Halo 3 is only the begining!!!

[qbert4ever]

Halo sucks. I'm sorry.

Wow, way to contribute to this topic in such an enlightining way.

And as far as that list that Sardaukar put up, most of those games came out after Halo CE. Unless you're talking about when it first came to PC, then you can't compare them in the way that captain planet was. After all, you couldn't say back when the first LoTR movie came out that "it was ok, but RoTK had better action in it" unless of course you were some kind of psychic.

 

[[HD]Rob Inglis]

Well, I just hope Bungie doesn't continue Halo, or make any spiritual sucessors, because:
A. It will probably be a fan game...
2. It will be for the purpose of just making some more money...
Red. I'm going to give them crap for not ending a series that is done with.

 

[broadband]

halo... is in sci fi, fighting agaisnt alien-zerg esque extraterrestres, and super advanced ones that thanks to some twist of the destiny we are capable to fight

 

[tiredinnuendo]

Ahh, but see--"good writing" is not the same thing as "great story." Die Hard had the *perfect* story for the movie it was trying to be. Was the writing great? No. The story though? Perfection. Just like how E. B. White's "Once More to the Lake" isn't exactly a great story, but it's some of the best writing qua writing ever.

Besides, if I was going to be elitist, I'd could knock Godfather for almost completely missing one of the major themes of the book, that gangsterism not only functioned better as a social institution for Italian immigrants than the government, but that gangsterism helped integrate Italians into mainstream American life more quickly than if they'd just worked hard because America, especially American government, and especially especially American justice, is not as evolved as it would like to believe itself to be.

But Godfather is still a good movie even if it is missing a lot of the depth of the novel because it's a cool gangster story. A less sophisticated story, but hey--sophistication isn't everything ;-D

You're confusing "story" and "narrative".

A "story" is that a little girl's father died, she and her stepmother didn't get along, she had to go live with dwarves, her stepmother found her and put her in a deep sleep, a prince awoke her, and she returned to cast down her stepmother and take the throne.

Narrative is how the story is told. It is the difference between Disney's Snow White and Neil Gaiman's Snow, Glass, Apples (which if you haven't read it, you should). Narrative is how the concepts are revealed to the audience.

- J

 

[tiredinnuendo]

Don't think I was--I think you just misunderstood me.

I had only meant to quote your first paragraph, as I agree that the story in the Godfather movie was less than the story in the book. I was still talking about good stories vs. good narrative vs. special effects. Recall that we're talking about the quality of the story in Halo, at least in theory.

Mass Effect has a good story. It's well thought out with several races, all of whom have seperate doctrines of war, religions, political schemes, etc; and the technological advances actually (somewhat) make sense. The narrative is only okay, but the actual story is well written. As a result of the so/so narrative, the game suffers in the eyes of some for being overly wordy and very predictable, among other complaints.

Bioshock has a good narrative. The story itself isn't that well thought out or explained as far as the creation of such a city and/or the workings of plasmids and there's much we have to take on faith. Add into that that most of the actual "story" is a prodigal son's return to aid in a power struggle. The reason it's so compelling is because of how information is presented and how the story is told.

Crackdown has good special effects. There is virtually no story to speak of unless you count the "Ah ha! We're the real bad guys!" moment at the end. There isn't any narrative either, unless you count the voice that keeps saying, "They're bad. Kill them." But blowing up bad guys is satisfying. Kicking a truck 40 feet is fun.

Halo's story is weak at best. Better than Doom 3, but really not beating out too much else as far as the quality put into the tale that is told. The narrative is straightforward and aside from one twist halfway through the first game, everything that happens is predictable. The special effects are good and the music can add a nice "epic" feeling.

It's my opinion that the quality of a story is something that can be judged fairly. The quality of a narrative is usually something open to opinion. Obviously your joy-levels with special effects will vary. Some folks define "story" differently than I do, but in the literal sense of the word, Halo's story is lacking.

- J

 

[qbert4ever]

Halo's story is lacking.

Okay, I can undestand the point you are making with how story Vs. narrative works, but can you explain how you came to the conclusion that Halo has a lack-luster story?

Personal preferences aside, what makes you feel that it is no good? are you including the books, comics, and any other form of backstory that add to the game? do you feel it's just a simple rehash of other games? Because, as far as I've seen, not many people have done the "aliens invade earth" storyline quite as well.

Please understand, I'm not a writer, and I doubt many people on this site are, so it may be obvious to you what Halo is lacking compared to other games of its genre/sub-genre/whatever the hell you want to call it, but it's just that I've seen the whole "Halos story sucks/is awsome" argument going on and I would like to know how you reach the conclusion that you did.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

No, I think we were talking about how silly it is to be an elitist about one's aesthetic judgments, because you mentioned the Godfather movie at the top end of the 'quality' spectrum, and I pointed out how if you were truly an elitist you'd look down on it considering how it totally failed to communicate a major theme--maybe *the* major theme--of the book.

edit: That it opted for a gangster family saga over social commentary and a challenge to some of the basic tenants of mainstream American historical thinking at the time. That you picked it over something like Once Upon A Time In America, which *does* do a better job of communicating that theme that's in the Godfather book than the Godfather film itself does.

I think we were more onto a 'critics who live in glass houses...' discussion ;-D

Careful, you're getting dangerously close to a "taking this personally" tone. Picking at analogies doesn't sway the core argument. My "spectrum of quality" was referencing movies, and I picked a bunch of stuff that everyone has seen so that it would be easy to follow. Most people haven't read Mario Puzo's book, and it was therefore not germane to the example.

I'll be honest, I almost feel like you're trying to outclass me while still saying that you like Halo, and therefore reduce my argument to the babblings of a pseudo-intellectual, rather than actually addressing my points for what they are.

My analogy about steak vs. the entire McDonalds menu was used to illustrate how many games will have few elements but the ones they have are highly polished (Thus, steak. One choice, really good), whereas Halo has many elements, all of them slightly polished (Lots of choices, mid-to-low quality). You introduce an analogy about Starbucks vs. Mom and Pop stores and I'm not sure that fits the point I was making.

Now I make a reference to a scale of stories that everyone's familiar with, and how some are clearly better than others. Your argument seems to be taking the tack of, "You mentioned the movie and not the book, and thus you don't understand real quality." But my purpose wasn't to say what is *best*, it was rather to show how all the movies on my list could be enjoyable in the right frame of mind, but the ones at the top also had a well composed story. Basically to contrast the difference between "good story" and "enjoyable movie".

All that said, perhaps I'm misreading your statements. Either way, I think the lesson for me here is that I need to make clearer what I'm trying to show by way of my analogies. Obviously it's not coming across very well.

- J

 

[tiredinnuendo]

Why do you say that and compare it with story as "something that can be judged fairly"? This seems to come up a lot in Halo discussions, and for some reason people who don't like Halo usually put special effects down.

I mentioned three different things in games (note: not a comprehensive list) that people will often associate with "story".

One is the true "story", that is to say the actual tale that is told. It is my belief that a story can be evaluated on merits, rather than feelings or opinion, because most stories themselves are pretty much without feeling.

Feeling brings us into the realm of narrative, which is how well the given story is told, and this is *completely* open to opinion.

The last point was about special effects, which many people (Brett Ratner, I'm looking at you) seem to believe is a story. I mentioned it because it was my third point, and I mentioned that how much fun one draws from special effects and explosions is up to the individual. I said nothing much about my personal feelings on the quality of Halo's special effects, but since I'm being pressed, I really dug the "driving the Warthog to epic music" sections of both Halo and Halo 3. It wasn't "story", but it was fun.

Apologies if that wasn't clear.

- J