What makes Halo Halo ??

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

My first Halo Game was the Master Chief Collection. I noticed, that every game has it’s own properties: Of vehicles, move-speeds, weapons and so on. I saw a lot of people say: Halo is developing away of Halo and becomes … something like another First Person Shooter. Well … Halo is a First Person Shooter … and it also seems, that the fanbase seems very splitted - even if we look only on the fans who are active in this forum.

Please try to answer it w/o listing nostalgic stuff. A game has to develope, or noone will buy it. And no sales means sooner or later - no franchise.
Also saying: This should not be in the game, because it is already in another game is just not a real answer: Or would you create a game without 3D-Grafics, just because it is in another game?

So simple question … or better: Hard question(s):
What makes “Halo” for you “Halo”? What is “Halo-Like” for you? And what not?

2

The campaign is what sets Halo apart in the big picture. Most games have underwhelming campaigns with little to no story. The last multiplayer shooter I played was COD:BO. The campaign in that game was laughably bad and the multiplayer was frustrating to me. Halo is one of the last AAA FPS that includes a good campaign and a good multiplayer.

For me the multiplayer “Halo” just means the holy trinity of gameplay: guns, grenades and melee. I love that trifecta. Other than that, it’s really just kill times that are longer than the other AAA games on the market.

3

> A game has to develope, or noone will buy it. And no sales means sooner or later - no franchise.

If the two choices are having a franchise you don’t like, or not having a franchise at all, there isn’t really any choice present.

You’re giving people an empty threat.

> Halo is developing away of Halo and becomes … something like another First Person Shooter. Well … Halo is a First Person Shooter

Chess is developing away of Chess and becomes … something like another Board Game. Well … Chess is a Board Game.
Chess is indeed a board game. Yet it plays nothing like monopoly, or chutes and ladders, or so on.

Not all shooters play the same, nor should they.
Mechanics aren’t guaranteed to work just because they happen to be in other games of the same general genre.
“Man all these other board games having rolling dice, Chess needs them too!”

No.

> What makes “Halo” for you “Halo”? What is “Halo-Like” for you? And what not?

Moving across compact maps, being able to shoot the entire time, gameplay revolves around item control and controlling portions of the map with a versatile utility weapon, battles rely on strafe and last significantly longer than other shooters, jumping is a major part of the game and map design, there is a lot more to say but this is the best I could think of at short notice.

It’s not an arena shooter. Arena shooters are about zipping across maps with reckless abandon, blasting everything in sight.
It’s not a millitary shooter. Those kinds of shooters are about camping, fast reaction times, and emulating real life.
It’s not a cover based shooter. Because…well that should be obvious.
So on.

Halo is its own style of shooter that contains simplistic mechanics. Trying to fit it under any umbrella term is pointless.

Needless to say sprinting across giant maps, being caught with your gun down, having no powerups at all, devaluing strafe, replacing jumping, etc are not things I look for in a Halo game.

4

> 2535428825532022;1:
> What makes “Halo” for you “Halo”? What is “Halo-Like” for you? And what not?

I’ll just paste what I said in a similar thread:

The “Halo feel,” is when you and another player are locked into a gunfight on an open pathway. There’s no cover between you. There’s no ‘correct’ method of defense, and the only thing stopping you from being a dead corpse in front of him, is skill. The victor is decided after a battle of wits, aim, and strafing. The confrontation only lasts a couple seconds, but to Halo players alike, it feels much longer…

If you get shot first, you have the disadvantage, but if you strafe left when he strafes right, he misses a shot, and then you’re both on equal footing again. He counters you by standing still, but then your aim does the talking, and another outplay will win you the battle. Just moves and counter moves (Hunger Games pun intended.)

That’s not the only style of confrontation, either. Alternatively, players can throw grenades to soften each other up, then melee each other to decide victory, but ultimately at higher levels of play, strafing is where it’s at. Any Halo game where the skill of proper strafing is lessened and/or ultimately superseded by something else, does not have that “Halo feel” in my opinion.

5

> 2533274819302824;3:
> > A game has to develope, or noone will buy it. And no sales means sooner or later - no franchise.
>
>
> If the two choices are having a franchise you don’t like, or not having a franchise at all, there isn’t really any choice present.
>
> You’re giving people an empty threat.
>
>
>
> > Halo is developing away of Halo and becomes … something like another First Person Shooter. Well … Halo is a First Person Shooter
>
>
> Chess is developing away of Chess and becomes … something like another Board Game. Well … Chess is a Board Game.
> Chess is indeed a board game. Yet it plays nothing like monopoly, or chutes and ladders, or so on.
>
> Not all shooters play the same, nor should they.
> Mechanics aren’t guaranteed to work just because they happen to be in other games of the same general genre.
> “Man all these other board games having rolling dice, Chess needs them too!”
>
> No.
>
>
>
> > What makes “Halo” for you “Halo”? What is “Halo-Like” for you? And what not?
>
>
> Moving across compact maps, being able to shoot the entire time, gameplay revolves around item control and controlling portions of the map with a versatile utility weapon, battles rely on strafe and last significantly longer than other shooters, jumping is a major part of the game and map design, there is a lot more to say but this is the best I could think of at short notice.
>
> It’s not an arena shooter. Arena shooters are about zipping across maps with reckless abandon, blasting everything in sight.
> It’s not a millitary shooter. Those kinds of shooters are about camping, fast reaction times, and emulating real life.
> It’s not a cover based shooter. Because…well that should be obvious.
> So on.
>
> Halo is its own style of shooter that contains simplistic mechanics. Trying to fit it under any umbrella term is pointless.
>
> Needless to say sprinting across giant maps, being caught with your gun down, having no powerups at all, devaluing strafe, replacing jumping, etc are not things I look for in a Halo game.

Power ups are confirmed, jumping isnt replaced, shields will be increased so strafe will be as necessary

6

The music, you got to love the music and it’s atmosphere within the game! And the …well honestly I don’t know how to explain it to you that whole entire thing.

Bungie style, I think it’s how you say it.

7

Its focus on tactical gameplay. Memorable moments and characters. The sandbox and its utilization. The diverse and intelligent enemies. The music.

Everything “wrong” with Halo: Twitch Gameplay

8

> 2533274819302824;3:
> > A game has to develope, or noone will buy it. And no sales means sooner or later - no franchise.
>
>
> If the two choices are having a franchise you don’t like, or not having a franchise at all, there isn’t really any choice present.
>
> You’re giving people an empty threat.

I didn’t say that it has to develope in a fixed direction.
If you don’t have an answer - it’s not caused by the threat.
Other people have answers:

> 2535460843083983;4:
> > 2535428825532022;1:
> > What makes “Halo” for you “Halo”? What is “Halo-Like” for you? And what not?
>
>
>
> I’ll just paste what I said in a similar thread:
>
> The “Halo feel,” is when you and another player are locked into a gunfight on an open pathway. There’s no cover between you. There’s no ‘correct’ method of defense, and the only thing stopping you from being a dead corpse in front of him, is skill. The victor is decided after a battle of wits, aim, and strafing. The confrontation only lasts a couple seconds, but to Halo players alike, it feels much longer…
>
> If you get shot first, you have the disadvantage, but if you strafe left when he strafes right, he misses a shot, and then you’re both on equal footing again. He counters you by standing still, but then your aim does the talking, and another outplay will win you the battle. Just moves and counter moves (Hunger Games pun intended.)
>
> That’s not the only style of confrontation, either. Alternatively, players can throw grenades to soften each other up, then melee each other to decide victory, but ultimately at higher levels of play, strafing is where it’s at. Any Halo game where the skill of proper strafing is lessened and/or ultimately superseded by something else, does not have that “Halo feel” in my opinion.

> 2533274819302824;3:
> > Halo is developing away of Halo and becomes … something like another First Person Shooter. Well … Halo is a First Person Shooter
>
>
> Chess is developing away of Chess and becomes … something like another Board Game. Well … Chess is a Board Game.
> Chess is indeed a board game. Yet it plays nothing like monopoly, or chutes and ladders, or so on.
>
> Not all shooters play the same, nor should they.
> Mechanics aren’t guaranteed to work just because they happen to be in other games of the same general genre.
> “Man all these other board games having rolling dice, Chess needs them too!”
>
> No.

Chess isn’t under the same pressure like Videogames - especially First Person Shooters for consoles - are.

And I guess, if you would go into a shop and ask how many of the newest Board Games were sold, and how many Chess Games were sold - they would say: Sure, the new game leads in sales. That’s not a big problem here. Creating a Chess Board and some figures isn’t expensive in developement or production. Also it’s old - so no copyrights and so on are here to look at.

If we look at high rated Videogames things are - maybe not different - but let’s say: Only the top places count.
You have to look on things that work - same as in the automotive market. Or you would have bad sales. CoD Ghosts have had not very good sales in comparision with other CoD Games. It’s one of my favorite games - and it even beats Halo 4’s sales on the 360 alone. But the developers and publishers started do do something against it. And it seems to work - if we look at the sales until now.

And, if you would say: Each Board Game has to sell at least fifty times in a month. Chess may not reach that number - and noone would put money in it.

Only some new cool version of it might do the trick and push the sales up. With dices maybe? Or with other stuff. Who knows.
But fact is - you have to do something.

I just want to know - if all people say: “Nah, no this. Not that. This doesn’t fit.” … Alright - but what instead of that?
I am sure the 343 Studio Guys ask that question, too.

Hard, hard times for Halo … Sigh.

9

so my first halo i owned was mcc but the fist one i played was 2 in 2006 since 2012 I’ve been a halo fan but mcc is the fist halo i owned what makes halo halo isn’t the multiplayer its the story and people tend to forge that

10

> 2533274970251252;6:
> The music, you got to love the music and it’s atmosphere within the game! And the …well honestly I don’t know how to explain it to you that whole entire thing.
>
> Bungie style, I think it’s how you say it.

I avoid to rate music, because this is a very individual thing.
But, you are right, music is a big part of the atmosphere in a game.
Other things are:

  • Grafic (Lights, Skyboxes, Weather)
  • Moving and Surrounding Sounds (Footsteps, Wind, Birds, Allied Radio, Talking of Foes, whatever)
  • Speed and Size of events
  • Storyline (the whole situation you are in)

In the Halo Campaigns were mostly a mystic atmosphere mixed with more bright than dark but also familiar surroundings. Only the skyboxes were more “foreign” with the Ring World or something like that.

What “Bungie Style” is I dunno. I know it’s the older developer group. But I dunno what is exactly “there style” now. That is a question like: What makes Halo Halo?

11

Halo to me is being able to come out in a firefight on top, regardless of the situation you were in. The better player that is smarter and is more skilled is highly revered because they did so on their own, not by some mechanics that made it easier to do so.

And that’s just a very simple sentence or two, but it’s extremely difficult to pinpoint everything that makes Halo, Halo to me. And you OP could maybe get a feel of it too by playing on the map Lockout in Halo 2, and just using all the gametypes that are in the game on that one map alone. You’ll see how much fun you can have and have dynamic it is.

12

> 2535465987553585;9:
> so my first halo i owned was mcc but the fist one i played was 2 in 2006 since 2012 I’ve been a halo fan but mcc is the fist halo i owned what makes halo halo isn’t the multiplayer its the story and people tend to forge that

(sic)
So yes, I heard and I know that the story and the campaign (which is mostly a big part of the story) are important things.
But why then so many people complain over movements like sprint?

First I thought: The people are splitted into two or three groups. But sometimes I got the feeling now: They are realy fragmented - and not all “goups” might disagree with other “groups”. Some, do. And some just dunno what they want. Also there are no solid lines between the fractions.

I hope I could help a bit. Because I would see good Halo Games in the future, too. :wink:
That’s it for my contribution.

13

The Halo universe. The campaign. This is what to me sets the experience apart from all the other games in existence.

That’s where the name comes from. It’s not called Simple Balanced 4v4 Multiplayer, despite what many people on these forums seem to think.

14

For me Halo means:

A rich, filled Universe, full of storys to tell, not just of the Chief but many people, Crew of the Spirit of Fire, Bucks ODSTs, Noble Team. I always played Halo mainly because of the Campaign, Multiplayer is good too but thats not my focus, for me a game needs a good story and as I said Halo has many of those to tell.

15

> 2533274819302824;3:
> > A game has to develope, or noone will buy it. And no sales means sooner or later - no franchise.
>
>
>
> If the two choices are having a franchise you don’t like, or not having a franchise at all, there isn’t really any choice present.
>
> You’re giving people an empty threat.
>
>
>
> > Halo is developing away of Halo and becomes … something like another First Person Shooter. Well … Halo is a First Person Shooter
>
>
>
> Chess is developing away of Chess and becomes … something like another Board Game. Well … Chess is a Board Game.
> Chess is indeed a board game. Yet it plays nothing like monopoly, or chutes and ladders, or so on.
>
> Not all shooters play the same, nor should they.
> Mechanics aren’t guaranteed to work just because they happen to be in other games of the same general genre.
> “Man all these other board games having rolling dice, Chess needs them too!”
>
> No.
>
>
>
> > What makes “Halo” for you “Halo”? What is “Halo-Like” for you? And what not?
>
>
>
> Moving across compact maps, being able to shoot the entire time, gameplay revolves around item control and controlling portions of the map with a versatile utility weapon, battles rely on strafe and last significantly longer than other shooters, jumping is a major part of the game and map design, there is a lot more to say but this is the best I could think of at short notice.
>
> It’s not an arena shooter. Arena shooters are about zipping across maps with reckless abandon, blasting everything in sight.
> It’s not a millitary shooter. Those kinds of shooters are about camping, fast reaction times, and emulating real life.
> It’s not a cover based shooter. Because…well that should be obvious.
> So on.
>
> Halo is its own style of shooter that contains simplistic mechanics. Trying to fit it under any umbrella term is pointless.
>
> Needless to say sprinting across giant maps, being caught with your gun down, having no powerups at all, devaluing strafe, replacing jumping, etc are not things I look for in a Halo game.

From what I gathered, I can say you are 1) terrible at analogies because chess and halo are nothing alike and 2) have never played an arena shooter because they’re nothing like what you described. Arena shooters are about power weapon control, map dominance, locking down power positions and careful team coordination on a level playing field. Stop pretending halo was some unique golden egg, it’s an arena shooter.

16

> 2533274798011936;15:
> From what I gathered, I can say you are 1) terrible at analogies because chess and halo are nothing alike and 2) have never played an arena shooter because they’re nothing like what you described. Arena shooters are about power weapon control, map dominance, locking down power positions and careful team coordination on a level playing field. Stop pretending halo was some unique golden egg, it’s an arena shooter.

Have you? I’ve played Quake, and Toxikk, and can assure you Halo is nothing like either of those games.

Halo is much slower, doesn’t have anywhere near as much map flow, and has an entirely different sandbox philosophy.
In those games you spawn with a -Yoink–tier gun and all guns respawn like every 10s.
In Halo you have power weapons on three minute timers and have a viable utility weapon.
Not to mention there’s no recharging shields, health pickups, having more than two weapons, etc in an actual arena shooter.
They are NOT about locking down the map, they are about constant map flow. What you describe there is a millitary shooter.

The only Halo game to even come remotely close to an arena shooter is Ce, and even that has some pretty stark differences.
The only real similarity Halo has with these games is map pickups and identical spawn weapons.

Halo is Halo. It’s a game that borrows concepts from both archetypes and sits precariously in the middle.

Chess and Halo are nothing alike. My point is you can’t just shoehorn game mechanics into a game just because other games have those mechanics. The mechanics have to actually fit the product.

17

I would say: Slower kill times, and being able to shoot at all times. That sums up Halo for me.

18

> ROBERTO jh wrote:
> From what I gathered, I can say you are 1) terrible at analogies because chess and halo are nothing alike and 2) have never played an arena shooter because they’re nothing like what you described. Arena shooters are about power weapon control, map dominance, locking down power positions and careful team coordination on a level playing field. Stop pretending halo was some unique golden egg, it’s an arena shooter.

Halo is a tactical shooter with arena elements. Halo was never pure arena. Those elements you mentioned are part of any competitive game.

The only things I know that Halo shares with other arena games are power weapons and symmetrical starts. It lacks other elements such as extremely fast movement speed. Games that would define as an arena shooter would be like Unreal Tournament or Quake.