Did Halo: Combat Evolved deserve the critical acclaim it got?

At the time, definately

Yes it did. And Half Life's AI is horrid

Did it deserve it's praise when first released, it did. Does it deserve it's god like nostalgia status it has nowadays... not really but then again neither do most games including the extremely overpraised F.E.A.R you mentioned in your post.

Well I think it did deserve it. Heck, i just played it 2 hours ago.

YES.

Anyone who says otherwise clearly has no clue whatsoever about great game design and imo also doesn't have very good taste when it comes to deciding what is or is not a great game.

I say no, it's a decent game, but it's not the best game ever. It didn't do anything new, and it was nothing special. The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell (Unlike say F.E.A.R.). It's not very challenging and the A.I. is terrible, unlike Half-Life 2. Critics ignored the flaws, gave into the hype by giving it high scores. There are better shooters out there. It was no where near as good as GoldenEye 007 or Perfect Dark, the controls are clunky compared to them. It even ripped-off a lot of elements from the excellent Red Faction. Whoever disagrees with me is a blind fanboy, who hasn't played very many games or first-person shooters before Halo to know what a good game is. I'd rather play the MGS series, which have deep gameplay, three dimensional characters, and oscar-worthy storylines.SworshSoosh

I can't tell if your trolling because you just said Half Life 2 has better AI then Halo. Half Life 2 has some of the worse AI I have ever seen. All the enemies are bullet sponges hardly move when under attack. Halo does have bad friendly AI but the enemy AI is really smart...I also love how you say anybody who disagrees with you is a fanboy when several of your points are just wrong. No argument they are just wrong. Maybe it was slightly overrated but most of your post sounds like you are describing another game.

Definitely. I didn't even get into it until just before the 3rd one launched.

Shame the rest haven't been so good.

It's not very challenging and the A.I. is terrible, unlike Half-Life 2. SworshSoosh

Yes it deserved it's critical acclaim for paving the way for console FPS. Saying Half-Life 2 has better AI is laughable because all they do is stand still or charge you recklessly.

Edit: I'd also like to point out that halo 1 basically invented recharging health.

Did Halo: Combat Evolved deserve the critical acclaim it got?SworshSoosh

Heh, I see what you did there. Not bad.Skittles_McGee

[QUOTE="SworshSoosh"]Did Halo: Combat Evolved deserve the critical acclaim it got?Kane04

do you consider Jeff Gerstmann a model reviewer for doing what he did? defying hype? paid hype?

[QUOTE="Kane04"][QUOTE="SworshSoosh"]Did Halo: Combat Evolved deserve the critical acclaim it got?HavocV3

do you consider Jeff Gerstmann a model reviewer for doing what he did? defying hype? paid hype?

AI is terrible, unlike Half Life 2?AAllxxjjnn

The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell(unlike say F.E.A.R.)?

...

Now I don't know if the Fear fans are about to rip me a new one, but come on now...

Switch both of those examples TC and you're good. That said, I don't see what's so horrible about Halo's AI... I actually found it pretty good at times...

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]AI is terrible, unlike Half Life 2?StealthSting

The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell(unlike say F.E.A.R.)?

...

Now I don't know if the Fear fans are about to rip me a new one, but come on now...

Switch both of those examples TC and you're good. That said, I don't see what's so horrible about Halo's AI... I actually found it pretty good at times...

For the last time yes.

[QUOTE="StealthSting"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]AI is terrible, unlike Half Life 2?SworshSoosh

The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell(unlike say F.E.A.R.)?

...

Now I don't know if the Fear fans are about to rip me a new one, but come on now...

Switch both of those examples TC and you're good. That said, I don't see what's so horrible about Halo's AI... I actually found it pretty good at times...

I have no idea, I haven't played the first Halo in a long time. But I do remember being surprised at times with the AI. Then again I'm probably one of the last people on the planet you should hear when talking about the Halo series... hell, I only got to finish Combat Evolved--still have to remedy that.

I say no, it's a decent game, but it's not the best game ever. It didn't do anything new, and it was nothing special. The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell (Unlike say F.E.A.R.). It's not very challenging and the A.I. is terrible, unlike Half-Life 2. Critics ignored the flaws, gave into the hype by giving it high scores. There are better shooters out there. It was no where near as good as GoldenEye 007 or Perfect Dark, the controls are clunky compared to them. It even ripped-off a lot of elements from the excellent Red Faction. Whoever disagrees with me is a blind fanboy, who hasn't played very many games or first-person shooters before Halo to know what a good game is. I'd rather play the MGS series, which have deep gameplay, three dimensional characters, and oscar-worthy storylines.SworshSoosh

Nice thread and decend points but you lost somerespect from me from that sentence highlighted in blue, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

...Halo vs FEAR vs HL thread.....we are still in 2010, right??FastEddie2121

I say no, it's a decent game, but it's not the best game ever. It didn't do anything new, and it was nothing special. The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell (Unlike say F.E.A.R.). It's not very challenging and the A.I. is terrible, unlike Half-Life 2. Critics ignored the flaws, gave into the hype by giving it high scores. There are better shooters out there. It was no where near as good as GoldenEye 007 or Perfect Dark, the controls are clunky compared to them. It even ripped-off a lot of elements from the excellent Red Faction. Whoever disagrees with me is a blind fanboy, who hasn't played very many games or first-person shooters before Halo to know what a good game is. I'd rather play the MGS series, which have deep gameplay, three dimensional characters, and oscar-worthy storylines.SworshSoosh

[QUOTE="StealthSting"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]AI is terrible, unlike Half Life 2?SworshSoosh

The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell(unlike say F.E.A.R.)?

...

Now I don't know if the Fear fans are about to rip me a new one, but come on now...

Switch both of those examples TC and you're good. That said, I don't see what's so horrible about Halo's AI... I actually found it pretty good at times...

Heh, I see what you did there :P

you obviously didn't experience CE when it first came out on Xbox.

repetitive enemies unlike Fear? Hm, maybe I was playing the wrong one, but didnt you fight a clone army? (literally?)

I say no, it's a decent game, but it's not the best game ever. It didn't do anything new, and it was nothing special. The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell (Unlike say F.E.A.R.). It's not very challenging and the A.I. is terrible, unlike Half-Life 2. Critics ignored the flaws, gave into the hype by giving it high scores. There are better shooters out there. It was no where near as good as GoldenEye 007 or Perfect Dark, the controls are clunky compared to them. It even ripped-off a lot of elements from the excellent Red Faction. Whoever disagrees with me is a blind fanboy, who hasn't played very many games or first-person shooters before Halo to know what a good game is. I'd rather play the MGS series, which have deep gameplay, three dimensional characters, and oscar-worthy storylines.SworshSoosh

[QUOTE="SworshSoosh"][QUOTE="StealthSting"]

The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell(unlike say F.E.A.R.)?

...

Now I don't know if the Fear fans are about to rip me a new one, but come on now...

Switch both of those examples TC and you're good. That said, I don't see what's so horrible about Halo's AI... I actually found it pretty good at times...

NotTarts

Heh, I see what you did there :P

Yeah, I didn't approach the argument centered on Modern Warfare because I wasn't sure if he was being serious or not with the Halo example XD... after all, I hardly remember which difficulty level I played Halo to begin with...

Did Combat Evolved start with a fixed difficulty level? I can't remember...

I agree that it did not.

Level design was rubbish (with the exception of the Silent Cartographer) and usually recycled room after room. Fighting the flood was boring as hell which was what you did for the last half of the game. Enemies were recycled over and over again with barely any memorable firefights. Multiplayer was an unbalanced mess where all the players hogged the Scorpion tanks and spawn camp and weaponry like the assault rifle and shotgun were useless due to the pistol.

No, the Halo franchise doesn't deserve the critical acclaim it gets. Microsoft overhypes and critics deliver but the games are pretty generic in the end, they definitely don't deserve these scores for shallow characters, story and pretty casual gameplay. It is not a coincidence that the two FPS from the most greedy companies in the business (Microsoft and Activision) get so much praise everytime they copy/paste the game. To much money involved.

Halo: CE 9.7

Halo 2 9.4

Halo 3 9.5

Halo ODST 9

Halo Reach 9.5

It is ridiculous. The most overrated franchise to ever grace gaming.

I say no, it's a decent game, but it's not the best game ever. It didn't do anything new, and it was nothing special. The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell (Unlike say F.E.A.R.). It's not very challenging and the A.I. is terrible, unlike Half-Life 2. Critics ignored the flaws, gave into the hype by giving it high scores. There are better shooters out there. It was no where near as good as GoldenEye 007 or Perfect Dark, the controls are clunky compared to them. It even ripped-off a lot of elements from the excellent Red Faction. Whoever disagrees with me is a blind fanboy, who hasn't played very many games or first-person shooters before Halo to know what a good game is. I'd rather play the MGS series, which have deep gameplay, three dimensional characters, and oscar-worthy storylines.SworshSoosh

[QUOTE="FastEddie2121"]...Halo vs FEAR vs HL thread.....we are still in 2010, right??mitu123

Can't tell if your serious...terrible AI unlike Half Life? Critics gave into the hype?...it was the first game in the series there was no hype. MGS has Oscar Worthy storylines? It has a nice story, but Oscar worthy I think not. As someone who enjoys film and is usually a bit more critical than the average person I can safely say MGS does not have an Oscar worthy storyline. It doesn't even come close to movies such as Gladiator or Avatar (which were Academy Award winner and nominee respectively)and both of those movies had very weak plotlines for Oscar movies and really shouldn't have been in the running.

[QUOTE="StealthSting"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]AI is terrible, unlike Half Life 2?SworshSoosh

The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell(unlike say F.E.A.R.)?

...

Now I don't know if the Fear fans are about to rip me a new one, but come on now...

Switch both of those examples TC and you're good. That said, I don't see what's so horrible about Halo's AI... I actually found it pretty good at times...

[QUOTE="SworshSoosh"]I say no, it's a decent game, but it's not the best game ever. It didn't do anything new, and it was nothing special. The level design and enemy types are repetitive as all hell (Unlike say F.E.A.R.). It's not very challenging and the A.I. is terrible, unlike Half-Life 2. Critics ignored the flaws, gave into the hype by giving it high scores. There are better shooters out there. It was no where near as good as GoldenEye 007 or Perfect Dark, the controls are clunky compared to them. It even ripped-off a lot of elements from the excellent Red Faction. Whoever disagrees with me is a blind fanboy, who hasn't played very many games or first-person shooters before Halo to know what a good game is. I'd rather play the MGS series, which have deep gameplay, three dimensional characters, and oscar-worthy storylines.hd5870corei7

It was no where near as good as GoldenEye 007 or Perfect Dark, the controls are clunky compared to them.SworshSoosh

You're seriously saying this? No lying? A game where you move and shoot with the same hand and all but two face buttons are useless?

This is surprising to me that you'd rather have that over dual analog controls.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

No, the Halo franchise doesn't deserve the critical acclaim it gets. Microsoft overhypes and critics deliver but the games are pretty generic in the end, they definitely don't deserve these scores for shallow characters, story and pretty casual gameplay. It is not a coincidence that the two FPS from the most greedy companies in the business (Microsoft and Activision) get so much praise everytime they copy/paste the game. To much money involved.

Halo: CE 9.7

Halo 2 9.4

Halo 3 9.5

Halo ODST 9

Halo Reach 9.5

It is ridiculous. The most overrated franchise to ever grace gaming.

SworshSoosh