Reviews In The Shower - Games: Halo: Reach
- Thread starter Timotei
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You have to remember that this site heavily favours consoles and many people here block out the existence of PC games altogether.
For PC gamers Halo was in no way revolutionary. It had some new mechanics but it was just one of many FPS titles. For console gamers it was something completely new (or nearly, Goldeneye was first).
For PC gamers Halo was in no way revolutionary. It had some new mechanics but it was just one of many FPS titles. For console gamers it was something completely new (or nearly, Goldeneye was first).
Pretty good review. I haven't had a chance to play the campaign yet, but I was never a fan of any of the other Halo campaigns, so I'm not holding my breath on it. It sounds like it's really good though, so I'll hopefully get around to giving it a shot in co-op sometime soon.
As for the mutliplayer, it's been painful from the few hours I've got in of it so far. Three and four player split-screen Halo 2 and 3 were regular fixtures for a couple of years. The amount of time a few mates and I racked up on them just playing Slayer with random weapons and vehicles was ridiculous. Fast forward a few years spent playing Unreal Tournament, Modern Warfare etc, and Halo: Reach just seems so slow. That's not particularly bad, just different to what I'm used to now, and I'm sure I'll get used to it again, but it's looking like it'll take a while due to my true problem with the multiplayer.
The maps. Seriously, Halo 2 and 3 had some of the best maps I have ever played in a shooter. I didn't even have a 360 until about 3 months ago, yet I managed to rack up a godawful amount of time on a game I didn't even own. And yet, the only word to describe the maps I've played so far on Reach is "terrible". Maybe it's just me still struggling with the slower pace and not knowing the maps very well, but I just found them to be nowhere near as good as the ones from Halo 2 & 3 and MW/MW2.
As for the mutliplayer, it's been painful from the few hours I've got in of it so far. Three and four player split-screen Halo 2 and 3 were regular fixtures for a couple of years. The amount of time a few mates and I racked up on them just playing Slayer with random weapons and vehicles was ridiculous. Fast forward a few years spent playing Unreal Tournament, Modern Warfare etc, and Halo: Reach just seems so slow. That's not particularly bad, just different to what I'm used to now, and I'm sure I'll get used to it again, but it's looking like it'll take a while due to my true problem with the multiplayer.
The maps. Seriously, Halo 2 and 3 had some of the best maps I have ever played in a shooter. I didn't even have a 360 until about 3 months ago, yet I managed to rack up a godawful amount of time on a game I didn't even own. And yet, the only word to describe the maps I've played so far on Reach is "terrible". Maybe it's just me still struggling with the slower pace and not knowing the maps very well, but I just found them to be nowhere near as good as the ones from Halo 2 & 3 and MW/MW2.
Wait wait wait, you don't spend a lot of time on this site do you?Ixal said:
This site is is almost majority wise, PC gamers. In fact, we have a group with 335 members on this site.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Escapist-PC-Gamers
And over 600 that play TF2 on the PC.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/The-Escapist-Team-Fortress-2-Group-PC
Trust me when I say that we are in no way shape or form, console majority.
Even then, I'd like to consider myself a PC gamer, seeing as I do have a rather small collection of games for my computer and even then, I love the Halo series. It is the only FPS outside of Team Fortress 2 that has remained well balanced and fun in Multi-Player. The Single Player is also great and it quite honestly may be the best Halo Game since Halo Combat Evolved.
Halo was in no way revolutionary. The only few things that it has done is bringing Regenerating Health to the board (And so far, it's the only game with a version of it that doesn't break the laws of reality) and it kind revived (I wanna say Revived, but I think Continued might be a better word for it.) the whole Space Marine idea. Not to mention that it is one of the VERY FEW First Person Shooter games out there to use drivable vehicles that are easy to control. It also still has Split Screen gaming which is also pretty fun.
maddawg IAJI said:
*sigh*
For the third and hopefully last time: Halo wasn't "revolutionary" to video games as a whole. PC games had been doing what halo had been doing for some time. However, to console gaming, a lot of the ideaa in Halo were fresh to the genre and laid out the archetype for a relatively new control scheme which many subsequent games would copy and experiment with. Please take a moment to read this, it might explain things a little further. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/8066-Experienced-Points-Before-There-Was-Halo]
[sub][sub][sub]EDIT: I thought I posted this 4 hours ago.[/sub][/sub][/sub]
I have one qualm about your review and my apologies if youre a hardcore Halo fanboy, because I am not and can see flaws where they're glaringy obvious.... anyway...
Your statement:
"For those of you not already on the bus, Halo: Reach is the prequel to 2001's Halo: Combat Evolved, which took a chance with a revolutionary new play style that has now become the staple of the FPS shooter genre. "
How in the hell did Halo: CE revolutionize the first person shooter genre?
Revolutionary new play style? What in the hell are you on? did you never play Half-life, or SKYnet?
There were much better games that came out before it and if you're referring to regenerating shields/health in first person shooters, yes Halo is the reason it became mainstream and it's crammmed into every fucking fps we play now, but I'm sorry to inform you that Red Faction for the ps2 initiated the idea first and puled it off much more successfully.
As for the melee attack, yeah that was a bit different to other games in that you didn't have to switch to a melee weapon to attack like in previous games.
But still... I would hardly call Halo: CE "revolutionary", it just sold well because it was the ONLY decent xbox game out at the time.
Your statement:
"For those of you not already on the bus, Halo: Reach is the prequel to 2001's Halo: Combat Evolved, which took a chance with a revolutionary new play style that has now become the staple of the FPS shooter genre. "
How in the hell did Halo: CE revolutionize the first person shooter genre?
Revolutionary new play style? What in the hell are you on? did you never play Half-life, or SKYnet?
There were much better games that came out before it and if you're referring to regenerating shields/health in first person shooters, yes Halo is the reason it became mainstream and it's crammmed into every fucking fps we play now, but I'm sorry to inform you that Red Faction for the ps2 initiated the idea first and puled it off much more successfully.
As for the melee attack, yeah that was a bit different to other games in that you didn't have to switch to a melee weapon to attack like in previous games.
But still... I would hardly call Halo: CE "revolutionary", it just sold well because it was the ONLY decent xbox game out at the time.
So what you're trying to say is that Halo:CE drastically changed the way the vast majority of console shooters are played, with many, many games taking notes from Halo and copying it. One might even say that we saw a "sudden, marked change [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/revolutionary]" in the way console FPS games were designed and built.Daedalus1942 said:
Haruhi's Skirt, do you people even get taught English anymore?
If you have a keyboard with the Alt Gr key, you can hold that down and click a vowel. áéíóú, ÁÉÍÓÚ. Alternatively, Accessories->System Tools->Character Map for some of the more exotic accents like ñ or ä.Irridium said:
What do you mean "we" people?Amnestic said:
I'm Australian and I'm merely saying the Halo: CE was nothing special, it's fairly generic as far as FPS's go, it ripped red faction off in it's gameplay style (at least RF had the geomod engine) with the regenerating shields, and the only reason it sold really well was because it was the only decent thing on the xbox at launch time.
So basically the other game companies saw the "success" *cough* marketing strategy *cough* of Halo:CE and thought "Well, hey let's fuck originality and carving our own path, we'll just copy this game for the next ten years"
And lo and behold CoD Modern warfare was born.
Anyone who can't google the definition of "revolutionary" apparently.Daedalus1942 said:
I'm British. Care for a bowl of spotted dick and some exquisitely brewed tea?Daedalus1942 said:
Yes. Which means that Halo created a marked change in how console FPS games were designed which as I just showed you is the definition of "revolutionary"!Daedalus1942 said:
This is not rocket surgery folks. Whether Halo was the first to impliment the mechanics is not particularly relevant. What is relevant is that Halo sparked the change. I cannot express this any clearer than I already am.
Also I just looked up whether Red Faction had regenerating shields. Kinda struggling here. Red Faction 2 did according to TVTropes [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RegeneratingHealth] but a quick google is coming up empty. It - that is, Red Faction 1 - also came out only 6 months before Halo did, and I have my doubts that they would have overhauled the entire shield system in Halo in six months before it hit store shelves.
Please give me a link to a review that does this, that isn't a pardy. By the way, cute avatar.Judgement101 said:
OT: A great review with alot of noticable effort put into it.
Nah, it's just some attention seeking moron who wants to get banned for something 'awesome' and hasn't figured out they could PM a Mod and just ask to be banned. Or better yet, stop posting.ShadowsofHope said:
Anywho, back to the review.
And it's a great review. I've actually read this a few times since it was posted and it's actually swayed me into getting it. I've played and loved the older Halo games but something about this seemed 'meh' to me. So congratulations, you've convinced one person to buy this game. Yay!
Kelethor said:
No, not really. But singing this will
That is unless you sing it when a person cusses you out.
That is unless you sing it when a person cusses you out.
I actually think the tally is up to three so far. Right up there with "people I have convinced Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990".Sassafrass said:
Still looking for a style to rival yours. Don't even thing I can.domble said:Great write-up, nice use of images, clear formatting - amazing stuff
Sweet review. A nice long read.
The only problem I have with Reach is that I don't like the new ranking system, but other than that it is awesome and well worth the 9/10.
[sup][sup][sup]Seeing this kinda makes me wish I finished those 'Seals of Approval' that I was supposed to be doing all those months ago...[/sup][/sup][/sup]
The only problem I have with Reach is that I don't like the new ranking system, but other than that it is awesome and well worth the 9/10.
[sup][sup][sup]Seeing this kinda makes me wish I finished those 'Seals of Approval' that I was supposed to be doing all those months ago...[/sup][/sup][/sup]
I think that's my resistance to this and other games like Borderlands that are lauded for their online play, but the single player if it exists doesn't seem fully developed. I can only take so much of the clownery that comes with playing online -- if it doesn't come with enough single player for me to justify the purchase price -- I find that I avoid buying those games. Not insulting the game at all, but to hook me, I need something deeper in the single player. If I was going to buy a game to rock out in online (Team Fortress 2 serves the purpose now) I guess Halo would be next choice.Jim From Accounting said:
So the next time make that distinction in your reviews instead of using general statements. The Escapist is not a console only website.Timotei said:maddawg IAJI said:
*sigh*
For the third and hopefully last time: Halo wasn't "revolutionary" to video games as a whole. PC games had been doing what halo had been doing for some time. However, to console gaming, a lot of the ideaa in Halo were fresh to the genre and laid out the archetype for a relatively new control scheme which many subsequent games would copy and experiment with. Please take a moment to read this, it might explain things a little further. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/8066-Experienced-Points-Before-There-Was-Halo]
[sub][sub][sub]EDIT: I thought I posted this 4 hours ago.[/sub][/sub][/sub]