New Review Posted: Halo 2

[Daniel Weissenberger]

Mike Doolittle kicks off our all-sequel week with his exhaustive review of Halo 2:

"Like an unstoppable juggernaut of hype, Halo 2 has stormed into the history books with all the subtlety of an intergalactic war machine, teasing gamers for months on end with everything from massive in-depth previews to a theatrical trailer. The first Halo is, in many respects, the story of the Xbox console. Following its release on the Xbox's launch, it sold quickly and garnered numerous "Game of the Year" awards, and for the past three years has remained a top-selling game and easily the single most popular game on the console. Indeed, were it not for Halo, the Xbox may have never established a foothold in the highly competitive console marketplace. Understandably, the sequel has a lot to live up to."

The rest of the review is available through the following hyperlink: http://www.gamecritics.com/review/halo2/main.php

[EnduroGamer]

Awesome job, Mike!

I hadn't played the game yet but you told me everything I need to know about it without spoiling much. Seemed like a very, dare I say, fair and balanced look at the game.

[Hypatia93]

Again, good review Mike, though I suspect I enjoyed the campaign a bit more than your average bear (excepting the "end," of course).

One quibble, though. You don't have to join a clan in order to play online or in order to play with your friends online. I happen to be unaffiliated, thank you. You can get in on quickmatches, optimatches, or the non-ranked self-made game with groups of friends. But then, I'm sure you knew all this.

[Daniel Weissenberger]

Si Holmes offers his opinion on Halo 2:

"From the rookie sportsman whose real test will be the follow up season where everyone knows his tricks, to the band releasing that difficult second album, much has been written about sequels. Still, it is worth summing up the salient point that there is a balance between developing artistically and not alienating existing fans, and that many sequels live or die around this dichotomy. Halo 2 lets me down as a sequel because it fails to improve upon most of the archaic design features that could be forgiven in the original, and gives Halo fans less of an experience in almost every area. It is a good game compared to the class of 2004, but it is no Halo and should be marked down accordingly."

The rest of the review is here.

[JackSlack]

Erm, wow. Is it possible to third opinion? I see where Si Holmes is coming from, but I couldn't disagree more. SPOILERS AHEAD!

Protagonist: Master Chief vs. The Arbiter

Let's start with the Master Chief vs. The Arbiter. The Master Chief is boring. Yes, yes, there's some issues of whether the Trojan class are ethical, etc. But let's face it, he's a total cipher. He has no motives. He has no personality. He's a flat out plot point, and nothing more.

The Arbiter is intriguing. He's been scapegoated for the Covenant after (correctly, for the most part) adjusting his troops to deal with the Flood rather than Master Chief. And yet he's too useful a political tool to throw away. He's the catspaw of the Covenant, and the story he has shows how he moves from their reluctant pawn to a rebel in their midst. He's fascinating, and I spent most of the game wishing the story had the guts to just ditch Master Chief.

Gameplay: Open-ended vs. Varied

I see what Si Holmes is saying about linearity, but I think he really drastically over-states the case. I recall maybe one divergent path you could take past the first Halo level. There were plenty of arenas, with multiple options for combat, but they were there in Halo 2, as well.

More importantly, Halo 2 didn't copy and paste its battles over and over. It had variety to spare, in a way the original didn't even get close to. Did you ever run the tank over a doomed bridge in Halo 1, fighting off flying foes, foot soldiers and eventually other tanks? No. What about a tense urban environment plagued by snipers? No. How about massive arctic fortresses where vertical distance became more of a gameplay issue than horizontal? No, no, and no. (To it's credit, the night-time raid was a nice twist on the standard fare, but it wasn't handled well enough.) Halo 1 was flat, repetitive, and unvaried. Halo 2 employed three dimensions a lot better, varied the action, and got rid of the Library.

Let me repeat that: It got rid of the Library. This is a massive point in Halo 2's favor.

Plot: Straightforward vs. Interesting, but uneven

Here, I'm willing to concede that Halo 1 has an argument against Halo 2 for superiority. Halo barely had a plot. Oh sure, ring planet question, and a fairly impressive plot twist toward that would have been more effective if the Monitor had shown up anytime reasonable before his betrayal. But the Covenant were two-bit bad guys, they had no depth, the whole war took place in a vacuum, and it was your boilerplate videogame plot.

Halo 2 isn't brilliant. But there's considerably more meat on its bones. The Covenant have religious intrigue about them, and they're not pure evil. Religiously misguided, yes, and with a corrupt leadership, but we can now see their motives somewhat.

But, and I concede this -- The humanity story is weak in comparison. There needed to be more emotional punch when Earth gets hit, we needed to see some cities get wiped out, for example, or see the devastation in human terms in the city. It's too clean.

The ending isn't as bad as people think, if you consider the episode the Arbiter's story. He defeats the leader of the new faction he despises, signalling a massive turn in Covenant politics. That's a good chapter point as any I can think of.

But yes, the human story was pretty uneventful, all said and done.

My take

Halo 2 isn't perfect by any means. But it's a solid, well done shooter, even in one player mode. It's got one great character (the Arbiter) and even if the other character gets short shrift, his scenes have some terrific set pieces for the action.

The gameplay is marvelously improved, with greater diversity and more varied challenges. Scenes crackle better than Halo 1's did.

I will agree with this point, though.

"To such an extent that to me, this doesn't feel like Halo anymore."

Indeed. I had fun with this one.

[Low Emissions]

Oh my... I think this guy just struck something I'd been thinking but not really thinking (you know what I mean). The Arbiter is the story's strong character by leaps and bounds. The Covenant story is so much more intriquing than the human story it's uncanny. Wow. >.>

You know, in order for me to go back through the original Halo and really, truly appreciate everything that was going on around me, I had to read the book. Halo: The Flood fills in all the details that the game just kind of leaves out. For example, when you're running through an area and find a bunch of dead marines, it'll explain why they're there and why they're dead. Those battles in the arctic sections of the game between the Flood, humans, and Covenant is explained. It's really awesome, and helps a person understand the whole universe a whole lot better than the game does.

Should've made the game more like the damn book.