Why Halo is getting so much hate Recently ?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by kingcrimson24 (460 posts) -

First off , well Most Play Station Fans hate Halo , thats a Normal thing and I was never Surprised by it . and I'm not talking about PS fans here .

But I Still don't Get it Why Some Halo Fans Say Halo 4 sucked or it killed the Series ... Halo 4 is Actually my second Favorite Halo game after halo 2 . Halo 4 had The Best Campaign With Amazing Art Style and Music , Great Story and Gameplay . and The way it ended and The Events of Spartan ops got me Really Excited for What's coming up next . Will Cortana be back ? what happens to Doctor Halsey ? What Happens to Masterchief now ? ....

I think those who Hated Halo 4 were People who played Just for Multiplayer and they didn't even Try out the Campaign . those who don't know anything about Halo Universe , Halo books , Races and Histories about them . they Just Bought it for MP and didn't like it .

what do you think ? what is wrong with Halo Franchise right now that made it get so much Hate recently ?

#2 Edited by IMAHAPYHIPPO (2569 posts) -

I think the Halo series is like a great actor on a TV series. He gets a few Emmy's, and then by the third or fourth season, the consistent high quality has grown stale because he's not getting any better. Halo's kind of on the same page. It hasn't really done anything new, and for people who eventually got sick of Halo 3, not seeing the series improve significantly is why Halo 4 bored them to tears.

#3 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18443 posts) -

Franchise fatigue. Anything gets heat when it has overstayed its welcome

#4 Edited by speedfreak48t5p (7496 posts) -

Microsoft's milking and anti-consumer business practices.

Also, the fanbase hated the multiplayer for some reason.

#5 Edited by Randolph (10503 posts) -

I dunno... I only see Halo mentioned in this forum these days when people make threads asking why it's "hated" so much. o_0

I love Halo. It's not very original, yeah. It's not "high art" gaming either. But I like the setting and lore, and the gameplay is usually really great. (the way too dark sections of Halo 2 with no headlamp aside) Cortana for life.

#6 Posted by platinumking320 (666 posts) -

First off , well Most Play Station Fans hate Halo , thats a Normal thing and I was never Surprised by it . and I'm not talking about PS fans here .

But I Still don't Get it Why Some Halo Fans Say Halo 4 sucked or it killed the Series ... Halo 4 is Actually my second Favorite Halo game after halo 2 . Halo 4 had The Best Campaign With Amazing Art Style and Music , Great Story and Gameplay . and The way it ended and The Events of Spartan ops got me Really Excited for What's coming up next . Will Cortana be back ? what happens to Doctor Halsey ? What Happens to Masterchief now ? ....

I think those who Hated Halo 4 were People who played Just for Multiplayer and they didn't even Try out the Campaign . those who don't know anything about Halo Universe , Halo books , Races and Histories about them . they Just Bought it for MP and didn't like it .

what do you think ? what is wrong with Halo Franchise right now that made it get so much Hate recently ?

I guess...For me it's the way the forerunner fights are situated. Not as varied as it could be. The formation between the knights and their support feels too similar. When you get past the grunt and elite formations in earlier titles the covenant mix it up a little better in single player.

Hopefully 343 will improve in this area.

#7 Posted by DJ-Lafleur (34145 posts) -

I don't hate Halo 4 or think it was terrible, but it was kind of disappointing after Reach.

So I am mildly interested in Halo 5, but not as much as I was for Halo 4 before it released.

#8 Edited by yearssomuch (54 posts) -

It's because the Halo series was supposed to end with Reach, until Microsoft decided that they couldn't launch a new console cycle without their biggest console seller.

Granted, I enjoyed Halo 4. The single player campaign was the best campaign since Combat Evolved, and the multiplayer was more reminiscent of Halo 2 and 3, which is a plus in my book (keep in mind, I enjoyed Reach very much at the same time). But that doesn't change the fact that they're milking the franchise at this point, which is clear.

#9 Edited by Legendaryscmt (12532 posts) -

To me, Microsoft is milking the franchise in the sense of adding on sequels to a story that had ended. Granted, I'm a big Halo fan and I thought 4 was good, but it shouldn't have been. I would have rather had a game that was a prequel, or one where you played as the Covenant, dealing more with their lore.

#10 Edited by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

Halo has no bigger fan than I. But H4 was a mess.

You say it had a good story, I say where was that when I played? Because I saw an entire game that exists essentially just for making a big ol retcon to work in their new Big Bad. Plus the Promethean enemies were crap in a hat. Halo's enemies have always been the best part of the game. Some people might not like the Flood, but you can't say the encounters with them weren't exciting. They break up the tension of the Covenant fights and with the exception of the original Library level, I think they were fun. There were tons of viable options for taking out Flood, and lots of ways to take out Covenant and it was a good time for all.

But the Prometheans. Ugh. What did they add to the mix? Nothing whatsoever. The same boring encounters over and over ad infinitum. Every Promethean encounter played out the same. Shoot the dogs, then the hovering enemies who heal and shield, then attack the Knights. Every time. EVERY TIME. Plus the new weapons weren't very interesting, plus there were no new vehicles, plus the enemies having the ability to just warp all over the battlefield is bullshit. It's just not fun to work like crazy to break the shield of a Promethean Knight only to have him zip away behind a wall and then boom, you've used all your good ammo for the first shield pop and now you have to scrounge whatever hasn't disappeared from the battlefield while he goes to regenerate. Frankly, the fights were overlong, dull, uninspired and the biggest sin of all: NOT FUN.

Sure, the Covenant encounters in H4 were fine. How could they not be? There's 5 other games to draw inspiration (and AI code) from. The Covenant stuff was fine, but without the Flood to break them up and with constant Promethean encounters to add in a level of frustration on top of everything else, I just couldn't bring myself to play Halo 4 a second time. Not even a second time. And for reference, the campaign is what I show up for. My friend and I co-op the levels, like finding the secrets or just seeing what kind of stuff we can do with the vehicles. And this one couldn't even keep me interested for 2 playthroughs. I've beaten Halo 1 at least 25 or 30 times. Halo 4 has never even been pulled back out of the files.

I honestly don't mind the changes they made to multiplayer that much. It's not why I show up, but I do like Halo multiplayer. Usually when a new Halo comes out I play it for a few weeks, maybe a couple of months, then I move on to another game. H4 I didn't even last 3 weeks before just getting bored of it. In Halo 3 and all the others since they had ancillary things to do when you needed a break from the action. FORGE was fun to goof around with, the theater mode was a blast and let you take interesting screenshots from a console game as well as videos. But shipping with a broken theater mode and a gimped FORGE mode was a bad idea.

Spartan Ops was the lone bit of excitement in Halo 4. Those were a good idea. But they weren't worth jettisoning the entire FIREFIGHT mode to have.

All in all, Halo 4 felt like a sloppy follow up to what are, collectively, some of the most fun games I've ever played. The original Halo trilogy as well as ODST and REACH are all great. But 4 is forced and unfocused and it seems to be desperate to work in Greg Baer's Forerunner Trilogy mythos instead of standing on it's own merits. I know that it's cool that Halo gets this expanded universe. And I have read and enjoyed a lot of the books even. But they were never necessary to enjoy the games. This time it didn't feel like that was the case. Of course I knew why the Covenant were attacking, I read Glasslands. But how many people didn't read that who are used to only playing the games? How many of them couldn't even follow the story? A lot of them, trust me. I remember the forums when that game came out. It was crazy.

Despite the several preceding paragraphs, I am actually hopeful for Halo 5. I had a bad feeling that most of the dev time was spent making Halo 4 looks so damn pretty and not enough time working out the details of the game modes like theater and stuff. I hope that the next game will have some new and interesting stuff to do with the Chief now that the boring exposition chapter of the Didact story has been gotten out of the way.

#11 Edited by so_hai (1698 posts) -

Any series that is "ended", and is then brought back can never recapture the excitement, even if the games are just as good. There's something cynical about bringing a series back so soon after its finale.

#12 Posted by kingcrimson24 (460 posts) -

Halo has no bigger fan than I. But H4 was a mess.

You say it had a good story, I say where was that when I played? Because I saw an entire game that exists essentially just for making a big ol retcon to work in their new Big Bad. Plus the Promethean enemies were crap in a hat. Halo's enemies have always been the best part of the game. Some people might not like the Flood, but you can't say the encounters with them weren't exciting. They break up the tension of the Covenant fights and with the exception of the original Library level, I think they were fun. There were tons of viable options for taking out Flood, and lots of ways to take out Covenant and it was a good time for all.

But the Prometheans. Ugh. What did they add to the mix? Nothing whatsoever. The same boring encounters over and over ad infinitum. Every Promethean encounter played out the same. Shoot the dogs, then the hovering enemies who heal and shield, then attack the Knights. Every time. EVERY TIME. Plus the new weapons weren't very interesting, plus there were no new vehicles, plus the enemies having the ability to just warp all over the battlefield is bullshit. It's just not fun to work like crazy to break the shield of a Promethean Knight only to have him zip away behind a wall and then boom, you've used all your good ammo for the first shield pop and now you have to scrounge whatever hasn't disappeared from the battlefield while he goes to regenerate. Frankly, the fights were overlong, dull, uninspired and the biggest sin of all: NOT FUN.

Sure, the Covenant encounters in H4 were fine. How could they not be? There's 5 other games to draw inspiration (and AI code) from. The Covenant stuff was fine, but without the Flood to break them up and with constant Promethean encounters to add in a level of frustration on top of everything else, I just couldn't bring myself to play Halo 4 a second time. Not even a second time. And for reference, the campaign is what I show up for. My friend and I co-op the levels, like finding the secrets or just seeing what kind of stuff we can do with the vehicles. And this one couldn't even keep me interested for 2 playthroughs. I've beaten Halo 1 at least 25 or 30 times. Halo 4 has never even been pulled back out of the files.

I honestly don't mind the changes they made to multiplayer that much. It's not why I show up, but I do like Halo multiplayer. Usually when a new Halo comes out I play it for a few weeks, maybe a couple of months, then I move on to another game. H4 I didn't even last 3 weeks before just getting bored of it. In Halo 3 and all the others since they had ancillary things to do when you needed a break from the action. FORGE was fun to goof around with, the theater mode was a blast and let you take interesting screenshots from a console game as well as videos. But shipping with a broken theater mode and a gimped FORGE mode was a bad idea.

Spartan Ops was the lone bit of excitement in Halo 4. Those were a good idea. But they weren't worth jettisoning the entire FIREFIGHT mode to have.

All in all, Halo 4 felt like a sloppy follow up to what are, collectively, some of the most fun games I've ever played. The original Halo trilogy as well as ODST and REACH are all great. But 4 is forced and unfocused and it seems to be desperate to work in Greg Baer's Forerunner Trilogy mythos instead of standing on it's own merits. I know that it's cool that Halo gets this expanded universe. And I have read and enjoyed a lot of the books even. But they were never necessary to enjoy the games. This time it didn't feel like that was the case. Of course I knew why the Covenant were attacking, I read Glasslands. But how many people didn't read that who are used to only playing the games? How many of them couldn't even follow the story? A lot of them, trust me. I remember the forums when that game came out. It was crazy.

Despite the several preceding paragraphs, I am actually hopeful for Halo 5. I had a bad feeling that most of the dev time was spent making Halo 4 looks so damn pretty and not enough time working out the details of the game modes like theater and stuff. I hope that the next game will have some new and interesting stuff to do with the Chief now that the boring exposition chapter of the Didact story has been gotten out of the way.

Actually After Playing 5 Halo games Fighting the Covenant and Flood , when I fought with Covenant During the First two Missions , I Felt bad , I Was like ... uh ... covenant covenant .... But As soon As Promethean Came up I was Happy and The game felt really fresh . And One of the amazing things about Halo 4 was the environments . Art Style and the concept Art was really good . a Good example is The Second part of Mission "Reclaimer " when you walk up to the Forerunner Building with the atmospheric Music and those green lights all over the place .

I loved the Glowing Orange theme of Prometheans all over the game . Much more than I liked Covenant . you know why ? because it felt Pure SCI FI . I must admit Halo Reach and a bit of Halo 3 felt like a Military shooter . but Halo CE and Halo 4 Have this feeling of exploring New Places , not just fighting .

#13 Posted by nicecall (428 posts) -

Franchise fatigue. Anything gets heat when it has overstayed its welcome

i think this also. After the first couple Halo games i was done... but they kept pumping them out. I rather have waited 10+ years for a really good Halo to come out after the original.

#14 Posted by Boddicker (2701 posts) -

@so_hai said:

Any series that is "ended", and is then brought back can never recapture the excitement, even if the games are just as good. There's something cynical about bringing a series back so soon after its finale.

Tell this to God of War lol.

Good Lord that franchise turned into shit.

#15 Edited by Zjun (146 posts) -

@nicecall said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Franchise fatigue. Anything gets heat when it has overstayed its welcome

i think this also. After the first couple Halo games i was done... but they kept pumping them out. I rather have waited 10+ years for a really good Halo to come out after the original.

Agreed.

Although Sony does lack the first party FPS games, I'll give M$ that, but not that's enough reason to by an Xbone.

Mr. Z~kun

#16 Edited by kingcrimson24 (460 posts) -

Maybe , Maybe I would be Happier if Bungie was Still With Microsoft and Destiny was the replacement For Halo . Microsoft should've done that ...

but still I don't mind A couple of Halo games and I'm actually still excited for it .

Something Fresh and New could be Better , thats True . but it Dosen't mean we should Hate Halo . its still exciting to think about what's coming up next .

and Halo isn't the only Franchise like this . Actually we Have COD which comes out every year with absolutely no changes .

or look at Sony which is sticking to Uncharted and uncharted 4 is coming up . or nintendo with Mario and zelda .

and if we look at it , we had just 5 Big Halo games in 13 years . and some Halo experiments like ODST , Halo wars (well thats a lot of change really ! ) and Spartan Assault and Remake of CE . many Game series come more quickly with less changes .

there are actually few New games coming up . all i can think of now is Quantum Break , Destiny and Cyberpunk 2077 .

#17 Edited by TheManofTin (333 posts) -

An awful, convoluted story, cut-and-paste level design, and frequent releases have caused all of my hate for the series. Halo 4 was literally "go here and push this button, repeat."

#18 Posted by The_Last_Ride (71397 posts) -

@kingcrimson24: I have a friend of mine that loves that series, but despised Halo 4 story and gameplay. I have personally never liked the games even though i played 1, 2 and 3. They're just not my cup of tea, i think people noticed the difference

#20 Posted by Randolph (10503 posts) -
#21 Posted by Bigboi500 (29691 posts) -

It's outdated and antiquated, and there are better console shooters available now.

#22 Posted by Mesomorphin (821 posts) -

It's outdated and antiquated, and there are better console shooters available now.

Hahahaha yeah good joke. Halo is the only fps that still reframes away from using ironsight, it looks beauitful and its amazing

#23 Posted by firefox59 (4379 posts) -

It's outdated and antiquated, and there are better console shooters available now.

I wouldn't say it's outdated. Most people didn't like Halo 4 MP cause they tried to make it more like COD with a faster pace and killstreaks.

#25 Edited by Shmiity (5113 posts) -

Halo deserves the hate. It's a boring as shit sci-fi game. HOWEVER - I did really enjoy the first one on the PC. But come on. 3 was supposed to be the end. Now there are how many more? Its SUCH a cash grab. I mainly play Xbox consoles, and I even hate Halo. No Sony fandom here. I just think Halo is a boring game that was cool at system-link parties 12 years ago.

#26 Edited by bowchicka07 (1073 posts) -

Not near as good or competitive as it used to be. Simple as that.

#27 Edited by sakaiXx (51 posts) -

played 1-3 to close the original trilogy and go wait for bungie's destiny. halo 4, reach and beyond is FU*K milking on a stale series

Did it with GOW played 1-3 and then skipped judgement. glad I did it and I felt awesome :D

#28 Posted by bowchicka07 (1073 posts) -

@sakaixx said:

played 1-3 to close the original trilogy and go wait for bungie's destiny. halo 4, reach and beyond is FU*K milking on a stale series

Did it with GOW played 1-3 and then skipped judgement. glad I did it and I felt awesome :D

Actually Judgement is good, you picked the wrong one to skip.

#29 Posted by kingcrimson24 (460 posts) -

You're a casual that has tainted the video game industry with movie-like video game that are generic as fuck. I wouldn't consider you a gamer or a fan of Halo, you pleb.

Why ? because i Care about things like Music , Concept art and Story books ?

I think you just see Halo as a Game , Just Gameplay and level design and Competitive Multiplayer and all the stuff like that .

But I see Halo as a Universe , not just a game ! and Halo 4 was a Great expansion to the universe that I love ;)

#30 Posted by Randolph (10503 posts) -

@Gaming-Planet: "cow"? Please leave System Wars culture in System Wars.

#31 Posted by sakaiXx (51 posts) -

@bowchicka07: I knew the series should have ended the moment I played judgement. the story just ain't that worth buying anymore. still, gears gameplay is quite good so I may try the demo of the next game by black tusk

#32 Posted by IncisionX (157 posts) -

They took away my Armour lock... How dare they! It was so fun on vehicle maps!

I still love Halo but for me it's getting stale, not as stale as Cod but it needs something truly special next turn round :>

#33 Posted by kingcrimson24 (460 posts) -

I heard they are going to add 64 player MP part , and A much more sandbox Campaign , or even an open world Campaign which can take 40 hours to beat .

It was just some Rumors tho . And it sounds too good to be True ... but if it Really happens . I Say Halo will be better than it ever was . there are a lot of Ideas that they can Bring into Halo ....

#34 Edited by Yoshi9000 (392 posts) -

I just hate how everything was dumbed down in halo 4. Prometheans and elites are boring to fight (I know people hated brutes in halo 3 but I thought they were really fun to fight). Less vehicles and the only new vehicle is also boring to fight. Weapons are all overpowered and kill instantly, like it's trying to be call of duty. Loadouts and ordinance drops don't feel right. Multiplayer maps are also dull. It's not a bad game, but compared to halo 3, it felt like a step down.

#35 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

I just hate how everything was dumbed down in halo 4. Prometheans and elites are boring to fight (I know people hated brutes in halo 3 but I thought they were really fun to fight). Less vehicles and the only new vehicle is also boring to fight. Weapons are all overpowered and kill instantly, like it's trying to be call of duty. Loadouts and ordinance drops don't feel right. Multiplayer maps are also dull. It's not a bad game, but compared to halo 3, it felt like a step down.

Wow, people hated fighting the Brutes? I loved Halo 3. All the big encounters were exciting. And the big fights always played out differently. Jump Pack Brutes and Grunts with Fuel Rod Cannons, you had to be at the top of your game to get through some of those encounters and I enjoyed every one of them.

And even though I've seen it thousands of times, I never tire of headshotting a Grunt when the Birthday Party skull is on.

#36 Posted by vashkey (33722 posts) -

It's really not as simple as some people make it out to be, there are some valid reasons that fans have been displeased with the franchises latest entries. I'll skip games like Wars, ODST, Anniversary and Spartan Assault because they aren't the core games and don't have the same sort of expectations or pull.

Reach and 4 are the ones that get the most crap.

With Reach it was mainly bloom and armor abilities. With bloom it added an unnecessary level of unpredictability and for competitive multiplayer that's not good. So when the played shoots their weapon, mainly the dmr, the game expresses the guns decreasing accuracy by making part of the crosshairs expand. If there's little to no pause between each shot fired the shots should become less accurate. The bullet can land anywhere the crosshairs cover in later shots but the first couple consecutive ones in rapid fire will reliably hit their target.

In closer ranges for the dmr this isn't a big issues but in further mid range and long range this can cause issues. It takes four shots to pop a player's shields so for the first four shot body shots are fine, the strategy should be to to pause before the fifth shot to cool down the bloom and then headshot but if the other player is doing just as well as you, hypothetically and has your shields down then continues to shoot what if he gets lucky and gets a headshot anyway?

It happens and it's frustrating. This is an aspect of the game that is luck based at times and that bad for competitive gameplay. On top of this legitimate complaint are just the idiots who don't understand bloom. Many players believed that bloom was implemented to prevent player from "spamming" the trigger, to punish them for shooting a bunch.... No. It's a shooter. It was implemented to increase the amount of skill involved in playing the game.

In close range you really don't need to worry about it and in closer mid range it's not much of a factor. For example, the pistol has the mos blooming of all the weapons. It round does the same amount of damage as the dmr but it can shoot at a much higher rate, so this makes the pistol much better for close to close mide range combat and since body and headshot damage do the same amount of damage to a shielded player it's best to just try and spam the tirgger and get four body shots in really fast then either follow up with a melee at close range or pause to reduce bloom and perform a headshot.

But because of the unpredictability of bloom in farther ranges, where a lot of Reach's combat can take place in it can ruin competitive gameplay.

As for armor abilities, the big culprit was armor lock. The player can become invincible for about three or four seconds, I can't remember. The trade off is that they're stationary the entire time. Regardless there are WAY too many benefits and even discounting them this ability probably still shouldn't exist.

Here's the typical scenario, to players are engaged in a heated gun fight and the player with armor low is either low on shields or loses them, so they go into armor lock. The other player has a few choices.

-They can sit and wait for the other player to leave armor lock, but in a game like Halo it's entirely possible that another player can come and attack them while they wait and in many cases the player waiting has lost some of their shields already and are vulnerable.

-They can choose to walk away, but they basically lose a kill then and the player in armor lock is free to leave armor lock any time they wish so they can chase the player if they turn their back on them.

The player in armor lock transitions to third person and are free to pan the camera around them, once they leave armor lock the player will be facing in the direction the camera was pointed in, so you can't really sneak up on a player in armor lock. When the player leaves armor lock they emit an emp that will damage any player's shields that are in close proximity to the player, so often times inexperienced players will be waiting right next to the armor locking player to melee them only to lose their shield from the emp and then get punched to death.

In addition to all this, armor lock can destroy vehicles. If a player goes into armor lock and a vehicle impacts them there's a very good chance the vehicle will be destroyed or at least severely damaged. The only way the game conveys what armor ability a player has a very small colored light on the player's back, at no point in the game is this ever explained and it's so subtle that you probably wont notice often times from a vehicle.

Armor lock turns one of Halo's most entertaining offensive vehicle tactics into an enormous risk. Personally, I'd be more forgiving of this if the game had a better way of conveying what armor abilities each player had.

The other armor abilities aren't as bad. The jet pack might be a little too effective, players with the high ground have an advantage since players below are more easily shot in the head because of the perspective, so on a one on one confrontation the jet pack player has an advantage but there's also a risk they take since they'll be a more visible target to other players in the map. Invisibility is a nuisance to deal with in large maps with snipers, but none of this is anywhere near as bad as armor lock.

There's also the fact that Halo: Reach was the slowest Halo game to date. The base running speed was the slowest, the maps were the biggest in the series and it took more shots to kill players. The dmr, Halo: Reach's primary weapon took four shots to take down shields and a then a shot to the head to kill. Five shot minimum, then you have to factor in bloom that could slow down the pace even more. Compare that to the four shots of Halo 3 and 2 and three shots for Combat Evolved.

Also, Halo: Reach didn't have as good a map line up as previous entries.

As for Halo 4, I have a lot less experience with it as the rest of the series so I wont critique it as well but I'd say the main problem is no one asked for Halo to turn into Call of Duty. We didn't want killstreaks, perks or loadouts. Also, I got the impression that the maps were even worse than Reach's. Halo 4 also needlessly removed fan favorite game types like assault and rocket race, the file search option didn't work until months after launch and Spartan Ops was poorly designed. I can't speak for how balanced or mechanically sound the game is but I hear that the dmr is the better load out weapon and I personally feel like it's a bad idea to let player spawn with the plasma pisol which allows player to take out shields and stun vehicles with a charged shot and the bolt shot, that acts as a shot gun with a charged shot

Despite this rant I actually think Reach and 4 are still great games, just much more flawed than their predecessors. The fans still had some gripes about Halo 2 and 3 back in the day, But none of it was so bad that it strongly effected the playerbase like it has for Reach and especially 4.

#37 Edited by lumzi32 (332 posts) -

Singleplayers compared.

Halo: CE was great (maybe fantastic, maybe sublime). Stunning, blood pumping music that the series has yet match again. Flood levels were a killer though.

Everything else is... eh.

Halo 2: Arbiter sections were crap, burlap textures that popped in, and terrible, indecipherable character voices.

Halo 3: Twas decent. That last level was awful. So awful I never finished it.

Halo Reach: Absolutely meh. Boring in all ways.

Halo 4: Mostly gorgeous. Incredibly cheesy story though. Also, Prometheans were a huge disappointment. That flying ship section near the end was incredible. Other vehicle sections fail to excite, which is a big shame for a Halo game.

More on Halo 4: Most beautiful Halo since the original, only even more so and in reverse. Halo CE had great outdoors but terrible indoors, Halo 4 is the reverse with crap outside levels and Forerunner levels that stun.

#38 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22911 posts) -

@lumzi32 said:

Singleplayers compared.

Halo: CE was great (maybe fantastic, maybe sublime). Stunning, blood pumping music that the series has yet match again. Flood levels were a killer though.

Everything else is... eh.

Halo 2: Arbiter sections were crap, burlap textures that popped in, and terrible, indecipherable character voices.

Halo 3: Twas decent. That last level was awful. So awful I never finished it.

Halo Reach: Absolutely meh. Boring in all ways.

Halo 4: Mostly gorgeous. Incredibly cheesy story though. Also, Prometheans were a huge disappointment. That flying ship section near the end was incredible. Other vehicle sections fail to excite, which is a big shame for a Halo game.

More on Halo 4: Most beautiful Halo since the original, only even more so and in reverse. Halo CE had great outdoors but terrible indoors, Halo 4 is the reverse with crap outside levels and Forerunner levels that stun.

I have to ask this, but please don't take it as an attack or anything.

I gotta know though, what was your issue with Halo 3's final level? I ask because it's one of my favorites from the entire original "trilogy" of Halo games. I had a big stupid grin on my face for most of the entire level. There were definitely levels in Halo 3 that I didn't care for. Specifically the level where you try to (SPOILER) rescue Cortana from the Gravemind (/SPOILER). But the final level was a blast for me on all difficulties and with or without a co-op partner.

#39 Posted by lumzi32 (332 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13: I can't remember why I hated it exactly. I know it had something to do with the over abundance of brutes, the Flood like look of the level and the way it never seemed to end. I kept dying at one place I think which only made things worse. Eventually, I left it alone probably thinking I'd get back to it but never doing so.