Arkley said:
The first Halo was not generic. It was a trailblazer, a genre definer for its generation. Hell, if it hadn't been as popular as it was, it would probably be looked upon as one of the greatest accomplishments of the 128 bit consoles. But, no. It was loved by the mainstream, and spawned a franchise. So the same people who extoll the virtues of Goldeneye 64 also condemn Halo, even though, in the long run, Halo: CE did far more for console shooters and tried many more new things. By today's standards it can certainly be called generic, but only because so many of the unique aspects it pioneered have been copied so endlessly ever since.
The second Halo couldn't have been called generic at the time - it was still arguably the best of its kind when it was released - but it was the beginning of what would become the Halo strategy: minimal changes, no new innovation. However, it was a technically superior game to the first, it did attempt a couple of new things and, most importantly, it succeeded at online console play like nothing before it.
Halo 3 is where the accusations of genericism start to gain weight. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's a fine game - critics certainly seemed to like it - but it continued to lack new innovation. This was largely excused at the time because "omgnextgenhalo!". The trails blazed by Halo: CE were commonplace in shooters now. Halo 3 was, technically, proficient in all areas. It was almost certainly better than its immediate competition. But no one can argue that the series wasn't beginning to stagnate as early as its third entry.
Halo ODST is probably the most divisive of the lot, excluding Halo Wars. It attempted some new things, but the new things it attempted weren't any good. Everything else was the same as ever. The multiplayer offered nothing significantly new, the campaign was too short, it was dull, it should have been a $15 expansion for Halo 3.
And then there was Reach. A Halo game that added very little that was new, and the stuff that was new barely affected the unchanged gameplay at all. You might point out that Halo "has bright colours", but since when has graphical style excused stagnant gameplay? Of course, I suppose I can't criticise it too much, I mean, the thing sold like...well, like a Halo title. And yet, while nothing worth a damn has changed, it's still fun. A lot of fun, especially with friends.
Halo is a game series with five major titles released over almost a decade that has barely changed at all since the 2001 original. It is a game with a silent space marine protagonist who shoots aliens with big guns, and takes place in a universe where humanity is at war with an alien alliance. It is a game with regenerating shields, a two-weapon limit and run&gun gameplay.
Yes, it is generic. There is no argument here - it is the very best example of a generic shooter. If I wanted to show someone an example of a generic shooter, I would show them Halo.
That doesn't mean it isn't good.
I feel that everything you said must be repeated as you said it, but I do want to add a few of my own beliefs in as well. I want to leave your initial comment entirely intact so I will simply list my comments under the titles of the games: Halo: CE, Halo 2, Halo 3, ODST, and Reach; corresponding with your paragraph format.
Halo: CE - The only reason it feels generic nowadays is because it was genre defining. I loved games like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, but Halo: CE really changed the playing field. Considering it was initially supposed to be for Mac, the adjustments Bungie made to transform it into the console version were incredible and the final product revolutionary. They worked to make a FPS that originally was intended to use a mouse and made it work, quite well, with a controller. In fact, I would say that this was one of it's largest contributions to the FPS world, the controller scheme. It's too good! Everything else feels like it, and conversely, it feels like every other FPS. It is generic, but only because the rest of the genre uses so much of the foundation it laid.
Halo 2 - This game was nothing too groundbreaking as far as the actual gameplay, primarily because it focused on polishing the rough edges that were in Halo: CE. It added the concept of dual-wielding (in my mind perfected by Perfect Dark) and it revolutionized online multiplayer! Does the campaign and overall feel of the game make it generic, yes. However, the entire reason that FPS are as popular online as they are today is because of Halo 2. In this way I think it deserves more credit, sure it didn't change a whole lot of the campaign experience, sure the story was a little predictable, but it did create a solid game that gave millions of people the experience of playing online as they never had before.
Halo 3 - Because I was a Gamecube man during the Xbox era I missed out on owning the first 2 Halo's. It was also because of Halo 3 that I decided to buy a 360 as my first new generation console. (I now own all three so don't give me crap about being a fanboy). Halo 3 in my opinion was the most lackluster of the original trilogy. The story was fairly bland and the overall feel of the gameplay did not change much from the first two. That said, Halo 3 has presented me with some of the most fun gaming moments in my life. Whether it was playing doubles online or beating the final level with four other people to get the achievement I needed to get RECON armor. We were up til 3 in the morning yelling at each other in our headsets making sure we all made it and stayed alive. Did it change the gaming community like the first two? No. In that way it is very generic; but it polished the gems that were the first two and will be around for many years to come because of it's smooth controls and excellent online play. I'll give it one thing, it added the Equipment option which changed the feel of the gameplay somewhat, but not enough to pull it out of the generic realm it falls in.
ODST - Yeah...I want to pretend this didn't happen. Story: awful, Gameplay: Unchanged (Bungie called it Halo 3: ODST for a reason, it's a 5 hour expansion pack with additional maps), Overall feel: I borrowed my friend's copy, beat it and returned it the same day.
Reach - I'm going to try to explain my feelings about Reach in different terms. I really love the move
The Boondock Saints, it is awesome! For those of you that don't know it, it was a huge cult classic and a really original movie that choose not to follow the standard path of action movies of the time. Recently, after many years Boondock Saints 2: All Saints Day came out. I watched it, excited to finally see more about the characters that were so well developed in the first movie. Instead I got a rather mediocre movie that felt like nothing had changed since the first. There were many call backs to the original characters, similar flashbacks and even a song including a guy that had died in the first movie. All of this just made me miss the original movie and remember why I loved it so much. Then I realized,
that was the point! The point of the second was a fanfare for the original. Sure it shed a little light on some of the character's history, but it was nothing new, nothing ground breaking. It was a giant shiny polished mirror that reflected all that was good about the first movie with some minor tweaks and back story.
This is the same way I feel about Reach. It is one giant reflection of all that fans loved about the Halo series as a whole. It was an encore, a salute, a celebration, complete with callbacks to old characters, including the fanboy favorite: a tiny clip of Master Chief (I'm not calling spoiler alert for that, if you're on this thread you better know it already, if not I don't apologize). The combat has changed with the inclusion of armor abilities, too similar to the perks in the COD series to be considered anything new, but it did change the strategy of online play. The pistol is back from Halo: CE. The multiplayer has improved it's matchmaking while keeping the same feel that Halo 2 had. The graphics look better than Halo 3. The overall experience is one giant polished gem on top of the Halo (yeah I couldn't resist). Is it generic? Yes. But when you come from the roots of something that defined a genre as a whole, I can understand why they didn't change the formula around too much.
