Please remember that this is my opinion, and although it is directed at Granite, it is not meant to start a debate. Its also unfair to compare a PC game to a console game.
This article pretty much sums it up.
Halo has never claimed to have ground breaking graphics or innovative game play. Halo has 2 things: story and multiplayer.
To most non-Halo-ers out there, Halo is just another FPS whose story is based on saving Earth by killing aliens. Although the pervious statement is correct, I would feel more comfortable saying all FPSs are point & click games, where the only action available is ‘use’ ‘gun’ on ‘man’.
On average, (console) FPSs are made in the same manner. A developer has an idea for a FPS game. They have a meeting, throw some good ideas around to incorporate into the game, and then rip an article out of the Sunday paper and call it their story. The plot to most games seem to be good ideas thrown together in a semi-intelligible manner (Army of Two is really bad for this, you can tell the game was rushed). This leaves the game feeling like a child who has lost his parents at Disney Land.
Halo, on the other hand, has a real story. It has a timeline, a universe. Halo does take place in the future, but not in the year 20xx. Everything in the story is totally within reason (sort of). When you start getting into the story, you begin to connect with the characters; it becomes more than a game. You can actually become attached to the characters (more so with Halo 3 through the dramatic cut scenes). Even with games like Army of Two where Lmack and I relate extremely well with the characters personalities, the story and involvement just isn’t there. I’m not saying Halo is the only game that does this, just the only one I’ve found and loved.
The other legendary aspect of Halo is its multiplayer. When you hear the words ‘Halo’ and ‘multiplayer,’ the first thing most people think is ‘Xbox Live.’ Those people would be wrong. Halo: CE (2001), that’s Combat Evolved, or rather Halo 1 for you fan boy wannabes, was released before Microsofts’ Xbox Live service. This means most of Halo: CE multiplayer was done via LAN.
Endless hours were spent surrounded by 4 TVs, scrambling to retrieve your own flag. The dedication need for & satisfaction gained from these experiences made Halo 2’s online experience so explosive (And 3 comes after 2, but I’m sure you can do the math on that one).
You can try to tell me that you're not all that into multiplayer, and I will tell you you will hate gaming within 5 years or so. Playing online with thousands of other experience players will almost always provide a more challenging and rewarding experience than any AI can create. (Online) Multiplayer is where the future of gaming is heading, like it or lump it.
Games like Halo that have a well written single player will still exist, but will become even further & farther between than they currently are as their focus will be on online and/or multiplayer.
If you're sitting that muttering to yourself about how Halo multiplayer isn't any different than any other console FPS, I urge you to sit down and play the campaign, understand the story (1, 2 and 3) and then spend a few hours playing online matchmaking. If you aren't sold, I'll invite you to are weekly Halo night where a small group of people play custom games; an experience with more laughs and less competition. If you still don't like it, then I can respect your opinion because you will have tried it.
I have always bad-mouthed WoW, but then one day, I tried it. Now I can really say I think its stupid and I don't like it. I know Halo 3 isn't perfect, and I find this hilarious. Never have I seen a review by this man that didn't make me piss my pants laughing.
4 comments:
Wow. Harsh.
I think the story of the Half-Life universe is about a billion times better than Halo.
And I wouldn't say that Halo is entirely believable. But it is rooted in reality enough for people to go along with it. That does make a good story.
But the problem is, there is nothing innovative about it. Human supersoldier? Alien threat? It is a premise that has been played out time and time again. Granted, Halo does much better with it than most, but it is still a story we have seen plenty of times.
And how can you say you dislike WoW but multiplayer is the future, like it or lump it?
The fact of the matter is that viewing MMO as simply a different genre of games is naive. MMOs are becoming a different type of experience altogether. A combination of social interaction client (like Facebook) with a liveable world (like Second Life) and a thrilling character driven adventure (like Monster Hunter).
MMOs are the future of a different type of gaming. It will not unseat single player gaming. It will - however - offer an entirely new experience for people to enjoy.
Jordan,
A billion? Really? Given that the premise you mentioned (superhuman, alien menace) could just as easily be a vague description of halflife, I'm not sure what the point is that you're trying to make.
The storytelling in HL is better, but don't confuse that with a better actual story. Also, in order to have such a good and immersive story, you need to accept the premise that your charcter is a mute.
Agreed that HL has a good story, I don't think you can compare it with Halo. I don't mean one is better than the other, just the ways in which they tell their stories is very different.
Also, have you ever played the campaign for the Halo trilogy?
Side note, I only threw in the WoW comment to illustrate (somewhat) how not playing a game voids ones opinion. I know MMOs are a different genre of gaming, one which I'm not a huge fan of. I think WoW is epically retarded though.
Multiplayer in general is becoming the normal; I didn't just mean MMOs. Like Halo 3, probably half the people who have it bought it for the online play, not the story. I wouldn't be surprised if 25-30% of people have never played the Halo 3 campaign.
PS. If you know the Halo story, you would also know the premise behind MCs existence. Its also the year 2552; its actually kinda sad that their guns still shoot projectiles. There are space elevator & inter-stellar space travel between humanities colonies. Does none of this really sound plausible in the next 500 years? Please know the story before you try to debate it with me.
How does the Halo differ from your beloved Samus? Human super solider, alien threat? Its hard to have an innovative story when you dumb it down to that level.
PPS. Half-Life (2... haven't had the chance to play #1) is still very awesome. Just wanna clarify that I'm not bashing it in anyway. Do not want to argue about it. It is awesome.
Didn't even come back here to check on this.
I do know the Halo story. I am aware of the storyline that unfolds in the campaign, and I've listened to I Love Bees multiple times. I haven't visited the novels/graphic novels/etc. because I:
a) Don't care enough to waste money on that stuff regardless of franchise
b) Rarely consider it to be canon, since it only takes one game developer to sweep all the sidestory information into oblivion.
Also, how are we debating the story? You cannot debate a piece of fiction. We're talking about which stories we prefer...and frankly, the Halo story doesn't shine in my eyes.
And as for Samus,
Samus is not a supersoldier. Samus is a woman in a technologically advanced space suit given to her by an alien race who took her in after her parents were slaughtered by an evil race known to humanity as Space Pirates (presumably not what their race is actually called...they don't speak English though, so the equivalent is probably gutteral noises and screeches).
Also, Samus Aran is unique because she was the first female video game heroine. And she isn't your typical sexual tension bound woman from all other video games. She operates alone, lives in solitude, and forms no emotional attachments. She is more badass than some male video game leads.
Don't ever speak ill of Samus Aran. Metroid's story is awesome, and the world is fantastic (it is like playing Myst with a gun).
@Liam
I'm still convinced that the story in Half-Life is much better. The plight of humanity seems much more real to me, because instead of it happening in the far distant future where our technology kicks ass and we have energy shields and all that, it takes place in an era reasonably close to the present, where mankind has been forced into the role of inferior race and is living in squallor in the derelict buildings of their once glorious civilization.
Also, I've always liked the fact that Gordon Freeman doesn't talk. It makes it so that he doesn't say anything stupid that you can laugh at later (no Masters of Unlocking, Jill Sandwiches or Doing Barrel Rolls in this game). Plus, it increases the immersion for me (especially because my name rhymes with Gordon, I can be delusional and put myself in his shoes).
I've always preferred the gritty dystopian future to the flashy technological future. It just doesn't seem like humanity will constantly be on an upward rise technologically. At some point, I cannot help but wonder if we'll do something stupid, screw something up, and kill ourselves. Half-Life appeals to me story-wise because of all future alien invasions, it is the road less travelled. Seldom do you see alien overlords restricting reproduction of humans in some sort of bizarre eugenics project from space.
Post a Comment