Why Halo is called innovative?

Recommended Videos

qbert4ever

New member
Dec 14, 2007
798
0
0
SomeBritishDude said:
Gormers1 said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Hey, don't get me wrong, I liked Halo alot. It just wasn't innotive, it didn't do anything new. Theres a difference.
Now you're doing it again. Say at least stuff like that regenerating shields had been done before, that the AI really wasn't that revolutionary, that other shooters limited the player to only carry two guns before halo (or that you didnt find it innovative)... Anything!
Well you dont HAVE to elaborate, as long as youre not hurting my feelings Im okay ;(. But I thought the point of this thread is to discuss why halo is or is not innovative, not just stating that "no, halo isnt innovative".
Regenerating Shields have been done before, the AI wasn't that revolutionary, and I didn't find two guns that innovative. Better?
NO! You will admit your mistake for all to see!

Nah, I kid. The important thing to remember is that just because something isn't innovative, that doesn't make it bad. I for one take the position that while Halo didn't actually do anything new gameplay-wise, it was the first one to do it all together (as far as I know), and do it well.

Question: Does being the first copy-cat make you unique?
 

SomeBritishDude

New member
Nov 1, 2007
5,081
0
0
qbert4ever said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Gormers1 said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Hey, don't get me wrong, I liked Halo alot. It just wasn't innotive, it didn't do anything new. Theres a difference.
Now you're doing it again. Say at least stuff like that regenerating shields had been done before, that the AI really wasn't that revolutionary, that other shooters limited the player to only carry two guns before halo (or that you didnt find it innovative)... Anything!
Well you dont HAVE to elaborate, as long as youre not hurting my feelings Im okay ;(. But I thought the point of this thread is to discuss why halo is or is not innovative, not just stating that "no, halo isnt innovative".
Regenerating Shields have been done before, the AI wasn't that revolutionary, and I didn't find two guns that innovative. Better?
NO! You will admit your mistake for all to see!

Nah, I kid. The important thing to remember is that just because something isn't innovative, that doesn't make it bad. I for one take the position that while Halo didn't actually do anything new gameplay-wise, it was the first one to do it all together (as far as I know), and do it well.
Oh, I completely agree with this. It took (stole sounds a bit negative) all its ideas from other FPS's and games bethor it, that certainly doesn't make it a bad game! I has a hell of a time with a Halo: CE. I played it couch co-op over at a friends house, and we completed the whole thing in one sitting. Thats the mark of a great game.

But like I've said already, what this thread is asking is if Halo is innotive. And that is a deffinite and final NO! That doesn't make it a bad game by any means.
 

Gormers1

New member
Apr 9, 2008
543
0
0
Im not saying that. Im not sayint that it being innovative means that it is a great game either. The thread title is "why is halo innovative", not "is halo innovative. If not, is it still a good game". Also, which games did things like regenerating shields etc before halo?
 

hypothetical fact

New member
Oct 8, 2008
1,601
0
0
SomeBritishDude said:
qbert4ever said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Gormers1 said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Hey, don't get me wrong, I liked Halo alot. It just wasn't innotive, it didn't do anything new. Theres a difference.
Now you're doing it again. Say at least stuff like that regenerating shields had been done before, that the AI really wasn't that revolutionary, that other shooters limited the player to only carry two guns before halo (or that you didnt find it innovative)... Anything!
Well you dont HAVE to elaborate, as long as youre not hurting my feelings Im okay ;(. But I thought the point of this thread is to discuss why halo is or is not innovative, not just stating that "no, halo isnt innovative".
Regenerating Shields have been done before, the AI wasn't that revolutionary, and I didn't find two guns that innovative. Better?
NO! You will admit your mistake for all to see!

Nah, I kid. The important thing to remember is that just because something isn't innovative, that doesn't make it bad. I for one take the position that while Halo didn't actually do anything new gameplay-wise, it was the first one to do it all together (as far as I know), and do it well.
Oh, I completely agree with this. It took (stole sounds a bit negative) all its ideas from other FPS's and games bethor it, that certainly doesn't make it a bad game! I has a hell of a time with a Halo: CE. I played it couch co-op over at a friends house, and we completed the whole thing in one sitting. Thats the mark of a great game.

But like I've said already, what this thread is asking is if Halo is innotive. And that is a deffinite and final NO! That doesn't make it a bad game by any means.
You have six pages of evidence yet you still refute that halo is innovative. Some people just don't want to change their mind no matter how misinformed they are.
 

SomeBritishDude

New member
Nov 1, 2007
5,081
0
0
Gormers1 said:
Im not saying that. Im not sayint that it being innovative means that it is a great game either. The thread title is "why is halo innovative", not "is halo innovative. If not, is it still a good game". Also, which games did things like regenerating shields etc before halo?
http://www.giantbomb.com/regenerating-health/92-83/

[quote/] Halo or Halo 2 are often credited for the first appearance of regenerating health, though this is not the case. The first appearance of this popular method of health control was in the game Wolverine Adamantium Rage. This game was released on the SNES, and the Genesis in 1994. Though Halo was the game that made it popular amongst developers and gamers. It's also usually implemented in first person shooters as well. [/quote]

Admitadley, I didn't know this when I said regenerating health had been done before. I was going on a wim. I good wim it turned out.
 

SomeBritishDude

New member
Nov 1, 2007
5,081
0
0
hypothetical fact said:
SomeBritishDude said:
qbert4ever said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Gormers1 said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Hey, don't get me wrong, I liked Halo alot. It just wasn't innotive, it didn't do anything new. Theres a difference.
Now you're doing it again. Say at least stuff like that regenerating shields had been done before, that the AI really wasn't that revolutionary, that other shooters limited the player to only carry two guns before halo (or that you didnt find it innovative)... Anything!
Well you dont HAVE to elaborate, as long as youre not hurting my feelings Im okay ;(. But I thought the point of this thread is to discuss why halo is or is not innovative, not just stating that "no, halo isnt innovative".
Regenerating Shields have been done before, the AI wasn't that revolutionary, and I didn't find two guns that innovative. Better?
NO! You will admit your mistake for all to see!

Nah, I kid. The important thing to remember is that just because something isn't innovative, that doesn't make it bad. I for one take the position that while Halo didn't actually do anything new gameplay-wise, it was the first one to do it all together (as far as I know), and do it well.
Oh, I completely agree with this. It took (stole sounds a bit negative) all its ideas from other FPS's and games bethor it, that certainly doesn't make it a bad game! I has a hell of a time with a Halo: CE. I played it couch co-op over at a friends house, and we completed the whole thing in one sitting. Thats the mark of a great game.

But like I've said already, what this thread is asking is if Halo is innotive. And that is a deffinite and final NO! That doesn't make it a bad game by any means.
You have six pages of evidence yet you still refute that halo is innovative. Some people just don't want to change their mind no matter how misinformed they are.
Its opinions not evidence. If your talking about innovation in the loosest term of "anything new" then yes, it is innotive. There hasnever been a game bethor it that has a pratagonist who's face you never see who's names master chief. If your talking gameplay machanics, its all been done bethor. I wouldn't concider it being first popular FPS game on a console as innovation.
 

Rednog

New member
Nov 3, 2008
3,567
0
0
I don't know if any one else mentioned this (skimmed through the 1st and 2nd page) but to me Halo was somewhat innovative on how characters were controlled/ how cut scenes were done. I remember back when the first halo was released and the second one was about to be released Bungie's Director of Cinematics came to my school and showed us how they created a lot of the cut scenes and in game events. Which was really cool because they had a system where each character could manipulated in real time like a director would an actor on a stage.
 

Fanboy

New member
Oct 20, 2008
831
0
0
Wargamer said:
Fanboy said:
It was the first console FPS I played with a Co-op campaign, but I'm not sure if it was the first ever (I think perfect dark had this.) I can't think of a console FPS before it that used vehicles, but again I'm probably wrong (again, I think perfect dark might have had this). The dual joysticks for movement maybe, I'm not sure.

I don't think it was as innovative as just really well rounded.
Perfect Dark had a co-op Campain. It had a Counter-Op Campaign; Player 1 plays as normal, Player 2 takes one of the enemies and tries to stop them.

Goldeneye used dual-joysticks for movement; one of the options for control was to use two controllers, thus giving you two sticks. I think that is far more innovative than using two joysticks when the controller itself has two built into it.

Goldeneye also used vehicles, so that's not new either.
Yeah that's what I thought about the Co-op and Vehicles, but I didn't know about the dual controllers. That's pretty interesting, but it probably would be pretty awkward.

I stand by my earlier opinion. Halo is not an innovative game, but it did borrow a lot of innovative ideas from other games and mesh them together very effectively.
 

SomeBritishDude

New member
Nov 1, 2007
5,081
0
0
Fanboy said:
I stand by my earlier opinion. Halo is not an innovative game, but it did borrow a lot of innovative ideas from other games and mesh them together very effectively.
This. Thank you.
 

Codeman90

New member
Apr 24, 2008
227
0
0
l Ancient l said:
halo 1 started all this space marine stuff
I'm going to have to go with Aliens and Warhammer 40k as the starters of all this "space marine stuff"

On topic: Halo was an innovative game when it came out. Not so much now but it was a huge hit for the consoles.
 

Gormers1

New member
Apr 9, 2008
543
0
0
SomeBritishDude said:
Gormers1 said:
Im not saying that. Im not sayint that it being innovative means that it is a great game either. The thread title is "why is halo innovative", not "is halo innovative. If not, is it still a good game". Also, which games did things like regenerating shields etc before halo?
http://www.giantbomb.com/regenerating-health/92-83/

[quote/] Halo or Halo 2 are often credited for the first appearance of regenerating health, though this is not the case. The first appearance of this popular method of health control was in the game Wolverine Adamantium Rage. This game was released on the SNES, and the Genesis in 1994. Though Halo was the game that made it popular amongst developers and gamers. It's also usually implemented in first person shooters as well.
Admitadley, I didn't know this when I said regenerating health had been done before. I was going on a wim. I good wim it turned out.[/quote]

Nice. The other elements thrown thats in thats mentioned still makes it very innovative for me of course. What I want is people to comment on what other aspects of halo has been done before, not just the usual saying "halo took gameplay aspects from other games and meshed them well together", not explaining what gameplay aspects they are talking about.
 

bad rider

The prodigal son of a goat boy
Dec 23, 2007
2,252
0
0
SomeBritishDude said:
Fanboy said:
I stand by my earlier opinion. Halo is not an innovative game, but it did borrow a lot of innovative ideas from other games and mesh them together very effectively.
This. Thank you.
Going entirely off topic, you changed you avartar!
Anyway, didn't the way it was meshed together actually make it innovative. E.g taking rechargable shields putting them in a multiplayer with vehicle combat, while keeping a good balance between weapons?
 

SomeBritishDude

New member
Nov 1, 2007
5,081
0
0
bad rider said:
SomeBritishDude said:
Fanboy said:
I stand by my earlier opinion. Halo is not an innovative game, but it did borrow a lot of innovative ideas from other games and mesh them together very effectively.
This. Thank you.
Going entirely off topic, you changed you avartar!
Anyway, didn't the way it was meshed together actually make it innovative. E.g taking rechargable shields putting them in a multiplayer with vehicle combat, while keeping a good balance between weapons?
Off topic, thx for noticing, I only played Psyconauts a few weeks ago, so I wanted to display it awesomeness!

Anyway, I suppose in the way you put, yer, Halo was innovative. But it still comes down to the same thing in my eyes, it meshed together lots of different ideas from other games and did it well. Whether having regenerating health [b/] in a FPS [/b] is innovation is entirely a matter of opinion, unless you want to take the meaning literially.
 

Rajin Cajun

New member
Sep 12, 2008
1,157
0
0
God this thread reminds me why I hate you tweeny Halo Fanboys. Innovative my arse.
Duel Wielding? Done and better with Soldier of Fortune 2.
Limited Weapons? Done and better with Rainbow Six.
 

zoozilla

New member
Dec 3, 2007
959
0
0
This thread reminds me why I hate fanboys in general.

How hard is it to actually re-read what you type before you post, so you can see for yourself the kind of idiocy compulsive praise or derision brings to the surface.

That said, I'm not going to re-read this post before posting it, so forget everything you've just read.
 

Zer_

Rocket Scientist
Feb 7, 2008
2,682
0
0
If Halo is innovative, then if I made a game where you get to take a dump behind a bush, then be off on your merry way kicking ass using a combination of Kung Fu and feces covered hands is just as innovative.

The only thing it did was make vehicular combat pretty seamless, but even then most of the competitive maps don't have vehicles to begin with.
 

Gildedtongue

New member
Nov 9, 2007
189
0
0
Here's a review I made of Halo: Combat Evolved back in '06. For those that don't want to wade through it all, overall my impression was "It's a shooter, a decent shooter, but honestly, nothing new came out of it."

---

So, being the rather non 1st person shooter player I am, I wasn't too interested in Halo when it came out. Nor when it came to the PC, nor when Halo 2 came out. But, as I'm browsing Gamestop, I come by a used $7.00 copy for the PC and thought, "Meh, why not? Every once in awhile I want to shoot something in the forehead."

So, I install and start to play the game, and get pretty much all the plot in one sitting. Big bad aliens, check. Some superweapon, check. Cyborg badass armed with automatic guns and one-liners, check. And that's about it until Bigger very bad aliens come around in later chapters.

On the PC the game runs pretty smooth. Quick response Half Life keyboard set up. Enjoy the always on hand grenades, and the ability to smack people with the butt of your guns is always pleasant. However, one realizes that the game's innovation ends there. Run, run, shoot, run into their face, smack them with your gun, run to the next guy, rinse, repeat. Now, you do have to "Worry" about your health. Except that you have an ever recharging shield that can deflect rockets. So, honestly, there isn't much need to find cover unless you're low on power. Then you hunker down for a couple minutes and then you're Five by Five and ready to go at the enemies again. There is really no sense of urgancy or personal risk.

Unless that risk happens to come from your allies. The buddies that are "backing you up" seem to have a personal grudge against you at all time. This is most apparent when some wacko gets their hands on a vehicle, like a Banshee. See, Master Chief can take rockets without any sort of issue, but if a hover craft going 5 miles an hour taps his shoulder, you die in the most dramatic fashion possible. It comes to this conclusion that the rest of the army is not there for any of their own fighting. They are there for you to walk up to, and shoot in the face with your shotgun because you need that sniper's rifle they're carrying. Otherwise, they serve no actual purpose.

Now, the first set of levels they offer you to play in actually are pretty fun and unique. Running around a ship, then crash landing and working on foot is pretty cool. Then, after awhile you start to "Explore the bowels of Halo." At this time in designing the game, apparently all the level design personnel failed their drug tests, because you run around and fight in the same room lay out again, and again, and again. (Corridor, Big room with glass encased smaller room inside, corridor, bridge, corridor, Big room with glass encased smaller room inside, repeat ad nauseum.) The only purpose of these rooms is to make you start to run low on ammunition, as the only source of bullets seems to be ripping them out of the dead fingers of your comrades. Fatalities either the baddies made, or you yourself made. Of course, you could use the plasma weapons the aliens use. But those guns are absolute crap anyway. Minus the pistol's slight homing ability, there isn't too much reason to waste your time with the Plasma Rifle, or *shudder* the Needler. Not that the Earth weapons are any better. The pistol is largely a joke since it's absolutely the poor man's sniper's rifle, with less zoom and less power (best thing to do with that is pistol whip your enemies to submission, but all your guns can do that). The rocket launcher is nice, however, you're commonly in small, tight corridors, thus it's impractical to use, though that nigh invulnerability due to shield does come in handy. Your best bet is to carry the Battle Rifle and the Shotgun, and use the Sniper's Rifle on those really long corridors.

So, that's about it with the gameplay. Since I got the game used, I didn't get a manual with it, but I figure what I saw is pretty much the extent of the plot. Master Chief remains a completely ambiguous person with no past, no real intentions, no passions, no hobbies. In other words, a very bland killing machine. Some of the supporting characters attempt to liven the scene, but the Full Metal Jacket Marine Corp.s Sargent, and the valant space admiral, and the bitchy AI just don't really make an impact with anyone, nor actually increase any sort of relationship with anyone.

About this time I get rather bored and... notice things. Various inconsistencies with real science. One, your battle rifle has a nifty little compass right on the barrel where the ammunition counter is. It's nice and pretty. Except, you're in space. Stuck on a circular space station, with no absolute magnetic point to base the compass on. Arguably on the space ships you could say that the compass is pointed towards the Engine bays. But one really can't say this on Halo itself. Two, if the alien menace doesn't know about Earth, and we've only recently come into contact with them. How is it they speak our language so well? The little dudes that seem to be the bulk of enemy forces and the largest bullet magnets all scream things like "It's the enemy!" and "Where is he?" and "Ahh, run away!" Erm... shouldn't they be speaking in an alien tongue that I can't understand? You know, because they're, you know, aliens? You might respond that "Well, they've been listening to the Earthling space ships and heard our language!" And that's probably true, but usually one speaks in their native tongue when surrounded by people of your own race. It makes as much sense as when Hans Gruber in Die Hard screams to shoot the glass in German, and then has to repeat himself in English for his (very German) lackey to understand him.

I guess for what it is, Halo is a pretty decent shooter. It does what every shooter should do, which is let me blast hot lead into the frontal lobes of my enemies. Why this game got so big is still confusing the hell out of me. Apparently it's the Multiplayer, but, eh, if Multiplayer is like Single, all I see is two armies running at each other guns ablazing... then cowering in corners for their shields to recharge.
 

Markness

Senior Member
Apr 23, 2008
565
0
21
I hate this thread. This is directly related to my hatred of hyperbole, insubstanciated remarks and mindless insults to hundreds of thousands of people. Anybody who declines to read the whole thread, ignores the many valid reasons or perhaps invalid, but ignores them anyway, and then says halo sucks and also this is why I hate tweeny halo fanboys perhaps should rethink their attitudes.

Is it seriously too much to ask to make realistic claims?

Gilded TOngue - firstly the master cannot deflect rockets, the rockets in the game kill not only your shield but also your health if they hit anywhere near you. Secondly, I think the point of recharging shields was so that you could be more careless and have fun and still be ok for the next battle. Thirdly, just a typo, fourth paragraph (of the review) it should be ghost not banshee. Fourth, I guess the language could be explained by translation software in the suit, he does by the way hove the most powerful ai possible at the time stuck up in there. Fifth - Im not sure but I thought that compass thing was pointing to objectives. I guess this has nothing to do with the topic of the thread but you can fix it up if you want your review to be more accurate.

Rajin Cajun - Didn't Soldier of Fortune 2 come out after halo 2?

Some British Dude - Perhaps Halo is innovative in regards to regeneration because the shield could reflect the minor damage not like the wolferine game where the health just slowly comes back over time. By the way did you read the link that Gormers1 posted, perhaps you could dispute that before saying Halo is in no way innovative.

I guess this a pointless argument, you can not really prove it isn't innovative at all, I mean you can't deny that Halo did something new.

\Btw does defending halo on a forum make me a fanboy, if it does, then I guess I embrace it.