By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Is Halo reponsable for many good games today ? Yes or No ?

leatherhat said:
Halo is responsible only for the massive amounts of generic shooting games on consoles. It is probably the worst game to ever happen to the the genre because due to its popularity it got copied for thousands of worthless console fps games. To anyone who thinks different I recommend getting a PC and finding out what true fps games are like. Done with that rant

Not sure if it's "worst game in the genre", but pretty much agreed with other your points.



Around the Network
Jereel Hunter said:
lestatdark said:
mjc2021 said:
lestatdark said:
mjc2021 said:
I think people forget that the original Halo came out in 2001. It was far more advanced than every game before it even most FPS games years after. It was a huge hit as well so I'm sure it inspired many games.

I beg to differ, Halo didn't advance much the formula that was already perfected by Half-Life, Counter Strike, Unreal Tournament and Quake 3, released two years prior to Halo. Halo revolutionised the FPS genre on the consoles indeed, but computer FPS have done the same things or even better than Halo did at the time.

 

I'm not saying there weren't great FPS games already. But Halo took it to another level and became the new benchmark. To say future FPS games weren't inspired by Halo is very naive.

 

Sorry for the double post.

Well you said that it was more advanced that the games before it, and i was just giving a different opinion. In most old gamers eyes, the only really different thing that Halo gave us was the regenerating Health/Shield system, because the strategies used in the game are the same used in all FPS's. Also, i'm not sure if you know it, Halo just improved on Marathon, the very first game made by bungie. If you play that game, you'll see the basis of both games are equal in some aspects.
Also i can give you exemples of FPS games that came before halo that weren't inspired by anything that is Halo. Doom 3, Quake 4, Half life 2, Counter-Strike: Source, Team Fortress 2, Bioshock...

Well, a FPS where you could hop into vehicles and use gunners was pretty new. Especially combined with 4 player split screen. Halo took the best ideas and merged them all, without sacrificing anything. Combined with the vast number of multiplayer options and a really deep immersive storyline.... It was quite a game. And while PC had great FPS, it didn't have ANYTHING with all of that, so bringing it to a console was even more impressive. It just showed that FPS could not only exist on consoles, but deliver an experience as good as a PC FPS. (And even give added bonuses like split screen, which PCs can't give)

 

Halo didn't add as much as you imply really.  The title did bring some nice ideas but those started out headed to PC (as Halo was intended as a PC title until MS saw the potential to make it a core title for the Xbox and purchased Bungie and diverted development to the Xbox).  So in fact the new ideas came directly from ongoing PC development, they just got diverted to another platform.

Split screen could easily be done on a PC (and some games did so) however it clearly suits a console environment better than a PC (not technically of course, more down to sitting on couch with a buddy vs squeezing around a monitor).  In fact, if I wanted to get prissy I could point out a PC can do anything a console game could technically and things a console couldn't (remembering a PC can be extended anyway you want, consoles cant).

Vehicles were arriving in general in FPS at that time and beacame the 'next big thing' for a while as a result.  But Halo did not invent that mechanic.

I'm not knocking Halo, but anyone who is console centric and thinking it totally took FPS to a new level or invented a whole new set of mechanics simply isn't aware of the PC FPS legacy of the genre and the far bigger impact titlels like Half Life and Battlefied 1942 made on the genre both offline and online.

 

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Jereel Hunter said:
leatherhat said:
Halo is responsible only for the massive amounts of generic shooting games on consoles. It is probably the worst game to ever happen to the the genre because due to its popularity it got copied for thousands of worthless console fps games. To anyone who thinks different I recommend getting a PC and finding out what true fps games are like. Done with that rant

How can you blame something revolutionary for the generic things it inspires? When Halo came out, it was amazing. Do you blame your favorite cereals for generic store brands? Do you shake your fist at the Model T because it ultimately brought us Kias?

 

Maybe my post wasn't clear, but there is not a damn thing revoloutinary about halo. If it had been released on PC it would have been very, very ignored. The only reason it saw any success in the first place is because it was the only decent game on xbox. In hact halo's biggest "gift" to the genre was recharging health, which of course it didn't come up with. Recharching health being the single most casual feature in any ever.



ǝןdɯıs ʇı dǝǝʞ oʇ ǝʞıן ı ʍouʞ noʎ 

Ask me about being an elitist jerk

Time for hype

Well not matter what the Pc "Elites" thing (...) ...

Halo is definitely one the first and most successful attempt to port the FPS genre to the console world. Judging by the big popularity of the genre on the console world now, I belive it was worth it...

 

Now to ask if it is responsible for enabeling many good games is the wrong question.

 

Is Wolfenstein 3D responsible for bringing many good FPS game on the PC ? Of course, but there is also a lot of very bad games as well...

 

Note : Halo Wars is trying to do the same with the RTS genre... and technically it does quite well.. (you can believe me, I'm an ex PC fanatic).



 

Evan Wells (Uncharted 2): I think the differences that you see between any two games has much more to do with the developer than whether it’s on the Xbox or PS3.

Not many good games but It definetely affected the genre.



Around the Network
leatherhat said:
Jereel Hunter said:
leatherhat said:
Halo is responsible only for the massive amounts of generic shooting games on consoles. It is probably the worst game to ever happen to the the genre because due to its popularity it got copied for thousands of worthless console fps games. To anyone who thinks different I recommend getting a PC and finding out what true fps games are like. Done with that rant

How can you blame something revolutionary for the generic things it inspires? When Halo came out, it was amazing. Do you blame your favorite cereals for generic store brands? Do you shake your fist at the Model T because it ultimately brought us Kias?

 

Maybe my post wasn't clear, but there is not a damn thing revoloutinary about halo. If it had been released on PC it would have been very, very ignored. The only reason it saw any success in the first place is because it was the only decent game on xbox. In hact halo's biggest "gift" to the genre was recharging health, which of course it didn't come up with. Recharching health being the single most casual feature in any ever.

I remember trying to play Halo on the PC for half an hour. Controls weren't PC like despite the mouse and keyboard. If didn't feel good, never went back to it.

 



Jereel Hunter said:
lestatdark said:
mjc2021 said:
lestatdark said:
mjc2021 said:
I think people forget that the original Halo came out in 2001. It was far more advanced than every game before it even most FPS games years after. It was a huge hit as well so I'm sure it inspired many games.

I beg to differ, Halo didn't advance much the formula that was already perfected by Half-Life, Counter Strike, Unreal Tournament and Quake 3, released two years prior to Halo. Halo revolutionised the FPS genre on the consoles indeed, but computer FPS have done the same things or even better than Halo did at the time.

 

I'm not saying there weren't great FPS games already. But Halo took it to another level and became the new benchmark. To say future FPS games weren't inspired by Halo is very naive.

 

Sorry for the double post.

Well you said that it was more advanced that the games before it, and i was just giving a different opinion. In most old gamers eyes, the only really different thing that Halo gave us was the regenerating Health/Shield system, because the strategies used in the game are the same used in all FPS's. Also, i'm not sure if you know it, Halo just improved on Marathon, the very first game made by bungie. If you play that game, you'll see the basis of both games are equal in some aspects.
Also i can give you exemples of FPS games that came before halo that weren't inspired by anything that is Halo. Doom 3, Quake 4, Half life 2, Counter-Strike: Source, Team Fortress 2, Bioshock...

Well, a FPS where you could hop into vehicles and use gunners was pretty new. Especially combined with 4 player split screen. Halo took the best ideas and merged them all, without sacrificing anything. Combined with the vast number of multiplayer options and a really deep immersive storyline.... It was quite a game. And while PC had great FPS, it didn't have ANYTHING with all of that, so bringing it to a console was even more impressive. It just showed that FPS could not only exist on consoles, but deliver an experience as good as a PC FPS. (And even give added bonuses like split screen, which PCs can't give)

Those are valid points, but you can't put split-screen as an advantage for Halo. PC's don't need Split-screen, because there is LAN. Multiplayer LAN for FPS's was around the times of the original DOOM, and most PC's fps's give you the exact number of multiplayer options that Halo CE gave you, especially since the MP modes were clearly derivated from Unreal Tournament and Quake games. Also i beg to differ on the storyline, but that's because i'm mostly and RPG player, so every FPS story (with the exception of Bioshock) feels shallow, cliche and simple. The vehicle inclusion was not a first in FPS as well. Star Wars: Dark Forces had it, Battlefield 1942 as well, Operation Flashpoint too.

 



Current PC Build

CPU - i7 8700K 3.7 GHz (4.7 GHz turbo) 6 cores OC'd to 5.2 GHz with Watercooling (Hydro Series H110i) | MB - Gigabyte Z370 HD3P ATX | Gigabyte GTX 1080ti Gaming OC BLACK 11G (1657 MHz Boost Core / 11010 MHz Memory) | RAM - Corsair DIMM 32GB DDR4, 2400 MHz | PSU - Corsair CX650M (80+ Bronze) 650W | Audio - Asus Essence STX II 7.1 | Monitor - Samsung U28E590D 4K UHD, Freesync, 1 ms, 60 Hz, 28"

leatherhat said: 

In hact halo's biggest "gift" to the genre was recharging health, which of course it didn't come up with. Recharching health being the single most casual feature in any ever.

Wasn't it recharching shield in addition to hit points?

 



lol I love the occasional PC fanboy who comes up mentioning counter strike, quake 3, half life, etc. We're talking consoles here.

Halo definately did a lot such as regenerating health, and...really high jumping?



Dr.KennethNoisewater said:
lol I love the occasional PC fanboy who comes up mentioning counter strike, quake 3, half life, etc. We're talking consoles here.

Halo definately did a lot such as regenerating health, and...really high jumping?

 

Not according to the thread title we don't.

Not many good games today are because of Halo, not even good console games, heck, not even good console FPS games.

Well, I guess Halo 2 and 3 are, ... by deffinition.