Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Image

Review: Halo: Reach 191

The launch of Halo: Combat Evolved in 2001 vaulted Bungie to the top of the game development industry and helped provide a stable foundation for the success of the original Xbox. Nine years later, having completed a trilogy and a standalone expansion for the Halo universe, Bungie has returned to the IP one last time for a prequel called Halo: Reach. They clearly wanted to do right by the fans and the franchise with their final sendoff, and the effort they put into the game reflects that. Read on for the rest of my thoughts.
  • Title: Halo: Reach
  • Developer: Bungie
  • Publisher: Microsoft
  • System: Xbox 360
  • Reviewer: Soulskill
  • Score: 8/10

The game gets its title from a planet named Reach, which is under siege by the Covenant a few weeks prior to the events in the first Halo game. Your character takes the role of new member to a team of soldiers who are trying, without much hope, to keep the planet from falling into enemy hands. If you play many shooters, it will be a familiar scenario, and Bungie doesn't spend much time crafting a detailed backstory or exploring character motivation. In that way the narrative shares the perspective of the characters — they're here to fight, and so are you.

This demeanor is maintained throughout the campaign, and it provides an odd contrast to other games in the genre. Most recent games try to set you or another character up as a tragic hero, using side-plots, sub-stories, and untimely deaths to provoke an emotional reaction. Halo: Reach handles this in a more detached, military way. When a character dies, the others acknowledge it with a moment of grief, but then move on, because they have a job to do. While I found it to be an interesting mind-set, I also never particularly cared about any of the characters, and never really got engaged in the story.

But, this is Halo; gameplay is paramount. The game engine was retooled and updated for Halo: Reach, and it shows. The feel of movement and combat is the best I've experienced on the Xbox 360. It's smooth and responsive, and it handles jumping, turning and aiming very well. As someone who typically prefers to play shooters on the PC, I was pleasantly surprised. The maps are consistently excellent as well. They maintain the Halo feel of being set on enormous backdrops, filling as much of the sky as they can manage with distant mountains, towering ships and structures, planets and moons. The layout of the fighting areas manages to avoid being constrictive while keeping you moving along the path necessary for the plot. Areas in which you fight typically have several different available routes, so that the direction you feel comfortable traveling while attacking or defending will take you where you need to go without having to double back. It's one of those subtle things about level design that's very often ignored, but does wonders for immersion when it isn't.

The AI isn't particularly good or particularly bad (unless your teammate is driving you around), and you'll quickly come to recognize enemy behavior patterns. The campaign combat gets a bit repetitive because of this, but Bungie planned ahead and created ways to spice it up. In addition to four standard difficulty levels, you can turn on "Skulls," a set of minor gameplay modifications that add challenge to the campaign. For example, one makes enemies toss more grenades, and faster. Another requires you to melee enemies to recharge your shields, and one makes enemies more lucky with events based on a random roll. You can also play the campaign cooperatively with other people, which is great if you have a couple of friends also playing the game. If you're the type to play a shooter's campaign once before retiring it to the shelf, this game probably isn't for you. But Bungie built in a lot of replayability. If you enjoy going through it multiple times, challenging yourself to do it the hard way, and playing through with buddies, there's a lot of potential entertainment to be had.

The available weaponry is a mixed bag. Modern shooters tend to have "superweapons" become available only infrequently, and with restrictions; limited ammo, slow movement speed, etc. In Halo: Reach they are perhaps too restricted, often with long wind-up times and a slow recharge. I found myself switching away or simply dropping those guns because they weren't much fun to use. By contrast, I found the pistol-type weapons to be the most satisfying to use, perhaps because they didn't inconveniently need a reload just as I brought down an enemy's shield. One thing Bungie definitely did right was the visual depiction of the projectiles shot out of the guns (bullets, plasma bolts, grenades, etc.). The bolts coming at you all have distinct colors and graphical effects that go along with distinct velocities and trajectories. Dodging enemy fire adds a lot of depth to the gameplay, and it's very easy to see what's being shot at you without having to focus on it.

Throughout the game you can ride in a variety of vehicles, and even perform multiple roles within the vehicles themselves. This suits co-op play very well, and solo play somewhat less. The guns on a tank or Warthog are big and satisfying to use. Driving takes some getting used to, using one analog stick for the throttle and the other for steering. If you're used to a game that uses one stick for both, it will feel awkward. There are a set of helicopter missions that fare better — once you're at an altitude you like, you can press a button to hold there, leaving you only 2-D movement to worry about while you aim, which isn't so different from ground fighting.

There are also a set of space missions, where you grab a fighter and fly around, trying to out-Star-Wars Covenant spacecraft. I was skeptical of their ability to pull this off, but the missions are a lot of fun. It's not tremendously complex; you've got lasers, which can knock down shields, and rockets to finish things off. The targeting system is generous, and you can evade enemy fire with rolls and flips. But the engine is just as smooth and responsive as it is for other forms of combat. It reminded me of playing old arcade space shooters. These missions are followed by the boarding of a ship that's had its atmosphere vented to space. As you trudge through hangars and corridors, shooting wildly at the waves of Covenant trying to block your progress, the familiar sound of gunfire is conspicuously absent, while your controller shakes softly in your hands. Its a nice touch.

If you played Halo 3 or ODST, you're probably familiar with Forge. It's the built-in map editor (or at least, map customizer) that lets you tweak items, vehicles, and objects while leaving the geography unchanged. You can't remove a cliff or make a hole in the ground, but you can move, add, and delete weapons, spawn points, buildings, ramps, giant rocks, Warthogs, and more. It's very simple to use; it'll be nice for groups who play on a regular basis to be able to easily change things about their typical maps, and there will certainly be a dedicated few (in fact, there already are) who create some really impressive levels in spite of the limitations. Spacious, mostly empty "Forge World" maps provide a relatively blank canvas for building something new or remaking something old. At the time of writing, one of the most popular maps has you jump your four-wheeler pointlessly but entertainingly through the air, and another is a pseudo-platformer.

The multiplayer experience is integral to the Halo games, and this one is no exception. There are about 40 different ways you can play this game with other people. We've come a long way from the days of "Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, and CTF" being the multiplayer standard. You get about a dozen game archetypes to choose from, and each of those may have several different variations. For example, there are four kinds of CTF, a couple different racing modes, three "bomb your opponent's base" modes, and even two different ways to play King of the Hill. It would be really tough not to find a few gameplay modes you enjoy from this huge list, and the name on the box guarantees there will be enough players to keep finding matches. Halo: Reach also brings back Firefight, Bungie's version of the industry standard "get-swarmed-until-you-die" game. Even here there are seven different versions, including one in which you attack or defend particular objects, and another that gives you a rocket launcher and unlimited ammo.

Of course, with all these options, the matchmaking system needs to be up to the task of putting players in games they want to play. Like Halo 3, the system uses "playlists." You select from several groups of game types, and once enough players are found for a match, they vote on which particular map and mode they want to play. While this has the benefit of finding games very quickly, the downside is that if you really want to play a particular map or mode, you may get voted down and stuck with something else. A simple browser would have been great, if not particularly elegant. In addition to the skill-based matching, you can also tweak a few options that narrow down whom you want to play against: chatty vs. quiet, competitive vs. casual, prioritizing skill, or a good connection, and so on. It remains to be seen how many players will use this as intended, but it's a step in the right direction toward filtering out some of the players who rub you the wrong way.

Bungie has built a huge fan base over the past nine years. For many, Halo: Reach will be the last true Halo game, now that Microsoft is taking over development of the series. Knowing this, Bungie really went all out to make this a game that gave players everything they could ask for. It stumbled a bit in the storytelling and the weapon design, but the heart of the game is in the multiplayer, and there they provided such a wealth of game modes, preferences, customizations and settings that even the most hardcore players will have difficulty running out of new ways to play. It'll certainly be a tough act to follow for whoever Microsoft puts in charge of the next Halo game, and Bungie knows it.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Review: Halo: Reach

Comments Filter:
  • Advice (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Pojut ( 1027544 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:03AM (#33599818) Homepage

    Read the books. Seriously. The Halo series is decent and fun, and certainly has its moments...but it's hardly deserving of the legendary status people have applied to it. The books, however...the books are amazing. The storyline makes for a great series of sci-fi novels, and are all page-turners.

    The best Halo experience isn't on a TV screen, but in a book. Just a bit of advice.

  • by Darkness404 ( 1287218 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:22AM (#33600012)
    The full benefits of multiplayer don't last forever on console games. Yeah, it might be fun for a few years but then either the servers get shut off or the matchmaking system doesn't work well and you are waiting 15 mins to get into a game.

    Yeah, there always is system-link or physical multiplayer but most games now for multiplayer focus it online.

    25 years from now, the single player mode will still be available along with local multiplayer but Xbox live will not. If you want a game you can enjoy 25 years from now, the single player mode is important.
  • by Pojut ( 1027544 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:22AM (#33600016) Homepage

    whenever I read a review that disparages a videogame's "story" I chuckle

    Sometimes, a story is integral to a video game [livingwithanerd.com]. Video games provide a medium that enables stories to be told in a way that would otherwise not be possible.

    Other times, a story doesn't matter at all [livingwithanerd.com]. Some games are hugely successful with literally no story.

    Dragon Age and Tetris will both suck up hours upon hours of your time, but for entirely different reasons. One keeps you coming back for the depth of its narrative, and the other keeps you coming back for sheer simplicity. Each type of game has its place in the culture, and both of them are equally important.

  • Re:Advice (Score:5, Interesting)

    by HaZardman27 ( 1521119 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:22AM (#33600024)
    I always considered Halo to be a mash up of Ringworld, Aliens, Ender's Game, and Starship Troopers. As far as an homage to these sci-fi heavyweights goes, I think they did a pretty good job.
  • Re:Gotta Say (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Haffner ( 1349071 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:30AM (#33600112)

    /rant

    As an enthusiastic fan of multiplayer gaming, let me be the second to say that Windows Live is perhaps the stupidest, most awkward, piece of crap to have ever been designed for gaming. It is inane, it removes functionality, it insists on running in the background while providing no added value, and it screws up everything. Until microsoft realizes what a useless, stupid, infuriating platform this is, they are essentially shooting their pc games in the feet, knees, stomach, and at least a few other vital organs. Please fix this, as some games (Batman Arkham Asylum, Bioshock 2) are actually worth playing were it not for the idiocy that is Windows Live.

    /rant

  • Bungie in 1996 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chebucto ( 992517 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:32AM (#33600144) Homepage

    Just for the heck of it, here is a video of the Bungie world headquarters from 1996, back when they were Mac developers, and before they moved to the dark side and joined Microsoft.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFbrfmqOtbE [youtube.com]

  • Re:Advice (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tophermeyer ( 1573841 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:43AM (#33600278)

    For a good SciFi novel, pass all the rest and pick up Robert A. Heinleins' Starship Troopers.

    So your suggestion is to skip every other sci-fi novel that is not itself a wildly successful classic and the book to which most other sci-fi combat stories are compared? Your bookshelf must be pretty bare.

    The Halo books are for children, not for adults...For a good SciFi novel, pass all the rest and pick up Robert A. Heinleins' Starship Troopers.

    ...aaaaand in case you weren't aware, some of Heinlein's best work was his children's stories.

  • by natehoy ( 1608657 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @11:46AM (#33600318) Journal

    If you want a game you can enjoy 25 years from now, the single player mode is important.

    Yes, but also if you want a game you can enjoy 25 years from now, you'd better buy 10 of whatever runs it and hope to hell that one of them lasts 25 years. Most video games released in 1985 years ago were arcade games. Sure, you could have bought "Where in the world is Carmen Sandiego?" for DOS on an 80286 that year, but only on 5 1/4" floppy, and I'm not sure if you could successfully emulate DOS 3.1 on an 80286 using modern hardware very well. I don't know about you, but my last 80286 didn't make it to 1990. Neither did my TI 99/4A or my Apple IIe.

    I have books that I've owned for more than 25 years and still enjoy. I don't even have the hardware to run the games I bought 25 years ago.

  • Re:One last time? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by grayshirtninja ( 1242690 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @12:04PM (#33600628)

    It's interesting to note that Bungie has a job position open for a "Software Development Engineer in Test (PS3)". A hopeful sign of things to come.

  • by Darkness404 ( 1287218 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @12:04PM (#33600630)
    Um, I've got a ton of NES games from 25 years ago and they still run perfectly fine. I even have a working NES, it might be a bit temperamental at times, but it works. I also have one of the remake top-loading NES/Famicom systems and all my games play just fine there. Heck, I've got a working 2600 system and games from the 70s!

    Yeah, cartridges are going to be more reliable than CDs/DVDs but DVDs/CDs are easier to rip. But I still have some CDs from the late 80s that still work just fine after 20 some odd years.

    Due to the ease of making universal disk drives, the optical disk isn't going to go away anytime soon unless SSDs become cheap enough to put "buyable" software on and movies.
  • Re:Advice (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Requiem18th ( 742389 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @12:16PM (#33600816)

    And Consider Phlebas isn't really much more than a Tresure Island/Pirates of the Caribean IN SPACE!

    It is just an excuse to introduce The Culture, the most interesting details are in the addendums. Remarkably, in that the titular Culture is introduced as the antagonists.

  • Re:Advice (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Killall -9 Bash ( 622952 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @01:02PM (#33601434)
    When the 17 year old Mountain Dew addicts get you down, switch to playing on servers with friendly fire==on. That shit is a whole other ballgame. You'll feel so much better when twitchy-McFastFingers can't tell red from blue.
  • Re:One last time? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Darkness404 ( 1287218 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @01:04PM (#33601464)
    But they are tied to the success of a certain brand. I see Bungie as being a lot like Rare who made a video game based on IP they didn't own (Donkey Kong Country, Goldeneye 007) and that forced them to essentially make another game with the same engine in the case of Goldeneye to really have a failproof plan. Investors and CEOs don't like uncertainty, Halo for Bungie is filled with uncertainty because for one its tied into Microsoft's platform which at this mid-way point seems rather sturdy but could, like the Mega Drive be filled with failed products that don't catch on. Plus, what about the successor to the 360? The Halo franchise is pretty much tied to the success of that if it comes down to it. And everything changed this generation. Sony, which was at the top before fell to last place and Nintendo which was last the previous generation has climbed to first place.

    Developing your own IP allows you to take things in your own direction. Because, Bungie owns a lot of the Halo code much like Rare owned the game engine for Goldeneye but just didn't own the IP used in there. So it is better in the long term for Bungie to make a Halo-like game and establish their own independent IP than to continue using Halo which the future is uncertain.
  • by Tuidjy ( 321055 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @03:48PM (#33603540)

    You have a point. I have two cars. One is a 2005, immaculate, 460hp Volvo S60-R. The other is a totaled 1990 Toyota Supra. Both have bucket seats, but before a cop on a cell-phone smashed the Supra, I had installed a $2500 sound system.

    Guess what, I still drive the Supra to work. I pay about 25% more for gas, and the ride is way rougher, but I enjoy the surround speakers, and there is something to be said about being able to push your right of way to the hilt (and then some) No one cuts off or rides the ass of a totaled car.

  • Re:Bungie in 1996 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by BJ_Covert_Action ( 1499847 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @04:08PM (#33603836) Homepage Journal
    I get your joke, but I wonder if they could have made more money by releasing for Playstation instead. I get the feeling Halo is 90% of the reason the original Xbox even got as big as it did. If it had never been released for Xbox, I wonder what kind of console-scape we would have today.
  • by BJ_Covert_Action ( 1499847 ) on Thursday September 16, 2010 @04:12PM (#33603892) Homepage Journal
    I never understood the draw to the 'realism' in COD type games. It's annoying. If I am playing a video game, I want to pretend to be a 9 foot tall space cyborg that can jump 20 feet in the air and kick a motorcycle a half-mile at an enemy. I don't want to pretend I am in Iraq getting shit on by insurgents with RPG's. Video games, at least the way I figure, at about a certain suspension of reality. It's funner to be a fire-breathing raptor and think about why on Earth I would be so interested in hunting down laser wielding zombies than it is to pretend to be fighting a real war with real people.

With your bare hands?!?

Working...