Hall of Fame: Halo vs. Half-Life

Why did you even bother making this thread, you set it up as a legitimate comparison but instead all of your responses have turned into nothing but fanyboy drivel. When someone disagrees with you (pretty much everyone here) you resort to bashing their avatars, calling them hermits or some other sort of childish attack.

The OP was pretty good too(with exception to the 9/11 reference) shame you ruined your own thread by resorting to name calling and personal attacks rather than legitimate arguments.

Halo 3 has outsold Half-Life 2 with regards to retail. Half-Life 2 stands at approx. 6.5 million retail copies sold. That statistic does not include steam purchases in which Gabe Newell himself has stated that steam purchases outpace retail. But hey, if sales were representative of quality, I suppose McDonald's is the best quality restaurant.

Many people have already pointed out how HL2 was a much deeper, more immersive, and overall much more rewarding shooter than Halo. Halo is your standard, shootem up, run and gun, blast the aliens game. Halo is great, I love it but saying its better than Half-Life... I don't think so, not even close.

Now instead of making a real comparison or arugment, all you've done is bash HL2 practically sayings its a terrible game.

The two can't be compared and here's why.

Have you ever tried to compare someone in one era of a sport to another? Many people try but it's not possible because the times were different.

I look at Wolfenstein/Doom as the Babe Ruths of the fps world. They started it all and were the first big names.

I look at Half Life as the Joe Dimaggio or Mickey Mantle. Half Life made the genre even more popular and revolutionized it.

I look at Halo as Alex Rodgriguez. He is the new kid on the block in comparison to the others and but has also had a huge effect on the industry.

...but just like the players you can't compare the games. They were in different eras. Just as one example, the amount of shooter fans back when Half Life sold was much MUCH smaller than nowadays and even smaller during the Doom/Wolfenstein days.

On top of that I don't think anyone would say Babe Ruth is inferior to the Mantles, Dimaggios and Arods of the future. Arod may be the current superstar but were it not for Joe D, Mantle and Ruth before him, he may not even have a job.

If you want to compare games, you should compare current generation games because the simple fact is there are too many other variables in place to make the comparison unbiased and complete.

Lets see....

The game that carried Microsoft's system back when it launched.....

Or the game that singlehandedly revolutionized the FPS genre?

Just to back my statement up.... Until Half-Life came out, FPS's were known simply as "Doom clones." There honestly was no reason to call them anything else. Then, Half-Life comes and reshapes the way the industry looks at the FPS genre.

Which one wins? I'd say it is obvious.

The Half Life series is leagues better.

Half Life re-invented the wheel. For ALL FPS. And, without argument, for the better. Halo, however did not. All Halo did was show that console FPS could be played smoothly. I even consider PErfect Dark to be better than Halo. To this day.

But Half Life 1 and Perfect Dark are two games in my top 3 FPS. And Halo is probably my 11th in my top FPS list. I think. It may be 1oth.

[QUOTE="TheDefinitive"][QUOTE="thegoldenpoo"]

Well Halo:CE is the better game but there are a good few years between HL1 and Halo:CE, in its time HL1 was an FPS revolution, i think it is one of the games that can be turely said to have invented the modern FPS.

Halo2 and HL2 both came out in the same year and the difference is staggering. they look and feel almost a generation apart. I still maintain that HL2 is the best shooter made to this very day (with S.T.A.L.K.E.R. SoC a close second)

Halo 3 was just a REALLY well done Halo2 HD IMO (not really a bad thing) and HL2;EP2 is dammed close to the heights of HL2. So its hard to judge which is the 'better' series.

I know which was the most innovative, and it wasn't halo ;)

AdrianWerner

So, is the best game still in the Halo series?

lol this guy always makes me laugh.... he says halo is better blabla, then some1 says its not and he turns into the biggest halo fanboy ever, like its some revolutionary game that changed the FPS genre

hey got some news for ya, ITS NOT.

Halo Combat Evolved > Half Life 1

Half Life 2 > Halo 2

Halo 3 > Halflife 2/ Half Life 11 + All expansions

The two can't be compared and here's why.

Have you ever tried to compare someone in one era of a sport to another? Many people try but it's not possible because the times were different.

I look at Wolfenstein/Doom as the Babe Ruths of the fps world. They started it all and were the first big names.

I look at Half Life as the Joe Dimaggio or Mickey Mantle. Half Life made the genre even more popular and revolutionized it.

I look at Halo as Alex Rodgriguez. He is the new kid on the block in comparison to the others and but has also had a huge effect on the industry.

...but just like the players you can't compare the games. They were in different eras. Just as one example, the amount of shooter fans back when Half Life sold was much MUCH smaller than nowadays and even smaller during the Doom/Wolfenstein days. On top of that I don't think anyone would say Babe Ruth is inferior to the Mantles, Dimaggios and Arods of the future. Arod may be the current superstar but were it not for Joe D, Mantle and Ruth before him, he may not even have a job.If you want to compare games, you should compare current generation games because the simple fact is there are too many other variables in place to make the comparison unbiased and complete.

Xalaten

I totally agree with this post! Well done, good sir!

Lets see....

The game that carried Microsoft's system back when it launched.....

Or the game that singlehandedly revolutionized the FPS genre?

Just to back my statement up.... Until Half-Life came out, FPS's were known simply as "Doom clones." There honestly was no reason to call them anything else. Then, Half-Life comes and reshapes the way the industry looks at the FPS genre.

Which one wins? I'd say it is obvious.

horrowhip

Why did Halo 3 sell more than Half-Life 2, then?

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

Lets see....

The game that carried Microsoft's system back when it launched.....

Or the game that singlehandedly revolutionized the FPS genre?

Just to back my statement up.... Until Half-Life came out, FPS's were known simply as "Doom clones." There honestly was no reason to call them anything else. Then, Half-Life comes and reshapes the way the industry looks at the FPS genre.

Which one wins? I'd say it is obvious.

TheDefinitive

Why did Halo 3 sell more than Half-Life 2, then?

Why did Wii Play sell more than Halo 3 then?

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

Lets see....

The game that carried Microsoft's system back when it launched.....

Or the game that singlehandedly revolutionized the FPS genre?

Just to back my statement up.... Until Half-Life came out, FPS's were known simply as "Doom clones." There honestly was no reason to call them anything else. Then, Half-Life comes and reshapes the way the industry looks at the FPS genre.

Which one wins? I'd say it is obvious.

TheDefinitive

Why did Halo 3 sell more than Half-Life 2, then?

Halo would not exist if Half-Life had not come out.

The FPS genre AS WE KNOW IT would not exist without Half-Life. That is absolutely undisputable.

Also, Halo has not outsold Half-Life. Half-Life 2 has sold 6.5 million AT RETAIL(considering the game was and has been one of the top selling games on Steam every week since 2004, I would say it is safe to assume they have gotten more than just 1.6 million Steam copies sold), and Half-Life has sold 9.3 million copies at retail, plus any copies sold through Steam....

So what now?

[QUOTE="kejigoto"][QUOTE="TheDefinitive"]Halo 3 had 1 million preorders in North America before it started. Cry. It still would have owned Half-Life 2 in sales.

TheDefinitive

Woulda, coulda, shoulda, but it didn't. Millions spent on advertising, and a game with next to no advertising outperformed it sales wise. All you can talk about is pre-orders and short term sales, but we are well beyond that, and as it stands right now, Half Life series has sold more than the Halo series.

Once again I issue my challenge to make a thread with a poll and let the people vote on it, I can assure you Half Life will come up on top. Doesn't matter how many Mountain Dew cans Master Chief was on, nothing can save him from the might that is Half Life.

No, it didn't. Halo 3 has sold 8 - 9 million copies. Half-Life 2 hasn't. Halo 3 also made $170M day one in the U.S. Half-Life 2 didn't. Halo 3 had 1.7 < preorders in the U.S. before release. Half-Life 2 didn't. Halo 3 sold ~2.5 million units in the U.S. in 24 hours. Half-Life 2 didn't.

Conclusion: Halo 3 owned Half-Life 2 (sales).

Chief has more money than Freeman.

Och..and funny thing, but you do know OrangeBox has HL2 in it? Which means that more people have bought HL2 than any Halo too :D

Half Life > all

HL series>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>any other FPS ever madeGiancar

Halo Combat Evolved < Half Life 1

Half Life 2 > Halo 2

Halo 3 < HOMO SAPIENS

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

Lets see....

The game that carried Microsoft's system back when it launched.....

Or the game that singlehandedly revolutionized the FPS genre?

Just to back my statement up.... Until Half-Life came out, FPS's were known simply as "Doom clones." There honestly was no reason to call them anything else. Then, Half-Life comes and reshapes the way the industry looks at the FPS genre.

Which one wins? I'd say it is obvious.

TheDefinitive

Why did Halo 3 sell more than Half-Life 2, then?

It might have something to do with the infinity billion dollars Microsoft spent advertising it.

[QUOTE="TheDefinitive"][QUOTE="horrowhip"]

Lets see....

The game that carried Microsoft's system back when it launched.....

Or the game that singlehandedly revolutionized the FPS genre?

Just to back my statement up.... Until Half-Life came out, FPS's were known simply as "Doom clones." There honestly was no reason to call them anything else. Then, Half-Life comes and reshapes the way the industry looks at the FPS genre.

Which one wins? I'd say it is obvious.

Xalaten

Why did Halo 3 sell more than Half-Life 2, then?

Why did Wii Play sell more than Halo 3 then?

[QUOTE="Giancar"]HL series>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>any other FPS ever madeAncientDozer

I do enjoy this specific debate if only to challenge the commonly accepted beliefs of some individuals. To make them ask the question "why".

As with Halo versus Half-Life, the games really aren't all that different. At least not to the extent that the fans would like.

Both have varying levels of strategy and tactics that could be applied but could easily be bypassed with running and gunning.

Both games have characters that lack depth or personality. The Master Chief with the few arguably cliche lines he spouts and the walking plank of wood that is Gordon Freeman. I want to hammer Freeman a little more because I know Master Chief gets a lot of flak and a lot of people like to put Freeman on a pedestal. But really, what is Freeman? He's suppose to be this lab rat who magically knows how to whup trained marines and aliens alike? Never really explained. The suit helps but it can only go so far. The guy never talks. His expressions are always the same. The characters do talk about him but they build him up even if you run around like an idiot. Really, he's no different from any other FPS lead character with a few novel and trendy ideas (lulz, crowbar and gravity gun).

People love to argue that Halo isn't original but Half-Life is. But when you think about it, Half-Life is really just Doom with a different paint job. In doom, you have some sap that never speaks who gets pulled into something he didn't want to get pulled into. Both games focus on portals/dimensional technology and accidentally releasing enemies into our world. The only difference is cosmetic. In doom it's demons. In Half-Life? Aliens/interdimensional beings.

The one advantage that Half-Life (well, 2) is graphics. It also has mod-ability. Which are big, don't get me wrong, but half of it wasn't even Valve's. Half of it doesn't even have to do with the actual game.

No, I don't hate Half-life. I own it all and I love it. But I do like kicking down pedestals and high horses that belong to other people.

Yes, Halo is like a lot of other FPS games and so is Half-Life. But they provide pretty good experiences and they are worth our time. That's what is important. We don't have to compare them. They do the best they can with what they got.

You clearly have no understanding of why they made Freeman the way that they did.... Gordon Freeman was designed as a nobody, a generic, simple man who was just caught in the middle of something bigger. and AS a nobody, they intended for the PLAYER to identify with him. They intended to have the PLAYER draw their own conclusions about who Freeman was and what he though. Rather than shoving the story down the player's throat, they took another approach and put the player in a world and let the WORLD tell the story. There are a number of MODERN games that can't even pull it off as well as Half-Life did.

And Half-Life 2 only took it forward.

As for wondering why Freeman is as good with a gun as he is, if you payed attention to the DETAILS and seen everything the game had hinted at about it, you would know that it was just a thing. They don't need to explain it. G-Man shows up and "buys" Gordon's contract for the sole purpose of having him fight the Combine. It is made to seem like you just were destined to do what you are doing. There isn't any reason other than you were chosen by the G-Man. And there doesn't NEED to be any more of a reason than that.

As for you arguing that Half-Life is Doom in a different paint job, you are again demonstrating your lack of understanding of what exactly Half-Life did. It made the world and the DETAILS important. The little things that 90% of people won't notice, yet still are needed to make the world complete. It honestly brought a new sense of storytelling into the genre that would be copied 100 times over in all future FPS games.

The story itself may not have been all that original. But it was all about the presentation. Having played Half-Life in 1998 when it came out, that train ride to work was a revolution in its own right.

Let me pose this question to you since you seem competent. How is its quality better? What aspects do you think are better?AncientDozer

Oh. My. God. You're exactly the reason why I attack Half-Life even though I love the game. Read my other post. Please. Also. . sauce? Where is your sauce to your bold claims.AncientDozer

Halo Ce and HL (the first one) were awsome fps defining games.

Halo 2 dissapointed me more than any game ever made

HL2 and Ep1 were beyond boring

Halo 3 and Ep 2 were decent

Halo Ce and HL (the first one) were awsome fps defining games.

Halo 2 dissapointed me more than any game ever made

HL2 and Ep1 were beyond boring

Halo 3 and Ep 2 were decent

htekemerald

Why did Half Life 2 and Episode 1 bore you? I was just re-playing Half Life 2 about an hour ago, and it was a blast.

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

Halo Ce and HL (the first one) were awsome fps defining games.

Halo 2 dissapointed me more than any game ever made

HL2 and Ep1 were beyond boring

Halo 3 and Ep 2 were decent

Noldorin2646

Why did Half Life 2 and Episode 1 bore you? I was just re-playing Half Life 2 about an hour ago, and it was a blast.

Generic guns (The gravity gun was awesome but not put to nearly enough use)

Bad AI

Terrible vehicle sections

Bad gunplay

bad puzzles (how many times do I have to put an object on one end of a stick to lift the other end up before it gets stale? once.)

Besides that the plot was pretty generic. An orwellian style society... never been done to death before.

Half Life revolutionized story/narrative-driven shooters. Halo popularized shooters among the mainstream casual gamer crowd.

Half Life definitely takes the cake for achievement.
foxhound_fox

you're comparing a game made years ago to a current gen game? your title is misleading, i actually thought you would compare halo: CE with half life 2.

either way, i do believe that the original halo still stands as the superior game because of it's superior vehicle mechanics, its a more fair comparison than what TC listed, considering that there are no HL current gen games as of yet. HL2 was more innovative, more creative, had a better story, but never felt as epic or was never as much fun as Halo CE.

I'll be blunt.

Half Life is better and more influential than Halo to the genre; particularly in design.

It revolutionised the genre, and has shaped the modern FPS as we know it.

Not much has happened since in the singleplayer department. No not even Halo.

Even though its three years older. And yes its a better series too, despite the epsodic design formula failing; howeve Halo 2 and 3 both sported very underwhelming singleplayer offerings.

Besides its in the GameSpot 'Greatest Games' hall of game too

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

Lets see....

The game that carried Microsoft's system back when it launched.....

Or the game that singlehandedly revolutionized the FPS genre?

Just to back my statement up.... Until Half-Life came out, FPS's were known simply as "Doom clones." There honestly was no reason to call them anything else. Then, Half-Life comes and reshapes the way the industry looks at the FPS genre.

Which one wins? I'd say it is obvious.

TheDefinitive

Why did Halo 3 sell more than Half-Life 2, then?