Halo-OMG what a game!

[Charlie]

Of course, what if Bungie had carried their original conception through to the end and made Halo the RTS it was originally designed to be? Now there's a scary thought.

 

Halo Wars should be out quite soon I think, which is a Halo RTS.

[c0Zm1c]

what is it about Halo on a technical level that you dislike?

Dislike is too strong a word I think. I'm not a fan of the Master Chief's lethargic pace, but it doesn't harm the gameplay (although I find it can be a bit of a pain sometimes in multiplayer). Really, in terms of technical integrity, I don't think there is anything outright wrong with the game at all.

 

I know Halo is technically superior to Half-Life, but how well the whole package translates into entertainment value is highly subjective. It's not something that can be dictated by a raw list of technical features. With regard to the differences you pointed out between the two games I think Valve did a lot better with what they had for Half-Life than Bungie did with what they had for Halo.

 

I don't know, maybe I'm being a bit too hard on Halo? I do like it, and I still regard it as the best console first-person shooter available. Like Half-Life, it has aged remarkably well.

[Kurtle Squad]

Fair enough, but 'masterpiece' is more a technical term denoting exceptional craftsmanship or artistry — the Sistine Chapel's ceiling would still be a masterpiece if I disliked it. But I'm not trying to beat you over the head with a dictionary; I was more using your comment as a springboard for my opinion on the game rather than trying to counter yours.

But a game is a different form of art to sculptures, paintings and such, you can't use the same masterpiece 'theory' for both.

 

Well for example the weapons are few, but incredibly balanced and they all have totally different reasons to using them.

You mean like the handgun being all powerful?

But yeah, everything but the plasma pistol were pretty well balanced.