Halo 3 is only the begining!!!

[qaqa1]

Well my guess is the bungie staff will land on Stick fights as the next big thing, then they will just replace all the halo characters with Stick people and make the levels look like something from a pop up book.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

Before my real reply, I want to say that because it's Sunday and I spend the day with my daughter today, and I highly suspect that when the mods come in on Monday this thread will be locked, I doubt I'll get a chance to say anything more on the subject. With that in mind, it's been fun.

According to that logic, if Uwe Boll made a version of Snow White it would be "completely open to opinion" whether it was better or worse than Walt Disney's or Neil Gaiman's. Are you sure you want to say that?

It's true to a limited degree. Art is entirely in the eye of the beholder, and there may be someone who would like Boll's version better. It's not my place to tell them that their opinion on how he tells a story is wrong. In extreme cases like you describe, communal majority wins out generally. One guy will say, "I like Boll's version better!" and then ten thousand people jump on him for it. Thus, he never speaks again and the matter resolves itself, but that doesn't mean that his opinion was wrong in anything other than my opinion.

No, just trying to show that you've got higher standards for FPSes than for other things. That in other aspects of your life, there are people who look down on you the way you look down on gamers that push sales of Halo. Maybe you'll be a little bit less critical when the tables are turned, you know?

I've said nothing about other areas of my life, and (for the record) I don't think the Godfather, in book or movie form, is the greatest story ever. It was just an easy point of reference that pretty much everyone has seen. Again, the whole point was to illustrate how anything on that chart can be enjoyed, and indeed several people probably liked the narrative of Forest Gump better than that of Citizen Kane, but the story of Citizen Kane was better written, and I think that's something that can be objectively observed.

Ahh, I did miss your point. My mistake. Although, can you compare a kind of food with a restaurant chain? One dish with a menu? I think the better analogy would be with a steakhouse serving a limited menu vs. McDonald's. Which leads me to ask: what are these 'elements' you're talking about, with Halo having many of lower quality than other games which have fewer of higher quality?

Let's use Bioshock for this example. Everyone and their mom has played it, so it works out. Note that I am not saying that Bioshock was the best game ever. Don't start talking about System Shock 2 next.

Almost everything in Bioshock was standard to the genre. The weapons went: melee weapon, pistol, shotgun, machine gun, sniper rifle, etc. The enemies displayed no tactics and basically ran straight at you. The moral choice was completely black and white. We had no inventory screen. It was vanilla. Then they added in plasmids (and AI reactions to certain plasmids), glorious graphics and musics, and outstanding narrative. A few highly polished elements that transformed the game from something mediocre into one of the best shooters of the year.

Halo has many more gameplay elements than Bioshock. Many more weapons, vehicles, planes, cooperative AI, multiplayer, additional equipment, etc. Every vehicle handles differently, different enemies react in different ways, and there are several different multiplayer modes. But despite how many more elements it has, none of them show the same degree of polish or originality that Bioshock's narrative does.

The storyline of Halo feels spliced together, and much of the scenery is reused. (Hit a switch in a tower. The other team didn't hit their switch. Go a little ways down the road and into what is basically the same tower to hit the same switch.) You get a lot, but at the cost of them being unable to spend a large amount of time on any one thing. Microsoft is at least partially to blame for this. "We need another Halo for our new system!" they cried, and cracked the whip on Bungie until they delivered.

So why aren't you as disappointed in people who see Die Hard as you are in people who buy Halo? My point isn't to outclass you or make you look like anything. My point is to show you how you seem to be far more critical of games than you are of other media.

Oh, make no mistake. I'm not disappointed in the people who buy Halo. I bought it. I'm disappointed in people who make it out to be more than it is.

People who go to see Die Hard don't tell me how the story was deep and enthralling and how it's totally realistic that John McClane can survive falls from space because of gel layers. They admit that McClane is a supercharacter and talk about how the movie was shallow but had lots of fun action, and I agree with them.

Too many people tell me how Halo has one of the best stories in modern video gaming, and that is what is disappointing.

- J

 

[Captain Planet]

Ah, the age old argument. Forgive me for being a lowly console gamer, but what are these so called "Awsome PC Shooters" that everybody seems to be talking about? I would truly love to get a list of games that put halo to shame that does not rhyme with "Calf-Mife"

Better idea, I would love to see the list of "great" Xbox games that aren't Halo. If you think Half-Life was the only great game to ever come out on the PC, then I want to see the Xbox exclusive title that had even 1/2 the impact of any one of Valve's games.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

But see, this is the question I keep asking and you keep avoiding: you say things like "[a]rt is entirely in the eye of the beholder" and then you say:

"Too many people tell me how Halo has one of the best stories in modern video gaming, and that is what is disappointing."

Don't you see how those two lines of reasoning contradict each other? Are stories not 'art'? If they are, why isn't the question of whether or not 'Halo has one of the best stories in modern video gaming' "entirely in the eye of the beholder"?

What do you know? I had time for one more post.

I see your point.

I believe that the quality of a story is quantifiable, and that the quality of a narrative is subjective. Does Halo have a good "story"? I believe that it's mediocre, and that its mediocrity is quantifiable.

Is the story told well? Some might think so, I personally think that the story is utterly straightforward, contains one twist halfway through the first game and then everything else is completely predictable and droll. Others may disagree, and I'd be curious to hear an explanation of why Halo's narrative is anything other than I've described it. With the exception of Cortana, the characters are entirely static, and even Cortana's "rampancy" was dispelled with ten seconds of flashback humor. If someone can explain to me why the story is told well, rather than simply competantly, I'll be glad to listen.

I guess what I've been failing to say is that I see claims of Halo's "great story" (by which I presume they mean great story-telling, because the story is straightforward and not really "great"), and I just don't see it. And no one else has ever illustrated the alternate point of view for me, other than to say, "Well, I liked it," which makes it subjective.

Let me make a better analogy: Bioshock is a great steakhouse and Halo is an okay tapas bar--somewhere you can get a little taste of everything in one visit. You wouldn't fault someone for preferring to eat at the okay tapas bar to visiting great steakhouse, right? You'd just say 'ehh--we have different priorities'.

I would never fault anyone for going to dinner at Old Country Buffet rather than Ruth's Chris. That's their call. Especially if they're 90 (I kid, I kid).

I will fault people for coming out and saying how the food is the best food the restaurant industry has to offer and the menu was entirely original.

Follow me? How much they like the food may be subjective, but the star for quality clearly goes to Ruth's Chris.

- J

 

[qbert4ever]

Better idea, I would love to see the list of "great" Xbox games that aren't Halo. If you think Half-Life was the only great game to ever come out on the PC, then I want to see the Xbox exclusive title that had even 1/2 the impact of any one of Valve's games.

Ask and ye shall recive.

Baldur's gate
Baldur's gate 2
Beyond Good and Evil
Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood
Brothers in Arms: the road to hill 30
Bully
Burnout series
Call of Duty series
Conker: Live and Reloaded
Crimson skies: High road to revenge
Destroy all Humans!
Elder Scrolls 3 Morrowind
Grand Theft Auto 3, VC, SA
Hitman series
Lord of the Rings 2 and 3
Madden whatever your favorite one is
Medal of Honor Series
Mercenaries
Metal Gear Solid 2
Mortal Kombat series
Need for Speed series
Oddworld series
Over the hedge( I kid, I kid)
Panzer Dragoon Orta
Prince of Persia series
Silent Hill 2 and 4
Pick your poison with Star Wars games
tCoR: Escape from Butcher Bay


That's as far as I'm going because I've already spamed you all with enough games.

Anyways, kind of touchy are you? I wasn't trying to be a smartass, I just dont know what is out there on the PC, And like I said before, your list wasn't exactly the "be all end all" reply to my question. (if you want to know why, then scroll up)

My point is, When a PC player talks about Halo, they tend to ramble on about how it sucks when compared to "all the great FPS's on the PC, and when I asked what games they mean, you came up with a bullshit list. (once again, if you can't remember why it's a bullshit list, then scroll up)

 

[tiredinnuendo]

Sorry, but, that's just silly.

I...can't take your criticisms seriously if you're basically telling me that the differences between the quality of Paul Verhoeven's and Robert A. Heinlein's versions of the story of Starship Troopers are subjective.

Having experienced neither, I'll have to take your word for it that there are large differences and that one is much much better than the other. However, I really can't comment further.

Going back to your Uwe Boll example though, I imagine if Uwe Boll were to make Snow White, it would have lots of shooting, a camera that spins in 360 degrees, and he'd forget a few minor elements, like the dwarves.

Now we have a situation, much like the earlier Godfather example, where the story is no longer what it was. It has become *less*. Or in Boll's case nonexistant.

I hold firm that stories are objective and storytelling technique is subjective. Say you have two people who tell the exact same story and use different methods. For example, we have two people who tell a story of a guy with a memory disorder. The only difference is that one tells it backwards. One person has told a story that would bore the hell out of me. The other has told Momento, which I liked but my cousin hated. The merits of forward/backward storytelling can be argued, but in the end it's about which storytelling technique related best to the audience.

I get the feeling that your Starship Troopers was not the same story in both versions, but again, I have experienced neither one.

How all this relates to Halo is this: I've given my reasons why Halo's story is bland and its storytelling is equally bland. I've heard people say that they liked it, but they never give any *reasons*. I'm left with a response of, "I liked it," and what can I say to that. "Good for you."

As for the Ruth Chris/OCB analogy, still doesn't fit. I get the feeling you're getting your points about Halo having a mediocre story and Halo being 'lots of mid- to low-quality elements' crossed up.

Yeah, that was the analogy that tried to do a bit too much. I'll have to stop using those and just say what I'm saying instead of saying what it's "like". Like if I was a diamond miner who kept digging up gold and....

Damn.

- J

 

[lulzawmbee]

I have a prediction on Bungie's next killer game:

It will involve firefights, guns, vehicles, multiplayer, and some kind of dialogue between charcters.

Are you serious? There's no way Bungie would put in dialogue. That's gotta wait until the next generation of consoles comes out.

 

[nightmare_gorilla]

my beef with halo has always been centered around the big floppy hard on they've got for themselves. i enjoy the co-op campaign and thats why i didn't like halo 2, it's short and easy and just plain crap, the first halo was lots of fun, and i will admit i liked halo 3 because it was pretty much a rehashing of halo 1 with good graphics i mean even the last 10 minutes of gameplay on both was identical.

the thing is halo story never explains anything, and they kept releasing new videos and comercials that had ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GAME!!!!!! hell even the crazy rants that cortana broke in on ya to make made no sense in the end, it's like the developers went "this makes no sense whatsoever in any sense, that means people won't understand it and therefore think it's brilliant and deep. yeah! high five!"

my biggest problem however is the undeserved praise, i'm ok with people loving on it, but when a game loves on itself i get pissed, i play on my 360 and did you know that if you try and play your own music, unlike every other game that replaces the in game music with yours and turns it off for cutscenes, a warning message pops up to let you know you're listening to your own music thank god for that i'd almost forgot i wasn't listening to the coma inducing tencho valium you guys made. but then they won't let you listen to your own music without throwing a tantrum. try it, if you want to play music off your hard drive while playing halo 3, they turn off ALL in game sound. that to me was just so childish and stupid that i almost turned the game off when i saw it.

seeing as how i could give less than a shit about mutliplay i feel like the creators have more or less abondoned me therefore i don't really care so much about the game, it's kinda like a whore, i enjoy playing with her and i am willing to pay for her but i never once develop feelings for her and kick her outa the car before slowing down because she'll keep coming back so long as i pay for her. plus a game that allows you to edit the maps yourself for multiplayer having new map packs released every other week is kind of pointless.

oh and the endless merchandising doesn't help the whole "not a whore" argument some people have made to me.

but despite all this, i enjoy playing the co-op campaign, and haven't much complaints about the gameplay though i think gears of war is better.

happy?

 

[qbert4ever]

post

I would like to reply to that, but my screen expolded from the lack of paragraphs, and now I have to type this useing a car mirror, four wires from my T.V., and a cellphone.

 

[EzraPound]

Halo sucks. I'm sorry.

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

Since I really don't want to expend much time arguing whether Halo [1] is as good a game as its critical response would suggest, allow me to ennumerate briefly a few of the flaws that I feel negate the praise it received:

- Redundant level design - This is UNACCEPTABLE for a high-profile FPS in 2001. GoldenEye offered engaging level design in '97. Half-Life offered it in '98. During several portions of Halo, it is possible to play for long periods of time without gaining any sense of progression.

- A lack of multi-player bots - This is a particularly damning fault since a large number of Halo's maps seemed to be built to house upwards of four players. So great. A multi-player oriented shooter on a console that's potential can't be maximized without the use of an obscure System Link periphery.

- Bland artistic direction - An alien invasion. The grey interior of spaceships. Grassy plains. A good/evil dichotomy. Boring military fare. Lots of bullets. Lots of explosions. A shotgun.

- A reliance on novelty items - Yes, the physics are excellent. Yes, the vehicles are well-executed. But Red Faction has a small smattering of vehicles available in it too, and features creative implementation of Geo-Mod technology - two features which hardly earned it "Game of the Year"-level praise (I should add that Red Faction's maps are also far better suited to split-screen multiplay then Halo's).

Halo is by no means a bad game - an 8.5, maybe, to throw out a figure. But nor it the killer app to end all kiler apps, or "the most significant launch title in recent history" (forgive me if I'm misquoting). In my opinion, its good qualities probably place it somewhere between Return to Castle Wolfenstein (good) and Deus Ex (brilliant) in terms of memorability.

 

[Saskwach]

- A lack of multi-player bots - This is a particularly damning fault since a large number of Halo's maps seemed to be built to house upwards of four players. So great. A multi-player oriented shooter on a console that's potential can't be maximized without the use of an obscure System Link periphery.

Having spoken to some die-hard Halo fans, many think no bots is a plus. Apparently this allows Bungie to make the multi and singleplayer better because no one ever heard of taking time to finish a new feature.
Looking at the Halos though, I can't say the bots would be that impressive. Though the Halos' SP can be fun the AI is hardly as brilliant as many think. The challenge of higher difficulties was always the sheer damage that enemies could take and give. Whenever AI characters were in an open area they usually followed scripted movements (in the general sense) or were just plain dumb. From this evidence Bungie seems unable to make satisfying bots.

 

[EzraPound]

- A lack of multi-player bots - This is a particularly damning fault since a large number of Halo's maps seemed to be built to house upwards of four players. So great. A multi-player oriented shooter on a console that's potential can't be maximized without the use of an obscure System Link periphery.

Having spoken to some die-hard Halo fans, many think no bots is a plus. Apparently this allows Bungie to make the multi and singleplayer better because no one ever heard of taking time to finish a new feature.
Looking at the Halos though, I can't say the bots would be that impressive. Though the Halos' SP can be fun the AI is hardly as brilliant as many think. The challenge of higher difficulties was always the sheer damage that enemies could take and give. Whenever AI characters were in an open area they usually followed scripted movements (in the general sense) or were just plain dumb. From this evidence Bungie seems unable to make satisfying bots.

These are apologetics, and in no way refute my point. 'die-hard Halo fans' are not an objective source of opinion regarding the game.