SnakeCL said:
Now see, that's where I disagree. There's this propensity for people to generalize Halo into "military shooter" without actually taking into account much of the nuanced story that goes with it. Heck, for most of the games, humanity is on the losing side of this conflict, getting beaten back planet by planet, entire population centers being lost.
"The humans are good, except the ones who are bad (and tried for warcrimes) and the aliens are bad, except the ones living on earth that are good, and the big one who is trying to kill humans which is bad, except for his wife which is trying to save humans which is good..." I think there's more ambiguity in Halo than you're willing to give credit for.
I almost wonder if you've ever actually played a Halo game (or at least a game since CE), because it sounds thoroughly like you're talking from your arse. Heck, there's a LOT of lore within the games themselves, but it seems people don't want to acknowledge it in favor of an easy reason to dump on the franchise.
And I'm not exactly biased. I hated Halo with a passion, until I played Reach, and realized how much deeper the universe and games were than I originally believed.
They're both fun FPS games, but this idea that Half-Life is some intellectual golden child of gaming, and Halo is "just some scifi military shooter" is just plain wrong. They're both fun games, and great experiences to play,
I played Combat Evolved and Reach... unless there was a bunch of stuff hidden away in collectibles, it was basically moving me from one objective to the next, not unlike the Call of Duty games do. The great bulk of the characters being stock military cliches, not unlike the Call of Duty games.
In Reach, I'm plopped down on a planet with some ill-defined "rebel activity", of which there is no real explanation or follow-through, because almost immediately I discover a Covenant massacre and spend the rest of the game hopping from one military objective to the next. Defend this, attack that, the hope of humanity must escape. I struggle to remember one thing any of my fellow Spartans said that wasn't mission related.
It's effective at what it does, but, quite frankly, I learn more about the Gears of War cogs in any given game than I learned about any character in either of the two games I played. There's an odd pathos to a character like Cole-Train, someone who is more than just a soldier carrying a gun, a guy with hopes and dreams. And I don't even like the douche-nozzle.
And HL2's reputation as intellectual masterpiece is beyond over-blown. The game is as shallow as a puddle and the plot is little more than a series of overly complicated objectives, but there's a decent amount of depth to characters. I haven't played the game in forever (and only once), but I can still remember quite a number of characters. I played Reach last year and can only remember "bitchy scientist".