Half-life and Halo

T

Tribalbeat

First time out of the vault
I have been seeing a trend starting way back in 2004 and still going strong where many PC gamers insist that the Halo franchise is the equivalent to liquid dog shit that has been sitting in the sun for ten days. These people however, insist that the Half-life series is the greatest thing mankind has ever created. Lets look at what the major similarities and differences are between the series.
Blue means good
Red means bad

Halo:
Very large universe
All weapons feel balanced for the most part
Lack of mods (unless you have Halo CE)
Good Vehicle controls
Co-op
Twelve year olds
Doesn't know if it wants to be serious or abit lighthearted

Both:
Silent protagonist
Major female supporting character
Alien enemies that use energy weapons
Interesting physics (Warthog grenade jumping and Gravity Gun)
Useless teammate AI
Milked (Episodes and ODST)

Half-Life:
Major NPCs are interesting and feel real (except for Eli's death)
Levels feel fresh and new
That MIT education really pays for itself (switchs)
The only real way to understand the plot is to either look up parts on Overwiki or replay about 2-3 times
Deathmatch isn't fun at all
What are Gmans motivations?
Mods

Before the legions of Half-Life's fans come swarming onto me calling me a console tard, you must understand that I played Half-life right when it came out. Hell, most of my gaming is done on the PC. Half-Life (to me) just feels overrated, this does not mean it is bad and it is still way above average with the same being said of Halo. However Halo just feels like a more social game. Back in 2001 when it was first released co-op and system link multiplayer were a blast.

I beat Half-Life 2 three times, but now the only real use of it seems to be the mods. Halo One and Two on the other hand, I have beaten about 4-5 times each. While in the end Half Lifes length makes up for this and should make it a tie between the two, there is just one bit about Half-Life that I cannot overlook, Gordon Freeman's characterization.

Many people praise the idea of Gordon never talking as immersion and how it allows the player to step in to his shoes better. To me it simply comes off as lazy. No one ever gave Doom praise for the exact same reason. Chief on the other hand, feels a bit more human. Ya, ya, he doesn't talk a lot, but when you look though most of the game, who is he supposed to talk to? Gordon is frequently interacting with other NPC's while Chief is usually a lone wolf. The thing that gives Chief the edge though is the expanded universe. After reading the first three books (they are actually pretty damn good) I saw him in a different light. That and he speaks during cutscenes.

TL;DR: I like both Half-Life and Halo, but I prefer the Halo Trilogy.
 
Half Life > Halo for me since I like Half Life. I also play single player games and Half Life has an entertaining one that isn't basically there just to get someone ready for multiplayer.

Still, I prefer RPGs and Grand Strategy games, so I don't think HL is the greatest thing ever made.
 
Tribalbeat said:
Doesn't know if it wants to be serious or abit lighthearted
Click to expand...

Eh? Personally i always thought Halo was pretty much to the point on the type of game it is.

Tribalbeat said:
That MIT education really pays for itself (switchs)
Click to expand...

Oh come on. Your seriously not faulting them for that are you? Its a passing remark. Your a scientist at a R & D Facility. What do you want to do, whip out a test tube and create a new acid or something to pour on your enemies?

Tribalbeat said:
The only real way to understand the plot is to either look up parts on Overwiki or replay about 2-3 times
Click to expand...

Eh? I got HL The first time i played through it.

Tribalbeat said:
Ya, ya, he doesn't talk a lot, but when you look though most of the game, who is he supposed to talk to? Gordon is frequently interacting with other NPC's while Chief is usually a lone wolf.
Click to expand...

Chief frequently has a intelligent AI in his helmet. He also interacts with Johnson on a regular basis. There is AS MUCH Opportunity for him to interact as there is for Gordon.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, im not calling Halo bad. I never understood the ire it attracts either. I've played all 3 (I thought the third was average, second was the best and the first was quite good). Its a fun enough game, especially with friends. I just find your criticism of Half-Life.....Petty.
 
Since Half-Life was a complete heap of shite and Halo not much more than co-op (everything is funnier on split-screen) with increadibly underpowered weapons, winning only the ones in Star Wars: Republic Commando, I just can't understand what makes everyone think that they are the greatest inventions of mankind.
 
Alright, first off, the colors are horrible. Seriously, wtf man?

Secondly, HL is so far superior to Halo, it's not even funny, you goddamn console tard. ;)

Third, this is a Star Trek vs Star Wars discussion. Nothing good will come off it.
 
You're comparing two entirely different games. Half-life was basically a first-person shooter that focused on the single-player and the multi-player wasnt much more than an afterthought.

I think the opposite can be said of the Halo games.
 
For such a comparison to be at least remotely meaningful you should compare aspects that are, well, comparable. Graphics with graphics, story with story, weapons with weapons etc. Right now you just have a list of mostly disparate points.
 
This is like the most random freaking thread ever.

Personally, I always liked Halo and always thought comparisons to Half life were retarded because of how different the two games are, apart from being FPS. Mario Kart and Need for Speed are both racing games, would you compare those?
 
Halo made the whole "duck behind cover for 2 seconds to heal" thing popular which makes it the FPS anti-christ.
 
This is indeed very subjective, I for example loved Half Life for its dystopian 1984-esque setting, story, protagonist, atmosphere, use of physics,.. and hated Halo for its generic story, flashy colors and annoying enemies (hate the sounds they produce).

horses for courses
 
PlanHex said:
Halo made the whole "duck behind cover for 2 seconds to heal" thing popular which makes it the FPS anti-christ.
Click to expand...

Well to be fair Halo 1 didn't and they are bringing health packs back with Reach as they were popular in ODST.
 
I noticed something cool...

I was staring at the TC's post for a few minutes and the Red/Blue combination makes the post look 3-D...

It was preety cool....until my eyes began to hurt....

:|
 
The episodes of HL2 are arguably milked, the rest, not so much. Actually HL2 in general was more milked than HL1 due to all of the major mods costing money, though most were bought by Valve and recreated by them instead of being done by the community for free, so it makes sense.

I'd say that HL Deathmatch was quite fun; on the other hand, HL2 Deathmatch was crap. I haven't played Halo single player so I can't really comment but I'd say that both HL and HL2's single player campaigns are overrated. I though that HL's bottomed out once you went to the alien world but was above average until then. HL2's, on balance, average gameplay at best, I'd say the original had mediocre gameplay while the episodes were above average. I think that both games are over hyped because they are more story driven, particularly HL2, and HL2 (particularly the episodes) pretty effectively tell the story through the gameplay. I'd say that the most fun single player campaigns that I've played were probably Golden Eye (has not aged well) and Perfect Dark (has aged pretty well, but is a console game).

What really sets HL apart from Halo is mods, CS and DoD were the big ones and CS dominated the online FPS market for quite awhile. HL2 has CSS (which I don't like as much as CS), TF2 (their big one), and the L4D games (their other big one). The source engine was also used to create Bloodlines, so props for that. I've played Modern Warfare on my buddy's PS3 a few times and I gotta admit that it's the best FPS I've played in awhile, then again I don't play too many of them (or a lot of the big ones).

Which is better, HL or Halo? That's up to the individual, HL probably beats out Halo in terms of telling a story and Halo probably beats out HL in terms of gameplay.
 
I got more bang for my buck with Half-Life than Halo.

Half-Life + Community + Mods + More Mods + Even more Mods + Even more Community. Natural Selection is the best online FPS that exists.

Halo, sucks money like all console games do.

Halo + Xbox Live! account + Twelve year olds +...Well that's it.
 
Tribalbeat said:
Good Vehicle controls
Click to expand...

Tribalbeat said:
The only real way to understand the plot is to either look up parts on Overwiki or replay about 2-3 times
Click to expand...

Sorry dude, but Halo's vehicle controls sucked rancid goat balls and i don't understand why you have to replay half life to understand what the story is about.


Half Life > Halo

To be honest i think it's just insulting to compare a gem of a game like Half Life to an overrated game like Halo.
 
It has nothing to do with Halo or Half-Life being better than the other. It has everything to do with the fact that the PC is a better medium and making your game engine user friendly and tweakable makes your product's value go up.


I mean, neither Halo or Half-Life are an art-game like Silent Hill, Metal Gear Solid, Sam & Max, or Beneath a Steel sky, so the presentation and format of the game isn't restricted by the plot and theme for purposes of expressing the developers/writers opinion. They are just really good gaming engines with plot-art-theme put in as an afterthought.

So if you release a game engine, you should focus on the options you have with such software rather than pretend that Gordon Freeman or Master Chief is the ultimate in character development because the game sold millions and some retard said that "It's minimalism to the finest".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top