I can't give a completely fair up to date assessment as I've noped out of some levels and I'll probably play the ending again as I remember that being very cool, but I would probably rate it at .. [8] or maybe [9], dunno. Some of the weak and repetitive level design does tarnish it some, but the gameplay, good levels, and co-op rightfully lift it up to proper classic status. It was around at the right time too I think, so will always hold a place in many of our hearts.

GurtTractor wrote:

Dinostar77 wrote:

Was Halo 1 the first game to introduce the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" concept in FPS games?

Was that in 1? I know 2 has the whole Arbiter, Gravemind, and Covenant civil war thing going on.

Use of that phrase on my part may have been a misnomer. I meant that the covenant are the main enemy, then the game introduces an enemy of the covenant, who is an enemy of yours as well but they help to take out the covenant in some levels. Or is that in later Halo games? Cant remember. Anyway the point way, was Halo 1 the first to do that in an FPS?

I get what you mean, multiple different factions fighting each other, you can sit back and let them duke it out before swooping in. I feel like that must have been done before, I think Half Life might have had that actually.

Doom infighting monsters say hello

I feel like that's a reference to talking to the monsters in Doom but I can't remember where from.

GurtTractor wrote:

Facewon wrote:

Gurt, walking into h2 like, fuck those rocket dudes...

Halo 2 actually has a different culprit for me, flood again but the shotgun guys. In Halo 1 I feel like the shotun wielding flood weren't as dangerous, like they nerfed the damage they could do. In 2 the shotgunners are an instakill if they get within a couple of metres to you, they've killed me more than anything else.

Basically any unremarkable looking average goon enemy that is able to kill you in one shot if they happen to have the right weapon can fuck off. I don't mind it when they stand out like a sore thumb but when they completely blend into the crowd it's just annoying and stressful having to watch out for the fuckers.

How this can not be jackal snipers is beyond me. Not only will they one-shot you, they’ll do it from half way across the map before you’ve even seen them.

Terrible enemies which, almost single-handedly make Halo 2 the worst campaign of the lot for me.

I don't find the jackal snipers that bad really, as soon as they fire once they telegraph their position, and they are easy to pop in the head with the commonly available battle rifle or carbine (best weapons in H2). If you start turning up the difficulty then they do get fucking annoying, but adjusting difficulty always fucks the balancing in Halo games.

For my recent playthrough I've done half of H2 in heroic, and I don't recall getting annoyed by the snipers. I switched back to normal mainly because one of the most fun bits about Halo for me is having the marines fight alongside you, giving them weapons and trying to keep them alive. They die far too quickly in heroic or legendary. They're useful against the snipers actually, as they will draw their fire giving you a chance to spot them and take them out.

I tend to define perfection in media as when I can't think of an obvious way to improve it. In the case of Halo 1 it has several missions that consist of either recycled or uninspired and repetitive scenery where you have to fight a much less interesting enemy type for far too long. They could have done some much better bespoke level design with improved signposting, changed up the flood ("Chief, they're starting to organise.."), or cut out a bunch of it and the game would have been more consistent overall.

Death Stranding or Half Life 2 get much closer to perfection for me, because while there are many things that I can imagine being improved or expanded upon, it's not obvious that making those changes would yield a net positive. Designing a good game seems to be all about balance of features and detail, knowing what to leave out or limit as much as what to chuck in.

My point about some of the missions in Halo 1 is that when you've gone through them once you probably don't want to revisit them again, unless there are people that fire up the game, go to the mission select and think "ooh I quite fancy playing The Library right now"..?

Ah well you only playing on Legendary probably means we like to play it in a very different way, so that's fair enough. I like to chill out and mess around more so Normal/Heroic is fine for me.

Fuck Halo 2 Legendary jackals.

It’s where I gave up. Seriously.

That is interesting, but I don’t have any interest in speed runs.

Yossarian wrote:

That is interesting, but I don’t have any interest in speed runs.

Never had an interest in speed runs generally, either. Its a sub culture of videogaming that would bore me to death (maybe im too old), if i tried it. Playing the same game again and again and again.

I don't remember the auto aim being as strong in the original as it is in the anniversary edition. Was that added or did I just not notice it much in 2001?

Probably, it felt like the gameplay was pretty much untouched. Got a nice Halo buzz going at the moment, can't decide whether to play more or wait for Infinite.

3, Reach or 5 though (not played 5). Don't fancy 2 again and refuse to touch 4 after it put me off the genre for a couple of years.

Yeah out of those I would play Reach.

Some like 5 but I didnt find it much better than 4.