So someone was like "Halo:CE doesn't hold up to modern games, so I looked at what Steams top FPS games are right now and, according to a panel of experts I made up in my head, they are objectively trash. Counter Strike is literally several years older than Halo and hardly constitutes a modern game. Apex Legends is Titanfall if you took all the cool Titanfall parts out. CoD:Modern Warcrimes is uniquely awful in such a perplexing way that I believe it is a modern art performance secretly performed under activisions nose. Siege is a game about poking holes in walls then shooting people you don't know. Rust is a man's inhumanity to man simulator. GTAV is about selling shark cards. The first four games on the list that are actually good in any sense are Deep Rock Galactic, Team Fortress 2, and Halo: The Master Chief Collection.

DRG is geuinely good and innovative. They made something cool, it's awesome, Rock and Stone.

Team Fortress 2 is a re-make of a Half-Life mod from 1997, and was itself released in 2007, only a few years after Halo:CE and Halo2. And Halo is, literally, Halo, still a top seller on Steam 22 years after it's release.

The last "Good" game on the list is the one my friend held up as an example of why Halo couldn't stand up to modern games. It's Destiny. And I said "But Destiny is Halo" and he said no, it's a totally different game, and i don't want to argue about it, and shut me down.

The left stick moves right stick looks around controller system that a considerable number of games use today was solidified and became an industry standard because of Halo.

The idea of a dedicated button for grenade and melee, instead of having them be another "gun" selected from the list of weapons every time you need to use them, comes from Halo.

The regenerating health bar, in Halo's case justified by shields, comes from Halo.

Destiny has all these things... because Destiny, in terms of it's core gameplay loop, is Halo. It's more Halo than a lot of the Halo games that came after three.

One of the biggest innovations in Halo, and one of the things that made it such a fun, successful game, was what I think they said at the time was something like the shoot-punch-grenade loop. They had set up the game around those three actions. They all had their own button, which wasn't really a thing at the time. The loop was that the player would shoot some things, then punch something, then throw a grenade to get breathing room, maybe go in to cover to regen shields, then repeat the loop. And the loop was fun. And the whole game was structured around that loop. Most of the guns were either inaccurate or had slow projectiles. Players would naturally try to move in to a zone where the guns would be most effective, able to consistently hit enemies. This also brought them in to a zone where enemy's could rush in to melee with them, or they could rush enemies, at which point they could punch something or even have a little boxing match. If they felt overwhelmed or saw an opportunity they could throw a grenade to buy some breathing room, reload, re-charge shields. Then it was right back at the top of the loop, moving in to weapons range and shooting stuff. You were always on the move, always doing something, but you have a couple of verbs to work with instead of just move and shoot like a lot of FPS games leading up to that point had. You had some flexibility. And the whole game was tuned around that loop. The speed at which you moved, the big, long, floaty jumps that could carry you up or down terrain, they way the reticle and auto-aim worked, the design of large, open levels intended to be navigated by vehicles to get the game a sense of scope and allow the player to explore, alternating with much more constrained areas that complimented the gameplay loop.

And Destiny, made by Bungie, designed by many of the people who designed Halo, uses all the same stuff. The guardians have more or less the same weapon inventory system as Halo - Two main guns that you switch between. Destiny switches it up by letting you carry a third "power" weapon, but the player's ammo supply is restricted so in practice it gets used against bosses and minibosses rather than being used as a normal weapon. Normally you choose two guns based on what role you want to take and what you expect to run in to and you stick with them. Halo:CE was the game that made "You can only carry two guns" an industry standard, even in games where this didn't work and was a terrible idea.

The Guardian's in Destiny have a bunch of "powers", but the powers are explicitly Halo's punch and grenade with fancy graphics. The grenade power is even called grenade, even though you're supposed to be throwing some kind of magic doohickey.. But most of the, what, 15 avaialable options now? are grenades. A few of them behave just like the halo plasma grenades, sticking the enemies for a few seconds until they explode (this was the height of comedy in 2001). Some are different, but most a ranged AOE attack thrown in an arc from the player, serving the same function and role as halo's grenades.

Melee works the same way - The characters have a variety of "melee" abilities, but for the most part they constitute a relatively powerful attack used at very short range.

A big part of Destiny's design is about severely restricting player behavior by constraining what they can do and when. They took the free form nature of Halo's melee and grenade and assigned timer's to them. In Halo you could melee any enemy with any weapon and do full damage whenever you want. In Destiny you have a powered up melee attack on a cooldown timer. Once you use it you're left with a much weaker attack that does less damage. Halo let you carry four grenades - Two human grenades and two alien plasma grenades. Destiny puts your grenades on a cooldown timer. Halo basically trusted that the player would figure out the shoot-punch-grenade loop. Destiny enforces it mechanically - You can only punch once, then throw one grenade, then you have to either shoot or use one of the game's mechanics for recharging your punch and grenade. It's the same loop using the same verbs for the same purpose. Destiny just gives the player a bunch of largely superficial choices and adds additional restrictions on what the player can do at any given moment.

Speaking of two guns - Destiny has a system wherein both guns and enemy shields have "energy" types. Supposedly they tie in to the game's story but they're really just a color coded excuse. You need a blue gun to do damage to blue shields, a purple gun to damage purple shields, and a red gun to damage red shields. There are also white guns, which are "Kinetic" and don't work as well against shields. This is almost directly from Halo. In Halo the human weapons shot bullets and were did less damage to shields, but more damage once someone's shields were down. The alien plasma weapons did more shield damage, but weren't as effective once the shields were down. Destiny does the same thing, they just have three flavors of shields to force players to use different weapons instead of finding a favorite and sticking with it. At higher difficulties they go even further than halo; A given color of shield can only be taken down by the right flavor of gun, otherwise the enemy is much more difficult to kill. If you don't bring the right flavors of guns for those enemy's you're essentially soft-locked and have to leave the mission, get the right guns, and come back.

Destiny's offers each class three different ways to jump, all of which end up having roughly the same range and height in order to make the game's jump puzzles completable by all players. Most of them are relatively high, long, floaty jumps that are a direct evolution from the way the Master Chief character handle's in Halo. They're used for the same purpose - To give hte player character a good deal of mobility to navigate up and down the terrain.

There are fewer direct parellels, but the enemy's do follow similar patterns. Halo:CE had big guys with shields and dangerous guns, small guys that were less dangerous but could flank or harass you, and really big guys that needed a special trick to take down. There were also the unbiquitous guy who explodes.

Destiny has several enemy factions, but in practice each one has a big guy who is dangerous close up or at range, has good guns, and often has shields, a little guy who is less powerful but can flank and harass you, and some kind of big guy, like a tank or an ogre or a giant floating eyeball.

If you've been playing games the whole time from 2001 to now the similarities would be striking even if you didn't know that Destiny was Bungie's passion project after they managed to flee from Microsoft, leaving their IP behind. If you were a true, verified fossil you'd even recognize how much of Marathon made it in to Halo and Destiny, right now to concepts like AIs slipping human control to gain true sentience and agency. Rasputin is just Cortana is just Durandal, exploring the same concept in different ways. Guardians and Spartans both have two weapons, a grenade button, a melee button, regenerating shields. Even the basic weapon classes in Destiny - Assault rifle that sprays ammo everywhere, battle rifle that fires short accurate bursts, semi-auto accurate scout rifle, sniper rifle with massive damage but low ammo, shotgun that can kill anything as long as it's within 5 feet, extremely accurate high damage pistols, missile launchers, smgs - can mostly be found in very similar forms in Halo.

I forgot one - Destiny's sparrow hoverbikes are very similar to the covenant ghost hover bikes. Indeed, the enemy hover bikes behave in the same way as the Halo ghosts, being a vehicle with medium heavy firepower, which the players can steal by shootin

I mean, Destiny has an anniversary DLC that has a bunch of weapons and items from Halo but with the serial numbers scratched off, ffs.

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]
    hexagon
    ·
    2 years ago

    Was there anything in particular that didn't impress you compared to modern games?

    • red552 [they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I'm just not really a fan of single player fps games. I just get bored shooting at ai, I'd rather fight against actual people, more unpredictable and interesting. I'm probably not the best to give any sort of critique as my most played games are in the list of ones you're saying are trash at the start of your post lol.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]
        hexagon
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        That's understandable. I enjoyed it most playing on the highest difficulty level with a friend. For it's time the Elites were fairly dynamic and challenging as AI, and Halo:CE was an extraordinary visual and storytelling experience for 2001. The graphics were very good, the soundtrack was and remains iconic, Cortana and Chief's dynamic worked very well. The missions had a nice variety of scenarios with tight close quarters battles, large open semi-exploration areas, power-fantasy vehicle sections, and some grand set piece battles. The abrupt switch from military sci-fi to eldritch horror halfway through the game was fun and I still consider a few play-throughs of the Library some of my fondest gaming moments. I also played it with some of my dearest friends that I have since grown distant from, which was a big factor.

        The multiplayer experience was a big selling point at the time, and I guess it still is. Halo:CE had a couple of really solid maps, especially Blood Gulch. The weapons offered a nice balance of options. It was fun being able to play with vehicles. Networking several X-boxes together and getting like 20 kids in one room to play together was great. Xbox was the first time I really got to have a lan party experience with lots of people playing together in the same room. That was a good summer. We used to use a rule set where everyone was invisible with no shields and a sniper rifle. Idk why I remember that in particular, but sneaking around trying to spot the glimmer of another invisible player before they saw me stuck in my memory.

        Re: trash games

        I consider Counterstrike to be arguably the best game ever made, tied with chess and football. It's just as close to perfect as a game experience can get. I understand the appeal of Apex but I've never been able to play it without noticing all the ways the original island was designed for Titans and Pilots that were later removed from the game bc the devs thought it'd be too fast for players to handle. They may have been right. I've been playing Warframe PvP and it's extremely demanding trying to track where players are around you when both of you are flying in different directions at 30mph.

        I honestly don't have anything kind to say about CoD. Whatever design philosophy is going on with that game is completely baffling to me. When I play it I mostly find myself playing to see what strange thing will happen next, like the time I discovered that CoD players don't know what to do when faced with a prone machine gunner defending a point, or the time I found out you can land the spawn helicopter on the other spawn helicopter, or the time I found out you can shoot down UAVs and spent the whole match denying the other team's UAVs. I think a lot of it, at least the in-game parts, is that I'm an extremely team-focused player and I keep trying to play the CoD team matches like I'm on a team, and it feels like I'm the only one doing that. Scenarios like hiding in a smoke cloud and killing one person after another wouldn't happen in most team FPS games bc someone would either using a ping or VOIP to warn others, or use an indirect fire weapon to clear me out, or rush me with a couple of people at once. But everyone in CoD is so individualistic that you can get away with just silly things. If I try to play CoD like CoD is supposed to be played I get destroyed, but when I do silly things like run around with a shield and smoke grenades i do quite well.

        Rust I sort of get, in that I like sandbox games and messing around, but I've never really been able to do survival sandboxes bc so much of it is based around destroying things people have put a huge amount of time and effort in to, and in ambushing and killing people who have no real chance of fighting back. That's fine in a real war but I don't enjoy it. It's left me in an odd spot - I like that style of game for the freedom it gives you to explore and build things, but I'm not interested in the PvP that is often the core of the game.

        Rainbow Six: Siege is fine, it's just not for me. I was around for the OG Rainbow, Which was very innovative for it's time for being punishingly realistic in terms of TTK, but also for giving you tight, measured control over your team in single player. You could plan out the entire raid on the target movement by movement and room by room, then pray that something went right when you blew the doors. Seeing Rainbow, and also Ghost Recon, become sillier and sillier over the years kind of soured me on the series, but then I wouldn't enjoy playing super-cops anymore anyway. I have been playing a VR game called Breachers that's sort of half way between Rainbow Lite and Counter-Strike. 5v5, fairly compact maps where specific walls, doors, and hatches in floors and ceilings can be breached, lots of gadgets like drones, flashbangs, proximity sensors, various area denial tools. It's very well done. It makes good use of strong art direction to create a compelling visual experience while being very efficient in it's use of hardware resources, which is to say it was designed for Quest and will run on a potato, but looks great. It has less destructibility than Siege so it's more about covering angles than making peep holes and having perfect map knowledge. But there's enough dynamism that things can go to hell very quickly, and since it's VR you can do lots of stupid tricks like banging on a wall then rolling a grenade under a door when someone comes to look, or blind firing around corners, or getting creative angles because you can actually physically move your body there. It's the only game where I can reliably use flash bangs without flashing myself because I can stand with my back to the wall and toss them through the door with one hand, almost completely removing the risk of it going off in my face.

        • red552 [they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          I've never done any sort of lan parties and that does seem really fun. I did play a bit of halo multiplayer but it was just random matchmaking, and there are other things I'd rather be playing so I dropped it pretty quick.

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]
            hexagon
            ·
            2 years ago

            Lan parties were a lot of fun. I'm sad that they're probably a cultural blip that existed for like 15 years before the technological standard that made them desirable stopped existing. One of my fondest memories is like 20 people sitting on a pile of couches in the dark watching our friend play Eternal Darkness with all of us screaming and gasping a that the dramatically appropriate moments like we were in a theater.

        • red552 [they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          On the point about COD, you're right about it being so individualistic. I'm also like you in that I always try to play for objectives with my team in games, except for COD. I don't play it very often but I only play it because using the crossbow is so much fun. If I try to use an actual gun and do the objective and all that I'll have a good score and a high KD, but it's just not very fun. So instead I just run around on my own trying to long range snipe people with crossbow. My score is terrible but it just feels so good getting those crossbow kills. COD is the only game I play where I have to do intentionally stupid things to have fun. I don't know how so many people sprint around with assault rifles game after game on repeat and not get bored really quickly. I've only played the recent modern warfares and they're very weird games design wise. I also never played the singleplayer as it seems absolutely terrible.

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]
            hexagon
            ·
            2 years ago

            I've only done the coop raids and DMZ and the AI is a mixed bag. They will aggressively use grenades and smoke sometimes, but most of the time they just peak out of cover at predictable intervals. A lot of the "Difficulty" in DMZ is that the AI just have so many damn hitpoints. I've got... uh... a distressing amount of playtime in Arma and I'm used to firefights happening at hundreds of meters where one or two hits are fatal. So when CoD has near 100% damage fall off and gives you "Long shot" bonuses for hitting someone with an AR at 100m, and the AI take half a magazine or more to bring down, it can be very frustrating.

            I do appreciate having one gun that is just particularly fun to use and feels right.

        • Grebgreb [he/him, they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s understandable. I enjoyed it most playing on the highest difficulty level with a friend. For it’s time the Elites were fairly dynamic and challenging as AI

          They still are, I have yet to play another game with ai that compares to Halo 1's. Even the rest of the Halo's downgraded it for some reason. All of the Cods I played had embarrassingly bad enemies, they barely moved and generally seemed to be magically aware of the player. Never felt like they had any sense of self preservation either. In Kingdom Come they frequently just break and sometimes will just stand there after being shot with an arrow. Payday 2's ai is just extremely basic and boring.

          The Covenant in 1 are believable, fair, and fun. Infinite is the only other game that similar ai but they don't work very well in the large open world. The interior sections of Infinite and the entirety of Halo 1 are the most fun I've ever had in a singleplayer fps. Shame it never became a thing to have good ai.

        • ssjmarx [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          the best game ever made, tied with chess

          There are like a hundred board games better than chess lmao