Ways that Halo Was Great

[desura]

For the time...

Halo was the first major FPS that--

1. Wasn't dark and grimy
2. had you fighting side by side other soldiers
3. had good coop.
4. Coop vehicular combat made for interesting cooperation

What else?

 

[futurefields]

I felt like the overall weightyness of everything was new. All objects had simulated physics and reacted accordingly and to me that was something really exciting to play with. Just toss a grenade and watch stuff fly, to me it was the first game that had that level of simulation, although im sure somebody will come along and say Half Life did it first or something, but I just dont agree.

 

[zerocool84]

Was the first console FPS that didn't truly suck. That's the only reason why it took off. Even before it many had ported great PC shooters with no luck, they got it right with Halo.

 

[futurefields]

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were pretty good.

 

[purbeast0]

was the first game i think that had a regenerating shield with health under it. it kind of set the way for all the fps now a days where you simply have regenerating health.

it was also one of the first games where you only could have a couple weapons.

first console fps that was played a lot online.

the overall control in halo was just very smooth too.

it set a new standard in a way for some basic features.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were pretty good.

Neither of them had aiming worth a damn. That's the reason I hated them. I had been playing games on PC that allowed free look for a while and Goldeneye was thought of to be some special game and I saw it as pretty terrible.

 

[007ELmO]

the same could be same for halo then, when it came out i thought it was nothing special - console games were always behind the times for FPS.

 

[Tweak155]

Neither of them had aiming worth a damn. That's the reason I hated them. I had been playing games on PC that allowed free look for a while and Goldeneye was thought of to be some special game and I saw it as pretty terrible.

You mean you couldn't aim worth a damn. It's ok

Halo 2 was the best FPS of its time I thought. I played the crap out of that.

 

[cmdrdredd]

the same could be same for halo then, when it came out i thought it was nothing special - console games were always behind the times for FPS.

Halo made fps on a console feel right. They did a good job with it I thought.

 

[purbeast0]

Neither of them had aiming worth a damn. That's the reason I hated them. I had been playing games on PC that allowed free look for a while and Goldeneye was thought of to be some special game and I saw it as pretty terrible.

the control in goldeneye and pd was great for having only 1 analog stick. i could aim extremely precise in it. you sound like the normal pc guy who has problems with games like uncharted or console fps and then automatically says they are bad games because you can't control it. (and yes i know you aren't one of those guys, i'm just saying that is what it sounds like in that statement).

 

[Sulaco]

I hate how childishly polarizing games like Halo are with some people, so I seldom discuss it or the series, but at least it's decent so far in this thread.

And the snobby PC elitism, let's get that out of the way ("Hurr Durr PC FPS were 70,000x better and Halo was for n00bs omg lol). I'd been playing FPS since the shareware Wolfenstein 3D back on the family 386. I still loved Halo.
And the inevitable exdeath "I hate the culture it spawned" nonsense is irrelevant and entirely unfair for judging the game on its own merits, not its legacy, so that needs to be dispelled.

It's more than just a sum of its parts. Yes, even if those parts individually had been done before.

Halo was a great game because of all the little things it did right.

+ An excellent orchestral score
+ Wide open areas and varied environments,
+A compelling story with likable characters (in an FPS!)
+The best console FPS controls to date
+Very good AI
+Stellar graphics and visuals with a consistent framerate
+Satisfying weapons
+Previously unheard of vehicle driving/flying possibilities in a story-driven FPS
+Excellent, unscripted AI companions that actually made you feel a part of a larger war
+One of the best co-op experiences to that point, of any genre, period
+Fun Deathmatch and competitive multiplayer

..to name a few. The co-op especially was fantastic. Playing split-screen with a buddy next to you, driving the Warthog like a madman while he tries to aim the cannon on the back, shouting quick strategies and warnings to each other in the heat of combat with your AI soldiers fighting alongside was just damn fun.

Of course the control was woefully inferior to PC and KB+m, and still is, and likely always will be. That goes without saying. But as a game as a whole those experiences it offered were top-notch.

 

[cmdrdredd]

the control in goldeneye and pd was great for having only 1 analog stick. i could aim extremely precise in it. you sound like the normal pc guy who has problems with games like uncharted or console fps and then automatically says they are bad games because you can't control it. (and yes i know you aren't one of those guys, i'm just saying that is what it sounds like in that statement).

Well, when I was walking around and aiming freely in my shooters for years then someone wants me to play a game where I don't have the same 360deg of movement, it's of course not going to feel as fluid. The transition to dual analog really helped make the games playable for me.

 

[Veliko]

Was the first console FPS that didn't truly suck. That's the only reason why it took off.

Goldeneye was the first console FPS that didn't truly suck.

Halo took off because it was an exceptional game.

 

[Skel]

Halo was the first FPS that didn't feel hobbled into the console. Goldeneye and the others that came before always felt incomplete and forced into the systems. It also helped a lot that the Xbox controller seemed designed for FPS.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Halo was a mediocre shooter that shot its load early on before descending into a slog of repetition. Its position as the X-Box's flag-bearer was the main reason for its success, mostly due to multiplayer.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Halo was a mediocre shooter that shot its load early on before descending into a slog of repetition. Its position as the X-Box's flag-bearer was the main reason for its success, mostly due to multiplayer.

Nope...Halo remains great to this day. AI that wasn't absolute retards, good controls on a console, a story in an FPS that made some sense. It really was the total package for an FPS.

 

[Rakehellion]

Halo sucked pretty hard.

-Every environment looked the same.
-Only two weapons.

 

[Sulaco]

Halo sucked pretty hard.

-Every environment looked the same.
-Only two weapons.

No, they didn't. Especially for 2001. It was one of the most environmentally diverse FPS up to that point, period.

As for the guns, you could only carry two at a time. Boo hoo you couldn't carry 14 different types of miniguns all at once. It means you actually had to use a modicum for strategy and planning.
But there were dozens of alien/human options available, you just had to be smart about it.

 

[darkswordsman17]

For me personally, Halo did 4 things that really made it great to me:
1. Legendary co-op.
2. Music
3. Loved multiplayer (one huge reason was the indestructible Warthogs in Blood Gulch)
4. The universe. For me, it was a great homage to cheesy sci fi like Aliens.

No it wasn't perfect, and it definitely had flaws (the repetitive stages, which I didn't mind as much as I liked some of them).

2 had probably even better music but botched the legendary co-op (Heroic didn't seem quite the same), and I really missed the indestructible Warthogs. It had some great moments/levels, but it also had some meh ones, and the story just went off the rails in a bad way (hated Gravemind...). It was way overhyped (I still remember reading that EGM article, and I'm still waiting for that game) though. It split the multiplayer for me and I kinda lost interest in that aspect (even though I have no problem with the argument that it was actually better). Halo 3 was just meh to me. There were some decent parts, and I liked the return to the original style of Legendary co-op, but it had already lost my real interest (I did like Forge mode in Reach though so I'll give it some props for that). I enjoyed Reach, but felt like they really didn't do anything all that special (really could have done something interesting with the different Spartan "classes" and didn't). I haven't gotten to play 4 yet so I don't have too much input on it. I didn't bother with ODST or Halo Wars either.

 

[ProchargeMe]

Halo was one of the only games I could get excited to play. Great story with coop, and multiplayer with friends was a blast, even more so in private matches. Halo introduced a ranking system to online multiplayer for consoles, and also introduced the level creator, granted Far Cry Instincts: Predator really had the best level creator before halo did it, but the community wasn't nearly as large. Halo is what made me buy an xbox in the first place and I feel like it's been an outstanding series up until halo reach. There's too many powerups and accessories in the halo series now for it to feel "traditional" in my opinion. I loved halo 2 for the simplicity, 2 guns, 2-4 grenades and thats all you got, but ever since halo reach people have jetpacks, bubble shields, and overpowered map pickups.

 

[Doppel]

The original Halo captured attention I think primarily because of the warthog and open environments. Instead of being cooped up, these huge environments plus really effective and seamless transition to that vehicle had just never been done before. And it was awesome.

IMO Halo in its current manifestation is, at the least, overhyped, and at the worst massively overrated. It hasn't changed in years. I played the most recent one and it was utterly bland and forgettable. I didn't play multiplayer, but the single player missions were utterly bereft of depth or story. That was okay a decade ago, but nowadays I expect more. It's just very flat now.

 

[Tweak155]

Well, when I was walking around and aiming freely in my shooters for years then someone wants me to play a game where I don't have the same 360deg of movement, it's of course not going to feel as fluid. The transition to dual analog really helped make the games playable for me.

Not sure what you mean. There was free look in Goldeneye.

 

[desura]

hey btw, so what's the best way to get acquainted to the...backstory of Halo 3? I have actually beaten Halo 1 and Halo 2, but I forgot everything about them.

 

[smackababy]

Not sure what you mean. There was free look in Goldeneye.

The free look in Goldeneye required either another button (which ceased your movement), the C buttons (which was cumbersome at best), or the use of a second controller (which took away player).

Goldeneye was a decent game, but in '97, there were much better FPS out on the PC. Quake had been out for over a year and Doom 2 for quite a while before that. Granted, those aren't the best in the series, but they are still better FPS than Goldeneye.


What made Halo so great, IMO, was they did everything right. The controls, the engine, the "arena" style, the universe, the story. Everything just fit right.

 

[drbrock]

Halo 1 was the best shooter of all time. It was just fun. Great controls and a lot of replay ability. Easy enough to where you can get good quickly but to become a true expert took hours upon hours of practice.

Halo 4 came close, the rest of the franchise is garbage comparably though. Hated 2 and 3. I wish it was still as popular as COD. I have enjoyed COD(Black Ops is my fav) but I never got the true fun factor like I did with halo.

I was playing Ghosts this weekend with my nephew and while it was fun, it did not give me an experience like Halo 4 or Halo 1. I think COD is becoming too complex with options and guns.

What do I know though... I think Minecraft is horrible and that is one of the biggest franchise of recent times.