#1 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -

...take after Halo and not Half Life 2?

What is it? All modern FPS's have obvious connections to Halo (recharging health, robotic supermen protagonists), while few, if any, have even one broad connection to Half Life 2: gameplay that isn't dumb. When I first played HL2 on The Orange Box on the 360, I basically said, "WELL I GUESS GAMES HAVE JUST GOTTEN BETTER LMAO." What I didn't realize is that games like Halo have made me dependent on that voice inside my head that tells me exactly where to go and what to do. Puzzles, no matter how simple, seemed impossible to me. I have become stupid from games. It's true, you can become stupid from games, but this comes from only certain games.

If only Half Life 2 was the standard and not the prime, then we'd be getting somewhere. Goddamn Halo...

#2 Posted by TimeWaffle (946 posts) -

because Halo sold like hot cakes and other developers think they can repeat it's success if it's like halo

#3 Posted by DarthMaul (803 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"I have become stupid from games."
You sure it's the games?
#4 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -
DarthMaul said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"I have become stupid from games."
You sure it's the games?"
Yeah. It's not drugs or anything. Okay, I haven't become stupid from games, I've become lazy from games. If you want a judge of my "anti-stupidness", I could tell you that I scored well on my ACT standardized test.
 
But I think that test is BS.
#5 Edited by HitNRun (344 posts) -

Well, FPS are sort of supposed to be mindless fun, or at best a simulation of being in an action-drama. Half Life was the exception, the genre-bender, not the rule.

It also just so happens that "mimicking Halo" results in some very quickly developed games that get out the door and get home with wheelbarrows full of money in a hurry. I mean, don't blame Bungie, they put the extra legwork in on *their* game with the multiplayer and commissioning novelists and extra dev time and whatnot.

#6 Posted by Systech (4078 posts) -

Everyone who has tried to re-emulate Halo has failed. You know why? Cause it isn't "Halo".

#7 Posted by HistoryInRust (6316 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"...take after Halo and not Half Life 2?

What is it? All modern FPS's have obvious connections to Halo (recharging health, robotic supermen protagonists), while few, if any, have even one broad connection to Half Life 2: gameplay that isn't dumb. When I first played HL2 on The Orange Box on the 360, I basically said, "WELL I GUESS GAMES HAVE JUST GOTTEN BETTER LMAO." What I didn't realize is that games like Halo have made me dependent on that voice inside my head that tells me exactly where to go and what to do. Puzzles, no matter how simple, seemed impossible to me. I have become stupid from games. It's true, you can become stupid from games, but this comes from only certain games.

If only Half Life 2 was the standard and not the prime, then we'd be getting somewhere. Goddamn Halo..."
Halo's concepts are easier to emulate without context. 

Think about it.  "Super-soldiers against overwhelming odds" in and of itself is such a simple device to cut-and-paste.  The difference is within Half-Life's dependence on inter-connectivity (and I use "dependence" as a good thing).  Everything in that game is only important as a part, a disparate element amalgamated into a figurative whole.  Half-Life has serious elements working as literal cogs; things like philosophy and political thought experiments are every bit as integral to that game as physics puzzles and the frightening omnipresence of the Combine. 

Without one piece, Half-Life suffers, and Valve, the developers, have ensured that this is the exact case, because Half-Life does more than allow the player to use interesting weapons to kill droves of malicious baddies, whereas Halo is a run-and-gun slugfest that does mere lip service to its story.  Halo is concerned primarily with the gameplay, because that's its bread and butter -- it must stay sharp to encourage multiplayer. 
#8 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -

Sure, but Halo's gameplay is retarded compared to Half Life. I say this as someone who had no idea who Valve was two years ago.

#9 Posted by Xeros606 (545 posts) -

because its harder to clone half lifes gameplay with the same success that half life has.Arkthemaniac said:

"DarthMaul said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"I have become stupid from games."
You sure it's the games?"
Yeah. It's not drugs or anything. Okay, I haven't become stupid from games, I've become lazy from games. If you want a judge of my "anti-stupidness", I could tell you that I scored well on my ACT standardized test.
 
But I think that test is BS."
haha me too. ive stopped reading books and my grades (while still good) have taken a general decline since i started gaming. but i dont think ive lost any of my ability to think.
#10 Posted by HistoryInRust (6316 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"Sure, but Halo's gameplay is retarded compared to Half Life. I say this as someone who had no idea who Valve was two years ago."
I wouldn't go as far as to call the gameplay "retarded," because, really, it kind of defined (and refined) console shooters in the post-Goldeneye era.  And whether or not you like the game has little to do with the fact that, simply put, Halo essentially showed console games how to do online matchmaking effectively. 

I think what you're arguing about is design rather than gameplay.  The design of the Halo games may be pretty generic (well, generic after the first, at least), which is also saying something about how willing other, lesser known companies are to pump out a generic First-person shooter.  Lots of guns, lots of battles, little (or incomprehensible) story, so on and so forth. 

From there, they take the mechanics of a game like Halo because, in short, they worked, and people liked them.  The logic then is as follows: If people liked it and bought it there, then if we implement those mechanics here, those same people will jump on this bandwagon, too.

#11 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -
Xeros606 said
haha me too. ive stopped reading books and my grades (while still good) have taken a general decline since i started gaming. but i dont think ive lost any of my ability to think."
Ahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa..............................just wait. Keep doing your math or you will definitely lose your wit. I haven't yet, and I wanna keep it that way.
#12 Posted by Xeros606 (545 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"Xeros606 said
haha me too. ive stopped reading books and my grades (while still good) have taken a general decline since i started gaming. but i dont think ive lost any of my ability to think."
Ahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa..............................just wait. Keep doing your math or you will definitely lose your wit. I haven't yet, and I wanna keep it that way."
but by the time im a junior (high school) ill have finished all the math classes offered. and theres no way in hell im doing math problems volutarily. not while im in a room filled with video games.  :O  :(
#13 Posted by pause422 (6188 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"Sure, but Halo's gameplay is retarded compared to Half Life. I say this as someone who had no idea who Valve was two years ago."
I know, I love how people can think they are on equal ground somehow. Halo feels more childish and cartoony than anything..and ask anyone that started as a PC game player, when Halo came out and people appeared to be BLOWN AWAY and certain things, we had all seen it before..it did nothing new whatsoever, trust me I still liked the first halo a lot,but it still didn't do anything new..and halo 2 and 3 are terrible compared to it, everyone says "everyoen who tries to copy halo's gameplay can't because its not halo" well apparently halo 2 and 3 can't even copy halo because they blew ass. And in all honesty, Halo when it came out just had shields that went down and regenerated, you still had to pick up health packs. Every game that has regenerative health now , people act as if its ripping halo off, as if no one else would have had this concept if it wasn't in Halo first...its rediculous. Get your head out of the gutter honestly. I admit I'm one of the people who don't mind either, it eally depends on the game.. I think some regen health is necassary, others set amount is needed with health packs and such.

Bottom line though, regardless of how much you like halo, if you're the biggest fanboy retard in the world for the game, if you can't admit that half life is and will always be better than it, you're just lying to yourself and everyone around you...it will never stand side to side with half life, and no, sales don't mean it does or ever will.
#14 Posted by Ubergeist (416 posts) -

Refresh me on what games play like Halo cause I can't think of any. Also, COD had regenerating health way before Halo 2 did. Halo is just watered down so the masses and grasp it and enjoy it. It's basically the poster boy for casual FPS.

#15 Posted by Wijeeba (87 posts) -

Halo is the "Jonas Brothers" of shooters... it's all been done before, but it's still widely popular.

#16 Posted by xruntime (1920 posts) -

Regenerating health is great when done right. Half Life 2 is more of a dramatic shooter, for lack of a better word - the plot isn't a feel-good hero-always-wins narrative, its a darker and deeper conflict. That, I believe, supersedes the few actual gameplay differences.

Halo is an easy game. Half Life 2 is an easy game. They both feature immersive, deep worlds, though I will give the edge to Half Life 2. So what's the difference? Well, it's the general feel of the game, in Half Life 2 you are weak and small, and you are trying to take down an entire Combine empire, while in Halo you are a planet trying to defend yourself against the Covenant. To put it metaphorically, Halo is like the Seven Years War of the Half Life 2 saga.

#17 Posted by Kung_Fu_Viking (708 posts) -

TBH I have never been "blown away" by Half Life 2, in fact very few FPS games have really amazed me with innovation. When I come to play a FPS I'm not looking for much more than some fast paced action balanced by some good ol' tactical strategy. Maybe a bit of stealth thrown in there too. I can't say I play FPS games with the intent of taxing my puzzle solving brain.

#18 Posted by Gunraidan (216 posts) -

Half-Life 2 took 7 years to create. Basically its the same reason why most 3D platformers take from SONY's platformers like Rachet and Clank and not Nintendo's like Jak and Daxter. Why most action adventure games take from games that are hardly action-adventure games and not full true ones like Metroid or Zelda. Why most JRPG's take from games like the Tales series and not Shin Megami Tensei. Bascially the reason that made games like Half-Life 2, Super Mario Galaxy, Twilight Princess, and Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne so great is that they had extremely polish design and developed gameplay which requires much talent and time. Halo on the other hand just made a single player campaign and add online multiplayer and you're done.

#19 Posted by Chiaro (49 posts) -
HitNRun said:
I mean, don't blame Bungie, they put the extra legwork in on *their* game with the multiplayer
Where's the bots?

I'm sorry if this sounds like a stupid question. I like playing console shooters beside my friends, and the maps are just way too big (excluding Guardian, but that's one map). Why did it never occur to add bots? Easy, Medium, Hard, Expert difficulty. It allows the inexperienced to train and it allows local multiplayer to be more fun.

A bit off-topic, but it's nagging me.
#20 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -
Chiaro said:
"HitNRun said:
I mean, don't blame Bungie, they put the extra legwork in on *their* game with the multiplayer
Where's the bots?

I'm sorry if this sounds like a stupid question. I like playing console shooters beside my friends, and the maps are just way too big (excluding Guardian, but that's one map). Why did it never occur to add bots? Easy, Medium, Hard, Expert difficulty. It allows the inexperienced to train and it allows local multiplayer to be more fun.

A bit off-topic, but it's nagging me."
What happened to bots anyways? Goldeneye and Perfect Dark kicked ass partly because of bots.
#21 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -

Having played Halo 1, 2 and 3 quite a bit, I can't say I felt out of place with Half-Life 2's puzzles. In fact, i'd hardly say they were puzzles at all and rather they were just showing off the physics engine they'd spent forever developing.

#22 Posted by Player1 (3868 posts) -

Because Halo and Half Life are two of the best FPS's ever...

#23 Posted by keyhunter (3207 posts) -

Health pickups became fucking annoying after a while. It got to a point where shooters best attempt at being difficult was to disperse the health pickups so much that it was impossible to complete any levels. So regeneration was introduced to ensure more firefights more often while keeping the play not frustrated or looking for elusive health pickups.

#24 Edited by DARKIDO07 (876 posts) -
Ubergeist said:
"Refresh me on what games play like Halo cause I can't think of any. Also, COD had regenerating health way before Halo 2 did. Halo is just watered down so the masses and grasp it and enjoy it. It's basically the poster boy for casual FPS."
You are a fanboy aren't you. Call of Duty (PC) came out 2003, it had health packs. Halo 2 (Xbox) came out in 2004, it had regenerating health. I wouldn't exactly be talking about being "water-downed" when Call of Duty  went from health packs and being slower paced and far more tactical online that required skill, to a shooter with regenerating health to a fast paced shooter with mass ammounts of aim-assist online with almost one hit kills, making it more appealing to the masses. Thats not to say that Call of Duty 4 was a bad game by any means the single player was fun while it lasted but the online was "water-downed" to appeal to more casual gamers. Infinity Ward even said that in GameInformer interview about Call of Duty 4's multiplayer. Maybe you should get your facts straight about games before you run your mouth off.


Also here is that quite I was talking about

"“One mistake that a lot of game developers don’t see is that they think weapons that take a ton of bullets to kill a guy make the game accessible. To me, that makes the game hardcore. So, if you play a game where it takes a million bullets to achieve a kill, you stay alive for a really long time, but that essentially means the new guy is never going to get any points. He’s going to feel like a new guy. He got to stay alive for a long time, but he never got to kill anyone. In our game, bullets are really deadly."-Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare’s lead multiplayer designer, Todd Alderman

Source: http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200803/N08.0305.1634.21173.htm
#25 Posted by Kush (8889 posts) -

It's because for the most part, the arcade action packed FPS game sell better than the more slower paced story driven FPS games. I prefer HL type FPS games, but the masses feel differently.

#26 Posted by iGaboru (215 posts) -

All games should emulate freaking DOOM II, the best FPS ever!

#27 Posted by OmegaPirate (5522 posts) -
Gunraidan said:
"Half-Life 2 took 7 years to create. Basically its the same reason why most 3D platformers take from SONY's platformers like Rachet and Clank and not Nintendo's like Jak and Daxter. Why most action adventure games take from games that are hardly action-adventure games and not full true ones like Metroid or Zelda. Why most JRPG's take from games like the Tales series and not Shin Megami Tensei. Bascially the reason that made games like Half-Life 2, Super Mario Galaxy, Twilight Princess, and Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne so great is that they had extremely polish design and developed gameplay which requires much talent and time. Halo on the other hand just made a single player campaign and add online multiplayer and you're done."
Isnt jak and daxter sony platform as well or did i misread you?

Also hl2 is a far more intellectual game than halo - those that cant be arsed with 1st person platforming and puzzle maniulaiton involving physics and buoyancy - can go for halo  -everyone wins
#28 Posted by xruntime (1920 posts) -

Let me be frank - this word "intellectual" is meaningless. Both games require preschool knowledge (how to work a seesaw is the most intelligence you'll be using in HL2), so while HL2 may be a little smarter, it's pretty much irrelevant.

The gameplay differences between each are minimal - both are easy as hell, both can feature action-packed scenes (antlion cave, for instance). I think the point Kush brings up about a story driven game is what separates HL2, because it features a more intricate plot.

#29 Posted by Sushbag (327 posts) -

Great topic, and it's easy to answer the OP's question. If anyone were to copy Half-Life 2, they'd have to copy enormously time-consuming and original aspects from a development standpoint, namely the spectacular facial animation, environment-manipulating weapons and puzzles, and storytelling that doesn't beat the gamer over the head. Those things are hard to copy, and publishers have learned that any CoD-style game will sell to the masses, so it's lose-lose for them to waste the time making, you know, good games.

On the other hand Halo sold millions of copies without any of those things that later made HL2 great, because it had amazing, addictive, and replayable gameplay. The gameplay aspects that made Halo great, like co-op campaign, recharging health, the two weapon limit (which EVERY game has copied), and the mysterious protagonist, those are relatively easy to emulate. The only really hard thing to copy from Halo was the amazing AI. 

So Halo was easier to copy, and it sold so well that emulating it was a no-brainer. Funnily though, Halo set such a precedent that some of the things the so-called 'hardcore' gamers mock it for were actually great back in 2001. Take the recharging health system that everyone has copied. Halo didn't actually have that, it had a traditional healhpack HP system, it just had a recharging shield on top of it. So the game encouraged you to take risks in trying to defeat the AI, especially on hard mode, but you sitll had to worry about your health. Brilliant. And the vehicle segments! Everyone, even Valve, put vehicle segments in their games after Halo did it. However, Bungie actually had a phenomenal physics engine and levels that were big enough to warrant using vehicles. Now, games like Gears of War just throw in vehicles for the hell of it, just so they can say on the back of the box something like, "Fight on the ground or in the air or on four wheels!" Lame.

#30 Posted by zeus_gb (595 posts) -

I think they real question is, why do people think that the majority of modern FPS games have copied things from Halo?

#31 Posted by atejas (3057 posts) -

Regerating health and GRIMDARK

both need to die a painful death in a corner.
#32 Posted by Justaddwater (291 posts) -

I prefer the slower paced thought out action of HL better but sometimes blowing shit up is fun you know?

Half Life seems to be holding onto some archaic gameplay rules as well, such as the health system, in my opinion recharging is the way to go.

#33 Posted by coakroach (2490 posts) -

Its fun not to die, that's why games take after Halo

#34 Edited by Mourne (789 posts) -
Sushbag said:
" If anyone were to copy Half-Life 2, they'd have to copy enormously time-consuming and original aspects from a development standpoint, namely the spectacular facial animation, environment-manipulating weapons and puzzles, and storytelling that doesn't beat the gamer over the head."
Oh, hey, another crate.

Crate + gravity gun = ?

Did you actually get some sort of challenge out of that "environment-manipulating" puzzle design? I don't recall getting stuck in a single area on the game, and especially not from those puzzles.

EDIT: Just re-read my post and realized it comes off as a bit arrogant. Point stands, but I'd at least like to note that I agree with your post. Carry on, carry on.