Halo's once great campaign elements.

Alright everybody, I got to think a while ago about all the things that made CE’s campaign great- and how most of those elements are almost gone by now. I usually hate these threads that trash other Halo games, but I couldn’t help but discuss these elements.

So here we go:

-The sandbox element.
This, to me, is the most upseting loss. The once great sandbox element can best be represented in CE’s “Assault on the Control Room” level. My favorite moment on the level is when the player comes across a snow covered bridge. On this bridge, there are two unmanned banshees. As the player crosses the bridge, elites attempt to get in the banshees. If the player wishes to do so, they can kill these elites (or simply outrun them) and take control of the banshees. This action greatly reduces the number of enemies in the later scenes, but didn’t remove them all.

Similar options were rarely presented to the play in Halo 2, but creative players could create similar situations. By Halo 3, unique options were rarely available. Again referring to banshees, there were banshees on nearly every level. Players creative enough to capture a banshee were rarely rewarded. Most vehicles not given to the player simply could not be driven. Reach was very similar to Halo 3 on this matter.

-Large scale battles.
While each game had at least one large scene, CE approached large confrontations casually. Again, I refer to the great “Assault on the Control Room.” The level starts with two elites and several grunts assaulting the player. The next room has 2-3 elites and multiple grunts/ jackals. The following bridge has 3-4 standard elites, multiple jackals and grunts, four turrets with sleeping grunt to man them, and a banshee on higher difficulties.

Battles such as this were nearly unheard of in later games. In Halo 2, most battles had 2 elites at the most- and only a few grunts to follow them. Hunters also rarely fought alongside other covie forces, whereas hunters in CE were rarely seen without other forces behind them. Halo 3 attempted to bring back difficult confrontations by including the brute “pack,” the difficulty of brutes failed to prove threatening. Reach attempted to bring this back, but once again failed. Confrontations rarely had more than 3 elites, and those that did were elite-only battles.

-Unique AI
This was another wonderful thing that CE brought to the table. My favorite bit of AI was the elites. When stuck, elites had several animations. Some would act as they currently do and charge the player, some would flail their arms and attempt to get the grenade off, others- if stuck properly- would spin in circles trying to see what had stuck to their shoulder. These elites were also fairly aggressive, but would hide when they lost their shields.

Halo 2 lost the spinning action, but remained fairly similar. They even got better at taking cover. Halo 3’s brutes rarely took cover, and would only charge the player when stuck. Reach’s elites could care less if they had no shields, and only charged players when stuck.

I’m a Halo glitcher and I approve this thread. You have my Thanks!

Reserved (currently replying to the points… Done!)

> Alright everybody, I got to think a while ago about all the things that made CE’s campaign great- and how most of those elements are almost gone by now. I usually hate these threads that trash other Halo games, but I couldn’t help but discuss these elements.
>
> So here we go:
>
> -The sandbox element.
> This, to me, is the most upseting loss. The once great sandbox element can best be represented in CE’s “Assault on the Control Room” level. My favorite moment on the level is when the player comes across a snow covered bridge. On this bridge, there are two unmanned banshees. As the player crosses the bridge, elites attempt to get in the banshees. If the player wishes to do so, they can kill these elites (or simply outrun them) and take control of the banshees. This action greatly reduces the number of enemies in the later scenes, but didn’t remove them all.
> Similar options were rarely presented to the play in Halo 2, but creative players could create similar situations. By Halo 3, unique options were rarely available. Again referring to banshees, there were banshees on nearly every level. Players creative enough to capture a banshee were rarely rewarded. Most vehicles not given to the player simply could not be driven. Reach was very similar to Halo 3 on this matter.

In other words, that segment of AotCR didn’t seem linear. Extremely good illusions!

What they did with Halo 3 was very disappointing. The Banshees on The Storm at the aa gun are ridiculously difficult to bring down and for all that effort, they are undrivable. What’s their purpose anyway? They just fly around. It’s unrealistic. In H2, on Metropolis, they setup barriers so that the Banshee couldn’t go through unless it was piloted by AI or moved by external forces. In this way, we could at least use the Banshees. But on Delta Halo, the Banshees that appeared couldn’t be boarded (this makes sense though). But why not the Banshees on The Storm in the first lakebed? They only appear on higher difficulties.

On the other hand, it should be noted that the Banshees in H1 level Halo could be made empty but they were still unpilotable.

> -Large scale battles.
> While each game had at least one large scene, CE approached large confrontations casually. Again, I refer to the great “Assault on the Control Room.” The level starts with two elites and several grunts assaulting the player. The next room has 2-3 elites and multiple grunts/ jackals. The following bridge has 3-4 standard elites, multiple jackals and grunts, four turrets with sleeping grunt to man them, and a banshee on higher difficulties.
> Battles such as this were nearly unheard of in later games. In Halo 2, most battles had 2 elites at the most- and only a few grunts to follow them. Hunters also rarely fought alongside other covie forces, whereas hunters in CE were rarely seen without other forces behind them. Halo 3 attempted to bring back difficult confrontations by including the brute “pack,” the difficulty of brutes failed to prove threatening. Reach attempted to bring this back, but once again failed. Confrontations rarely had more than 3 elites, and those that did were elite-only battles.

If I may point out something, you’re referring to small skirmishes, not large scale battles. You mean there were larger and more variable groups of Covies in CE compared to the other games. Or am I not seeing the whole picture? But anyways, large scale battles were noticeably absent in the other games.

In CE, there were plenty of mini-firefights and they culminated in huge spectacular battles on Two Betrayals and the later levels. Of course, this does not mean that it didn’t not have a linear path. It merely had more options.

In H2, the Covenant city occupation (a.k.a Outskirts) was like AotCR without the doors and rooms. If I had played it when I was younger, I would be expecting having to go all over the place assisting marines, like in Halo Wars rather than fighting scattered groups and waves of Covies. On the other hand, on Gravemind, you could bring Hunters from the previous area to the Masoleum battle and on Outskirts, you could fight waves of Ultra Elites. But it is unfortunate that the honor guard Councilor and his Elites don’t spawn until you’ve killed all the Elites and Brutes.

In H3, it was the same thing as H2, the only difference being, The Storm. On that level, certain enemies from the warehouse and then on all had the general desire: to go to the AA gun. If you allowed them to leave the building, you could fight even more Covies than usual.

Indeed. On LNoS, at the infinite AI beach battle, the most you could get was 4 Elites, 2 from the dropship, 1 from the previous dropship, and 1 from the other dropship. On Two Betrayals, there could be up to 6 Elites.

> -Unique AI
> This was another wonderful thing that CE brought to the table. My favorite bit of AI was the elites. When stuck, elites had several animations. Some would act as they currently do and charge the player, some would flail their arms and attempt to get the grenade off, others- if stuck properly- would spin in circles trying to see what had stuck to their shoulder. These elites were also fairly aggressive, but would hide when they lost their shields.
> Halo 2 lost the spinning action, but remained fairly similar. They even got better at taking cover. Halo 3’s brutes rarely took cover, and would only charge the player when stuck. Reach’s elites could care less if they had no shields, and only charged players when stuck.

And some would run around trying to get it off. In other words, they were intelligent. This is very noticeable on Two Betrayals. Kill everyone except the Elites and try to fight them with the Needler. They take cover behind the rock, the 2 shields, and those Goldies use suppressing fire. This is probably the best combat in the entire game!

Yep, the H2 Elites were a pain in the -Yoink- to deal with, especially Ultra Elites.

I agree about the H3 Brutes not taking cover but I disagree about the charging. They also pursued you if you got up real close to them. And Brute Chieftains would would charge more aggressively if they had activated their invincibility.

Of course, charging is not always good. Ironically, the H3 Elites would charge enemies, especially when facing Hunters. It’s like Bungie got their AI mixed up. Elites never do their evasive maneuvers (except diving from grenades) unless you betray allies and get them to turn against you.

Reach Elites didn’t take cover long enough IIRC. And even if they did, it’s really unnecessary because of their health, shields, fast melee velocity, firing rate, and ally support. There was less retreating time for them except in special cases (i.e. arrival of that pelican dropping off reinforcements on LNoS). As a result, they couldn’t care less about their allies dying. It felt more like fighting zombies than fighting Elites.

> I’m a Halo glitcher and I approve this thread. You have my Thanks!

I actually though about adding a “glitching” note, but I wasn’t sure how that would go. The inclusion of invisible walls in Halo 3 broke my heart. The inclusion of soft kill zones was just aweful.

> > I’m a Halo glitcher and I approve this thread. You have my Thanks!
>
> I actually though about adding a “glitching” note, but I wasn’t sure how that would go. The inclusion of invisible walls in Halo 3 broke my heart. The inclusion of soft kill zones was just aweful.

Oh. They already existed. They just weren’t so close. Ghost Town is a notable example of invisible walls being placed too close. Yeah that was far more worse.

Sliding Ghost,

First of all, I can’t tell you how nice it is to get some intelligent feedback. You just blew my mind!

Skirmishes seem like a much more accurate description of what I was trying to get to. I coulnd’t quite find the right wording at the time, so I’ll edit that in just a bit.

I did want to expand on some of these points, as you have, but was limited by… nevermind. I just realized I misread the max character count. I feel silly now.

The AI in Reach did frustrate me though. As you said, it seems the AI don’t know what they are.

I still play it very often, and on AOtCR at that, and I like to play it over Halo 2 or 3, and especially the boring game of Reach.

The reason CE’s gameplay is so fun is because it just happens to be designed that way by the way your weapon moves and shoots from your perspective, how powerful and useful everything is, among other small things.

I fully believe the absence of the incredibly large campaign maps in all games after Halo CE is why people feel campaign has suffered ever since. Wandering through AotCR and Truth & Recon still amazes me to this day, and playing any mission in Reach just feels cheap and rushed.

But this had me thinking: what’s odd about the mission in Halo CE is that almost every level is repeated later on in the same game? Pillar of Autumn and The Maw, AotCR and Two Betrayals, all three levels of The Library, and Keys and Truth & Recon are each nearly identical levels with a few changes or areas now cut off.

Is is repetitive level design the key to a successful campaign? I can’t see how it would, and something like that is generally frowned upon by gamers. If any developer made a game like that today it would probably fail just because of that, yet Halo succeeded gloriously.

What made Halo CEs campaign so great were the huge worlds and A.I. enemies fighting each other, combined with epic (and sometimes sad) music.

Everything on this topic is well said. For me Halo:CE was just so epic you were on the edge of your seat, there were so many ways to play. I think thats why I enjoyed Halo 3 for its open enviroments, many different ways to take on enemys. But AOTCR and Two Betrayels have got to be my favorites.

Mega battles were teh awesome in CE. So were the aggressive elites, who would charge you when your shields are down, but would still duck behind cover when their shields were low. Looking at Reach, elites are glad to stand back and exchange fire with you… WTH? They aren’t aggressive at all.

The key to success is having corridors flow well with the semi-open world. CE did a great job of this. Think of the levels Halo, TnR, Silent Cartographer, etc. You did spend time in corridor after corridor, but this monotony was broken by the huge area that you could play in. Having strictly one or the other would break the game, and having entire levels of one is also a bad idea.

For example, look at the Library, or look at the levels of H3 that played out like a straight corridor shooter, or look at all of H2. These levels don’t work.

> Sliding Ghost,
>
> First of all, I can’t tell you how nice it is to get some intelligent feedback. You just blew my mind!
>
> Skirmishes seem like a much more accurate description of what I was trying to get to. I coulnd’t quite find the right wording at the time, so I’ll edit that in just a bit.
>
> I did want to expand on some of these points, as you have, but was limited by… nevermind. I just realized I misread the max character count. I feel silly now.
>
> The AI in Reach did frustrate me though. As you said, it seems the AI don’t know what they are.

Haha yeah, that’s what I was aiming for.

Precisely.

Ok.

Right.

> Is is repetitive level design the key to a successful campaign? I can’t see how it would, and something like that is generally frowned upon by gamers. If any developer made a game like that today it would probably fail just because of that, yet Halo succeeded gloriously.

Nope it isn’t, as we can see by The Storm and Floodgate. It’s because of the unique encounters and how radically changed (for the better) the levels were that CE succeeded. Floodgate was convincing sure, but it would have been way better if it was based on Sierra 117 or Crow’s Nest. Those waters could have made great ambush spots. Flood controlled pelicans with missiles. Crow’s Nest looking like The Maw. Etc.

OP, I salute you, my good sir

For what it’s worth, from all the videos and interviews, especially the Halo 4 panel at Halo Fest, it seems that 343i is definitely striving for that sense of freedom again. That Halo sandbox; let me play in it. I love having multiple ways and means of solving a problem. And as for Reach I know it has its detractors but I really enjoyed that campaign. It was a solid romp and a ton of fun to play with a buddy or two. Awesome environments…

I loved the stuck elites, just because they were hilarious. Actually stuck jackals were even funnier.