| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) | |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 446 Joined: 14 Jun 2008     | |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 537 Joined: 9 Apr 2008    |
Better to be a fanboy than an ignorant hater;P
I dont think we have been properly introduced. If you want you could respond to my post (that I sat up all night writing, showing how devoted I am to my love): http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.83153?page=2#1152372 Its okay to have different opinions, but as written earlier
It makes you come of as a little fanboyish. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 3317 Joined: 1 Nov 2007     |
Hey, don't get me wrong, I liked Halo alot. It just wasn't innotive, it didn't do anything new. Theres a difference. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1412 Joined: 19 Nov 2008   | I'm a Halo fan. I like all of the games but 2 is my favorite. |
Infamous Scribbler Posts: 537 Joined: 9 Apr 2008 |
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! |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3317 Joined: 1 Nov 2007 |
Regenerating Shields have been done before, the AI wasn't that revolutionary, and I didn't find two guns that innovative. Better? |
Infamous Scribbler Posts: 537 Joined: 9 Apr 2008 | Sure. Would have been awesome if you said which games had regenerating shields, but its okay. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1054 Joined: 14 Dec 2007     |
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? |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3317 Joined: 1 Nov 2007 |
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. |
Infamous Scribbler Posts: 537 Joined: 9 Apr 2008 | 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? |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1566 Joined: 8 Oct 2008     |
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. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3317 Joined: 1 Nov 2007 |
http://www.giantbomb.com/regenerating-health/92-83/
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. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3317 Joined: 1 Nov 2007 |
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. |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 594 Joined: 3 Nov 2008     | 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. |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 985 Joined: 20 Oct 2008    |
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. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3317 Joined: 1 Nov 2007 |
This. Thank you. |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 108 Joined: 24 Apr 2008   |
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. |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 535 Joined: 11 Aug 2008    | Halo wasn't really innovative, it did however take many popular ideas that had been done before, in separate titles, and meshed them all together. Quite successfully too, but Halo didn't really "create" anything, just combined a few popular themes. |
Infamous Scribbler Posts: 537 Joined: 9 Apr 2008 |
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. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2142 Joined: 23 Dec 2007   |
Going entirely off topic, you changed you avartar! |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3317 Joined: 1 Nov 2007 |
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 in a FPS is innovation is entirely a matter of opinion, unless you want to take the meaning literially. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1419 Joined: 12 Sep 2008    | God this thread reminds me why I hate you tweeny Halo Fanboys. Innovative my arse. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1054 Joined: 3 Dec 2007   | 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. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1686 Joined: 7 Feb 2008   | 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. |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 358 Joined: 28 Aug 2008   | Among the first popular FPS, multiplayer, and 3 introduced the power of BLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMM. |
Beat Writer  Posts: 169 Joined: 9 Nov 2007  | 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. |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 537 Joined: 23 Apr 2008   | 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. |
Muckraker  Posts: 330 Joined: 4 Sep 2008  | It didnt do anything really new, it just did it better. Its the most influential fps since wolfenstein 3d, and its the one most other fps try to copy, which is sorta innovative if your willing to stretch the definition. the only truely original thing its done is the shield/ health system, and the way it perfected the holy trinity, ie: gun/nade/beatdown/ |
Muckraker  Posts: 234 Joined: 9 Dec 2008   | Halo 1 showed how well a shooter could do on a console, along with bringing weapon balance to the table. Halo 2 had something to do with online gaming on consoles, along with being the only game really worth playing online. Halo 3 brought the most custimization in a console shooter that I have ever seen. |
Muckraker Posts: 317 Joined: 20 Dec 2008   |
I still don't necessarily agree with that, while i agree in some games you should have the health bars, I think that in Halo they use the fact that u don't have any health, and just regenerative shield to throw huge amounts of enemies, and get u involved in intense firefights, where cover and everything is useful, without punishing you too much, if you do get hit in the line of duty, often on legendary, you'll have to try multiple ways before you finally find a way of getting round and killing all of the enemies, and if you had health this would damage this very important game mechanic. |
BANNED  Posts: 6317 Joined: 29 Nov 2007    | Halo: CE, innovative? Possibly. Though the only thing I can really think of that it brought new to the table would have bee.....Looking at your own feet in an FPS. Halo2: Sure, the multi player was good. Halo3: Forge and theater. So, maybe Halo 1 wasn't very innovative, but Halo 3, for bringing programs originally only available to a computer, yeah, it's innovative. User was banned for: The hypocrisy is KILLING me.. (Permanent) |
King of the Yetis  Posts: 2539 Joined: 15 Jul 2008 | While I'm sure some of these things occured in earlier shooters Halo was the first game to throw them all in the mixing bowl. 1: Whacking aliens over the fucking head with the press of a button. Before Halo, melee weapons were generally considered a last resort when you ran out of ammo (in fact lots of games were bypassing melee weapons completely in favor of the 'shitty rechargeable pistol' which shows how little use these weapons were getting). Switching to a crowbar, wrench, dildo etc mid battle was just too much of a hassle. With Halo feeding Jonny Martian a knuckle sandwich is not only incredibly satisfying but easy to boot. 2: Whacking aliens with explosive devices. Same again with grenades. The single button grenade toss made grenades a valid tactical choice because you're not completely defenseless while you're using them. Grenading people out of cover or finishing them off with a nice sticky grenade is very very satisfying and, like the insta-melee, it's cropping up in a lot of games. Oh the sticky plasma grenade was a great idea too. 3: Vehicles with real presence. Vehicle sections and first person shooters have always gone hand in hand but up until Halo games transitioned from 'shoot alien' to 'run over alien' in a pretty crude manner. Being able to hop in and out of a vehicle at will was a revelation. There's no invisible anti-tank walls in Halo or areas where Mastrer Chief leaps from his death tank for no apparent reason. 4: The rechargo-shield. Regenerating health, although not perfect, is a step forward for shooters in my opinion. Life bar based shooters always reward defensive play and punish aggression because of the constant threat of being crippled by a lucky enemy. Regenerating health or shields, providing the timing is right, allows a player to move into advantageous positions, wait a moment, then attack. This encourages a more tactical approach that takes the terrain into account rather than simply testing the player's reflexes. |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 767 Joined: 4 Sep 2008    |
That's true, but the health bar was not necessarily a bad thing. It added another small layer of depth and tactical thinking; when your health was low, you wouldn't be able to easily rush a large group of enemies or a base; you would try and keep your shields from depleting, and take less risks, as once they were gone you would be dead very quickly, which simply isn't the case anymore. Health was also a risk when falling. The shields were there to protect the health, which was static, not to protect another weak recharging shield. Another thing I'd like to point out is the environment; it may have been great back then, but the real meat is in its direction. The developers created the game so that it had as few dead ends as humanly possible, and tried their damndest to make sure the player never got lost. Even in The Library, you had the glowing blue flying ball to keep you on the right track. In most other FPS games I played at the time, I got lost several times, and quite often in Timesplitters. Vehicles have been covered, so I'll leave that. The weapons; They may seem simple enough at first glance, but looks can be deceiving. In Halo: CE, every weapon had its place, with the exception of the Pistol, which brought the game so much WIN. The Assault Rifle was good for taking out health fast at medium-close range; the Pistol was great for headshots and medium-long range fighting; the Shotgun was a devastating close-range weapon, that could still do damage at medium range; The Sniper Rifle was effective and had a few nice bells, i.e.range & elevation-finders; the Rocket Launcher was a powerful anti-tank weapon, as most are, but it also had the bonus of having a good area effect. The Plasma Rifle was a rifle that ravaged shields; The Plasma Pistol was a basic infantry gun, that had a secondary option of charging to remove all shields from the target; The Needler could cause a massive explosion when enough poked a target, but was also guided, ignited fallen grenades, and prevented shields from recharging; The Fuel Rod Cannon was the enemy heavy weapon, but had a drop-failsafe that caused it to explode so the player wouldn't pick it up; The Energy Sword also had a less explosive failsafe, but was a devastating close-range weapon that caused players to focus on it before they died. The grenades were even honed as well; Frag Grenades had a large area effect, and "shoved" the players a bit; Plasma Grenades were fairly short-range, but stuck to players and vehicles, and had a delayed explosion; both these grenades could be ignited on the ground, causing huge chain reactions. And yet, somehow, they managed to balance all of these weapons so that every weapon had a niche, and no weapon would allow the player to dominate in every area. This is what is truly innovative about the weapons. Fall damage; while not necessarily original, it caused the player to be temporarily frozen after a fall, as an additional consequence. I don't necessarily mean to be a fanboy here, but I do like to be precise and thorough. There's still likely stuff I've missed, though.
I have to disagree here. The shields do recharge yes, but offensive behaviour is only punished if the player rushes into a group full of enemies, or charges a sniper across a map. I still play online, and you have to be aggressive, or you just get rolled over. Being defensive in small plays works wonders, i.e. laying a grenade at on a hill just as the enemy is about to walk over the top. Being constantly defensive just makes the game longer, and less fun. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1769 Joined: 27 Dec 2008 |
Its true that it never started out as an online game (It was originally going to be an RTS) it evolved into one of the most well known online games. And just like the games you stated. Halo is still drawing legions of fans and in time I bet that it will catch up with TF and CS, but remember those games have been around for YEARS, so it will take awhile before it gets the chance to be comparable to those classics. |
King of the Yetis Posts: 2539 Joined: 15 Jul 2008 |
I find having a life bar discourages people from moving from cover to cover because you'll undoubtedly lose health as you go. In single player moving through empty space to cover is problematic unless you know there's a health pack in the position you're moving to. |
| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) | |
Reply to Thread
|
|
Not registered? Sign up for a free account! |
How very postmodern of you.