Poll: Alright guys, settle a bet for me. Half Life, Halo, or CoD?
- Thread starter Yak Johnson
- Start date
Specifically single-player? I'll go with Halo - I never really 'got' half life. All the revolutionary charm people claim it has basically seems to come down to 'it has physics puzzles'. I like the no cutscene approach to story-telling, sure, but the rest seems kinda generic. Also, I prefer regenerating health/shields to medpacks, and hate the point where you have to creep through each room agonisingly slowly because you have 1 HP left and have to clear huge rooms of enemies with it.
Recently played through the first Halo game courtesy of the anniversary edition, and loved every non-library second of it. Hard-pressed to say why, admittedly. I also find the series in general to have a greater replay factor than half life or CoD.
CoD's singleplayer has gone a long way downhill since the first modern warfare, and is now merely an add-on to the multiplayer. They should stop including it now the MW story's all wrapped up.
Since I'm here, let's go off-topic onto multiplayer!
Half life doesn't have any. That's not inherently a bad thing, as long as the story has the length and or low price to back that up, which it does here.
CoD does, and it's highly successful. What I can't work out is why, since no-one enjoys it whilst they're playing. The adrenaline levels are so high that very primal rage responses come out, and everyone finishes a session incredibly angry (the sample size for 'everyone' here consists of everyone I've seen play it. Even me, and I'm usually unaware of what anger even is)
Halo also does. I'm a huge fan of the series, so providing a remotely objective view of it will be nigh-impossible. It doesn't have the tension of the CoD (or any other 'realistic') shooter, so seems to induce slightly less aggression, whilst offering broadly similar gameplay (by which I mean pull the trigger until the other guy falls over).
Recently played through the first Halo game courtesy of the anniversary edition, and loved every non-library second of it. Hard-pressed to say why, admittedly. I also find the series in general to have a greater replay factor than half life or CoD.
CoD's singleplayer has gone a long way downhill since the first modern warfare, and is now merely an add-on to the multiplayer. They should stop including it now the MW story's all wrapped up.
Since I'm here, let's go off-topic onto multiplayer!
Half life doesn't have any. That's not inherently a bad thing, as long as the story has the length and or low price to back that up, which it does here.
CoD does, and it's highly successful. What I can't work out is why, since no-one enjoys it whilst they're playing. The adrenaline levels are so high that very primal rage responses come out, and everyone finishes a session incredibly angry (the sample size for 'everyone' here consists of everyone I've seen play it. Even me, and I'm usually unaware of what anger even is)
Halo also does. I'm a huge fan of the series, so providing a remotely objective view of it will be nigh-impossible. It doesn't have the tension of the CoD (or any other 'realistic') shooter, so seems to induce slightly less aggression, whilst offering broadly similar gameplay (by which I mean pull the trigger until the other guy falls over).
If we are talking about series, Halo takes it for me.
It's story is simply unmatched in gaming as far as I am concerned and it is one of the few modern game series I have seen that actually has solid mechanics.
However, it doesn't matter what I say because The Escapist is sort of a Valve Fansite Lite.
It's story is simply unmatched in gaming as far as I am concerned and it is one of the few modern game series I have seen that actually has solid mechanics.
However, it doesn't matter what I say because The Escapist is sort of a Valve Fansite Lite.
BUT WAIT! There's more!J03bot said:
No, we've still got BlOps two left, if that comes out. Considering all the...
'Woods id alive' references and all the 'lol, they go rogue and have an SAS agent sent after them, called 'John' second name not given but may be 'Price'.
...I think that's pretty likely.
Hopefully they'll then go 'fuck it' for a year before coming out with an epic storyline, blended with some ali-as-fuck multiplayer.
i tried playing Halo: Combat Evolved but i didn't get too far... it wasn't that interesting (it's called a classic cut it reinvented the FPS genre but going back to that alpha just wrecks my eyesight (cuz of the too low resolution)
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is fun. I tried the MP and SP and both are quite adrenaline-rush inducing. I don't like the system of lvl-ing up a specific weapon cuz it stops u from experimenting with diverse weapons
. The singleplayer is alright though.
I tried Half-Life 2 this summer and i liked it... some of the most amazing and "never-before-seen" moments in gaming are found there. It gives the sense of Open-world even though its very linear, and it looks like there are so many ways of advancing to where u need (Valve level design for u) and u always end up somehow on the right way . The open world feel immerses u very deep in the game and gives the feeling of this being an actual place and not a scripted scene.
The same compliments can be given to the first Half-Life (even in greater proportions, because the feeling of open world is even greater there)
I vote for Half-Life
(note: IT IS NOT MY FAVOURITE GAME EVER!)
(note: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time is my favourite game ever.)
p.s. I UNDERSTAND U VERY MUCH FORUM CREATOR SIR. I HAVE FRIENDS WITH THE SAME OPINION ABOUT HALF-LIFE, VALVE ETC AS YOUR FRIENDS. I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHY (since they didn't give a proper explanation and refuse to do it to this day (p.s. they haven't really tried to play it it either even though they claim to have played it))
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is fun. I tried the MP and SP and both are quite adrenaline-rush inducing. I don't like the system of lvl-ing up a specific weapon cuz it stops u from experimenting with diverse weapons
. The singleplayer is alright though.I tried Half-Life 2 this summer and i liked it... some of the most amazing and "never-before-seen" moments in gaming are found there. It gives the sense of Open-world even though its very linear, and it looks like there are so many ways of advancing to where u need (Valve level design for u) and u always end up somehow on the right way . The open world feel immerses u very deep in the game and gives the feeling of this being an actual place and not a scripted scene.
The same compliments can be given to the first Half-Life (even in greater proportions, because the feeling of open world is even greater there)
I vote for Half-Life
(note: IT IS NOT MY FAVOURITE GAME EVER!)
(note: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time is my favourite game ever.)
p.s. I UNDERSTAND U VERY MUCH FORUM CREATOR SIR. I HAVE FRIENDS WITH THE SAME OPINION ABOUT HALF-LIFE, VALVE ETC AS YOUR FRIENDS. I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHY (since they didn't give a proper explanation and refuse to do it to this day (p.s. they haven't really tried to play it it either even though they claim to have played it))
Having played all 3 extensively, I'd say I respect Half Life the most for what it has done for gaming, but honestly I'd rather play Halo. Half-Life feels dated to me and it doesn't help that I've played so many mods all on the source engine so I feel like half the time I'm on PC I'm playing Half-Life in some way. CoD seems like the exact opposite of Half Life; its quick stupid fun, but may very well be destroying gaming as we know it. Halo provides a good balance of contribution to the gaming world and actual fun gameplay, so it gets my vote.
You'll probably win
Although my vote's on Halo. Half-Life series are better as narratives, but IMO Halo is much better in terms of actual shooter gameplay.
Although my vote's on Halo. Half-Life series are better as narratives, but IMO Halo is much better in terms of actual shooter gameplay.
I prefer Half-Life, simply because I feel like you have a better sense of identity and location than the other games. With Halo I can barely tell who's an enemy and who's not, and in CoD I've always had trouble figuring out the area. It's hard to keep track of where you're at, and it's hard to tell what you can go and where you can't. It all just looks the same. Half-Life just has so many subtleties in the level design that keep you on track as a player, whereas Halo and CoD just don't appear to have that same thoughtfulness attention to detail. They feel like the levels were just made in one go, whereas Half-Life's levels and set-pieces feel very distinct and carefully laid out, both by optimizing things for the player and telling a story through the layout of the scene.
Freeman's quite well-defined from his actions. He's a Free Man; hence the name.MrJKapowey said:
Master Chief has a whole backstory of being awesome at everything - without the player having any say in it. Gordon survives by the wits of the player, and is risen to the rank of hero despite what he does. Master Chief is an author insert character; rather than Freeman who is swept along by what happens. You can play Half-Life as a pacifist, sniper, gun-bunny or tactician. HALO requires you to play in certain ways at certain times.
CoD doesn't even give you that choice - you're just the main PoV in an unfolding story.
Truth be told, whichever of your cousins bet for Halo does not understand the Escapist community very much. Whichever one bet for CoD does not understand the Escapist community at all.
I do find all three games enjoyable (although, in order of fun, it's HL, Halo and then CoD), but on pure merit it has to be Half Life.
I do find all three games enjoyable (although, in order of fun, it's HL, Halo and then CoD), but on pure merit it has to be Half Life.
I thought the moderators frowned on creating Vs threads?
Oh wells..this looks civil enough.
Half Life 2 wins because it mixes up the gameplay elements a bit more, forces the player into odd scenarios where the best approach isn't *always* obvious, and mostly because the level design completely blows the others' out of the water.
Oh wells..this looks civil enough.
*Call of Duty is dead last because it's basically Halo 1.5, but set in Tom Clancyville.
Staring down ironsights is nifty and all, but it's not revolutionary in any way.
Everything that CoD4.x does best was done in prior games first, and done better.
(Fuck, the Ballistic Weapons mod for UT2004 predates CoD4 by a considerable margin, and includes everything you could ever want from CoD4, minus the racist tweens. Unless you can't live without an weekly injection of rust-rock-sand+Bloom graphics, I'd suggest that mod over CoD4.x any day of the week)
*Halo
In a vacuum, I admit it's a very solid presentation. But as a franchise, it's the same exact game repeated over and over and over again, and its fanbase among the worst in recent memory (only barely ahead of FF7 fanboys).
Minor changes between each instance of the series does NOT dissuade or fool me; this was not an epic space-story.
Master Chief's is roughly the story of Achilles, but minus EVERYTHING that made Achilles a character. He is NOT a character. He is NOT bad-ass. He's a boring blank slate that grumbles one-liners on occasion between murdering space aliens.
*Half Life (2)
Half Life 1 has not aged well. At all. Since the topic mentions The Orange Box, I'll use Half Life 2.
As a game series, they're tightly designed. I would be lying if I didn't say that I love parts of the level design, the little shout-outs to other characters, the pure first-person perspective of the plot, and the physics elements of gameplay.
Really, the level design is aesthetically, and mechanically married, when nearly all of its competition keep the two in separate boxes, and move everything of importance along with cutscenes (*cough*CoD4*cough*).
That said...I don't much care for the characters. I don't hate them, they just aren't all that interesting to me and I really don't give a fuck about the plot.
But I do like the 1970s B-Movie elements (the Vortigants, the Headcrabs ["aka, body snatchers"], the 1970s scientia-industrial theme).
Staring down ironsights is nifty and all, but it's not revolutionary in any way.
Everything that CoD4.x does best was done in prior games first, and done better.
(Fuck, the Ballistic Weapons mod for UT2004 predates CoD4 by a considerable margin, and includes everything you could ever want from CoD4, minus the racist tweens. Unless you can't live without an weekly injection of rust-rock-sand+Bloom graphics, I'd suggest that mod over CoD4.x any day of the week)
*Halo
In a vacuum, I admit it's a very solid presentation. But as a franchise, it's the same exact game repeated over and over and over again, and its fanbase among the worst in recent memory (only barely ahead of FF7 fanboys).
Minor changes between each instance of the series does NOT dissuade or fool me; this was not an epic space-story.
Master Chief's is roughly the story of Achilles, but minus EVERYTHING that made Achilles a character. He is NOT a character. He is NOT bad-ass. He's a boring blank slate that grumbles one-liners on occasion between murdering space aliens.
*Half Life (2)
Half Life 1 has not aged well. At all. Since the topic mentions The Orange Box, I'll use Half Life 2.
As a game series, they're tightly designed. I would be lying if I didn't say that I love parts of the level design, the little shout-outs to other characters, the pure first-person perspective of the plot, and the physics elements of gameplay.
Really, the level design is aesthetically, and mechanically married, when nearly all of its competition keep the two in separate boxes, and move everything of importance along with cutscenes (*cough*CoD4*cough*).
That said...I don't much care for the characters. I don't hate them, they just aren't all that interesting to me and I really don't give a fuck about the plot.
But I do like the 1970s B-Movie elements (the Vortigants, the Headcrabs ["aka, body snatchers"], the 1970s scientia-industrial theme).
Half Life 2 wins because it mixes up the gameplay elements a bit more, forces the player into odd scenarios where the best approach isn't *always* obvious, and mostly because the level design completely blows the others' out of the water.
this is actually a perfect question (If ya left out call of duty xD)
I'm giving my vote to half-life. it is the pinnacle of FPS gaming: well written story, solid gunplay, great variety of weapons, excellent script, brilliant set pieces, the works.
HOWEVER! Halo is a VERY close 2nd place.It also has all the above (I'd say the lore of the halo universe makes up for it's generally weak stories) and it also has the added bonus oF MULTIPLAYER. However in the end, I'm giving the title to valve. Both series are the best FPS series in the world, and deserve all the recognition and royalty they have earned.
Call of duty, on the other hand? well.... xD
I'm giving my vote to half-life. it is the pinnacle of FPS gaming: well written story, solid gunplay, great variety of weapons, excellent script, brilliant set pieces, the works.
HOWEVER! Halo is a VERY close 2nd place.It also has all the above (I'd say the lore of the halo universe makes up for it's generally weak stories) and it also has the added bonus oF MULTIPLAYER. However in the end, I'm giving the title to valve. Both series are the best FPS series in the world, and deserve all the recognition and royalty they have earned.
Call of duty, on the other hand? well.... xD
I'm kinda surprised how much love Halo is getting in this thread (the poll says otherwise, but still), usually the Escapist hates Halo.
That said, I like Halo and CoD, but I've got to go with Half-Life. It's gunplay might be a little archaic compared to newer shooters (no melee, no ironsights, you can carry 50 guns, etc.) but the gameplay is more varied, the story is more interesting, the environments are more interactive, and the characters actually have depth. All 3 games have their merits, but Half-Life is one of those games that just makes you feel like you're there.
That said, I like Halo and CoD, but I've got to go with Half-Life. It's gunplay might be a little archaic compared to newer shooters (no melee, no ironsights, you can carry 50 guns, etc.) but the gameplay is more varied, the story is more interesting, the environments are more interactive, and the characters actually have depth. All 3 games have their merits, but Half-Life is one of those games that just makes you feel like you're there.
Um... Half-life's release timelineAngry Juju said:
1998 - Half-Life
1999 - Half-Life: Opposing Force
2001 - Half-Life: Blue Shift
2001 - Half-Life: Decay
2004 - Half-Life 2
2004 - Half-Life 2: Deathmatch (non-canonical)
2005 - Half-Life 2: Lost Coast (non-canonical)
2006 - Half-Life 2: Episode One
2006 - Half-Life 2: Survivor (non-canonical)
2007 - Half-Life 2: Episode Two
2007 -Portal
2011 - Portal 2
(Yes Portal is part of the HL universe)
You mentioned 11 things for Halo, but I could mention 12 things that were released in the HL universe.
Sure some are non-canonical, but that doesn't excuse it from not being counted.
I'm assuming you're referring to Half-Life 2, since you mentioned the Orange Box, but nonetheless, if you meant Half-Life as a series I still pick it. I would say Halo 1 was better than Half-Life 1, but Half-Life 2 kicks the crap out of every first person shooter that ever was or will be.
Also Halo 2, 3, and Reach were terrible. ODST was alright though, maybe that's just because I'm a sucker for Bladerunner and film noir, I don't know.
IMHO, CoD2 was the last really good one. Heresy, I know! Maybe it's just the hipster in me talking, but MW2 wasn't worth $5 to me, and CoD4, while decent, just wasn't the same as the WW2 ones. I don't know, I never got into CoD multiplayer, and all the campaigns are just terrible. Although I have not played MW3 yet, so I don't really know about that one.
Also Halo 2, 3, and Reach were terrible. ODST was alright though, maybe that's just because I'm a sucker for Bladerunner and film noir, I don't know.
IMHO, CoD2 was the last really good one. Heresy, I know! Maybe it's just the hipster in me talking, but MW2 wasn't worth $5 to me, and CoD4, while decent, just wasn't the same as the WW2 ones. I don't know, I never got into CoD multiplayer, and all the campaigns are just terrible. Although I have not played MW3 yet, so I don't really know about that one.