Halo is one of the few video games I have actually finished, mainly due to the AI. Whether it is really that smart or not, the experience shines. Granted I don't have that much FPS experience, but Halo is one of the few games where I actually felt like I was fighting a squad of enemies. Each battle feels different and unique. And yes, the game doesn't really shine until you play on the hardest or second-hardest difficulty level. Lower than that, and the enemies feel more like your basic FPS target practice.
Besides that, it was a very well-polished game with great graphics for a XBox launch title.
The game was certainly rushed, but the finished product was very complete considering the circumstances. When Halo was shown for the first time at E3, that demo level (Silent Cartographer?) was in fact the ONLY level they had completed up to that point. And that was a scant 6 months before the game was released!
Although I can see how some are a bit jaded with the game (or just flat-out didn't like it), I think to claim that Halo is ALL hype is completely overblown.
I was thinking along the same lines, but a little differently. To me, art is more than just simple communication. As someone above said, "I like to think that art is the expression of ideas and concepts in a manner that evokes something above and beyond the sheerly practical."
Thus, video games, paintings, film, etc. are all different mediums. Video games are not art in and of itself- they are a medium for communication, entertainment, and art as well. Whether a particular game or movie or novel is or is not art, is for the most part in the eye of the beholder.
Or perhaps it's more accurate to say that context and experience "determines" whether something is art or not. A can of soup is not art, but a painting of one is? If so, then the original can of soup can be experienced from a certain context as art to the viewer.
Slashdot Mirror
Halo is one of the few video games I have actually finished, mainly due to the AI. Whether it is really that smart or not, the experience shines. Granted I don't have that much FPS experience, but Halo is one of the few games where I actually felt like I was fighting a squad of enemies. Each battle feels different and unique. And yes, the game doesn't really shine until you play on the hardest or second-hardest difficulty level. Lower than that, and the enemies feel more like your basic FPS target practice. Besides that, it was a very well-polished game with great graphics for a XBox launch title. The game was certainly rushed, but the finished product was very complete considering the circumstances. When Halo was shown for the first time at E3, that demo level (Silent Cartographer?) was in fact the ONLY level they had completed up to that point. And that was a scant 6 months before the game was released! Although I can see how some are a bit jaded with the game (or just flat-out didn't like it), I think to claim that Halo is ALL hype is completely overblown.
I was thinking along the same lines, but a little differently. To me, art is more than just simple communication. As someone above said, "I like to think that art is the expression of ideas and concepts in a manner that evokes something above and beyond the sheerly practical." Thus, video games, paintings, film, etc. are all different mediums. Video games are not art in and of itself- they are a medium for communication, entertainment, and art as well. Whether a particular game or movie or novel is or is not art, is for the most part in the eye of the beholder. Or perhaps it's more accurate to say that context and experience "determines" whether something is art or not. A can of soup is not art, but a painting of one is? If so, then the original can of soup can be experienced from a certain context as art to the viewer.