Poll: Is Halo a generic shooter?

[AcacianLeaves]

The first Halo was not generic. It was a trailblazer, a genre definer for its generation. Hell, if it hadn't been as popular as it was, it would probably be looked upon as one of the greatest accomplishments of the 128 bit consoles. But, no. It was loved by the mainstream, and spawned a franchise. So the same people who extoll the virtues of Goldeneye 64 also condemn Halo, even though, in the long run, Halo: CE did far more for console shooters and tried many more new things. By today's standards it can certainly be called generic, but only because so many of the unique aspects it pioneered have been copied so endlessly ever since.

The second Halo couldn't have been called generic at the time - it was still arguably the best of its kind when it was released - but it was the beginning of what would become the Halo strategy: minimal changes, no new innovation. However, it was a technically superior game to the first, it did attempt a couple of new things and, most importantly, it succeeded at online console play like nothing before it.

Halo 3 is where the accusations of genericism start to gain weight. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's a fine game - critics certainly seemed to like it - but it continued to lack new innovation. This was largely excused at the time because "omgnextgenhalo!". The trails blazed by Halo: CE were commonplace in shooters now. Halo 3 was, technically, proficient in all areas. It was almost certainly better than its immediate competition. But no one can argue that the series wasn't beginning to stagnate as early as its third entry.

Halo ODST is probably the most divisive of the lot, excluding Halo Wars. It attempted some new things, but the new things it attempted weren't any good. Everything else was the same as ever. The multiplayer offered nothing significantly new, the campaign was too short, it was dull, it should have been a $15 expansion for Halo 3.

And then there was Reach. A Halo game that added very little that was new, and the stuff that was new barely affected the unchanged gameplay at all. You might point out that Halo "has bright colours", but since when has graphical style excused stagnant gameplay? Of course, I suppose I can't criticise it too much, I mean, the thing sold like...well, like a Halo title. And yet, while nothing worth a damn has changed, it's still fun. A lot of fun, especially with friends.

Halo is a game series with five major titles released over almost a decade that has barely changed at all since the 2001 original. It is a game with a silent space marine protagonist who shoots aliens with big guns, and takes place in a universe where humanity is at war with an alien alliance. It is a game with regenerating shields, a two-weapon limit and run&gun gameplay.

Yes, it is generic. There is no argument here - it is the very best example of a generic shooter. If I wanted to show someone an example of a generic shooter, I would show them Halo.

That doesn't mean it isn't good.

Quoted for having basically the exact same opinion that I do. The gameplay of Halo was established in 2001. It has not changed since. I wouldn't call Halo 'generic' per-say, but it is basically the same game copy-pasted over 5 titles. Since Halo:CE came out in 2001, the entire shooter genre has evolved and adapted around the good things it did. The innovative shooters have added something new to the formula, while the generic shooters have stuck to the same gameplay. Halo 3, ODST, and Reach are in the later category FOR SURE. Halo 2 is debatable.

 

[redisforever]

Well, it inovates, but it is THE generic shooter.

I get how wierd that sounds, but what I mean is, other games just do what Halo did.

 

[TriGGeR_HaPPy]

When the first Halo came out, nobody tried to claim it was generic. It was an interesting new game. It might not have been completely revolutionary, but it put enough neat little tweaks on all the existing cliches that it was unique and most people found it quite fun.

On the other hand, it hasn't changed much since then, has it?

So overall, if you asked me if say... Halo: Reach were generic, I'd probably agree. It's well made for what it is, but it's also a bit generic. You didn't ask that though. You asked if Halo as a whole was generic, to which I would say no. Halo basically solidified the norms for the genre, and maintaining a bit of consistency throughout a series doesn't make the whole series generic.

That's how I feel about the matter anyway.

I love it when someone types out my feelings, so I don't have to.
Thanks, ZephrC!

No, really. If you want my opinion, see the above, quoted post. ^_^

 

[Grounogeos]

Halo is the kind of game that makes every FPS that comes after it "generic."

 

[SnakeCL]

I feel like calling something "generic" is just a cop-out for any sort of discussion.

FPS games have remained relatively unchanged for years, its almost like if you call Halo games "generic" then you're going to have to call every FPS since the original 3d paradigm was invented "generic". Heck, one could man an argument that the "Half-Life" series is generic.

 

[Woodsey]

It's only generic because every FPS has tried to copy it since Halo: CE.

Every? You must be 'avin' a laugh guv.

OT: Yes.

 

[Phlakes]

Halo 1 revolutionized console FPSs and was probably the best of its generation, but 2 and 3 didn't really add anything to the formula, obviously. Reach definitely helped and (along with the others) still provides an experience unique from other games, just not their own series.

So no, it's not generic.

 

[Zhukov]

Uhh... sort of.

Halo: CE was innovative. (Whether its innovations were good or bad is up to you.)

But now those innovations have been copied so many times that they have become the norm. And since the Halo games haven't really changed much over the years, they too have become generic.

...

The only mechanic that has been copied over and over is the regenerating health. I haven't seen anything else from Halo being copied in many games.

Two weapon capacity. The melee button. And, yes, regenerating health.

 

[redisforever]

other games just do what Halo did.

Which is what exactly? Other then the regenerating health there isn't anything Halo did that was entirely new. The online play did not really kick off until Halo 2 so that doesn't really count.

I have been playing shooters ever since the original Doom which was released more then 7 years before Halo 1, and while I did enjoy my time with the game there wasn't anything in the game that I thought was in any way revolutionary. The regenerating health was nice, but it wasn't game changing since you still had health packs.

What makes the Halo fanboys so extremely annoying isn't that they think the game is great, that is just their opinion and they are entitled to it, what makes them annoying are their retarded claims that Halo somehow either invented all of the things seen in the game as if they never even existed prior to the game's release, or that all of the things seen in the game had "never been done well before" which is a giant load of crap.

What I meant is, Halo didn't really invent anything new, but Bungie put everything together into one package, which FPS's now take most things from. I totally agree with what you're saying about the fanboys, but that happens not only with Halo, but almost any series.

 

[TheTaco007]

The problem is that Halo was the thing that kicked off a bunch of generic shooters. It WAS very original, but then everyone started copying it, and now there's a bunch of Halo Clones that we call "generic shooters."

So basically, Halo was original, but became generic because everyone tried to make their own Halo.

 

[sagacious]

Halo is a trend setter. It was different at the time it came out, but It has become generic over time as the rest of the genre catches up to it.

So, yes and no? Anyone who has played Halo can attest to it not being brown (rather colorful, actually as most games don't have blue and or pink explosions) And it is only generic in regards to the slow-moving, two-weapon, regenerating health that it helped to make a Genre standard.

 

[nipsen]

..first one was neat. Bungee had made Oni and that underwater on the rails shooter in the same look before, but Halo was a good game. Vehicles and co-op and all that - great title.

..Halo 2 was generic as sawdust four minutes in, though.

 

[InsanityBaronOfAtrocity]

I actually voted "no it's innovative" for a laugh expecting mine to be the only vote. Well I am appalled. Tried to play that new Reach thing. Jesus. Christ. Even with a few drunk mates on co-op we couldn't bear more than 15 minutes of that game. Over and over the same thing same formula. Argh. Bored just thinking about it.

 

[Fluse]

The only thing innovative about halo combat evloved was the platform it was released on... Since then its been generec space marine fps all the way.

 

[Arkley]

Two weapon capacity. The melee button. And, yes, regenerating health.

The "grenade" button was also pioneered by Halo. Previously, you had to switch to a seperate weapon to throw grenades, just like you had to switch to melee weapons.

Vehicles that you could enter, drive and leave at will had not been done before - vehicle sections were precisely that; vehicle sections.

Such expansive, outdoor areas with multiple methods for approaching your target had not been done before.

And also, as you pointed out, two weapons, melee button and regenerating health.

Halo really did lead the way in its time.

 

[Fluse]

Two weapon capacity. The melee button. And, yes, regenerating health.

The "grenade" button was also pioneered by Halo. Previously, you had to switch to a seperate weapon to throw grenades, just like you had to switch to melee weapons.

Vehicles that you could enter, drive and leave at will had not been done before - vehicle sections were precisely that; vehicle sections.

Such expansive, outdoor areas with multiple methods for approaching your target had not been done before.

And also, as you pointed out, two weapons, melee button and regenerating health.

Halo really did lead the way in its time.

Try and look up Starsiege: Tribes, a game released 3 years before Halo Combat Evolved. Or Tibes2 released the same year as Halo Combat Evolved.

Vehicles that you could enter, drive and leave at will - check

expansive, outdoor areas with multiple methods for approaching your target - check

And as far as i remember, you where limited to a 2 weapon + melee + granades setup. main weapon + side arm. altho, it is a long time ago so im only 90% on that one.

that leaves you with a granade button and a health bar modification, not exactly a revolution if you ask me.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

It certainly changed the main platform of FPS gaming from PC's to consoles, at least in the eyes of developers and the vast majority of the public.
The regenerating health was new. The melee system was... if not entirely new, at least different (i.e. not a separate weapon), and the 2 weapon thing wasn't something I'd seen pre-Halo.
Is it generic now? Well... Do most FPS's have regenerating health etc... yes. So I suppose that it could be argued that the answer is yes. But it does try to change some things with each instalment (and I'd like to see what other people want from any series when they say it needs more innovation in each iteration), so I would personally be inclined to say it's not generic.
Accusations of generic-ness would have to be backed up with games from which Halo shamelessly steals within the same genre.
Examples:
Medal of Honor (the new one)- generic. Stole everything from CoD, and did it badly.
Army of 2/Kane and Lynch - likewise, but from Gears of War.

Hell, way back when, every FPS had healthpacks, ridiculous movement speeds, and the ability to hold all the weapons in the game, with the rarest most powerful ones being found last and having the least ammo. And they were all referred to as Doom clones. If that's the genre standard, then the two big FPS brands upon which all other FPS's at the moment seem to be based are not generic, and are borderline revolutionary.

I will accept the possibility of there being a bias to my comment based on the fact that I like Halo, as long as others are willing to accept that their opinions on any given subject are not necessarily the only possible viewpoint.