Poll: Why do people like Halo so much?

[Glongpre]

Halo was both critically acclaimed and popular among consumers. However, I see nothing special about the series. Even Halo:Reach, which was in my eyes easily the strongest of the series, seemed a bit weak for the 10/10 reviews it was getting. I would like to hear from both people who do like Halo and those who don't in this thread.

Halo Reach the best?! Hahahahahahhaahahhahahhahahahahahhhhahahahahahah.....no thx

Halo 2 and 3 were the tops, the gameplay was just fun to play, there was a nice learning curve. Halo reach and 4 are too...call of duty-y if you know what I mean.
2 and 3 had great pacing and maps that were very memorable.

Captcha: sour grapes...indeed

 

[sabercrusader]

I like Halo because, well, I find it fun. I think the gameplay is pretty damn great, and the story, while it has it's lows, is also pretty decent to actually being really good. And custom games, seriously, get about 5 friends or more, or hell, even just randoms online, and go into a custom games lobby, and take turns playing some user-made maps and gametypes for the hell of it, seriously, it's probably one of the funnest things I've ever done in my entire gaming career.

 

[neppakyo]

*snicker* People saying halo has a really good story. They think they're people. *pats them on the head*

 

[Zeh Don]

...I see nothing special about the series... I would like to hear from both people who do like Halo and those who don't in this thread.

What's the point of this thread?
Is there going to be some magical combination of words that suddenly alters your enjoyment of the game, retroactively making them more enjoyable?

Most Halo love affairs began with the original Halo. For it's day, it was THE first person shooter. No other first person shooter was offering those visuals, the sandbox nature of it's combat, or it's production values in terms of story, audio and music. And my god, the music. Like Goldeneye 007 before it, Halo proved that console first person shooters could compete with the biggest and the best. And it's multiplayer was truly unique.

From there, it's just people enjoying more of what they liked. Halo 2 was better in every imaginable way - and still ranks as the tied-best entry in the series. 3, ODST and Reach never managed to hit Halo 2's highs. 3 in particular is probably the tied-weakest entry along side the original Halo.

Halo 4 is the most emotional of the three games, has the best writing, best visuals and sharpest gun play. It's multiplayer, though, is love or hate. It's a little too "Call of Duty" with the ordnance drops, entirely removing the "weapon high ground" style of the previous four entries and devolving it into a run-and-gun frag fest.

At the end of the day though, like everything else you'll encounter in this life, it's not for everyone.

 

[Smeggs]

Halo I can take or leave.

It's slightly above average.

It does not deserve all of the handjobs it gets from reviewers.

 

[BrotherRool]

I don't know how to vote. I'd never voluntarily play a Halo game, but I really appreciate the way the story goes (particularly in 2,3 and Reach), I like the mythology, more importantly they made some hugely influence design decisions that really helped console shooters take off (quick weapon selection, more based on choice pros and cons, shields for getting back into the action quickly etc). It completely deserves it's place in history for being one of the really viable console shooters. Even greats like Timesplitters feel a lot looser in gameplay compared to Halo.

It was all a bit too floaty and bright and round for me to really enjoy it and I'm not much of a shooter guy, but it's a hugely important game series

 

[GlorySeeker]

I chose "meh" but I really wish there was an option for "I used to" on the poll. I was at one point a really big fan of the Halo games, even buying up the spin offs that fleshed out the universe a little (in my opinion ODST was the best Halo, just sayin). After Reach, which brought everything full circle, I was satisfied. I felt like the series had reached a peak and that I was ready to move on to something else. I ended up buying Halo 4 to see what the new story was about, but I could never bring myself to finish it because it felt like fan-fiction.

Glad Im not the only one that regards ODST as one of the best Halo games. I think that ODST had enough atmosphere to present the story with, that made the game better for me. IDK. I just really loved it.

 

[Fox12]

Halo was both critically acclaimed and popular among consumers. However, I see nothing special about the series. Even Halo:Reach, which was in my eyes easily the strongest of the series, seemed a bit weak for the 10/10 reviews it was getting. I would like to hear from both people who do like Halo and those who don't in this thread.

I'm not a huge FPS fan, so I may be missing something. I've always despised the Halo series with a passion. The story is generic, the combat always seemed boring at best and irritating at worst, the levels felt uninspired, and the characters lacked... any character. I largely ignored it, except when I played it with friends, and even then I felt like bashing my head in with a rock. A game has to have a really good story, and I always felt like Halo had a laundry list of problems with it's story.

Then I played Half Life 2 and Call of Duty, and suddenly I felt like I was being too harsh on Halo. After playing the generic grey paste that was Half Life 2 and COD, I could rejoice in the colorful world of Halo. I'm still not a fan, but after playing something significantly worse I could atleast appreciate Halo for what set it appart.

 

[Terramax]

It's ok. Why do people like it so much? Presumably for the same reason so many like those really lame Star Wars movies. I've never had someone give an adequate reason why they like either franchises.

 

[Thoughtful_Salt]

I think that the people who like it are just gamers who didn't experience the PC shooters of the late 90s and early 2000s and don't know any better.

Fun fact: I've played Half-Life, all of the Doom games, classic Wolfenstein, Serious Sam, Duke Nukem, Quake, Deus Ex, Thief, System Shock 2, Halo, etc.

And out of that list, you know how many of those games I've actually completed? Halo. ... and Star Wars: Dark Forces II, but that's because you get to be a Jedi.

It's almost like there are actually people out there who *gasp, shock, horror* might not actually care about whether your character zooms around at eighty miles an hour, flipping between an entire armory strapped to the void on their back or not!

So you're the an exception to the rule. Feeling special? Most people who played classic shooters like Half-Life expect more from their shooters, I guess you're not.

Expecting much more like... What? I realise Half-Life came out long before Halo did, and was more of a classic, but just saying "expect more" is a really vague way to put it. I can see how you could say that Halo "had less" in comparison to things like System Shock 2 or Deus Ex, but those two are known as pretty much the best PC games ever, so saying that Halo isn't as good as them isn't much of an insult to it. I can't really think of anything Halo was lacking that Half Life had, though.

But seriously, expect more what?

More environment types, more weapons (different weapons for different purposes, not ones that make others useless), better working mechanics, more room for exploration, more original plot. Again not saying that it's the worst, I'm saying that it's mediocre and doesn't have anything special about it to distinguish it from others.

Its mechanics work just fine, the weapon variety is just fine (ie.every gun is fun to use and no they don't make others useless, it's just a matter of your tactical approach). "More room for exploration" strikes me as a bit entitled, ie. the game is clearly designed to be a particular way and you want it to be something else entirely. "More Original Plot".......not as easy as you'd think (how many original plots have you come across oh enlightened one), it's all about execution and Hale CE has an immersive plot driven by strong gameplay, gorgeous art design (graphics have aged though) and a minimalist edge.

It brought the smoothness of PC controls to console fps's, i'd say that makes it, if not great, at least important. I think we can all agree that Halo CE is the best of the series and it all went downhill from there (Halo Reach was boring and Halo 4 was utterly laughable). Different games attempt to do different things, Half Life was designed to be a different beast, ditto system shock 2, you can't judge every game by the same standards or else what's the point of even trying?

 

[fezgod]

1. Sprawling open levels (except for Halo 4) that are far more enjoyable than the narrow corridors that dominate other fps's
2. Split-screen co-op, which should be in every fps (in my opinion)
3. Enemies are actually pretty varied and require slightly different strategies to take down. (as opposed to the standard fps enemy types - guy with gun and guy with body armor)
4. Its multiplayer was way ahead of its time with vehicles and huge maps.

While the Halo franchise is becoming a bit stagnant and repetitive, the first two games are some of the best games I have ever played.

 

[ZZoMBiE13]

Jesus tap-dancing Christ. Are we still doing this? In 2013?

How do people not get this?

Because: opinions. End of story.

I like some things, I don't like other things. Your mileage may vary. How is it seriously this hard to figure out? If we all liked the same shit, it'd be a pretty boring planet now wouldn't it?

 

[Revolutionary]

Stop liking things I don't like.
OT: Halo has a richer universe than most FPS's, and it's meta narrative has always interested me more than the mechanics. Having said that I wasn't that fond of Halo 4.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

When it first came out as an XBox exclusive, it did a lot of things different. First, it already was boosted by the popularity of Bungie, who made tons of other great FPSs like Marathon, and by the marketing of the Xbox. Second, it was extremely original and a new breath in the world of sci-fi and games. Third, it was the first viable FPS with multiplayer on the console--just about every FPS back then was designed for the PC and the consoles were shunned for having nothing on par with PC exclusives, then Halo and its famous multiplayer came along and showed how great splitscreen looks on the next generation. (Yes, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark existed, but they control like a bunch of ass, and Halo again had better marketing).

Halo 2 had the BEST graphics of Xbox, and it took what made Halo: CE great and expanded on it. I think of all games, Halo 2 was the game that made the biggest impact to everyone about the series.

After Halo moved to the 360, there was some things to it that made it stay alive. One is the deepness of the lore and the dedication to the campaign -- obviously underrated and forgotten, since people call the campaigns short and never pay attention to the world Bungie created.

But honestly, it worked because of the splitscreen and multiplayer. It isn't often you have a game with very solid maps and very solid vehicles with very solid combat and very niche-y and solid weapons. It isn't often anymore that you have a sort-of fast paced FPS that doesn't use ironsights and everyone has the same abilities as everyone else. Because Halo places weapons on the map and you spawn with junk (or everything is rocket launchers, another fun thing about Halo), everyone had the same possibilities of going huge and you couldn't say 'fucking superjump perk pro noobs', it was based on skill.

Then Reach ruined what I stated above by making everyone function different. Armorlock or sprint or jetpacks or whatever. I hear Halo 4 now has the Call of Duty class system with perks, and man, that just isn't a Halo game. (Reach still is really fun though.)

...

I haven't bought a Halo game since 2, (I've only got Reach because it was a free download with my 360), but I've beaten all of the campaigns except ODST and Halo 4. It's got solid gameplay and its mostly stayed solid, and they never fixed what ain't broke until Reach.

And it works as a supplement for Timesplitters.

 

[sumanoskae]

Halo is monstrously overrated but it's by no means bad, in fact I'd say that it's pretty good for what it does.

My problem with Halo is that critics treat it like it's in the same league as truly profound gaming experiences like Persona, Dark Souls, Sith Lords, Planescape: Torment, Dragon Age: Origins or Mass Effect.

There are plenty of games worth of being called high art, what annoys me is that we have journalism environment that refuses to acknowledge the difference between competence and brilliance.

This wouldn't bother me as much if I thought that people who call Halo the "Best game ever made" really meant what they were saying, but I've never heard someone speak about what makes it such a transcendent experience to be called "The best game ever". Most people still just call it fun, and while it is fun, I wouldn't feel worse off for not having played it and I don't sense that it's that important to them either, they don't really pay attention to it when they're not playing it; I've never heard someone convincingly profess that they were deeply affected by a Halo game.

I have nothing against people enjoying Halo, I have nothing against people proclaiming it their favorite game, what I am annoyed by is people pretending that when I say that The Sith Lords changed the way I think about the nature of good and evil, I'm expressing the same thing as they are when they say that they really love the Energy Sword; it doesn't ascend their comment about Halo, it diminishes my comment about Sith Lords.

 

[Kajin]

Liked the first Halo. Loved the second Halo. Didn't really like the third Halo. Loved Halo: Reach.

Halo is just a different experience. It handles itself differently, it looks different, it feels different. It's just different. It's relatively simplistic and easy to get into. The enemies are at least somewhat interesting and varied and require different strategies to overcome. It's visually appealing with all manner of vibrant colors and designs that stick out way more than the generic browns and grays of most other modern shooters.

If I want to play a thinking mans puzzle shooter, I'll play Half Life. If I want a shooter that features a deep introspective on the nature of man and avarice, I'll Bioshock. If I want something bright and colorful and mildly interesting enough to hold my attention without really having to think too much, I'll go for some Halo. Point is, all these games are different, and each of them caters to different people. Sure, there might be some overlap (I love all three), but for the most part not everyone will like them.

I hate it when some jackass comes along and tells me a game I like is terrible. Fine, you don't like the game I'm playing. Big deal. Now piss off and let me play this game you don't like. I didn't even invite you into my house anyway.

 

[Terminate421]

Because it is a fun game it I have this mythical thing called:

A different opinion than you.

 

[Strelok]

Halo: Combat Devolved is the poster child for generic and bland, first one was ok, not as great as the console crowd made it out to be, couldn't touch Half Life at the time, but the crimes against the FPS genre far out weight anything good that it did. It's responsible for regenerating shields and health, two of the worst things to ever happen to the FPS.

It's funny though, when Halo tried to change all the Halo fanbois took a shit all over it, ODST was the first one I ever played with interesting characters, and a compelling story that I wanted to see through to the end, but no, Master Chief that cardboard cut-out of a "character" (I use that term loosely) has to be in every one, awful, Bungie just started making the same game over and over, except this time with jet backs!!!! In the prequel no less, not in Halo: Combat Devolved weird, but pretend you don't see it.

My favorite argument from the Halo fanboi is the incredible story, where I mention I have played most of them and ODST is the only one that appeared to even have a story. Their response? The story is in the books, oh so sorry, I thought the story was supposed to be in the game? Anyway here's hoping whatever remains of this walking corpse of a franchise dies with the XBone.

 

[sumanoskae]

Jesus tap-dancing Christ. Are we still doing this? In 2013?

How do people not get this?

Because: opinions. End of story.

I like some things, I don't like other things. Your mileage may vary. How is it seriously this hard to figure out? If we all liked the same shit, it'd be a pretty boring planet now wouldn't it?

If you're proposing that an opinion isn't worth elaborating on or explaining, then why are you trying to explain your own?

The OP isn't gasping in shock that people like things that are different than they do, they're surprised that nobody can EXPLAIN why they feel so strongly about something they claim to love.

And yes, in 2013 we are still talking about Halo. We are also still talking about The Count of Monte Cristo, Dante's Inferno, Paradise Lost, The Godfather, Citizen Cane, The 7th Seal, Star Wars, Torment, Bioshock, Knights of the Old Republic, Earthbound and Chrono Trigger. I don't think Halo is a classic in the making, but we're also still talking about The Room and Phantom Menace so I guess crap and mediocrity are noteworthy as well.

I want to know HOW other people think, not just WHAT they think. Lots of people have interesting things to say about familiar subjects.

 

[scorptatious]

For me, I really enjoyed the first three Halo games. They were atmospheric, had a decent plot, good characters, cool enemies, fun gameplay, and pretty awesome music.

This right here is one of my most favorite tracks in the series:


Blasting my way through ghosts and wraiths alongside my fellow marines and elites, then hopping onto a hornet and fighting TWO scarabs. One of the most awesome segments in the game.

Oh, and of course there's the multiplayer.

Halo 3 was probably the first online multiplayer game I've played and I was hooked for a very long time.