Halo - pretty average for 9/10?

halo blows, killzone is pretty much the same
and resistance shows promise, especially #2 coming out, with 64 multiplayer

 

I have to agree with the general consensus of the Halo trilogy. The first one was the best in the series (albeit many games from the same time were better IMHO), the biggest reasons being that it was the only worthwhile game for the Xbox for a long time and it was the first big console LAN title; for the first time lots of people could play a game together without having to have a PC setup and a copy of the game for everyone, you just needed 1 console and TV per 4 people, so I have many memories of doing that years and years ago. Also on a side note, I always had fun with the crappy physics in it and would always play bumper cars trying to see how many flips we could do and land it.

Then, came the second which was a let down in just about every area, the only improvement being online play. And now the third one was just as much as a let down, being decent at best. I remember all of the network problems over the Christmas holidays where my roomates would spend an hour and a half waiting to get in a game just for it to be filled with lag; all the while my friend and I were playing good games of Team Fortress 2 on PC the whole time, of which I feel is a much better online shooter. My roomates no longer ask me to play Halo 3 with them online, because they know that halfway through the first match I'll get bored and try and kill my teammates since its more challenging not having the autotargeting on friendlies.

 

I remember playing Timesplitters and Red Faction multiplayer long before Halo......
local console multiplayer wasn't something Halo brought to the field....it was there long before

 

red faction was the shit

 

But I'm pretty sure neither title were playable between multiple systems, which is what I was getting at. I think Timesplitters was predates the network adaptor for PS2, and I know Red Faction was only up to 2 players on 1 system, I have it and still play it every now and then. Also, understand that I'm one of the last people that would like to give credit to Halo, mostly out of the fact that I can't stand Halo fanboys; I remember a whole argument that my friend had with some fanboy on IRC that was convinced that Halo invented dual wielding among other things that it didn't.

 

Agreed. I never understood the "wonders" of Halo, and I'm curious as to why people love it so much. It's a shooter, a boring repetitive shooter just like the rest of them. Only difference is that it has some story to it...but does that really make it worth of being any good?

Ah well, I just hate most shooters in general, except for the classics.

 

the reason i liked the first one was because i like co-op games, you can kill the little bastard aliens by punching them with your gun and you can play it stoned. that might be some of the reasons other people liked it

 

I hate Halo. All of them. Actually 90% of all first-person shooters pretty much suck. I dunno. I've hated FPS all my life. I don't see the fun in them at all. Thats just me though...

 

I was the same for years. Then I played F.E.A.R and it really got me into them. I'm still not a huge fan of FPSs but I can stand to play them now.

 

Halo fanboys. Yeaaaah...

I dunno. I thought that they were all decent, average game, each one introducing more things while screwing something else over. The first was, as stated prior, the first good XBOX game in a very long time. The second, while brining in dual wielding (which admittedly isn't very much of an improvement...) seemed to be riddled with lag, some poor map making, and a very poorly written "EPIC STORYLINE (!)". The third... deja vu, right? It's the same bloody thing we've played before and for years before with other shooters, but: LOOK! TEH COLOURZ! BLOOOOOOM!

Please. Shut up about the story, it makes next to no sense unless you sit around and decode it, and, should you be doing that, then the story isn't good to begin with. The gameplay is only subpar, as every FPS has done it before, and, well, better. I'll give it to ya, the graphics look mighty purdy. But so does Team Fortress 2. And F.E.A.R. And DOOM. Hehe, see what I did thar? DOOM sucks because it has bad graphics. ROFLCOPTER!!!! No. Just...no. Should a game suck, it's because it's gamePLAY is bad, and do you remember what particular verb you associate with games? You PLAY them. BOLD

Give me a good old, original game, and I'll be find. Hell, give me a game with a good story or some awesome music, and I'll be fine, too. Just, for the love of [insert deity name here], do not praise Halo as being perfect, or even as being the best shooter. I'll just beat the tar out of you with a baseball bat, BUB! BEAT IT FATTY!

 

It's just because it has good graphics and community, I have Halo 1 on PC, love it, can't find Halo 2, want to buy, Fuck Halo 3, screw it

 

i now am totaly for halo 3, people keep saying its crap but its not. and its really fun to go slaying on live

 

Actually I never loved the First person shooters except for Bioshock that I own on my PC. From Halo to Halo 3 whats the difference between them... except for savvy graphics. Still having a PC I never even thought to have a Halo game in my life... too much overhyped.

 

The Halo 3 soda was delicious, though.

It seems like most of you have never played it very long. Yeah, it's generic shootan game #117, but so is generic shootan game #207, and generic RPG #30078, etc. I'm sure if some of you played it longer, with a large group of friends, and got into it, it would be better.

and Halo>Halo3>Halo2

 

It was still better than if you had played it by yourself, right?

 

Halo games were an okay game, i got 1 and 2 for pc, but I have to say, other than incorperating vehicle combat correctly into a game there wasn't much special about this one (sci-fi shooting, big story, I'd go for metroid, or to a lesser extent, metroid prime) but it was fun to just run up and smack your mates out in a single blow despite the reloading sheilds...

They made things too easy or too hard at times (going againt flood with dieing shields was suicide)...

I say the first earnt a 8, and 2 was 8.5 (graphics were better and far more involved story, playing as the elites changed things...)

Then again, almost all FPS games (except Condemed...don't bother) play nearly the same and YES even golden eye and doom, shoot the bad guy, run to a spot, do something and repeat, when halo came out it added hide in between crap, wait for your infinute health to recharge, to the mix...

 

For saying Halo and Timesplitters 1/2 came out about the same time, I think I know which I'd rather play. I'm also rather displeased at all the PS3 hating going on here. I own a PS3 (every Sony console, still works, BOOYAH) and am pretty devout to it, but as I have a LOT of friends with 360s I also take an interest and play plenty of 360 games. I've played quite a bit of Halos 2 and 3 and neither were particularly great. While I enjoy it being accesible to noobs (not a massive FPSer), it isn't as amazing as people say it is. Gears Of War is a far better FPS (PS3 FANBOY SAYING THIS!) and is quite well designed. The original Killzone game was quite good, far better than everyone now thinks it was, and Killzone 2 is quite run-of-the-mill minus several things: they set it up so you were just effectively another soldier in the huge war for Helghan, the AI were brutal as heck, thanks to the graphics they clearly spent a while doing you feel like you're on a war-torn planet. Resistance 2 and it's 64 player multiplayer were quite good, the 20 player co-op is also incredible but is generally overlooked.

The only (proper) FPSes I'm interested in now are MAG (take that 360's processing power) and MW2 (Looks like they're not just copying the news this time). MAG seems better now that I read that they intend to reward team-players (128 player teams so it's needed) and aren't forcing specialization on the player as they don't make you pick a class almost straight off. They allow you to slowly piece together what you want.

It's also very true that it's about GAMEPLAY not graphics or statistics or franchises.