Back when I bought a X360, the very first thoughts I had were "hope this does not RROD on me" and "finally I'll be able to play Halo". But, after some minutes playing the game - around hal a hour to be precise - I realized the game was no better than others FPS that I was playing at time, like Call of Duty 3. The missions were lame and the feeling I get was that I was playing a game made from a book or a movie, made in a hurry. Yeah, the storyline is great and using the bayonnet gun (eh forget its name) was nice also, but nothing more.

Then I tried to play the original XBox Halos to see if they're any better. Halo 2 ran smooth on the X360 but it hadn't the assault rifle so the game failed to me, altough was intersting to see the brutes appear for the first time. The original Halo has its framerate owned on the X360 so I got the PC version, but mouse and keyboard didn't help on any way to make me perceive some value which justifies like what, ~8 million per title?

I haven't really played any FPS from 5th generation, so I was wondering that perhaps the game brought some innovation to FPS games that I was already used to. In which aspect the Halo series are so great anyway?

Are you telling me that you judge games by half-hour bursts?

troll post (op)

I don't think I've ever liked a game in my first hour or two of playtime, ever. The online is addicting, well designed, and varied. It will grow on you quickly. Halo 2 and 3 aren't exactly known for their great campaigns anyways.

When you drive some of the awesome vehicles, play 4 player co-op, get into some of the truly epic battles, play online multi-player, and see some of the cooler weapons, get back to me.

Hmm I think you should of played more than half an hour before posting. But I kind of agree, I thought halo 1 and 2 were pretty average... have not played halo 3 but I think it still has the same crappy weapons.

It's a very slow-paced shooter with a lot of tactics involved, which makes it immediately different to a great deal of shooters out there.

It also allows (certainly in Halo 2) for skilled players to completely dominate over newer players. Which is rewarding for players who invest a lot of time into it.

Excellent design coupled with solid gameplay is what makes Halo a good shooter.

Online play. Best FPS deathmatches by far.
Not to mention that every other game in which one heals by hiding for a few seconds is basically admitting "Yeah, we want to be Halo".

Halo 3 has some absolutely epic large scale battles, a lot of them coming early on. I think its great

Sad thing about all this Halo hype is... Bungie looks like one game developer for gamers en masse. Everyone seems to forget their previous efforts in genre like Marathon series which sets the ground for modern FPSs with it's new ideas in gameplay mechanics, not to say superior to most of contemporary shooters story, which was pretty well written (Marathon games were really heavy on text and background). Pathways into Darkness... blend of FPS, one of the most earliest horror game, role-playing (rogue-like style), some unique gameplay ideas like the ability to talk with dead (trigger word system, no dialogue threads), actually in PiD all NPCs were dead +Lovecraft-inspired story. Not bad at all. Halo was pretty much Marathon remake, sets in the same universe (but the whole bunch of story telling was omitted). Will be glad to see horror game a-la Pathways into Darkness made by Bungie, but that's unlikely, they're still very concentrated on Halo franchise.