Slashdot Mirror


Insightfully Critical Fan Review of Halo 2

Anonymous the Cowardly Lion writes "While browsing the tome of data that is the online-Halo-community I came across 7hr33.org, a group apparently known for their pioneering work in the Tricks scene (contemporaries of the infamous Warthog Jump). What caught my eye was their critique of Halo 2 from December 2004: The Page of Woah|Woe. It's a little too in-depth for the casual player at first, but by the final third it really encapsulates the reactions of core players to the sequel." From the article: "The assessment is in: Halo 2 is... well, different. And I don't mean that in an entirely negative fashion. A lot of the changes are for the better, and we should certainly hope so. Online play, dual-wielding, boarding, the energy sword, stunning new vistas, and a compelling story arch... in many ways, H2 is a phenomenal game. There isn't another like it."

3 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Halo 1 by EnglishTim · · Score: 2, Informative

    The first reference I found to it on Usenet is from Steve Job's July 1999 Apple keynote address - I assume they'd shown some footage, so it must have been in production for bit before then.

    Halo was released in November 2001, so I'd say they probably spent about 3 years on it (at least)

    It *certainly* wasn't completed in six months!

  2. Re:Halo 1 by hollismb · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's Xbox incarnation was. From the time Microsoft bought Bungie and told them they needed to have Halo ready or the Xbox launch, they had six months to make Halo 1 as it existed on the Xbox. We all know that all that RTS stuff got totally thrown out. Heck, even Halo 2 was pretty much only done in the last six months or so if you watch the special edition DVD.

  3. A "simple" summary by MrHen · · Score: 5, Informative
    • If you don't want to read the whole thing (it is rather long), here is a "quick" summary of what they gets into. They get into a nice little bit on all of this and actually
    • think before they write.
    • From their own conclusion: Even our own re-readings of this article leave us wondering if we've been a tad too hostile. Perhaps we have; please use salt liberally when needed.
    • Weapons
    • Simple details seem to be missing (such as the shotgun's reloading).
    • The pistol from H1 has no suitable replacement. They admit it was broken.
    • The Magnum and the Battle Rifle could have used a bit of tuning (they also mention ammo).
    • The grenades were nerfed.
    • The rocket-launcher is too easy to use in dogfights.
    • Weapon roles seem confused. "Removing the (I thought) rather clever ability of the energy weapons to freeze opponents removed a crucial variation and advantage of the energy weapons. Without it, they're just another bullet hose."
    • "[M]any of the guns just don't feel like they are the actual instrument firing the bullets seen on screen."
    • Paired weapons are mentioned. "... Now I find myself standing on top of a shotgun, trying in vain to trade it up for my slung needler, while trying to maintain my Sarah Michelle Gellar (SMG)/Pistol combo."
    • The Sword is mentioned.
    • The Covenant weapons are mentioned. "... the plasma pistol has been downgraded to "accessory" status."
    • "Though the weapons are supposed to be more balanced than in the first, they invariably end up feeling rather impotent and bland, and the weapons that most teams scramble over each other to get at are the sword and the rocket launcher, leaving those unequipped or unwilling to use them with no truly effective countermeasure (ie. a powerful, universally distributed mid-range rifle, etc.). "
    • Feel and Consequences
    • "Campaign seems to lack many of the pensive, clandestine sections and well designed confrontations so treasured in the first..."
    • The HUD: no health meter, the shield meter is "rather bulbous, compact shape, is difficult to read on the fly."
    • Removal of fall damage.
    • Draw-In
    • The graphics glitches.
    • "The added detail and plethora of shadowed nooks and crannies end up making the game feel, for lack of a better word, grungy."
    • The "Teaser" Cinematic Redux"
    • Yeah.
    • User Interface
    • The menu's UI is awkward.
    • "To our disappointment, it honestly doesn't feel as though much care was put into the basic Heads Up Display and game status feedback features as well."
    • "And if only the tutorial messages weren't displayed in the dead center of your screen. While being shot at, I've got more important things on my mind than being told how to play with the flashlight or flip a banshee..."
    • Reasonable Difficult
    • "This philosophy [H1's Legendary] was not kept up in H2, and seems to have been replaced with the single goal of making H2 Legendary especially impossible, as though H1 Legendary players had to be put in there place somehow."
    • Glitches
    • Some examples. "These and several other quirks contribute once again to the beta version feel of the game."
    • Bosses
    • All they had to say about it: "Most notable quote during play so far: 'If I wanted to play Metal Gear Solid, I'd have bought a Playstation.' He he."
    • Levels and Encounters
    • Campaign levels seemed "stretched, anticlimactic, and by game's end leaves you feeling like the entire experience was made up of only 2-4 huge landscapes, rather than the 10+ levels you supposedly just played through."
    • "Ironically, the removal of the between level loading times and the new flow from one level to the next without moving to a different l