Poll: How do you view the Halo series?

[Always_Remain]

Well they all are pretty average if you ask me. I like ODST the best though. It was a good break for all the extremely averageness.

My most fun experience is the Multiplayer in Halo 3. Call me crazy. It's fun playing with friends and winning a lot. :]

 

[Avatar Roku]

With confusion.
Everyone goes on and on about how it revolutionized FPS games. But it didn't. There was nothing unique about them at all.

*cough* [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunny]

To expand on that a bit, it was unique in that it was a very polished, well done console FPS. Although Goldeneye and others were as well, this brought them as close as, at the time, they had ever been to being like PC FPSs. Now, as I argued above, it would have happened with or without Halo, but still, it was the one we ended up getting, and I'm satisfied.

It wasn't unique. Please prove how it was.
It wasn't well done or polished. It was generic. Generic and easy. That isn't revolutionary.

Not unique or polished? Show me another console FPS from the times that was as well done. Along with Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and a few others (all a few years before), it proved the viability of FPSs on consoles.

As far as PC FPSs at the time, you're right, Halo was generic, but that's not the point: Halo was a console FPS, it wasn't even ported to the PC for two years. The effect it had was almost solely on the consoles, but that doesn't lessen it's impact (or that of my other examples).

You're not proving it was. Just screaming SHOW ME ONE THAT WAS doesn't prove the one you're saying is.

But I am. Ok, I cite other examples, so it isn't totally unique, but the fact that it was a console FPS which worked well, in those days, was unique. Beyond that, it was the closest that console FPSs had, at that time, gotten to PC FPSs, which makes it unique even from the other examples. Do you want me to cite statistics? To my knowledge, there are none for this sort of thing. I'm just saying how I see it (incidentally, don't think I'm taking the "it's my opinion" cop-out, feel free to continue challenging me).

As I said above, if it had been a PC FPS first and foremost, it would not have been unique, but that's the heart of it: it wasn't a PC FPS, and the mere fact that a PC FPS could be called "average" by PC standards was quite unusual at the time.

So what you're saying is because it didn't suck, it was unique, original and perfect?

Hell no! It had many flaws, and even if it didn't, I just realized I was arguing more for it's influence than anything else. All I'm saying is, to my young, console-gaming-only (at the time) mind, it was unique, original, and perfect. Chalk it up to nostalgia, then, I guess, but the mere fact that it was truly competent (like my other examples, see above) was all my then-seven-year-old self needed.

Does it still hold up to scrutiny? Not so well, but its influence is undeniable, and I loved it when I was younger, so I can still have a good time with it.

I think I am taking the "it's my opinion" cop-out now, but I can't really see where else this could go.

Has Doom ever put you in the shoes of the demons? In case you don't know, for around half of Halo 2, we were given The Arbiter, one of the Elites, as our protagonist, and it gave a good deal more insight into the Covenant and showed that they weren't all evil. Sure, the Prophets (ones at the top) were all bat-shit crazy, and the Brutes, their lapdogs (by the end of Halo 2, at least) were very...well, brutal, but eventually, after finding out the truth, all of the Elites and some of the Grunts and Hunters rebelled and left the Covenant.

Tell me, did anything like that happen in Doom?

No, but there are plenty of mods that let you control the demons.

Did Halo stick you up against a giant robotic demon armed with a rocket launcher? I only could force myself up to about halfway on the first (no idea of anything beyond that partailly because the XBox is not my console of choice), but nothing like that there. How about a plasma cannon that fires an explosive ball of energy that damage all near-by enemies with a clever acronym for a name? Halo has BFG.
Point I am getting at is minus specifics, they are one in the same. No amount of fanboi ravings will change my opinion on Halo.

I suppose I sort of missed your point, but you're being awfully general about this. I mean, this is what you said:

Space marine in green power armor with spaceman helmet, check. Mix of standard human bullet weapons and energy weapons, check. Hideous enemy monsters, check. You being the last hope for doomed humanity, check. Invasion of earth, check.

Minus the first one, which is fairly innocuous anyway, those are all either incredibly broad similarities (i.e, the weapons comment), or storytelling tropes that are far older than doom (i.e, having you be humanity's last hope). Also, for the aliens comment, I was just pointing out that Halo 2 went to great pains to show that they aren't "hideous alien monsters", although I suppose we can ignore that since it was the sequel. Either way, it says nothing of how the game plays, for example, only that the story from as far back as you can zoom is similar.

Also, the "Earth is invaded" comment confused me, as Doom took place on Mars, and Halo took place on Halo (also on a ship in the first level, but still not Earth). I mean, the first few levels of Halo 2 and the entire first half of Halo 3 took place on Earth, but still.

Nothing really much Halo does differently than Doom, besides limit what you can carry and reward you with more health if you go and hide for a while.

ummm...correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those pretty big differences? If nothing else, you're going to have to change your play style dramatically between the two.

Look, feel free to ignore this as a "fanboi rant", I'm not trying to tell you how to feel, and if Halo's not for you, it's not for you, simple as. It's just that your post seemed like a gross over simplification to me.

 

[BOBdotEXE]

I think they try to hard,
every Xbox gamer I know worships it,
but for what the 30 minuets of story, the gameplay,
every level is the same, shoot aliens, no real objectives,
also the NPC's are STUPID, I'll be running around the stage, killing everyone, then after I finish, I here one yell "good work, now hop in the vehicle!", and I'll turn around and see them charging right at me!!! and they just run me over! However, the shooting is fun, but that cant save it from being extremely Repetitive, I enjoy the CoD series much better. Didn't sgt. Jonson, die in halo 1???

 

[JeanLuc761]

With respect to the OP, how many threads like this do we need per week? Ah well, nothing I can to do stop it so I might as well contribute something meaningful. I view the Halo Trilogy as such:

A marginally above-average shooter with a horribly devoted fanbase, an exceptional storyline (if you've read the books!), and created by talented developers who don't know when to let the series end. It plays extremely well on a gamepad, the singleplayer is decent and the multiplayer is extraordinary, but it's let down by some rather glaring flaws.

First off: The first half of each game demonstrates fantastic level design but the latter half suffers from horrific amounts of unoriginality and backtracking.
Secondly, the Master Chief is an iconic...but extremely shallow character. If you haven't read the books, the motivation for his struggles are unclear and can easily come across as sheer, blind heroism, which is uninteresting.
Thirdly, and this isn't really the games fault...is the following. I won't say much about it, but I have always failed to understand the blind devotion Halo fanboys have to these titles.

 

[Geekmaster K]

Personally, I like Halo for what it is. I'm not saying it's the best game ever. I've played better games since, some of which predate Halo. However, I feel that what Halo does, it does decently well. Granted, it has been gradually declining in quality, but that doesn't mean the games are bad. I can understand why it doesn't appeal to some people, but I don't understand the hatred for it. It seems to be the "in" thing these days to hate on something once it becomes popular enough. Anyway, I thought the first game had the best story, but the multiplayer on Halo 2 was what introduced me to the concept of a LAN party. This was before I had a fast enough computer to run any games other than Minesweeper or Solitaire, so console gaming was my only option until about two years ago. I have way too many fond memories of Halo to say that I dislike it, but I'm not going to say that it's a great game either. I'll just say that it's good for what it is and leave it at that.

By the way, even though it's not the best game ever, the soundtrack is friggin' epic!

 

[SilverUchiha]

I get bored of it REALLY fast. And I'm basing this opinion having played Halo 1, 2, and 3 to some degree.

 

[Volafortis]

I really enjoy it.
My ratings are as follows:
1. Halo: Combat Evolved
2. Halo 3: ODST
3. Halo 3
4. Halo 2
5. Halo Wars

 

[WayOutThere]

I recieved Halo 2 as a present while knowing about nothing about it except that it was hugely acclaimed.

I started playing it and was like WTF, this is just an average shooter.

Maybe the first game was something special when it came out but the franshise has since become woefully average.

 

[TehCookie]

I hated the first one, and when the others came out no one liked them so I figured they were worse and didn't play any of them.

 

[Dont Fear The Reaper]

In fairness, Mario RPG was pretty awesome.

 

[Deathsane]

stupid story and good gameplay that sums it up.

 

[JohnnySex]

I really really like Halo. It's a bit overrated, but not terrible at all. Very fun game for parties and stuff.

 

[Avatar Roku]

With confusion.
Everyone goes on and on about how it revolutionized FPS games. But it didn't. There was nothing unique about them at all.

*cough* [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunny]

To expand on that a bit, it was unique in that it was a very polished, well done console FPS. Although Goldeneye and others were as well, this brought them as close as, at the time, they had ever been to being like PC FPSs. Now, as I argued above, it would have happened with or without Halo, but still, it was the one we ended up getting, and I'm satisfied.

It wasn't unique. Please prove how it was.
It wasn't well done or polished. It was generic. Generic and easy. That isn't revolutionary.

Not unique or polished? Show me another console FPS from the times that was as well done. Along with Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and a few others (all a few years before), it proved the viability of FPSs on consoles.

As far as PC FPSs at the time, you're right, Halo was generic, but that's not the point: Halo was a console FPS, it wasn't even ported to the PC for two years. The effect it had was almost solely on the consoles, but that doesn't lessen it's impact (or that of my other examples).

You're not proving it was. Just screaming SHOW ME ONE THAT WAS doesn't prove the one you're saying is.

But I am. Ok, I cite other examples, so it isn't totally unique, but the fact that it was a console FPS which worked well, in those days, was unique. Beyond that, it was the closest that console FPSs had, at that time, gotten to PC FPSs, which makes it unique even from the other examples. Do you want me to cite statistics? To my knowledge, there are none for this sort of thing. I'm just saying how I see it (incidentally, don't think I'm taking the "it's my opinion" cop-out, feel free to continue challenging me).

As I said above, if it had been a PC FPS first and foremost, it would not have been unique, but that's the heart of it: it wasn't a PC FPS, and the mere fact that a PC FPS could be called "average" by PC standards was quite unusual at the time.

So what you're saying is because it didn't suck, it was unique, original and perfect?

Hell no! It had many flaws, and even if it didn't, I just realized I was arguing more for it's influence than anything else. All I'm saying is, to my young, console-gaming-only (at the time) mind, it was unique, original, and perfect. Chalk it up to nostalgia, then, I guess, but the mere fact that it was truly competent (like my other examples, see above) was all my then-seven-year-old self needed.

Does it still hold up to scrutiny? Not so well, but its influence is undeniable, and I loved it when I was younger, so I can still have a good time with it.

I think I am taking the "it's my opinion" cop-out now, but I can't really see where else this could go.

So what you're saying this comes down to "I played it when I was seven and thought it was good, so it its"? Wow. Just, wow.

You know what? I played Mario RPG when I was like seven. So that game is now unique, got that everyone? Utterly unique, you're not allowed to disagree with me. It's officially unique because I played it before I played any other jrpg.

For god's sake, I'm not saying that at all! I'm saying I played it at 7, so I think it's good, and here's my reason why. I never once implied that you weren't allowed to disagree or that your opinion was invalid, I was just telling you how I saw it.

 

[demoman_chaos]

Minus the first one, which is fairly innocuous anyway, those are all either incredibly broad similarities (i.e, the weapons comment), or storytelling tropes that are far older than doom (i.e, having you be humanity's last hope). Also, for the aliens comment, I was just pointing out that Halo 2 went to great pains to show that they aren't "hideous alien monsters", although I suppose we can ignore that since it was the sequel. Either way, it says nothing of how the game plays, for example, only that the story from as far back as you can zoom is similar.

Also, the "Earth is invaded" comment confused me, as Doom took place on Mars, and Halo took place on Halo (also on a ship in the first level, but still not Earth). I mean, the first few levels of Halo 2 and the entire first half of Halo 3 took place on Earth, but still.

Nothing really much Halo does differently than Doom, besides limit what you can carry and reward you with more health if you go and hide for a while.

ummm...correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those pretty big differences? If nothing else, you're going to have to change your play style dramatically between the two.

Look, feel free to ignore this as a "fanboi rant", I'm not trying to tell you how to feel, and if Halo's not for you, it's not for you, simple as. It's just that your post seemed like a gross over simplification to me.

Both are run and gun FPS games.
I think in Halo 3 earth was taken over. In the ending of Doom 2 it specifially says Earth was saved. Doom 1 was about Mars, Doom 2 was about Earth. I am more reffering to Doom 2 in this matter.
It is on the broad scale, but Halo is much more like Doom 1 and 2 than Doom 3 was.

 

[Vrex360]

With confusion.
Everyone goes on and on about how it revolutionized FPS games. But it didn't. There was nothing unique about them at all.

*cough* [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunny]

To expand on that a bit, it was unique in that it was a very polished, well done console FPS. Although Goldeneye and others were as well, this brought them as close as, at the time, they had ever been to being like PC FPSs. Now, as I argued above, it would have happened with or without Halo, but still, it was the one we ended up getting, and I'm satisfied.

It wasn't unique. Please prove how it was.
It wasn't well done or polished. It was generic. Generic and easy. That isn't revolutionary.

Not unique or polished? Show me another console FPS from the times that was as well done. Along with Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and a few others (all a few years before), it proved the viability of FPSs on consoles.

As far as PC FPSs at the time, you're right, Halo was generic, but that's not the point: Halo was a console FPS, it wasn't even ported to the PC for two years. The effect it had was almost solely on the consoles, but that doesn't lessen it's impact (or that of my other examples).

You're not proving it was. Just screaming SHOW ME ONE THAT WAS doesn't prove the one you're saying is.

But I am. Ok, I cite other examples, so it isn't totally unique, but the fact that it was a console FPS which worked well, in those days, was unique. Beyond that, it was the closest that console FPSs had, at that time, gotten to PC FPSs, which makes it unique even from the other examples. Do you want me to cite statistics? To my knowledge, there are none for this sort of thing. I'm just saying how I see it (incidentally, don't think I'm taking the "it's my opinion" cop-out, feel free to continue challenging me).

As I said above, if it had been a PC FPS first and foremost, it would not have been unique, but that's the heart of it: it wasn't a PC FPS, and the mere fact that a PC FPS could be called "average" by PC standards was quite unusual at the time.

So what you're saying is because it didn't suck, it was unique, original and perfect?

Hell no! It had many flaws, and even if it didn't, I just realized I was arguing more for it's influence than anything else. All I'm saying is, to my young, console-gaming-only (at the time) mind, it was unique, original, and perfect. Chalk it up to nostalgia, then, I guess, but the mere fact that it was truly competent (like my other examples, see above) was all my then-seven-year-old self needed.

Does it still hold up to scrutiny? Not so well, but its influence is undeniable, and I loved it when I was younger, so I can still have a good time with it.

I think I am taking the "it's my opinion" cop-out now, but I can't really see where else this could go.

So what you're saying this comes down to "I played it when I was seven and thought it was good, so it its"? Wow. Just, wow.

You know what? I played Mario RPG when I was like seven. So that game is now unique, got that everyone? Utterly unique, you're not allowed to disagree with me. It's officially unique because I played it before I played any other jrpg.

To be fair, I don't think that's what he's saying. I think his point was that the nostalgia of being a seven year old playing it may have contributed greatly to his joy of it but that also looking back, he in his own personal opinion, finds the game to be competant and fun to play. I remember in an earlier post he ended it by saying something along the lines of:
'if you don't like it, that's fine I just personally do'
I'm not sure if he was addressing you or someone else in that regard but still he isn't like preaching his point across saying 'YOU CAN'T DISAGREE WITH ME' honestly reading his post strikes me more as just a guy expressing how it comes to be that he personally enjoys Halo and thinks it's a good game.
Sorry if that seemed a little harsh by the way, I don't think it will but you never can tell with internet text. So in any case this was an informal rant and not in any sense am I trying to insult or annoy you.

 

[MasterMongoose0]

Halo is one hell of a game.
+Great soundtrack. Seriously.
+Single-handedly saved Xbox Live
+Made split-screen co-op insanely popular
+Innovative (for consoles) forge and theater
+Nearly flawless controls/presentation/use of vehicles (a lot of games have sucking vehicles)
+Helped to make video games a more spread medium (books, toys, etc)
+A decently creative story given their constraints (its a lot better than it's given credit for)
+Vibrant graphics


I could rant on and on. I don't think there's any reason to. People who bash Halo will bash Halo. I love it, and can't wait for all the people who come back for Reach.