Jump to content

Why hasn't Halo been the same?


Spotter1

Recommended Posts

The important part of Halo is the storyline of the entire halo series campaign evolving around Master Chief, Cortana, and the Rings.

 

-Look back at Halo 1, it is mostly developed on your relationship with Cortana and the rings. As you go through the gameplay, your bond with cortana tightens, as it does throughout all the Halo's. The rings however, are also developed about how 'you needing to protect it is the utmost importance, as humanity deponds on it,' and that the rings aren't what they appear.

 

-In Halo 2, the same exact thing happens, except at the end you lose Cortana on High Charity, leaving her to fall prey to the Gravemind, one of the reasons why the rings were created,

 

-Halo 3, in my opinion, is the 'Real' ending in Halo, because of the fact that the end of Halo you got Cortana back, the rings were 'Mostly' deactivated, and a treaty between Alien Races was built.

 

-Halo 4, I think was very dramatic but the storyline in my opinion wasn't great because it was just so wierd how they introduced the Prometheans into the campaign like they did. I felt they rushed into it too much, and the way they ended the game like that was just a big emotional disappointment.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Halo 4 was a rushed game. It was and that's why it felt like it was rushed and incomplete. In fact it still is incomplete right now and 343 is working on completing it as we play it and that's why there are new playlists every week and probably why Spartan Ops season 1 wasn't released as a whole.

 

The main reason why Halo 4 feels different is because of exactly how you set the OP up. Everyone was expecting a Halo 3 or at least a Halo 1 or 2 feel to the game but it's not those games and it's not about the same thing. It's still Halo, and I have a lot of faith in 5, but it's not supposed to be like Halo 3 or 2 or 1. If you'd never played those games you would probably think Halo 4 was better. You have to look at it that way really.

 

If you think about it though you do have a lot of the old game's features besides a title and the way the game operates. You've got this huge open unexplored world just like Halo 1 but you don't get the full extent of that feel because we've already played Halo 1. Then you have the the wide variety of weapons and the introduction of a new enemy species just like Halo 2 but the fact that they're mechanical and don't really react when we shoot them kind of takes away from the feel of it. And then there's the mechanics of the game which are just like Halo 3 and it makes multiplayer all the better. The gameplay is definitely faster what with sprint being default now but its core is mostly like Halo 3 even in campaign. You've got this sense of urgency like you did toward the end of Halo 3 like you do in Halo 4 that you need to get off the planet or die and you have to fight everything in your way to get the hell out. Also the gravity and body mechanics! My favorite. I hated how every time you killed someone midair in Reach they'd either float up and then back down motionless because you'd just killed them as they were jumping or they'd start flailing and spinning. Every freaking time. But now it reminds of Halo 3 when you could tell the sniper is so powerful that if shot in the head the body will fly back head first lucky that it didn't come right off.

 

The differences are pretty obvious but I just wanted to show you why they were different to everyone because not everyone seems to realize that yet. I do agree with your opinions on each of the games OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to give an in-depth opinion about Halo 4's campaign, but I don't have the time to do so. I'd say 343 tried to introduce us to the "Storm elites" and the Didact's Promethean force in order to get some background information on further covenant plans and to be able to unravel further story progression. I did found the Didact to be unexpected, so Halo 5 should answer some questions regarding this and other matters.

 

I feel that Halo 4's campaign was rushed, but it's still pretty good to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

halo 4 had the most rushed, and emotional let down campaign of all the halo games,

at least reach had an amazing campaign.

 

reach = not very good multiplayer but very good campaign

halo 4 = crap campaign, decent multiplayer

halo 3 = amazing multiplayer and awesome campaign. halo 3 would of been alot better if they hadn't of had boosters, hackers, etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the campaign was a bit rushed and they put almost too much into it, the addition of the death of cortana was a bold move and one that in my opinion kind of worked (seemed to me like the first time the chief really faced failure), however the speed at which we were introduced to prometheans, the didact and the lack of background was a little disconcerting when considered afterwards, while playing I did not notice this as much.

 

Also things like showing some of the chiefs face was a poor attempt to divert attention from all of this and a cheap trick to make the game memorable, anyone in europe who watches top gear will understand when I say it was like the stig coming out.. Mystery is mastery in the story telling world.

 

All in all still a good campaign, not quite the standard of previous Halo games but still very good. I do hope that the rush of info was to allow for greater expansion in later installments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...