Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: My Thoughts on the Halo Series | |
| Posted By: mercury | Date: 9/12/06 3:45 p.m. |
In Response To: My Thoughts on the Halo Series (Gravemind) Wow. : If you disagree, which I'm sure some of you will, then feel free to offer
Of course you won't have the time, you spent all of it already, you probably have none left. :p I want to chime in on only a few of the thoughts that came to mind as I read that. - That's an amazingly detailed, long, and well thought out essay... which makes me feel sad that its timing makes it feel slightly futile. A year or year and a half is certainly not enough time for a game like Halo 3 to turn course. So we either have to hope its on a course we like, and that they've listened to all the *constructive* criticism, or move on. - Halo 1 is better than Halo 2 as a whole. I think we all feel that in some way, but I don't think its because of skill or graphics or physics or mechanics or any smaller details. Yes, they all add up, and yes many of them were detractors to the quality of 2, but Halo 1 simply had a better "feel". I think it hinges on the slightly less tangible differences. You covered a few, but IMO you focused too much on the mechanical differences... Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see some of the mechanics you wrote about make it into the game, but i think that the "Halo 1 > Halo 2" issue is more inherent in what the games are, what they represent, and the parts of the larger story that they cover. i think of Halo 2 as the part of the book that gets confusing, hopefully to be pulled together by the end. Does it detract from the book? that's up to interpretation. - Xbox live changes you. Halo 1 never had the exposure that Halo 2 has had. Most of us have only experienced it in a LAN. Sure there's PC, and Xbox connect, but those communities are smaller and less "lowest common denominator" than Live. Many of the things that I consider to be major problems in Halo 1's multiplayer, were things that the honor system held at bay in my living room. Halo 2's problems are not so controllable on Live. Even in a LAN atmosphere, or just with friends, I think the Live experience has changed peoples' thinking about how the game is played. I played Halo 1 differently than most people, but I play Halo 2, in some ways, exactly the same as everyone else. - However, I agree with a lot of the things you stated. I don't think it will change anything by talking about it, but here goes anyways. 1. Fall damage is important. Lack of it means less deterrents for certain unrealistic styles of play. Although I like being able to dodge someone's fire by jumpping straight down from the top of lockout to the bottom, most of my opponents do think its cheap that I'm so good at running away... Anyhow, you're right, superjumping and the like would be dead in the water if there were fall damage. 2. Melee lunge always seemed ridiculous to me. Plus, over Live, if one person is lagging, a sword lunge fight is very one sided. Much like the situation that occurs with a shotgun fight. 3. Difficulty differences. I do think that the easy has become too easy, and legendary too hard. I did like the balance between the difficulties in Halo, and I was very frustrated in that first hanger bay and on my first legendary jackal encounter. Aside from those things though, I enjoyed Halo 2 on legendary, and despite the frustration, beating the second hanger bay was an exciting victory. And, I do enjoy the easy setting when I want a laid back experience. The learning curve, however is steep in single player. 4. The N00b C0mbo 0_o. I hate Halo 2's plasma pistol. I hate that it was all I used though half of legendary, I hate feeling my shield go down and knowing I have absolutely no chance. I would love to see a plasma pistol take more than one shot to remove shields, or to lose the homing altogether. - My biggest gripe with your essay is the "skill" comments, etc... I get tired of hearing that there should be a difference between the "hardcore" and the "casual" gamer. Both should play for fun, not for a challenge. A casual player in chess can sometimes get the better of a master. But to a chess master, is it a casual game? I don't think so. Who was the more skilled? This may be addressing mothergoat's statement more than yours, but I don't feel like that means Halo 2 was designed for the lowest common denominator. Speaking from the standpoint of someone who did okay for himself, but not great, in Halo and Halo 2, I don't feel like Halo 2 was any easier for me than Halo (Actually I've noticed that after a long time of playing H2 and not H1, I actually play much better than I used to in H1 when I go back), or that it took any less effort. Anyhow, none of this is as thought-out as your essay, and you made a lot of good points. Hopefully the next Bungie game will take a lot of all of this into account. There's not much hope for H3, unless you trust them to make a great game despite all of this. But, hey, if Halo 2 lowered all of our expectations, then Halo 3 should amaze us, eh? | |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |