Halo: Combat Evolved Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Halo forum
  • Subject: Halo forum
Subject: Halo forum

Is it worth geting like ,I've never played Halo or halo 2 so sometimes I cant understand what some people are talking about so should I ?

  • 05.11.2008 7:03 PM PDT

--Dear Father, I've been waiting, I've saved you a seat in hell
--I live to see death, destruction, over the light, but the light cannot be extinguished...
A More Complete Compendium of a Bungie History
-Thanatos 117

For the price you can get Halo for these days, I definitely recommend that you get the first Halo. Especially if you like the story behind the series.

  • 05.11.2008 7:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Yes, it remains one of the greatest games to date. It probably won't feel as amazing to someone who picks it up for the first time today as it was for people who picked it up 6 years ago, but you should still get some enjoyment out of it.

  • 05.11.2008 10:33 PM PDT

The story is amazing, gameplay is especially balanced, and unlike Halo 2 and Halo 3, there are very, very few Legendary Choke Points. However, even in Easy, you have to think, you can't simply do it in your sleep.

  • 05.12.2008 9:16 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

yes you definetely should espacially for the price even if you dont like it which i doubt it wil be hardly any money spent

  • 05.12.2008 10:12 AM PDT

It's worth it, but it will probably feel a little bit lacking if you're used to Halo 3. It's a bit different from Halo 3, and it's definitely missing some features.

Missing Gameplay Features:
No equipment.
No fire or spike grenades.
No forge or theater.
No dual wielding.
No vehicle boarding (making splatters much easier).
You can't move the death cam.
No zooming on weapons without a scope.

Differences in Gameplay:
Fall damage.
You don't jump as high.
You walk faster.
Health and shields, but only shields recharge.
Different physics.
You can stack power-ups. (e.g. You can have an over shield and active camo.)
Over shield is more powerful.

Weapon Changes:
Smaller Weapon Selection.
Assault rifle shots aren't as powerful, but it has 60 rounds.
Pistol is awesome. It shoots pretty fast, has a three-shot-kill, and a scope.
Plasma weapons will stun, making it harder to move when you're hit.
You can throw grenades much further.

Vehicle changes:
Only three vehicles in Multiplayer: Scorpion Tank, Ghost, Warthog
Ghost doesn't have a boost.
Scorpion tank machine guns are also fired by the driver.
Vehicles are all indestructible, and they never despawn/respawn.
Most likely, if a moving vehicle touches you, you're dead.
Flag/Oddball carriers can drive.

There are some other changes too. The graphics are, of course much different as well. The options are rather limited too. I personally like the gameplay, maps, and weapons the best, but I can't deny that it's lacking in other areas, especially by today's standards.

[Edited on 05.13.2008 8:52 AM PDT]

  • 05.12.2008 10:19 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member

And also, there is a very low, small bit of diffrence in how fast your wheicle have to travel to kill an enemy with it. :P

You should buy it, yes.

[Edited on 05.12.2008 12:37 PM PDT]

  • 05.12.2008 12:37 PM PDT

Posted by: Ziex
And also, there is a very low, small bit of diffrence in how fast your wheicle have to travel to kill an enemy with it. :P

You should buy it, yes.
I guess the vehicle boarding statement didn't fully cover the difference in splatters. I'll have to add that.

Most likely, if a moving vehicle touches you, you're dead.

  • 05.13.2008 7:55 AM PDT

For the most part, yes. Unless you're riding in another vehicle. I.E. you're riding on the treads of a Scorpion(yes, players can do that here) and a warthog flies through your face, you're fine.

Another big difference is the melees. A teeny bit harder in Halo CE than Halo 2 and Halo 3.

  • 05.13.2008 8:00 AM PDT

Just message me on live.

You should get it, the BR is the Pistol but each bullet does 1/3 the damage but if they all hit it's the same damage.

  • 05.13.2008 12:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

ARBITER, I CAN'T BELIEVE IT'S NOT BUTTER!!! WORT WORT WORT.

It's an awesome game. Do it.

  • 05.15.2008 12:37 AM PDT

crazy.

Posted by: Captain K Mart
Yes, it remains one of the greatest games to date. It probably won't feel as amazing to someone who picks it up for the first time today as it was for people who picked it up 6 years ago, but you should still get some enjoyment out of it.

hardly. it was one of the better console games perhaps, but the story is quite cliche, and it's flaws were truly seen on the PC version when compared to the other FPS's. it did help bring a pc level fps to consoles, but i wouldn't call it one of the greatest games ever

  • 05.15.2008 8:56 AM PDT

Posted by: adrien69
hardly. it was one of the better console games perhaps, but the story is quite cliche, and it's flaws were truly seen on the PC version when compared to the other FPS's. it did help bring a pc level fps to consoles, but i wouldn't call it one of the greatest games ever
Most games have their flaws, but I don't think Halo's flaws are any more apparent. Most FPSs don't exactly have the best stories. While the basis of the story wasn't particularly original, the implementation of the story was still pretty good. That's pretty true for most aspects of the game. Most of it isn't particularly ground breaking, but it does a good job of pulling existing ideas together. Also, while the PC version is a good game, it wasn't exactly the best port.

  • 05.15.2008 10:35 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: adrien69

hardly. it was one of the better console games perhaps, but the story is quite cliche, and it's flaws were truly seen on the PC version when compared to the other FPS's. it did help bring a pc level fps to consoles, but i wouldn't call it one of the greatest games ever


In addition to what SentientGiraffe said, the story is also fleshed out in a unique way through the books, graphic novels, etc. By the time the PC version came out, FPS's had evolved a bit (some probably due to the success of Halo for Xbox itself) and besides the addition of some new multiplayer maps, nothing was changed from the console version. I believe what truly made Halo special was the replay value provided by the co-op campaign and the polished multiplayer. Other games may have done one of those two better than Halo, but together? Halo was the best of it's time. The community of Halo players was rivaled only by CounterStrike players, and LANs were probably easier to come by for Halo players due to how easy it was to bring an Xbox and a TV compared to your entire computer setup.

All these factors together make Halo, in my opinion, one of the greatest games to date.

  • 05.15.2008 11:08 AM PDT

crazy.

It wasn't a good port, this is true (from what i gather in articles and the demo) and being a console gamer myself halo was one of my favorite games on xbox, but seeing unreal tournament and having played other FPS's on ps2 (star trek elite force was my favorite for awhile) i wasn't as impressed with it. the co-op was fun, and so was the multiplayer, but the story was overpraised. the weapons weren't too cool (pistol : machine gun :: plasma pistol : plasma rifle) but their usage and particular strategies that evolved out of them were pretty neat. overall, it was an average FPS what helped it was the xbox, and the fact that a console had finally done an FPS with tight controls and good graphics. it gave us non-pc gamers access to some decent fragging and a good game for xbox LAN parties.

to answer the original question though, i'd recommend halo:CE. not so much halo 2 just because halo 2 and 3 are similar in physics and guns. in the original halo you had different weapon strategies due to the lack of dual-wielding and weapons that halo 2 and 3 include. in halo: CE you'd shoot an elite with a charged plasma shot then switch to the much more useful pistol for a headshot. or you'd always make sure to have a needler to eliminate elites even more swiftly.

EDIT: sorry, someone posted above me before i finished my submission. if i repeat things it's because they stated them already above

[Edited on 05.15.2008 11:19 AM PDT]

  • 05.15.2008 11:17 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: SentientGiraffe
Posted by: adrien69
hardly. it was one of the better console games perhaps, but the story is quite cliche, and it's flaws were truly seen on the PC version when compared to the other FPS's. it did help bring a pc level fps to consoles, but i wouldn't call it one of the greatest games ever
Most games have their flaws, but I don't think Halo's flaws are any more apparent. Most FPSs don't exactly have the best stories. While the basis of the story wasn't particularly original, the implementation of the story was still pretty good. That's pretty true for most aspects of the game. Most of it isn't particularly ground breaking, but it does a good job of pulling existing ideas together. Also, while the PC version is a good game, it wasn't exactly the best port.
Yeah... but he never said anything about the port. And if I may be presumptuous myself, that's not due to the PC's fault. I have to agree with adrien for the most part.

  • 05.15.2008 11:56 AM PDT

Posted by: Master Kim
Yeah... but he never said anything about the port. And if I may be presumptuous myself, that's not due to the PC's fault. I have to agree with adrien for the most part.

That point was in reference to the quote below. Also, the console version of Halo came out in 2001, and it didn't exactly have a strong feature set at the time. Not many features were added to the PC version, and it came out two years later. The PC version making the flaws more apparent seems to be a result of it being a poor port and the release date of the port.

Posted by: adrien69
it's flaws were truly seen on the PC version when compared to the other FPS's.

  • 05.15.2008 12:32 PM PDT

crazy.

Yes, there were many issues with the PC port, but release dates and bad porting job aside, comparing Halo on Xbox to other action shooters on PC would show that most of the enjoyable pc games were either on par with or above the level of halo. halo's success was due to the lack of good first persons on consoles is the only point i was ever trying to make. as a game, it's one of the better fps's of 2001, as a landmark in gaming history, it was a key stepping stone for consoles. from then on fps's followed halo's example as well as elaborating on it.

  • 05.15.2008 3:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: SentientGiraffe
Posted by: Master Kim
Yeah... but he never said anything about the port. And if I may be presumptuous myself, that's not due to the PC's fault. I have to agree with adrien for the most part.

That point was in reference to the quote below. Also, the console version of Halo came out in 2001, and it didn't exactly have a strong feature set at the time. Not many features were added to the PC version, and it came out two years later. The PC version making the flaws more apparent seems to be a result of it being a poor port and the release date of the port.

Posted by: adrien69
it's flaws were truly seen on the PC version when compared to the other FPS's.
My mistake, I completely missed that.

  • 05.15.2008 3:24 PM PDT

I guess I've never found another game that had the right balance of features and simplicity. It's a relatively simple game, but it has enough to keep it interesting.The maps weren't exactly complex, but they were some of the best. There isn't a great selection of weapons, but the essential weapons are there. There were three kinds of attacks, and they worked together. On paper, it seems like a pretty average game, but I believe it has a harmony that isn't common among its peers.

  • 05.16.2008 7:22 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: SentientGiraffe
I guess I've never found another game that had the right balance of features and simplicity. It's a relatively simple game, but it has enough to keep it interesting.The maps weren't exactly complex, but they were some of the best. There isn't a great selection of weapons, but the essential weapons are there. There were three kinds of attacks, and they worked together. On paper, it seems like a pretty average game, but I believe it has a harmony that isn't common among its peers.
Several things about Halo that weren't in any other games:

1. Only being able to hold two weapons at once. Doom, Quake, etc. always let you hold up to as many as you could find, but Halo made you think about what weapons you should carry.

2. The Rock-Paper-Rocket Launcher weapons. Halo did with nine weapons what most shooters couldn't do with twenty. Each weapon in Halo had a specific role and was unique from each other. Although you wouldn't ever use the Needler or the Plasma Pistol in competitive gameplay, you could at least appreciate them in Campaign and how they had their own roles. Plasma weapons drained shields while fire-arms were good for taking down health. Frag grenades were good for blowing stuff up and plasma grenades were for precision demolition.

3. Regenerating health. This mechanic is over used to such bad effect nowadays, it's painful for me to play another shooter that has it. However, it was quite innovative at the time and it allowed for good pacing and it was good. It was almost perfect, considering how you still had health bars to look over. It was really like having regenerative armor, which is what shooters should really have.

4. Good vehicle combat. Seriously, the Wart Hog was tremendous win. There was really nothing more fun than getting on the back of a machine gun while your team mate was driving. It was great.

Besides that, it was simply a decent, solid shooter that was executed quite well that was only above average.

  • 05.16.2008 12:00 PM PDT

Well, I think you already covered the main points, except for the Easter Eggs. Based on every game I've ever played, Halo is the only one with decent eggs worth looking for.

I do have one thing to add for regenerating health. In Halo CE, you had a health bar, and a shield bar. One recharged, and one had to be replenished with health packs. Fairly simple, fairly obvious. Like you said, recharging health is incredibly(and poorly) implemented nowadays, with the exception of Call of Duty 4. Most games have a shield bar and recharging health; completely redundant. The whole point of recharging shields was to allow the player to fight more freely without being under constant threat of near-instant death. Enter recharging health. Now, you get pretty much no combat potential once shields are down, in any game. Particularly Halo 3, IMO. Where you might've been able to retreat and let your shields recharge after taking health damage, now you simply die.

To finish this off, recharging shields + recharging health = bad + redundant.

  • 05.16.2008 6:44 PM PDT