Poll: Halo 3 ODST: Why the hatred?

[Neverhoodian]

Based on my observations reading gaming forums like this one and reading reviews, it appears that Halo 3: ODST is regarded as the "black sheep" of the venerable Halo family. I find this a bit puzzling, as I personally enjoyed the game immensely. In fact, I might even go so far as to say it was my favorite game in the series until Reach came along. In many ways, it felt like the series had gone back to its roots (no gimmicky dual-wielding, the return of health packs, large, complex levels), yet at the same time still put a new spin on things (no Master Chief, no annoying Flood, more somber tone). I also liked how your ODST wasn't as capable as a Spartan. In order to succeed, you had to use your wits and terrain to your advantage rather than mindlessly charge into the fray Rambo-style.

I didn't have Xbox Live at that point, so the lack of a multiplayer mode besides Firefight was no big loss. Indeed, it probably added to my enjoyment since Bungie put more time and effort into the campaign than Halo 2 or 3. Also, Firefight was a blast, alone or with friends. Whenever I had company over, we'd spend hours playing Firefight trying to see if we could beat our old records (even if we didn't, we would always have lots of fun).

I put some of the most common complaints levied against ODST in the comments. For those who dislike ODST (or if you like the game but you have a theory why others don't), I'd like to hear your reasons.

I may be a Halo fan, but I'm not a Halo fanboy. If you dislike ODST (or the Halo series in general) I respect your opinion. However, I DO tend to have more respect for those who have reasons better than "because it just sucks, that's why!" I'm NOT out to start a flame war, I'm just curious.

 

[jcallen]

Personally I liked ODST. It was not my favorite but I still liked it.

 

[robodukky]

I thought ODST was pretty good. It meant that we didn't have to worry about all that flood nonsense + the story was pretty good.

 

[jcallen]

I thought ODST was pretty good. It meant that we didn't have to worry about all that flood nonsense + the story was pretty good.

I liked the flood!

 

[Rylot]

For me it felt just like another Halo. Nothing really special about it. Nothing really stood out for me.

 

[Neverhoodian]

It's a great expansion to Halo 3. But that's all it was.

They took Halo 3's multiplayer and added one mode, and put on a relatively short campaign.
If it was a DLC about the price of GTA IV's add-ons, it would have been bloody brilliant. Sadly, Microsoft told them to package it off and try to sell it as a full priced game.

It's truly fantastic, except for the demented pricing.

Also, it has Nathan Fillion in it, which is fucking awesome.

Yeah, I'd say its cost is a pretty legitimate complaint. I just happened to luck out and bought a copy when it was on sale.

 

[Wevet]

I am an avid Halo fan, and from what I have noticed there are two kinds of people. The people who couldn't stop playing the original Halo games, and the people who didn't like the invincible super-soldier concept. Halo: Combat Evolved was a truly grand game for its time, which got me hooked on the series. I have been unable to stop playing up until Halo 3, which I was addicted to for the longest time. ODST had less super-soldier mechanics and seemed to cater more towards the COD crowd. This made it less of a game for fans of the Halo series, and at the same time was unrefined and unoriginal so it didn't stand out for fans of that sort of thing. That's where Halo Reach excels. It is new, and grand. It does not however have the same feeling that the original Halo games had for me. So I am not nearly as attached as I once was. They are catering to a new crowd, and ODST was a rough draft.

 

[Icehearted]

Halo 3 didn't Win me over. I hate the way they lean on their "multiplayer as filler" crutch a lot in this series as well. Had they at least made a real and genuine effort to deliver what was advertised I can see at least some value to this game. As for what it is, it's a Multiplayer game with a single player tack-on, and since In detest multiplayer, this just isn't my bag.

 

[ultrachicken]

I really miss the flood. The flood is the true source of conflict in the Halo series, so not having them in a game seems... out of place. I still liked ODST, though my biggest gripe was that the combat felt gentle. No recoil from guns, everything had a "pew pew" sound to it, and it was all so smooth.

I didn't have to pay for it, however, which may have colored my opinion.

 

[Shock and Awe]

To short for the 60$ price tag. If it was like 30$ there would have been no problem.

 

[Peteron]

It was short, and the setting was dull and repetitive. You spent your time going through the same city the entire game going through memories and then redoing the same level in the present. It was a terrible game. The ONLY thing it brought to Halo was firefight, which was still a GOW Horde wannabe.

 

[Tupolev]

The storytelling started fairly dark but got much too happy for my expectations as the story progressed.

The campaign gameplay felt monotonous; it had neither the danger of shieldless games or very intense shielded games (your "vulnerable" character still has a shield, plus a fair deal of health) nor the upbeat combat of Halo CE or to a lesser extent Halo 3.

The soundtrack as an independant entity is pretty good, but apart from the calm jazz in the city streets, I thought the in-game integration of it was substantially below what it's been prior in the series. The way the upbeat stuff was integrated couldn't hold a candle to classic moments like The Gun Pointed at the Head of the Universe playing as you charged up into the 343GS swamp.

It's one really strong point, I think, is the general atmosphere of the nighttime city streets, which in my eyes means it succeeds in bringing out one single environment about as well as the original game brought out, well, all of its environments. And even then it can't sustain it as well as HCE because, being a modern Halo game, it makes you feel awkward if you attempt actual exploration as opposed to just wandering the overly-well-beaten path; its forcedness and scriptedness yanks some of the long-term wonder from it, once you've identified all the mechanics involved.

I think it's good, but unimpressive for what I expect of a full-priced Halo title.

 

[Thaius]

The campaign of ODST came very close in quality to that of the first Halo, in my opinion. And seeing as how even Reach didn't quite dethrone the first game from my favorite shooter of all time (though it came close), that's high praise. I loved it. It was kind of short, but only an hour or two shy of the other games, so not all that bad. It was engaging, interesting, and the way it told its story, though not exactly a breakthrough, was rather intriguing. And wandering the ruined streets of New Mombasa was amazingly fascinating. Loved it.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Because I paid 60 bucks for a game that barely lasted an afternoon. The story was pretty poor and very confusing if you decided not to get the collectibles and only enjoyable character was Buck. The annoying flood was replaced with the even more annoying Engineers. The Rookie still had enough power to knock a Brute out cold with a single punch into his spine and Health played a small role since your shields or armor were still strong enough to take multiple shots before failing (And someone fixes itself?).

And lets be honest here. Firefight was a joke in ODST. The maps were horrible, the lack of most vehicles in the Campaign was bad and the enemies didn't really bring anything with them except a blue tentacled thing that gave everyone a shield and blew up when you killed it. It didn't really add anything to the mix and that's why its often judged lower then the other Halo games.

 

[Premonition]

It's because it started out as DLC. But then it became too big to be considered DLC and so they released it as a full game. And then people thought: THIS IS DLC FOR FULL PRICE? WHAT?

 

[repeating integers]

I loved it myself. I love the atmosphere of New Mombasa, the writing on the walls and the "ghost town" feel of it, which was reinforced by that wonderful "rain" piece of music. True, the characters weren't really there (we had Buck, Buck II with a skull on his helmet, a girl, a jerk and a blank slate in the lines of Gordon Freeman), but I loved it anyway - Firefight was even more fun with friends than ordinary multiplayer (and it somehow isn't in Reach, dunno why), the campaign told the story of what had happened to Earth while you (MC) were gone to the Delta Halo killing prophets for shits and giggles, and I think it did it well. Quite frankly, I think the only people who found it "dull" are the kinds of people the haters deride Halo's fanbase for - they have a small attention span.

On the other hand, I got it cheap off Amazon a year or so after release IIRC, so I never experienced the fabled pricing problems. How Bungie - or I dunno, Microsoft? - should have handled it was:

* Released the full game for less than £40
* Put the campaign on XBL alone as DLC for the people who are rich and already have all the multiplayer map packs

There, was that so hard? I bet the game wouldn't get nearly as much hate if you did that.