Halo is the most overrated game ever and I want to know why

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Ok, how do I begin... Before anything I have to clear that I don't finish it, I arrived at silent cartographer and finished the mission... I never in life give a "review" (This is a discussion not a review for a reason, continue read) a review before finish the game but... But this game is something I never seen in my life and it breaks me... I'm shocked, this is not a taste or subjective thing, this has clear problems too objective...

This game is incredibly monotonous... This game is all the same for 6 entire campaigns... But don't go away that is not the most serious problem... This game is a mindless shooter to begin ok... You can say what you want but this is just mindlessly shoot... The game change environment and whatever but the gameplay doesn't change... The gameplay is too simple and boring, the shooting feels horrible for me, the assault rifle has this big enormous target, scope whatever... The enemies are always the same and for me they don't say anything... They seems cheap, they are too much no one... In videogames the most important thing is the gameplay, but this is the only game I ever touched that have the story/plot the thing that Im more interested... The story is good I like it (obviously for a game, is not a cinema masterpiece) but the other things apart from are just... No, the scenography is good but for me the gameplay is too ridiculous... I don't find it fun, only boring and ALL THE SAME, from what ive seen, I can be wrong but this game have no puzzles, no platform, no anything, this game is just shoooooooooot... And the weapons for me don't communicate anything, but now I will say what really is the most big problem... You want to hear it? Now I will say it... Now I will go off topic for a bit, my favourite game ever is half life, and it gives me the most great experience of gaming when I first play it, but why... It was my first real game, no mobile or indie strange game, so I was a "noob" I take 30 hours to finish it, and I died a lot, but every time I died I learn something new, I achieve something new... It's fun, and the atmosphere get everytime more strong... But that is for any game by default, except this... Good atmosphere with lot of personality yes but when I die... Nothing, it's just boring and repetitive I somehow don't achieve nothing... And the game is too hard for the simplicity of the gameplay... And all the same etc...

How this game has so success, why is so popular... It's not a subjective thing this game is too much...



Don't accuse of clown farming, don't say that you don't read, answer me please... Why do you like it, why... Why?

(I don't want to get banned or anything, please this post is not toxic or offensive just a legit question)

[Rws vi Britannia]

Originally posted by =*PoS*= The Predator of Death:

As Civie11 said when playing pro blood #1 Extra cripsy is means for co op , to solo it would be highly unlikely and yeah i grew up with blood one of the most amazing game and i got dusk too it's awesome, glad to see boomer shooters making a come back

Civvie is awesome. Good taste, brother

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Originally posted by Falleax:

Originally posted by chrisvig71:

I why do I expect a serious answer I don't know... This was a bad idea... I will probably get a clown soon

Yes... you... will...
Especially when you have a giant wall of text full of ellipses... that looks silly... and serves no purpose...

Also tl;dr, I'll only answer the title. The game is good, it probably just isn't for you and you may have gone into the game with the wrong mindset, expecting too much and not getting it coloring your opinion more negatively than if you had no expectations.

1-i never go in Games with any mindset, I absolutely not play games to please myself, I play it because I heard it was a masterpiece so I let the game talk and control the show... But no, I just explain why in the main post
2- yes the game is good but precisely I'm not into the "good or bad product" Because otherwise that will be a review not a discussion, I want to know why people like it
3- the giant wall of text is complicated and I will stay here to make it another one if I explain so just accept that is relatively short
Thanks for the comment, the thing that probably will make me think that this is actually a good game is the fact that comments actually responded instead of being toxic or clown accuse ecc. I didn't expect this

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Originally posted by Rws vi Britannia:

Originally posted by chrisvig71:

I started serious and with a mature tone but after reading the forum rules I'm traumatized, so please no combat or anything

If you ever need a co-op partner for the Library, I'll gladly help you out ^^

I will practice a lot in assault on the control room, I will at 100% finish the game... Now I'm even more scared of the library mission, good thing that I absolutely don't know anything about the story evolution so I will enjoy the plot, but I'm concerned around the same gameplay same thing for 5 games... Is there something that change between the games?

[Rws vi Britannia]

Originally posted by chrisvig71:

Originally posted by Rws vi Britannia:

If you ever need a co-op partner for the Library, I'll gladly help you out ^^

I will practice a lot in assault on the control room, I will at 100% finish the game... Now I'm even more scared of the library mission, good thing that I absolutely don't know anything about the story evolution so I will enjoy the plot, but I'm concerned around the same gameplay same thing for 5 games... Is there something that change between the games?

Each game changes things and adds new weapons. I didn't like Halo 2 at first because it didn't feel like Halo 1, but then I got good at it and ended up liking it by the end. Halo 3 feels a lot more "modern military" than the previous Halos, which felt kinda sci-fi military. Certainly not bad and going from Halo 2 to 3 feels like the same skill-set and generally the same weapons that worked in Halo 2 work in 3 as well. Felt easier than Halo 2, but some sections can lead to cheap deaths which pissed me off. At the end of the day, it's all skill issue and I just needed to get good and adapt.

There's new additions to the gameplay in Halo 3. Halo Reach might be my favorite alongside the original Halo. Guns feel tight and it feels closer to Halo 1 than Halo 2 did, but maybe that's just me. Halo 2 and 3 don't have health anymore, only shields. Reach brings back the health, so I guess that's why I liked it so much. Also, Reach brings new abilities, such as jetpacks. Never played ODST or Halo 4.

The overall story is good, I enjoyed it.

The problem with the Library is that it's long. It's a slog to get through. Who knows how many hours I spent in it as a kid trying to beat it. Painful, annoying, long, repetitive. But if you beat it (especially alone), chances are you finished the most annoying mission of the whole series - or at least I can't recall a mission more disliked than the library. Good luck on your journey. Once you get the basics down, the game will feel more satisfying to play.

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Originally posted by Rws vi Britannia:

Originally posted by chrisvig71:

I will practice a lot in assault on the control room, I will at 100% finish the game... Now I'm even more scared of the library mission, good thing that I absolutely don't know anything about the story evolution so I will enjoy the plot, but I'm concerned around the same gameplay same thing for 5 games... Is there something that change between the games?

Each game changes things and adds new weapons. I didn't like Halo 2 at first because it didn't feel like Halo 1, but then I got good at it and ended up liking it by the end. Halo 3 feels a lot more "modern military" than the previous Halos, which felt kinda sci-fi military. Certainly not bad and going from Halo 2 to 3 feels like the same skill-set and generally the same weapons that worked in Halo 2 work in 3 as well. Felt easier than Halo 2, but some sections can lead to cheap deaths which pissed me off. At the end of the day, it's all skill issue and I just needed to get good and adapt.

There's new additions to the gameplay in Halo 3. Halo Reach might be my favorite alongside the original Halo. Guns feel tight and it feels closer to Halo 1 than Halo 2 did, but maybe that's just me. Halo 2 and 3 don't have health anymore, only shields. Reach brings back the health, so I guess that's why I liked it so much. Also, Reach brings new abilities, such as jetpacks. Never played ODST or Halo 4.

The overall story is good, I enjoyed it.

The problem with the Library is that it's long. It's a slog to get through. Who knows how many hours I spent in it as a kid trying to beat it. Painful, annoying, long, repetitive. But if you beat it (especially alone), chances are you finished the most annoying mission of the whole series - or at least I can't recall a mission more disliked than the library. Good luck on your journey. Once you get the basics down, the game will feel more satisfying to play.

Thanks for the comment, so at least I know that the games are different and how, that is very helpful.
Then the library I don't know anything except for how is described, I predict that for me is a masterpiece and it's difficulty is overrated, mission 3 is harder... At least that's what I can imagine then maybe it's hell... But first I have to beat control room that I don't think is so easy...

[Adalbert]

My opinion having played through campaign for the first time recently - Halo 3 has a pretty fun gameplay, but crap story, Halo 2 best story, worst gameplay, ODST is the best halo, just the audiolog story was kinda cringe.
4 isn't horrible, I just hate fighting the new faction.
No opinion on multiplayer thou.

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Originally posted by Adalbert:

My opinion having played through campaign for the first time recently - Halo 3 has a pretty fun gameplay, but crap story, Halo 2 best story, worst gameplay, ODST is the best halo, just the audiolog story was kinda cringe.
4 isn't horrible, I just hate fighting the new faction.
No opinion on multiplayer thou.

Wow I'm so out of multiplayer and online games that I totally forgot that multiplayer exist and the campaigns are secondary at this point

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

The thing that probably makes halo so bad for me is that it has one things that makes it not a quality product... It's arena level design... The arena level design is a sign of a cheap level design, of a amateur game... Quality fps game does not have arena level design in combat, or maybe they have it for a lot too but is more natural, because the arena style is too much videogame it's like a 80s arcade, while the liner path combat is more immersive and with more work and heart and is more true etc. While spamming enemies around you all time is more immature... But the problem is that in games like doom eternal for example the combat is not my favourite but is more complex and requires more brain, and has platforming too, so it's less "boring" But halo is just... Too much arena shooting too much simple

[Schorl]

Originally posted by Adalbert:

My opinion having played through campaign for the first time recently - Halo 3 has a pretty fun gameplay, but crap story, Halo 2 best story, worst gameplay, ODST is the best halo, just the audiolog story was kinda cringe.
4 isn't horrible, I just hate fighting the new faction.
No opinion on multiplayer thou.

Which is why I hated Halo 3 for a while. I disliked the story quite a lot and made me not see the reason why I should put it on a high pedestal like most people have it. Halo 2 having the worst gameplay...I wouldn't agree. It was the tightest and most responsive in the trilogy. I think Halo 2's biggest flaw was the level design in the campaign. The multiplayer however was the best when it came to that in my opinion. Kinda like the original Modern Warfare 2 from 2009. Bad levels in the campaign. Great levels in the multiplayer.

[Schorl]

Originally posted by chrisvig71:

The thing that probably makes halo so bad for me is that it has one things that makes it not a quality product... It's arena level design... The arena level design is a sign of a cheap level design, of a amateur game... Quality fps game does not have arena level design in combat, or maybe they have it for a lot too but is more natural, because the arena style is too much videogame it's like a 80s arcade, while the liner path combat is more immersive and with more work and heart and is more true etc. While spamming enemies around you all time is more immature... But the problem is that in games like doom eternal for example the combat is not my favourite but is more complex and requires more brain, and has platforming too, so it's less "boring" But halo is just... Too much arena shooting too much simple

I think that you should just jump into Halo Reach, which probably has the least amount of arena based levels. And it's the most immersive game in the franchise overall next to ODST.

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Originally posted by Schorl:

Originally posted by chrisvig71:

The thing that probably makes halo so bad for me is that it has one things that makes it not a quality product... It's arena level design... The arena level design is a sign of a cheap level design, of a amateur game... Quality fps game does not have arena level design in combat, or maybe they have it for a lot too but is more natural, because the arena style is too much videogame it's like a 80s arcade, while the liner path combat is more immersive and with more work and heart and is more true etc. While spamming enemies around you all time is more immature... But the problem is that in games like doom eternal for example the combat is not my favourite but is more complex and requires more brain, and has platforming too, so it's less "boring" But halo is just... Too much arena shooting too much simple

I think that you should just jump into Halo Reach, which probably has the least amount of arena based levels. And it's the most immersive game in the franchise overall next to ODST.

Ok good thing that you inform me, so I should play halo reach... Well it doesn't matter anything because I respect history so I will play them in order of date, but you made me curious about halo reach now

[rcf5089]

See I don't understand the original comment, as describing this game as " incredibly monotonous" Is the last description I would give to it. there is enemy and weapon variety and each scenario you encounter is different. Some sections are built around vehicles, others around gunplay. Some sections were wide open with little cover where you had to focus on moving and dodging others were in narrow corridors. and the game play is really switched up in the second half. The levels in CE do suffer a bit from cookie cutter design and level 7 of that game really is monotonous, but outside of that one level the game was constantly switching up what you were facing, and what was available to use.

I can see it being monotonous on lower difficulties but you said the game was too hard so I am not sure what difficulty you are on, and whether to turn it up or down. Generally I advise a difficulty where you die occasionally, but not so high that you die multiple times a checkpoint. Halo is a game where once you get good you can reliably beat most levels without dying even on the higher difficulties (except maybe Halo 2). Depending on what weapons are available there are multiple strategies for tacking a particular engagement, and even beyond the strategy, enemies telegraph a lot of their actions meaning you have a split second to react to whatever they are doing. It becomes a dance of action and reaction. The better you get at it the more fun it gets. This is more than "get gud" it is like learning to play an instrument, the first songs you practice with are the easy more repetitive ones that can get boring, once you do get good and can move on to harder songs it gets more fun, and if you can freestyle it is a blast.

Comparing this game to Half Life, yes Half Life does mix up shooting with puzzles and platforming, but I would neither call Half life a great shooter, a great platformer, or a great puzzle game. It does all 3 well enough but it really masters none of them, and the real charm to that game comes from mixing it up. Halo's gameplay focuses everything on the action, and at that it crushes Half Life. Or for another valve example you have Portal which focuses everything on the puzzles (with a little platforming) and at that it likewise crushes Half life. Half life is a great jack of all trades master of none example here. Halo also has some puzzles and platforming but all of it is to find the hidden easter eggs and skulls. If you want a campaign that does puzzles and platforming on top of shooting try out Titanfall 2 if you haven't already.

Hope this helps.

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Originally posted by Overlord1993:

I mean, literally every game is repetitive after a while. In the end it comes down to pushing buttons after all. You do the same few things in most games so that's really not just something exclusive to Halo. I enjoy it for the lore and the story, the amazing times I had playing with my dad and friends while growing up and the gameplay is solid.

Your technically right, practically wrong... Halo is monotonous from like the second mission... Then it's a feeling thing, maybe out there are games more boring technically but they are more entertainig at the end... If you talk with technical or philosophy factors like you did the whole thread will break and be a mess, so at the end is Noticible that combat evolved is more monotonous than 95% of games out there

[Doktor Mandrake]

If you weren't there, you weren't there

Back then shooters on console wasn't exactly common, sure we had things like goldeneye and perfect dark prior but nothing like Halo

The concept of playing games online was also new, and Halo was good for promoting xbox live

Even things like the regen shields instead of health packs.. Again this was a new concept at the time.

I wouldn't say it's all nostalgia, the games still fun but the campaigns have aged badly in some regards

[OutSIdeOfTheBoX (chrisvig71)]

Originally posted by rcf5089:

See I don't understand the original comment, as describing this game as " incredibly monotonous" Is the last description I would give to it. there is enemy and weapon variety and each scenario you encounter is different. Some sections are built around vehicles, others around gunplay. Some sections were wide open with little cover where you had to focus on moving and dodging others were in narrow corridors. and the game play is really switched up in the second half. The levels in CE do suffer a bit from cookie cutter design and level 7 of that game really is monotonous, but outside of that one level the game was constantly switching up what you were facing, and what was available to use.

I can see it being monotonous on lower difficulties but you said the game was too hard so I am not sure what difficulty you are on, and whether to turn it up or down. Generally I advise a difficulty where you die occasionally, but not so high that you die multiple times a checkpoint. Halo is a game where once you get good you can reliably beat most levels without dying even on the higher difficulties (except maybe Halo 2). Depending on what weapons are available there are multiple strategies for tacking a particular engagement, and even beyond the strategy, enemies telegraph a lot of their actions meaning you have a split second to react to whatever they are doing. It becomes a dance of action and reaction. The better you get at it the more fun it gets. This is more than "get gud" it is like learning to play an instrument, the first songs you practice with are the easy more repetitive ones that can get boring, once you do get good and can move on to harder songs it gets more fun, and if you can freestyle it is a blast.

Comparing this game to Half Life, yes Half Life does mix up shooting with puzzles and platforming, but I would neither call Half life a great shooter, a great platformer, or a great puzzle game. It does all 3 well enough but it really masters none of them, and the real charm to that game comes from mixing it up. Halo's gameplay focuses everything on the action, and at that it crushes Half Life. Or for another valve example you have Portal which focuses everything on the puzzles (with a little platforming) and at that it likewise crushes Half life. Half life is a great jack of all trades master of none example here. Halo also has some puzzles and platforming but all of it is to find the hidden easter eggs and skulls. If you want a campaign that does puzzles and platforming on top of shooting try out Titanfall 2 if you haven't already.

Hope this helps.

1- thanks for the comment
2- I'm very good at moving and I'm very skilled in fps but I think I don't really understand the game mechanics at this point, I play on normal btw
3- don't compare this to half life, this game is miles away from it, everything you said I'm not into it, for me the gunplay is 100 times better than halo, and really. .. Halo for me at least is not so action, I can say to you games that have better action if you want
4- I already have titanfall 2 and I enjoy it
5- we are talking about two other games in a forum where literally the rules are "not compare this to other games" So I'm waiting for this thread to disappear in any moment I'm anxious now please I don't want to die an-