Scanning through GGD, I came across a thread where the TC was stating Halo sucks. He goes on to say that he's not flaming or bashing the series, just that it's average and as a PC gamer he feels it brings nothing to the table. Average story, averarge gameplay, etc.
Now, certainly, not everyone is going to like Halo and that's fine. But his post bothers me for a few reasons.
1. There's no reason to say it "sucks". That's just inflammatory and intended to piss people off. Why not simply say that you did not enjoy the game or that it was okay but not outstanding
2. "Average story that's all cliche - basically you have to beat the bad guys, the aliens, to save the earth". This point always gets on my nerves, because it is so ignorant IMO. Let me explain. The story, IMO, is incredibly deep and well thought out. The covenant isn't simply some bad guy alien race - it's far more complex than that. They have a very interesting hierarchy and their motivations for their actions are thoroughly explored. From their overzealous/almost fanatical behavior to them being intentionally mislead by the prophets, they are certainly more than one dimensional. Halo 2 did a great job in exploring things from their side of view. Hardly average, IMO.
Second, there is the flood and the forerunners. Much mystery there. Yet, some kind of common theme that seems to link the covenant, flood, forerunners, and humans together. There have been tons of theories about who and what the forerunners were and whether humans are the offshoot of them or not. Why is the "Ark" on earth, etc.
Masterchief. Yes, he doesn't say that much, but he doesn't need to. Just like Samus, his personality and character can be inferred from his actions and from the responses of those around him. Cortana seems to give me plenty of insight into how chief works and thinks. remember, Samus never says a word, but many people believe she is a well developed, 3 dimensional character. Same with chief
Plus Halo seems epic to me. I've played through plenty of FPS like Prey, Far Cry, Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, etc. While they were fun, they just didn't seem to have that appeal, that epic quality that Halo contains. The only one that matches or surpasses it could be Half Life IMO.
3. "Average gameplay". Bogus. Why has Halo gotten such acclaim? Why has it gotten big? Why do so many people like it? Because it has average gameplay? Obviously not. It does so many things well. The controls are good. The enemy AI is great. The seamless play of vehicles into the gameworld works great. The graphics have always been good for the console. The music helps to set the mood. The weapons and dual wielding provide great variety and replay. Bascially, it does many things well and that blends together well for a good experience. Hardly bland.
Sometimes people just like to bash or hate on highly acclaimed games. I certainly understand that not every game will appeal to ever gamer. I've had some big epic games that I didn't like. But calling them garbage or worthless or insinuating that they suck is a little ignorant in my book. Chances are that if users love a game, and reviwers give it high scores, then it's a good game.
If you take any game and look for faults, you'll find them. You can dumb any game down to make it sound bad. But why? What is someone's motivation to do that other than to be inflammatory?
Log in to comment