves
I see that they're planning a sequel to that as well as a sequel to the Marathon series.
New IP? Nice. I hadn't heard. I always had a soft spot for the Myth games and the exploding dwarves
I see that they're planning a sequel to that as well as a sequel to the Marathon series.
New IP? Nice. I hadn't heard. I always had a soft spot for the Myth games and the exploding dwarves
That article was satirical, actually. They haven't announced what their next game will be. All we know is that it won't be Halo, since Microsoft owns it and the spinoff (343 Industries) set up specifically to churn out future Halo games and tie-ins, and that the next Bungie product will be published by Activision. It's a pretty good guess that it'll be an all-new series, but since they own everything they've made except Halo, it could be a continuation of one of their older titles, too.
Yeah, Im interested to see what comes out of Bungie as well. I've never really been as impressed with Bungie as others have. I felt that Halo was overrated (even back in the day) and the only other thing they produced this decade was the underwhelming (and quickly forgotten) Oni for the PS2 and PC.
That being said, at least Halo has been solid, I do hope for more though.
That being said, at least Halo has been solid, I do hope for more though.
New IP? Nice. I hadn't heard. I always had a soft spot for the Myth games and the exploding dwarves
That article was satirical, actually. They haven't announced what their next game will be. All we know is that it won't be Halo, since Microsoft owns it and the spinoff (343 Industries) set up specifically to churn out future Halo games and tie-ins, and that the next Bungie product will be published by Activision. It's a pretty good guess that it'll be an all-new series, but since they own everything they've made except Halo, it could be a continuation of one of their older titles, too.
Ahh, I see. In that case, I look forward to seeing what they'll do, and I do hope it will be multi-platform, ie consoles and PC and Mac.
The thing about Halo that makes it significant isn't readily obvious or apparent - it's the combat system and the AI.
Basically, Halo has the most effective sandbox AI for an action-shooting game out there. This is most apparent in the Firefight modes of Reach. Games such as Call of Duty are heavily scripted to give an appearance of intelligence on the part of enemies. In Halo, encounters can play out in a very large number of ways because it's very dynamic.
If you just play Halo for a single pass on the easy difficulty, you'll never see it. Playing on harder difficulties, and in co-op with a team of players, changes the experience. It's why in Halo 3 and Reach, co-op campaign has become its own thing, complete with a scoring system, leaderboards, and game mutators (skulls) - it's meant to be played over and over, not just a single pass to see the story then forget about it.
The multiplayer in Halo, meanwhile, is significant because of its flexibility. There's no console shooter with as many game set-up and editing options as Halo; same goes for the variety and balance of the weapons in the game.
Halo isn't trying to be realistic and that's not the point; what it is trying to do, is be a very deep experience that gives more over time if the player puts more into it.
Halo as a whole has not so much been over-rated, as overhyped, for the wrong reasons. Microsoft has tried to ride Halo into the ground because that's what they do - they're Microsoft. Therefore, they've tried to overplay and oversell Halo for being "bad assed" and for its story, and for its primary character (Master Chief and Spartans in general). Much of the distaste for Halo being overhyped originated back in the day with Halo 2 - a game that Microsoft pushed to the moon, but is the most incomplete and broken game in the entire series because MS forced Bungie to shove it out the door long before it was finished. There's half a game's worth of content missing from Halo 2 that died on the cutting room floor.
Ironically, a game like Call of Duty may service the casual player a lot better than Halo, because Call of Duty has become eponymous with a "movie like" and Michael Baytastic thrill ride through a relatively short but action-packed single player game. Its online multiplayer also sacrifices a lot of variety and depth for its attractive RPG grinding gameplay, with micro-rewards to keep people playing a little every day. I am not criticizing Call of Duty; just calling it what it is.
A lot of Halo fans (who aren't just fanboys of Mister Chef, but fans of the gameplay itself) tend to be a lot deeper into the nuts and bolts of such games, based on my own experience. It makes sense, since the last couple of versions of Halo have featured complex game type editors that allow one to create their own game variations and even customize maps to a deep degree.
Also, as far as graphics go, another reason why Halo's visuals are not as "impressive" as something like Call of Duty is again because it isn't as linear. Its battles and areas are larger, more open, must be playable from many angles of attack and under many circumstances, filled with vehicles, and employ dozens of advanced AI units in campaign and firefight modes. That takes its toll and requires a lot of tradeoffs. To make up for it, Halo does tend to have a great, meticulous attention to detail that stands up to repeated examination. The design and animation of weapons in Halo, for instance, is some of the most complex in any first person shooter - even if they don't "look real" at first glance because they're fictional and not based on real firearms.
Basically, Halo has the most effective sandbox AI for an action-shooting game out there. This is most apparent in the Firefight modes of Reach. Games such as Call of Duty are heavily scripted to give an appearance of intelligence on the part of enemies. In Halo, encounters can play out in a very large number of ways because it's very dynamic.
If you just play Halo for a single pass on the easy difficulty, you'll never see it. Playing on harder difficulties, and in co-op with a team of players, changes the experience. It's why in Halo 3 and Reach, co-op campaign has become its own thing, complete with a scoring system, leaderboards, and game mutators (skulls) - it's meant to be played over and over, not just a single pass to see the story then forget about it.
The multiplayer in Halo, meanwhile, is significant because of its flexibility. There's no console shooter with as many game set-up and editing options as Halo; same goes for the variety and balance of the weapons in the game.
Halo isn't trying to be realistic and that's not the point; what it is trying to do, is be a very deep experience that gives more over time if the player puts more into it.
Halo as a whole has not so much been over-rated, as overhyped, for the wrong reasons. Microsoft has tried to ride Halo into the ground because that's what they do - they're Microsoft. Therefore, they've tried to overplay and oversell Halo for being "bad assed" and for its story, and for its primary character (Master Chief and Spartans in general). Much of the distaste for Halo being overhyped originated back in the day with Halo 2 - a game that Microsoft pushed to the moon, but is the most incomplete and broken game in the entire series because MS forced Bungie to shove it out the door long before it was finished. There's half a game's worth of content missing from Halo 2 that died on the cutting room floor.
Ironically, a game like Call of Duty may service the casual player a lot better than Halo, because Call of Duty has become eponymous with a "movie like" and Michael Baytastic thrill ride through a relatively short but action-packed single player game. Its online multiplayer also sacrifices a lot of variety and depth for its attractive RPG grinding gameplay, with micro-rewards to keep people playing a little every day. I am not criticizing Call of Duty; just calling it what it is.
A lot of Halo fans (who aren't just fanboys of Mister Chef, but fans of the gameplay itself) tend to be a lot deeper into the nuts and bolts of such games, based on my own experience. It makes sense, since the last couple of versions of Halo have featured complex game type editors that allow one to create their own game variations and even customize maps to a deep degree.
Also, as far as graphics go, another reason why Halo's visuals are not as "impressive" as something like Call of Duty is again because it isn't as linear. Its battles and areas are larger, more open, must be playable from many angles of attack and under many circumstances, filled with vehicles, and employ dozens of advanced AI units in campaign and firefight modes. That takes its toll and requires a lot of tradeoffs. To make up for it, Halo does tend to have a great, meticulous attention to detail that stands up to repeated examination. The design and animation of weapons in Halo, for instance, is some of the most complex in any first person shooter - even if they don't "look real" at first glance because they're fictional and not based on real firearms.
Great post, Kaijima, the Legendary difficulty modes in Halo 2 and 3 feature enemy AI that can definitely be a royal PITA.
Halo 2 co-op was especially difficult, because you couldn't infinitely respawn as long as the other player was alive like you can in Halo 3. There is a spot during the first mission of Halo 2, in the hanger when you have to defend the station from a boarding party.... holy shit that is difficult to pull off given the limited amount of ammunition you are given and the "duck and cover" defensive posture of the Elites. THOSE DAMNED PERSONAL SHIELDS!
Halo 2 co-op was especially difficult, because you couldn't infinitely respawn as long as the other player was alive like you can in Halo 3. There is a spot during the first mission of Halo 2, in the hanger when you have to defend the station from a boarding party.... holy shit that is difficult to pull off given the limited amount of ammunition you are given and the "duck and cover" defensive posture of the Elites. THOSE DAMNED PERSONAL SHIELDS!
My brother and I were playing co-op through all the Halo games recently, and we spent about an hour trying to get past that point and failing miserably. Eventually, we had to drop the difficulty down to heroic and got through it in only one attempt. We stayed at heroic for the rest of the game. 
Another vote here for Halo's appeal being in co-op campaign mode and multiplayer (split-screen deathmatches in my case, never got into the online craze). I intensely dislike the single-player campaign for repetitive levels and enemies, unless I have someone to play with, but splitscreen slayer can entertain me to no end.
Me n a friend completed Halo Reach today, was probably best Halo game to date though I didn't care for the story it was structured quite poorly at times but fun action. Bungie biggest problem is they try to do dramatic cutscenes but many feel flat, they seem to want to copy COD's hollywood style story telling but can't quite get there.
Encountered a glitch thats been reported online from a quick google search...Completed the entire game on normal but didn't get the finish story mode on normal achievement but it says we didn't do chapter 4
BUT how did we unlock chapter 5...seems if you leave a chapter midway and come back later loading the checkpoint, sometimes it doesn't register it for achievement so will have to re do that chapter before we try the story on Legendary.
Encountered a glitch thats been reported online from a quick google search...Completed the entire game on normal but didn't get the finish story mode on normal achievement but it says we didn't do chapter 4
BUT how did we unlock chapter 5
...seems if you leave a chapter midway and come back later loading the checkpoint, sometimes it doesn't register it for achievement so will have to re do that chapter before we try the story on Legendary.Similar threads
