Halo is loved by the hardcore, casual and mainstream. Is it a phenomenon?

Discuss.

Any game that sells as much as Halo is a phenomenon.

Not since COD4 came along and killed any and all interest in the series for me and others.

Because Bungie is an amazing developer, their games are addicting and fun

Lots of games do that.

I'd say it is.

Its Cool.

I wouldn't say its worthy of an X-Files episode.

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

AHUGECAT

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

slvrraven9

Even Microsoft will admit Halo is the reason the Xbox is still around. When the Xbox launched all it had was Halo (and Oddworld, but meh), and though a few good games released in its first year (Panzer Dragoon and Splinter Cell come to mind) it was Halo that kept it alive. Without Halo there would be no Xbox.

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

AHUGECAT

Link or it didnt happen.

it isn't loved by the hardcore though >.>

i always thought people like Fatal1ty were hardcore because they played actually hard games and stuck with them for a long time. most people dont stick with a game for more than 1 year, 2 at most

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

slvrraven9

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

AHUGECAT

Even Microsoft will admit Halo is the reason the Xbox is still around. When the Xbox launched all it had was Halo (and Oddworld, but meh), and though a few good games released in its first year (Panzer Dragoon and Splinter Cell come to mind) it was Halo that kept it alive. Without Halo there would be no Xbox.

give MechAssault some credit, that was the definitive XBL MP experience before H2 came by in 2004.:)

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

AHUGECAT

Even Microsoft will admit Halo is the reason the Xbox is still around. When the Xbox launched all it had was Halo (and Oddworld, but meh), and though a few good games released in its first year (Panzer Dragoon and Splinter Cell come to mind) it was Halo that kept it alive. Without Halo there would be no Xbox.

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

AHUGECAT

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"] no. the only reason Bungie is around mabey...but MS has other games believe it or not. theres more to MS than just halo. bet thats a shocker to you huh?HavocV3

Even Microsoft will admit Halo is the reason the Xbox is still around. When the Xbox launched all it had was Halo (and Oddworld, but meh), and though a few good games released in its first year (Panzer Dragoon and Splinter Cell come to mind) it was Halo that kept it alive. Without Halo there would be no Xbox.

give MechAssault some credit, that was the definitive XBL MP experience before H2 came by in 2004.:)

MechAssault was Xbox Live's first killer app (good times) but Halo 2 sustained it. Without Halo though there is no Xbox. The impact Halo had on the Xbox was incredible - it was the first $350 game ever.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"] no. the only reason Bungie is around mabey...but MS has other games believe it or not. theres more to MS than just halo. bet thats a shocker to you huh?slvrraven9

Even Microsoft will admit Halo is the reason the Xbox is still around. When the Xbox launched all it had was Halo (and Oddworld, but meh), and though a few good games released in its first year (Panzer Dragoon and Splinter Cell come to mind) it was Halo that kept it alive. Without Halo there would be no Xbox.

first off you will NEVER hear microsoft admit ANYTHING like that. also ninja gaiden, fable,morrowind and COUNTLESS other games added to MS getting a strong footing in the industry. halo may have been the system seller back then but it wasnt the ONLY game that sould the system. theres more people than just halo lovers that owned xbox's

slvrraven9

Ninja Gaiden and Fable came out in the Xbox's later life cycle, and aren't even an inch near Halo, but Halo is what sustained it. The Xbox has a strong library (I prefer the Xbox) BUT it was Halo that made the Xbox what it is. The Xbox would not be around today if Halo never existed. The launch would have failed miserably and the games that came out the first 2 years wouldn't sustain it.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

Chutebox

Hell yeah they would, okay maybe not the Ratchet series (gotta have diversity here) but they'd give up Resistance, Killzone and SOCOM and whatever shooters they have in a heart beat for Halo.

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Even Microsoft will admit Halo is the reason the Xbox is still around. When the Xbox launched all it had was Halo (and Oddworld, but meh), and though a few good games released in its first year (Panzer Dragoon and Splinter Cell come to mind) it was Halo that kept it alive. Without Halo there would be no Xbox.

wolverine4262

yeah youre right they made some great games before halo. i personaly loved Oni and marathon just to name a couple. you got me there. Halo helped them out a lot though...their first real blockbuster hit

but i dont remember MS saying anything to the affect of it being sustained ONLY because of the halo sales. you mightve heard a reviewers opinion or some critic, but i doubt it was MS. thats like Sony admitting the PS3 survived its first year only because so many people bought it as a blu ray player and that saved itfrom of its lack of software...

It really is. Bungie Halo games are very successful both in sales and scores and the community are very active through the years.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

AHUGECAT

Hell yeah they would, okay maybe not the Ratchet series (gotta have diversity here) but they'd give up Resistance, Killzone and SOCOM and whatever shooters they have in a heart beat for Halo.

yeah youre right they made some great games before halo. i personaly loved Oni and marathon just to name a couple. you got me there. Halo helped them out a lot though...their first real blockbuster hit

but i dont remember MS saying anything to the affect of it being sustained ONLY because of the halo sales. you mightve heard a reviewers opinion or some critic, but i doubt it was MS. thats like Sony admitting the PS3 survived its first year only because so many people bought it as a blu ray player and that saved itfrom of its lack of software...

slvrraven9

Halo sustained it, eventually the Xbox did get a good library to justify it even moreso, but Halo is the Xbox and Xbox is Halo. Thankfully now though Microsoft has more massive franchises (ie Forza, Gears of War and Fable) but for the first few years the Xbox was only there so you can play Halo.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="Chutebox"] No they wouldn't lol.brennan7777

Hell yeah they would, okay maybe not the Ratchet series (gotta have diversity here) but they'd give up Resistance, Killzone and SOCOM and whatever shooters they have in a heart beat for Halo.

Halo has outsold all of them COMBINED, I mean the only reason Resistance and Killzone even exist is to try and recreate the Halo experience on the PS3. Halo > all PS3's shooters.

[QUOTE="brennan7777"]

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Hell yeah they would, okay maybe not the Ratchet series (gotta have diversity here) but they'd give up Resistance, Killzone and SOCOM and whatever shooters they have in a heart beat for Halo.

AHUGECAT

Halo has outsold all of them COMBINED, I mean the only reason Resistance and Killzone even exist is to try and recreate the Halo experience on the PS3. Halo > all PS3's shooters.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="brennan7777"] Lol prove it.

FIipMode

Halo has outsold all of them COMBINED, I mean the only reason Resistance and Killzone even exist is to try and recreate the Halo experience on the PS3. Halo > all PS3's shooters.

Killzone would've never happened if it wasn't for Halo. In fact Microsoft has had more innovations in the console area than Sony EVER has had. Sony is the anti-innovator. The PS2 was hilariously bad HARDWARE (ie only 2 controller ports?) Sony just follows, always have.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="Chutebox"] No they wouldn't lol.brennan7777

Hell yeah they would, okay maybe not the Ratchet series (gotta have diversity here) but they'd give up Resistance, Killzone and SOCOM and whatever shooters they have in a heart beat for Halo.

idk. the fact that Killzone was brought to playstation in attempt to suppress the popularity of Halo.

the same thing that MS does with Forza to weaken what Gran Turismo had/has to offer.

there's TONS of titles out there like this. you see EA and Activision doing this kind of thing all the time. Guitar Hero/Rock Band. COD vs. BC and MOH.

the same thing applies to so many 360/PS3 titles.

if there was no Halo(on console), I really doubt there'd be a Killzone. If Gears never came around, Insomniac probably wouldn't have gotten a request for Resistance. Hell, I believe Resistance released around Gears twice and Killzone was launched around the same time as H2. I don't see how they weren't trying to slow the popularity of eachothers' games.

until someone makes a what-if machine, we'll never know.;)

[QUOTE="FIipMode"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Halo has outsold all of them COMBINED, I mean the only reason Resistance and Killzone even exist is to try and recreate the Halo experience on the PS3. Halo > all PS3's shooters.

AHUGECAT

Killzone would've never happened if it wasn't for Halo. In fact Microsoft has had more innovations in the console area than Sony EVER has had. Sony is the anti-innovator. The PS2 was hilariously bad HARDWARE (ie only 2 controller ports?) Sony just follows, always have.

360 went down that path though too.

really, it's quite fun to draw inferences between PS2 and Xbox Original----PS3/360.

the consoles you'd think that are more deserving of higher sales just didn't, and that's all. Kind of sad how MS tried to offer everything last gen and still got put down. then we see them as their cheap selves this time around. but hey, can't blame them.

[QUOTE="wolverine4262"][QUOTE="slvrraven9"] first off you will NEVER hear microsoft admit ANYTHING like that. also ninja gaiden, fable, oblivion and COUNTLESS other games added to MS getting a strong footing in the industry. halo may have been the system seller back then but it wasnt the ONLY game that sould the system. theres more people than just halo lovers that owned xbox'sslvrraven9

yeah youre right they made some great games before halo. i personaly loved Oni and marathon just to name a couple. you got me there. Halo helped them out a lot though...their first real blockbuster hit

but i dont remember MS saying anything to the affect of it being sustained ONLY because of the halo sales. you mightve heard a reviewers opinion or some critic, but i doubt it was MS. thats like Sony admitting the PS3 survived its first year only because so many people bought it as a blu ray player and that saved itfrom of its lack of software...

[QUOTE="brennan7777"]

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Hell yeah they would, okay maybe not the Ratchet series (gotta have diversity here) but they'd give up Resistance, Killzone and SOCOM and whatever shooters they have in a heart beat for Halo.

AHUGECAT

Halo has outsold all of them COMBINED, I mean the only reason Resistance and Killzone even exist is to try and recreate the Halo experience on the PS3. Halo > all PS3's shooters.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="FIipMode"] Yes your right because Killzone was so similar to Halo. :roll:HavocV3

Killzone would've never happened if it wasn't for Halo. In fact Microsoft has had more innovations in the console area than Sony EVER has had. Sony is the anti-innovator. The PS2 was hilariously bad HARDWARE (ie only 2 controller ports?) Sony just follows, always have.

360 went down that path though too.

really, it's quite fun to draw inferences between PS2 and Xbox Original----PS3/360.

the consoles you'd think that are more deserving of higher sales just didn't, and that's all. Kind of sad how MS tried to offer everything last gen and still got put down. then we see them as their cheap selves this time around. but hey, can't blame them.

The Xbox 360 is far more innovative than the PS3 though. HD DVD is my only complaint but that would've made the price go too high ($599 lol) and HD DVD wasn't ready then. Microsoft last gen didn't understand what to do in the video game business but with the 360 they nailed it (except for RROD ahem ahem).

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="brennan7777"] Lol prove it.

brennan7777

Halo has outsold all of them COMBINED, I mean the only reason Resistance and Killzone even exist is to try and recreate the Halo experience on the PS3. Halo > all PS3's shooters.

Fable and Mass Effect aren't racing games, but yes, MS would have to be stupid not to give up Forza for Gran Turismo (even though Forza is a better series, Gran Turismo is very popular). And no way would MS give up Halo for Gran Turismo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_1_games

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ps2_games

Looking at the list of games you can see first person shooters were not on Sony's mind at all during the PS1/PS2 era, so why the sudden change? Simple: They wanted their own Halo (and Gears of War). If Sony did not want Halo they would not focus so much on shooters this gen.

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"]

yeah youre right they made some great games before halo. i personaly loved Oni and marathon just to name a couple. you got me there. Halo helped them out a lot though...their first real blockbuster hit

but i dont remember MS saying anything to the affect of it being sustained ONLY because of the halo sales. you mightve heard a reviewers opinion or some critic, but i doubt it was MS. thats like Sony admitting the PS3 survived its first year only because so many people bought it as a blu ray player and that saved itfrom of its lack of software...

Halo sustained it, eventually the Xbox did get a good library to justify it even moreso, but Halo is the Xbox and Xbox is Halo. Thankfully now though Microsoft has more massive franchises (ie Forza, Gears of War and Fable) but for the first few years the Xbox was only there so you can play Halo.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"]

yeah youre right they made some great games before halo. i personaly loved Oni and marathon just to name a couple. you got me there. Halo helped them out a lot though...their first real blockbuster hit

but i dont remember MS saying anything to the affect of it being sustained ONLY because of the halo sales. you mightve heard a reviewers opinion or some critic, but i doubt it was MS. thats like Sony admitting the PS3 survived its first year only because so many people bought it as a blu ray player and that saved itfrom of its lack of software...

slvrraven9

Halo sustained it, eventually the Xbox did get a good library to justify it even moreso, but Halo is the Xbox and Xbox is Halo. Thankfully now though Microsoft has more massive franchises (ie Forza, Gears of War and Fable) but for the first few years the Xbox was only there so you can play Halo.

What I am saying is the truth. What you think I am saying is that the Xbox had no games but Halo, but what I am saying is that Halo was the reason people bought the Xbox, especially during its first 2 years.

[QUOTE="HavocV3"]

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Killzone would've never happened if it wasn't for Halo. In fact Microsoft has had more innovations in the console area than Sony EVER has had. Sony is the anti-innovator. The PS2 was hilariously bad HARDWARE (ie only 2 controller ports?) Sony just follows, always have.

AHUGECAT

360 went down that path though too.

really, it's quite fun to draw inferences between PS2 and Xbox Original----PS3/360.

the consoles you'd think that are more deserving of higher sales just didn't, and that's all. Kind of sad how MS tried to offer everything last gen and still got put down. then we see them as their cheap selves this time around. but hey, can't blame them.

The Xbox 360 is far more innovative than the PS3 though. HD DVD is my only complaint but that would've made the price go too high ($599 lol) and HD DVD wasn't ready then. Microsoft last gen didn't understand what to do in the video game business but with the 360 they nailed it (except for RROD ahem ahem).

well, they left out a number of other features this time around. Wi-fi doesn't bother me (wire is always best) but it bothers a select group and their adapter's price tag does it no good.

they offered everything you would need at the time with Xbox Orig, and were ousted badly. Sony offered crap-nothing (feature-wise)and had poor quality control at the start. they still made tons of teh cash.

now Sony offers the bells and whistles, better initial quality etc, but they lose tons and tons of money in the process. just as MS did with every one of their 23 million Origs. and you really CAN'T blame them for charging for online at the time.

now I'm skipping around a lot, but my point is that they really flip-flopped in so many fields. doing the very opposite of eachother from their ps2/xbox transition.

and you're right about HD-DVD. Don't think either even caught on until 2006, well after launch.

nor were they major proponents in the development of HD-DVD, and if it had failed with the Xbox having internal HD-DVD, I wonder what hoops and excess expense would be involved to keep it going.

well, they left out a number of other features this time around. Wi-fi doesn't bother me (wire is always best) but it bothers a select group and their adapter's price tag does it no good.

they offered everything you would need at the time with Xbox Orig, and were ousted badly. Sony offered crap-nothing (feature-wise)and had poor quality control at the start. they still made tons of teh cash.

now Sony offers the bells and whistles, better initial quality etc, but they lose tons and tons of money in the process. just as MS did with every one of their 23 million Origs. and you really CAN'T blame them for charging for online at the time.

now I'm skipping around a lot, but my point is that they really flip-flopped in so many fields. doing the very opposite of eachother from their ps2/xbox transition.

HavocV3

Oh yeah I forgot about WiFi, that's a good point, but you can get WiFi + an Xbox 360 for under $299 (PS3 price), but yeah MS should've put it in (but would've cost too much).

And you can't blame them for cutting off the Xbox early too, $4 billion in losses, wow. Now of course MS is trying to get that back with outrageous priced peripherals (ie WiFi adapter).

The PS3 actually has been losing features since its original inception - they went from having 239053295 USB ports, memory card slots, backwards compatibility, etc. etc.

and you're right about HD-DVD. Don't think either even caught on until 2006, well after launch.

nor were they major proponents in the development of HD-DVD, and if it had failed with the Xbox having internal HD-DVD, I wonder what hoops and excess expense would be involved to keep it going.

HavocV3

I think if MS was going to use HD DVD they would use it for storage only, like with the DVD for the Xbox. To play movies you need the software and dongles for it, but even then HD DVD would cost too much (not as much as Blu-ray though). I think MS was smart sticking to DVD because it helped the price so much.

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Halo sustained it, eventually the Xbox did get a good library to justify it even moreso, but Halo is the Xbox and Xbox is Halo. Thankfully now though Microsoft has more massive franchises (ie Forza, Gears of War and Fable) but for the first few years the Xbox was only there so you can play Halo.

What I am saying is the truth. What you think I am saying is that the Xbox had no games but Halo, but what I am saying is that Halo was the reason people bought the Xbox, especially during its first 2 years.

It WAS a phenomenon, the series has turned into a bit of a joke with ODST (full game? Yeah right)andHalo Wars. Its been 9 years since Halo: CE, and 5 since Halo 2, after that the series has jumped the shark. Halo 3 was pretty good, but in a year with the superior CoD4 its just another in a line of declining Xbox games.

Nothing against MS, but all they seem to have for major exclusives are Halo, Gears, and maybe Fable. If MS could commit to more new IP's and creative ideas and just let Bungie run their course with Halo, I imagine they could really do something to rival PS3 monsters like Heavy Rain and Killzone 2.

So to answer your question, no it is not a phenomenon. It WAS one, but now its just another in a line of many, many shooters you can find.

EDIT: Also just wanted to say, people did not buy an Xbox for Halo, they bought Halo because it was the only good game forthe Xboxat the time. I could just say people bought a Nintendo for Wii play or PS3 owners bouth a PS3 for Resistance 1.

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

Not since COD4 came along and killed any and all interest in the series for me and others.

clubsammich91

It WAS a phenomenon, the series has turned into a bit of a joke with ODST (full game? Yeah right)andHalo Wars. Its been 9 years since Halo: CE, and 5 since Halo 2, after that the series has jumped the shark. Halo 3 was pretty good, but in a year with the superior CoD4 its just another in a line of declining Xbox games.

Nothing against MS, but all they seem to have for major exclusives are Halo, Gears, and maybe Fable. If MS could commit to more new IP's and creative ideas and just let Bungie run their course with Halo, I imagine they could really do something to rival PS3 monsters like Heavy Rain and Killzone 2.

So to answer your question, no it is not a phenomenon. It WAS one, but now its just another in a line of many, many shooters you can find.

EDIT: Also just wanted to say, people did not buy an Xbox for Halo, they bought Halo because it was the only good game forthe Xboxat the time. I could just say people bought a Nintendo for Wii play or PS3 owners bouth a PS3 for Resistance 1.

SPYDER0416

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason the Xbox is around still. Sony would give up Resistance series, Killzone series, SOCOM series, Ratchet series, and a lot more JUST for Halo.

93soccer