Wow, you would never guess a 'Halo' game is just weeks away from being released would you? Last time around, the biblical event was preceded by months of some of the most ridiculous marketing and hype in the history of media. Everywhere you turned you were bombarded by claims that the game's release would herald the next evolutionary step for humanity. Master Chief Gatorade; a labyrinthine ARG; prime-time television adverts; a preposterous (and canonically erroneous) series of fictional war documentaries - even for a fan, it was utterly exhausting. Precursors be praised - this time around Microsoft have realised that their golden boy is running out of steam and spared us from a similar display. But this isn't a post about the Halo hype-machine. No... this is an attempt to defend myself for being a (I like to think so, anyway) particularly high-brow gamer who still likes the 'Halo' franchise in its entirety.
Liking Halo these days seems to be a highly dangerous thing to do. No franchise has generated an equal measure of derision and popularity in the history of gaming. While it may be hugely successful from an economic point of view, most of the Internet sites and forums focused on gaming culture (well apart from IGN, but that doesn't really count) agree that 'Halo' in its entirety is over hyped, derivative, archaic, overrated and played and appreciated mainly by idiots. Admittedly, the majority of leet-speaking fucktards populating Xbox Live and the internet in general usually have the words "Master" and "Chief" appearing in their user names. So, when I express ANY positive feelings I have towards the franchise I'm usually met with laughter and made exempt from even suggesting that I have an iota of integrity and taste. As such, I am about to do my best to defend myself. I'm either going to succeed or I'm going to be permanently labeled an idiot. I hope for the former.
I am blissfully aware that any attempt on my part to argue the merits of the 'Halo' franchise based solely on the content of the core trilogy of games will likely prove an unfruitful one. The games are commonly criticised for (despite the hype) for being a straightforward first-person shooter which consists of mostly linear levels separated by cutscenes, concerning a genetically altered supersoldier's attempts to blow up as many aliens as possible. Quite why being a linear first-person shooter should be considered a crime is beyond me. I don't recall the game ever claiming to be a open world FPS/RPG - it was always in the same genre as the COD's, MOH's and countless others. Yet these franchises have never had to face any of the accusations frequently aimed at the 'Halo' series.
Quite frankly, in the category of linear first-person shooters 'Halo' is the defining game. From a visual standpoint its varieties of enemy, weapon and location design is far more interesting and impressive (to me, anyway) than the bombed out buildings and painstakingly modelled assault rifles present in the rest of the genre - even if you have little interest in aliens and lasers, I honestly can't see an argument for the visual aesthetics of 'Modern Warfare' over 'Halo 3'. Likewise for the soundtrack and overall audio design - the sound scape of 'New Mombassa' and 'Installation o4' being far more engaging to me than countless Middle Eastern vistas. Gameplay - same story.
Okay, so in the end every entry in the FPS genre consists of the exact same thing - shoot the guys who aren't you. The measure of a good FPS is just how much fun it is to do so. Face it - Warthogs's are fun to drive, Scarabs are fun to blow up, Energy Swords make a fun sound, the babble of the enemy and friendly NPC's is enjoyable and the enemy AI is compelling to fight against. Over the course of three big-budget games, Bungie refined and polished countless gameplay elements to an almost perfect sheen, creating one of the most balanced and instantly gratifying games in the FPS genre. Anybody who was expecting anything more complex or intelligent were horribly misguided. Yes, the marketing for 'Halo 3' insisted it was something it wasn't - but if you fall for such old ruses then it's entirely your own fault.
But the game itself isn't really why I like it so damn much. My love of the universe as a whole stems mostly from the expanded media of the books, graphic novels and ilovebees. From a story standpoint, 'Halo 3' was quite a disappointment for me - but that's probably because my foray into the extended universe occurred during the gap between 'Halo 2' and 'Halo 3'. I went in expecting a narrative at least as involving as one of the novels, but was probably demanding a bit too much from a mainstream videogame. It didn't help that 'The Arbiter' was 'Jar-Jar-Binksed' from the third game - the character that had made me realise just how much to the universe there was. Unfortunately, your average gamer didn't agree - demanding his immediate removal and replacement by 'the green dood'. It's a shame that the games themselves are the shallowest entries in the canon, but every glimpse of the grander scheme in them - from the first encounter with the 'Gravemind' to the terminals hidden throughout 'The Ark' - leaves me wanting a whole lot more. Guess I'm just a sucker for ancient super advanced alien civilisations being blindly worshipped as deities by a zealous conglomerate of xenomorphs.
I really can't wait for ODST - I live in the slim hope that the game reveals more of what was hinted at in 'Second Sunrise over New Mombassa'. I also hope that 'Halo - Legends' gives even more insight into the Insurrection era of Earth's colonies. I also wouldn't mind a little look at Rtas 'Vadum's and Thel 'Vadam's return to (what I bet will be a Jiralhanae attacked) Sanghelios. However, I know that this is highly unlikely - the franchise being too 'Master Chief' orientated to dare attempt to explore a more obscure corner of its universe in one of the core entries. Oh well, those of us excessively interested in said universe will have to stick to the books.
So, when I say that I'm a "Halo Fan" please understand that it shouldn't suggest that I believe 'Halo' is the be all and end all of gaming. Sure, I think the games are brilliant... when it comes to linear first person shooters - a genre not generally thought of as intelligent or capable of doing interesting things. 'Bioshock' and 'Fallout 3' may indicate otherwise, but please understand that I don't categorise them as linear first person shooters - and as such the 'Halo' games cannot (in my opinion, for what little it's worth) be fairly criticised for being what it is, a brainless shooter that puts fun before storytelling or originality. But I love it nonetheless.
Now that is out of the way, I guess it's time to come clean on a few other things -
1. I have watched every episode of 'Desperate Housewives' but I have only watched one season of 'Stargate SG-1'.
2. I have a secret partiality to female acoustic and synth pop artists.
3. I am definitely NOT gay.
Liking Halo these days seems to be a highly dangerous thing to do. No franchise has generated an equal measure of derision and popularity in the history of gaming. While it may be hugely successful from an economic point of view, most of the Internet sites and forums focused on gaming culture (well apart from IGN, but that doesn't really count) agree that 'Halo' in its entirety is over hyped, derivative, archaic, overrated and played and appreciated mainly by idiots. Admittedly, the majority of leet-speaking fucktards populating Xbox Live and the internet in general usually have the words "Master" and "Chief" appearing in their user names. So, when I express ANY positive feelings I have towards the franchise I'm usually met with laughter and made exempt from even suggesting that I have an iota of integrity and taste. As such, I am about to do my best to defend myself. I'm either going to succeed or I'm going to be permanently labeled an idiot. I hope for the former.
I am blissfully aware that any attempt on my part to argue the merits of the 'Halo' franchise based solely on the content of the core trilogy of games will likely prove an unfruitful one. The games are commonly criticised for (despite the hype) for being a straightforward first-person shooter which consists of mostly linear levels separated by cutscenes, concerning a genetically altered supersoldier's attempts to blow up as many aliens as possible. Quite why being a linear first-person shooter should be considered a crime is beyond me. I don't recall the game ever claiming to be a open world FPS/RPG - it was always in the same genre as the COD's, MOH's and countless others. Yet these franchises have never had to face any of the accusations frequently aimed at the 'Halo' series.
Quite frankly, in the category of linear first-person shooters 'Halo' is the defining game. From a visual standpoint its varieties of enemy, weapon and location design is far more interesting and impressive (to me, anyway) than the bombed out buildings and painstakingly modelled assault rifles present in the rest of the genre - even if you have little interest in aliens and lasers, I honestly can't see an argument for the visual aesthetics of 'Modern Warfare' over 'Halo 3'. Likewise for the soundtrack and overall audio design - the sound scape of 'New Mombassa' and 'Installation o4' being far more engaging to me than countless Middle Eastern vistas. Gameplay - same story.
Okay, so in the end every entry in the FPS genre consists of the exact same thing - shoot the guys who aren't you. The measure of a good FPS is just how much fun it is to do so. Face it - Warthogs's are fun to drive, Scarabs are fun to blow up, Energy Swords make a fun sound, the babble of the enemy and friendly NPC's is enjoyable and the enemy AI is compelling to fight against. Over the course of three big-budget games, Bungie refined and polished countless gameplay elements to an almost perfect sheen, creating one of the most balanced and instantly gratifying games in the FPS genre. Anybody who was expecting anything more complex or intelligent were horribly misguided. Yes, the marketing for 'Halo 3' insisted it was something it wasn't - but if you fall for such old ruses then it's entirely your own fault.
But the game itself isn't really why I like it so damn much. My love of the universe as a whole stems mostly from the expanded media of the books, graphic novels and ilovebees. From a story standpoint, 'Halo 3' was quite a disappointment for me - but that's probably because my foray into the extended universe occurred during the gap between 'Halo 2' and 'Halo 3'. I went in expecting a narrative at least as involving as one of the novels, but was probably demanding a bit too much from a mainstream videogame. It didn't help that 'The Arbiter' was 'Jar-Jar-Binksed' from the third game - the character that had made me realise just how much to the universe there was. Unfortunately, your average gamer didn't agree - demanding his immediate removal and replacement by 'the green dood'. It's a shame that the games themselves are the shallowest entries in the canon, but every glimpse of the grander scheme in them - from the first encounter with the 'Gravemind' to the terminals hidden throughout 'The Ark' - leaves me wanting a whole lot more. Guess I'm just a sucker for ancient super advanced alien civilisations being blindly worshipped as deities by a zealous conglomerate of xenomorphs.
I really can't wait for ODST - I live in the slim hope that the game reveals more of what was hinted at in 'Second Sunrise over New Mombassa'. I also hope that 'Halo - Legends' gives even more insight into the Insurrection era of Earth's colonies. I also wouldn't mind a little look at Rtas 'Vadum's and Thel 'Vadam's return to (what I bet will be a Jiralhanae attacked) Sanghelios. However, I know that this is highly unlikely - the franchise being too 'Master Chief' orientated to dare attempt to explore a more obscure corner of its universe in one of the core entries. Oh well, those of us excessively interested in said universe will have to stick to the books.
So, when I say that I'm a "Halo Fan" please understand that it shouldn't suggest that I believe 'Halo' is the be all and end all of gaming. Sure, I think the games are brilliant... when it comes to linear first person shooters - a genre not generally thought of as intelligent or capable of doing interesting things. 'Bioshock' and 'Fallout 3' may indicate otherwise, but please understand that I don't categorise them as linear first person shooters - and as such the 'Halo' games cannot (in my opinion, for what little it's worth) be fairly criticised for being what it is, a brainless shooter that puts fun before storytelling or originality. But I love it nonetheless.
Now that is out of the way, I guess it's time to come clean on a few other things -
1. I have watched every episode of 'Desperate Housewives' but I have only watched one season of 'Stargate SG-1'.
2. I have a secret partiality to female acoustic and synth pop artists.
3. I am definitely NOT gay.
