Well it’s here; the highly anticipated sequel to the Halo series is upon us. Released on September 22nd, Halo 3: ODST, puts you not in the shoes of the super powered Master Chief, but in the unlikely shoes of several significantly weaker Orbital Drop Shock Troopers. After seeing the trailers and footage from E3, I was certainly excited to finally get a chance to play through this game, especially the new Firefight mode.
But I also assumed that there would be additional online content, because, as far as I’m concerned, that’s the REAL reason to play a Halo game. Well, some of you may be in for a bit of a disappointment with this potentially overpriced title. Don’t get me wrong, there is a lot of content, for the right subset of players, it’s just not everything I expected.
Whether you’re shooting zombies, terrorists, aliens, or Nazis it seems that most first person shooters all follow the same simple formula.
Pit a player in an epic environment with a desperate conflict in which his/her faction or side is losing. Then have their respective faction enlist their help to somehow turn the tides of war.
The player then must slaughter their way through countless armies and foes in order to achieve victory and save the world. Now throw in some explosions and engaging firefights throughout the game and you got yourself a FPS.
Predictable? Yes, and many have complained as a result, but will the FPS genre change anytime soon?
Some of the best games come in trilogy format: Halo, Diablo, Warcraft (pre “World of”), so wouldn’t it make sense for developers to plan on making trilogies? After all, filmmakers and novel writers have been doing so for years. Well, what’s good for one medium isn’t necessarily good for others, so the short answer: no, game makers shouldn’t plan out trilogies. Full reasoning after the jump.
Everyone plays video games with a goal in mind. The goal is usually very simple: “Even though it’s three in the morning and I have to wake up for school tomorrow, I just want to beat this stupid flash game before I go to sleep.” Goals based around skill of video games usually don’t aim higher than looking for a sense of accomplishment. So it’s easy to determine when someone is too good at a video game: it’s when they can no longer complete their goal because attaining it is not a challenge.
No, this isn’t another internet “top 5″ list. That would imply music is quantitative, and it’s not. But still, how do you choose the best in-game music, when really it can’t all be compared? It’s an apples-to-oranges situation. You may think, “Well, it’s music, and it’s in a game. So, yes, stupid, it can be compared.” But if you do that, you miss the entire point of music not being quantifiable. To be the best in-game music it has to be moving, memorable, and meaningful…and not all good game music has those qualities.