REDPill357:

Almightyjoe:
"OGM HALO IS DA BESTEST FPS IN DA WURLD!!!11!!!!" (or variants of such)

There was one guy here who reviewed Halo and Half-Life 2, and rated Half-Life 2 as vastly inferior, and lauded praises upon Halo. I also know people in real life that can't possibly comprehend that 5 games in one package can be better than Halo 3. My main point is that people in real life think that Halo is the best thing ever, but not many on a sophisticated gaming forum think so.

That was me :)

Although I don't think it's the best FPS eva. I think Call of Duty 4 and Bioshock surpassed it with respect to each games' generation.

Unbiased review of HALO:

Good:
Decent weapons
Interesting health-concept
Sticky grenades
Melee combat
Fun multiplayer.

Bad:
Insipidly bland storyline
Not very good controls for certain vehicles (flying mostly)
No f***ing recoil- gun feels like a toy.
Souless charecter.
Multiplayer is not as good as Timesplitters 2.(Not really a bad but I thought Iwould just straighten that out once and for all time)

Halo is an 8/10 game- good, solid and reliable fun, not massively imaginative but quite frankly there are some times when it's best to have reliable fun instead of the post-modernism of, say, Killer7.

To summarise, the FPS comparison chart.

Better than HALO:

Timesplitters 2
Half-life
BLACK
Killer7
Team Fortress
Operation Flashpoint
COD4
Bioshock

Worse than HALO:

Killzone
Area 51
DOOM 3
CRYSIS
Farcry

Feel free to add to or modify my lists if you disagree. But don't be rude- else I shall return the favour.

Ravenstien:
However, when I first played it, I thought it was ok, but not fantastic, as it really brought nothing fantastically *new* to the table. The weapons were a cavalcade of mediocrity (to pinch Yahtzee's phrase), and the Library was just time-wasting as you ran around holding down the fire button and pointing it at anything that moved and collecting Shotgun ammo on the way.

No. Halo was almost as important to the FPS genre as Goldeneye. I cannot remember any other game before Halo that used regenerating health, grenades on the left trigger, and a permanent melee button. That's not to mention the vehicles, and how well they integrated with the levels. By today's standards, Halo is not a particularly good game, but it redefined the genre, and has influenced almost every FPS since. Even if they did muck up the health system in the sequels.

O'course, I have no idea what PC gaming has been like since Halo, but I honestly don't think it matters. Console FPS' and PC FPS' are worlds apart. You may as well ask how Halo influenced the racing genre.

Fondant:
Good:
Decent weapons

I have to disagree on this point. The weapons in Halo were woefully inaccurate. The assault rifle has the largest spread of almost any weapon in gaming history. On the other hand, the pistol can shoot a flea off of a dog's back on the other side of the ring.

And Break, you're wrong. PC FPSs and Console FPSs are now very similar.

REDPill357:

Fondant:
Good:
Decent weapons

I have to disagree on this point. The weapons in Halo were woefully inaccurate. The assault rifle has the largest spread of almost any weapon in gaming history. On the other hand, the pistol can shoot a flea off of a dog's back on the other side of the ring.

And Break, you're wrong. PC FPSs and Console FPSs are now very similar.

Now, yes, back then, no.

If Halo was a multi-platform title then we wouldn't be having this argument.

The Halo argument is usually carried out by two parties; those who have Halo and those who don't.

Lets look at CoD4 here shall we; Multi-Platform game. Similar to CoD2 with modern face lift, made use of create a class that is a nice feature for multiplayer, has some really epic single player moments, looks great, over all fun to play.

Lets look at Halo 2; NOT Multi-platform, similar to Halo 1 with a graphics face lift; made use of matchmaking that has been used in every Console FPS since (possible the best thing for console FPS' as far as multiplayer is concerned) which is a nice feature, has some great Single player moments and is over all fun to play.

These games are very similar, but why does CoD4 have less hate then the Halo franchise? Well I think its because halo is easilly picked on by "xbox haters" while CoD4 isn't as easilly picked on because by saying the Xbox version of CoD4 is crap your saying that the PS3 and PC versions are crap.

The Halo sucks argument came from the PS2 and Xbox flamewars of 2004. This War has died down but it still ocasionally surfaces, such as the post I'm talking replying too now.

I'm not saying I think halo is "TEH BESTESTZ GAMERZ EVA 111ONE!!! but the hate directed at Halo is just pointless fanboy attacks. So I find it a little bit hard to say that Halo is the sucks when by saying that I am putting my self in the position of being a Halo Hater Fanboy.I can't say that halo "Rock in the socks with the box that has the dots, dominoes" because that makes me as idiotic as those that say Halo sucks.

I'm not neutral in this Flame War, I think I take my side with halo because I must admit I did enjoy the game. The Position I take in this flame war is "I don't care". I've played Halo and I have my impressions of it. What some dickweed on the internet says about it or the console I own will never change my opinion of any game.

Now I know what that noise was! It was the stampeding of idiots making gross generalizations and giving oppinions that everybody disagrees with in one way or another in order to make a point that nobody except fan-boys and trolls care about over a game that is not relevant anymore in order to try and make the other party come over to "their way of thinking" under the guise of being a non-objective person and provoke ANOTHER god-damn flame war that no sane person will want to take part in but will feel the unresistable pull of stupidity and all that will happen is the thread will get locked, people will be banned, and nobody will be happy.

"Takes huge breath."

Sorry for the rant, but come on. Do we really need to talk about this AGAIN? It's like Cloverfield. Either you love it, hate it, or are somwhere in between. But at this point in time it's been done to death, and we need not talk about it anymore.

However, I will say this for The Library level. Hate it or hate it a lot, when you play it on co-op legendary, you find out who your true friends are.

"Hits self in head for being a filthy hypocrite."

Break:
No. Halo was almost as important to the FPS genre as Goldeneye. I cannot remember any other game before Halo that used regenerating health, grenades on the left trigger, and a permanent melee button.

Regenerating health is really hard to say if that was good or bad. In some cases I think it is nice, but in some cases it really feels like just a system to help dumb down the game for idiots.

One button grenades had been used before. (Off the top of my head, Team Fortress Classic used one button grenades and in my opinion used them better.)

Permanent melee button is one of the worst additions to Halo. Instead of focusing on the shooting, half of multiplayer pretty much comes down to a boxing match. Because of the ease of which you could use the melee attack, it took away from the shooting aspect and basically made much of the strategy of getting in as close as possible to finish off your enemy with a melee attack. This problem was made worse by the generally slow pace of Halo compared to many FPS prior to it.

I personally think that the best addition that Halo brought was the limitation of how many weapons you could carry. It certainly made things much more tactical from a single-player standpoint.

Break:
By today's standards, Halo is not a particularly good game, but it redefined the genre, and has influenced almost every FPS since. Even if they did muck up the health system in the sequels.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. As I've had to point out to people numerous times before, Halo wasn't a revolution, it was an evolution. I'm willing to bet that you probably didn't play FPS prior to Halo on the PC, but Halo really wasn't a revolution to the genre as, say, Half-Life was.

If you say that Halo helped to define the genre for consoles, then you would be right. It really nailed the controls down for a console and showed that while the controller wasn't quite as good as a mouse, you could still have a good time playing an FPS with a controller. However, it didn't do a whole lot for the genre as a whole.

Halo is widely discussed because of it's popularity through marketing campaigns, I fail to see the reason to discuss it because I think most reasonable folk can agree that it quite simply is mediocre, average and bland, it's just your run of the mill shooter like BLACK or FarCry, theres guns and theres people to point the guns at and shoot. Not more to the game than that.

The thing that ticks me off is when people praise it's graphics or design, because the design is terrible, those annoying small little bastards that essentially are the Dioablo 2 Imps of Halo, and noone likes killing those damn Imps.

If you have a Half-Life mod that allows three-way fights, please let me know. I'm dying to try that.

I have mods that allow 64-way fights...? Unless you mean something completely different.

Nope, completey different game mechanics.

Excuse me? You mean HALO's overabundance of epilepsy-inducing effects? In what way is any FPS working with different game mechanics than any other one?

HALO is the same as any of the POPCAP games, they may be enjoyable and addictive but ultimately they're just shallow rehashes.

If you disagree, and I'm sure some will, can you provide me with a part of HALO that would rival any other form of media in their awards? Music, Sound, Quotes, Anything?
I know that I can find something in Half-Life, Deus Ex, Psychonauts or System Shock 2.

In my opinion, Halo would be an excellent game if not for:
- high-pitched children in alien suits running around
- horrendous level design (and then you go back and play through a bunch of levels again, in reverse)
- contrasting tones of "this is serious business!" and "lol my gun's plastic"
....
Well that's pretty much it. Truly, I don't think it was a *bad* game, I think what bothers me most is the wasted opportunity. The story is decent, the music is above average (definitely not great, but it didn't hurt either), the weapons (apart from the alien ones looking ridiculous) were pretty good, and the flood was fun to fight for the first hour or so.

What I see with Halo is this: Halo 1 was rushed out the door to save the xbox, it needed a killer app desperately. Halo 2 was rushed out the door to get the drive sales and clear out xbox inventory prior to the release of the xbox 360. Halo 3 was rushed out the door because, once again, the 360 was a flood of mediocrity and ports in the beginning and needed a killer app.

I'm not really bothered by people loving halo so much, it just makes me chuckle when people who have no experience whatsoever prior to owning an xbox say Halo is an excellent FPS. It's like taking a modern-day Ford Escort back in time 500 years... see if anyone complains that it's not the best they've seen.

Halo certainly did give us two notable things - the one-button grenade and enjoyable vehicle segments. Besides this the entire series is uniformly unremarkable.

It does what it did good not great just good. Personally i didn't like Halo, i am an Story-Driven person and Halos story didn't cut it for me, but i can see why people like it.

I thought that this thread was supposed to be an investigation into WHY the Halo trilogy is so popular and so divisive amongst gamers, rather than being an opportunity for the two opposing camps to set up and hurl abuse.

I see it like this: Halo is possibly the best console FPS yet released (in terms of SP and MP combined, otherwise Bioshock b34ts Halo hands down in terms of SP experience). As such, it deserves its large following of Xbox gamers. While I admit my experience of consoles (post N64) is somewhat limited and there may be better console shooters out there - I have yet to play them.
I bought Halo:CE when it was released for the PC, got bored with the repetitive SP very quickly and proceeded to play the multiplayer mode, which was fun for a while, got bored with that and went back to Half Life Mods and Battlefield.

Halo's problem on the PC market is thus: while on the Xbox there is little, if nothing (apart from Bioshock - the first single player FPS to make me really pay attention for a long time), that can offer the complete FPS gaming experience as fluidly or as compellingly as Halo1/2/3, on the PC format there has been other games released which do everything that Halo can do, better. Half-Life 2 (no point dragging up games older than this for comparison) - though not the only game I could have mentioned - handles the 'alien invasion' plot in a more sophisticated fashion, with genuinely compelling NPC characters (you can't tell me the military hardcores of Halo are fully fleshed out characters, they are as one dimensional as....a one dimensional inter-planar space amoeba?). I'm not even going to bother listing all the multiplayer games that are better than Halo on the PC - they are too numerate.

The point of this over-long post is:
Halo does not suck - it is what it is: a fun game that spits in the eye of those who say a decent FPS experience can't be made for consoles. Most of the mechanics that Yahtzee listed as being annoying in his recent review of Turok actually worked in this one instance - such as the health system and the 'nades.
BUT
It is not the messiah of FPS gaming (beyond the Xbox and 360, at least). It delivers very little in terms of new mechanics - with the notable exception of dual wielding weapons (decent vehicles doesnt count as a new mechanic I'm afraid, its an old mechanic done well). On the PC it is distinctly average - but I get the feeling that Halo was never meant for the PC market and was only pushed there by greedy microsoft execs trying to pump the brand for money.

Either way, I'm greatly relieved to know that there will never be another Halo game release to provoke this debate into rearing its butt-ugly head again. The conclusion must be: Halo on the Xbox rules OK. Halo on the PC does not. Case F*cking Closed.

I think the best FPS of all time in my own honest opinion is Perfect Dark. It improved upon everything from Goldeneye, introduced Bots as a must have feature for all FPSs with multiplayer (except Halo ¬_¬), introduced secondary function weapons, had many mnay game modes in multiplayer and was polished to the point of blinding you in regard to its time. And it had a gun that could shoot through walls...go figure.

p.s. I think Timesplitters 3 is great for multiplayer too and had a decent, funny storyline

excessum ado:

Fondant:
Unbiased review of HALO:
[snip]

NONE of those games were better then halo aside from COD 4 and Bioshock. You were pretty far off with the others. Killer7 In particualr was just awful. I dont think you could have been more wrong there.

but my good man thats the wonder of opinions, i could shout that whatever i liked is better than halo and nobody could make me think differently if im stubborn enough (not aimed at anyone just a point im making)
Although i am a halo fan and do enjoy the matchmaking frequently i think everyone should just calm down, halo seems to bring out the worst in people.

excessum ado:

Fondant:
Unbiased review of HALO:

Better than HALO:

Timesplitters 2
Half-life
BLACK
Killer7
Team Fortress
Operation Flashpoint
COD4
Bioshock

NONE of those games were better then halo aside from COD 4 and Bioshock. You were pretty far off with the others. Killer7 In particualr was just awful. I dont think you could have been more wrong there.

Really? I think he could have been more right. Infact:

Better than HALO:

Timesplitters 2
Half-life
BLACK
Team Fortress
Operation Flashpoint
COD4
Bioshock
Soldier of Fortune
Gmod (It counts)
Day of Defeat

I truley had more fun playing the above games than I did Halo.

(For some reason I never got into CS or CS:S)

excessum ado:

Fondant:
Unbiased review of HALO:

Better than HALO:

Timesplitters 2
Half-life
BLACK
Killer7
Team Fortress
Operation Flashpoint
COD4
Bioshock

NONE of those games were better then halo aside from COD 4 and Bioshock. You were pretty far off with the others. Killer7 In particualr was just awful. I dont think you could have been more wrong there.

By what standard do you find Halo a superior game? What possible criteria can you come up with that Halo actually beats these games?

In fact, the above games are better than Halo (I can't vouch for Black, Killer7 or Timesplitters... but the rest, definitely). Halo only wins on the console format. Play it on the PC and you will discover how mediocre it is. As I said before: Halo works for Xbox gamers, on the PC it sucks. Case Closed.

Halo 1 used a health bar and health packs + shield system. halo 2 and 3 did the regenerating health + shield.

for halo, as far as I am concerned, I'm over it. halo 3 didn't keep my attention story wise or online like 1 and 2 did. after halo 3, the halo lans stopped happening and most players switched to CoD4. the only thing that was memorable about 3 was how hyped it was before release, and how fast it died afterwards...

The first Halo was really good. It was a semi fresh design and had a great single player.

The second Halo was ok, nothing too exciting and no developments in the story line.

The third Halo was a huge letdown. Nothing has changed from the previous games. Same story line.

The only thing good about this one is that the online gameplay is amazing.

But still, it the same game.

I wish I wouldn't have wasted the money...

I still hate Halo 2, and can no longer enjoy Halo CE (it has NOT aged well). Halo CE did not go over the top with story like the latter two, but it had awful, awful level design. Halo 2 had much better level design, but it felt bland and uninteresting in comparison to its contemporaries, and the multiplayer was very, very shitty (skilled players need not apply) even when you were playing with good people.

Halo 3, in my eyes, is the best in the series by far. Single-player was short, but the levels were much better-designed and so this is not such a big problem. It has greater replayability. Multiplayer is actually good; it is balanced and requires at least a small amount of skill (which is why so many Halo 2 vets bitch about it, I suppose). It doesn't matter if it was a let-down, it's still a better game by my standards.

mattery:
The first Halo was really good. It was a semi fresh design and had a great single player.

The second Halo was ok, nothing too exciting and no developments in the story line.

The third Halo was a huge letdown. Nothing has changed from the previous games. Same story line.

Makes me glad I stopped at Halo. Playing through the original Halo on XBox with my brother on legendary co-op was the highlight of that gaming console's life. It was tough, fun, and original.

Hating Halo is like hating EA. People do it for the sake of it. Yeah they have their bad points, but most people just like to jump on a trend.

I don't hate Halo 2 or 3, I've not played them so have no opinion. Unlike a lot of people though, I won't hate them simply because others do.

Halo 1 IMO was a decent to good FPS that had 2 things going for it.

A control scheme that wasn't terrible and amazing music that was actually memorable.

Most music in FPS are more along the lines of emotion enhancement, meaning they convey what emotion you are suppose to feel, but other than that there isn't much to it. I've played through HL2 3 times and the episodes 2x apiece, and I can't really play back any of the "songs" in my head. On the other hand who doesn't know the Halo song from Halo 3, or the Gregorian chat from 1.

My biggest problem with halo is Live, I hate the people on there so much.

If Bungie hadn't been under the wing of the microsoft marketing team, I don't think Halo would have as big of a deal. Sure, it still would have made a decent splash in the gaming community, but i think without the over hyping and rediculous marketing of the series (im talkin to you "Gamer Fuel") there would have been less of the love/hate controversy. Or mabe I'm just making a bigger deal about this than need be like the rest of the planet...

Well...Halo 3 is exclusive to only one console. That would explain a lot of the hate directed towards Halo. Also, the criticisms of Halo 3 are often really stupid, lack of innovation being one of them. Of all the console games released last year, I thought Halo 3 was the only one to expand what console FPSs could do (Theater). Just because Halo isn't the most innovative game out there doesn't mean its bad, but it seems that people only focus on that characteristic to determine whether Halo is mediocre or excellent. Not only that, it is the ONLY game that gets that kind of treatment. What about the other games?

"CoD4 is innovative because you can shoot through walls." -Billy
*sigh*

EittilDratsab:
Well...Halo 3 is exclusive to only one console. That would explain a lot of the hate directed towards Halo. Also, the criticisms of Halo 3 are often really stupid, lack of innovation being one of them. Of all the console games released last year, I thought Halo 3 was the only one to expand what console FPSs could do (Theater). Just because Halo isn't the most innovative game out there doesn't mean its bad, but it seems that people only focus on that characteristic to determine whether Halo is mediocre or excellent. Not only that, it is the ONLY game that gets that kind of treatment. What about the other games?

"CoD4 is innovative because you can shoot through walls." -Billy
*sigh*

Tell me then, how can the FPS style of game be anymore "innovative".

And no, most of the hate isn't there just because it's an exclusive but because it just dosn't deserve all the praise it gets.

Halo 3 got all these 10/10 and 5/5 ratings and the only reason it got thoughs scores was because of all the hype it was getting. reviewers felt obligated to give it top marks.

Its like yahtzee said "it's average".

That's it.

No more, no less.

Joeshie:
I'm going to explain to you exactly the reason for the polarizing opinions of Halo in one simple sentence.

The crowd who loves Halo never had much experience with good FPS before Halo (save for Goldeneye), while the crowd that loaths Halo had plenty of experience of FPS. For those of you who had started playing FPS before Halo, you probably saw a just above average FPS title, but were quickly driven into the "I hate Halo" camp as soon as you heard the Halo fans exclaim "OMG BEST GAEM EVR" or "GRETEST FPS IN DA WURLD!!!11". For those who just started playing FPS with Halo, then most of you mistook a pretty good FPS for a fantastic one due to your inexperience with the genre.

It's really the same exact thing that happened with Final Fantasy VII.

I would disagree, I had played stacks of FPS on both consoles and PC prior to picking up Halo. In fact prior to it Half-Life was in my oppinion the pinacle of excellence in terms of FPS (although I did have a secret man-crush on Perfect Dark). I'll make no apologies for it, I loved Halo. I don't think it is the best game ever, but it does do a lot of things consistently well (something Halo 2 does not) and that's what I really like about it. Halo 3 made a welcome return to most of the great things that Halo embodied and brought along a few nifty improvements but at the end collapses under the weight of its own story.
I tend to agree with most people in that in terms of overall quality you would rank Halo first, Halo 3 second and Halo 2 third. Halo 2 definately has that middle child syndrome feel about it, but it is by no means an average game.

In regard to FFVII, again I'd played plenty of RPGs (not JRPGs mind) prior to picking it up and I disliked it. I don't think that makes it a "bad" game, it's just not for me; I can't get into it.

My opinion on why the Halo series polarises gamers - the crowd it attracts. I've met some great people while playing it online, but there are an AWEFUL lot of, as Yahtzee would put it, "hooting dickholes".

I just have to ask. If you throw out all of the multi-player stuff, would it be popular at all? I mean, I know it'd sell, but without Xbox Live, would it be as lauded as the "OMG Best Game Ever"?

I really do doubt it. Maybe I'm antediluvian (it wouldn't be the first time (nerdy references galore)), but if the only thing that really justifies a game is "once you're done, you can play online" I'm kinda turned off. I would have liked to see them poor all of that multi-player energy into a better story, realistic massive battles (I don't care how good Master Chief is, there should be at least some ground battles which don't just consist of him killing everything).