Halo: Reach

Review from Starks - Monday, 20 September 2010 @ 8:20pm

The Halo series has been a defining franchise for Microsoft’s Xbox and 360 consoles, selling in the millions of copies across 5 games. Bungie, the mastermind behind the series, announced that they would be finishing their involvement, with Halo: Reach defining their legacy.

I expected big things of the game, to be honest. Halo has been a big part of my gaming life for nearly 7 years. I’ve played competitively, run competitions and flown interstate all for this series and it has given me no end of enjoyment. So my expectations were reasonably high given Bungie seemed intent to leave on a high note.

The game centres on the story of the Noble Team and the world of Reach – A UNSC military hub and one of the last remaining interstellar colonies not overrun by the Covenant. HR is set before the Halo: Combat Evolved time line and is one of the most recognised of the novels due to the evocative story. It’s a story of rising against adversity, sacrificial service and hope.

I won’t comment too much more on the story, as it does tend to drive the whole point of the campaign. While it differs from the novel, I can accept Bungie taking license with the ‘canon’ as they, in essence, own it. How they choose to tell the story is really up to them and complaints that it goes against canon is somewhat contradictory since they made the canon with the series itself.

Suffice to say, the campign is dark, moody and involved. There is a large emphasis on cinematic experience and the telling of the story with cut scenes sometimes running up to 4 or 5 minutes worth. Even from the early stages of playing, you can tell that they are looking to leave an impression on the player.

I will have to admit right now that the campaign didn’t really 'feel' like Halo to me. The 'feel' of H:CE does not seem to have been replicated during the series, although the third instalment certainly was close. Reach simply seems to lack the charm and enjoyment I experienced with the original Halo, and I think it is because they’re retelling a story found in a book. Given the level of detail and explanation a book can go to in order to get across its meaning, this means a great deal can be often left out in the transference to a computer game.

For instance, why is Hasley so aggressive towards specific Spartans? This isn’t easily explained, as it requires an even greater knowledge of the various other books and so this particular element of the character development is hindered as a result.

One of the interesting things that Bungie have noticeably done, however, is including the player's specific character model in the game and in the cinematics. By leaving Noble 6 as a blank canvas of sorts, the player is able to fit him or herself into the game in a personalised manner, hence increasing the level of immersion experienced.

As I was playing through the campaign, I tended to smile at specific occasions as you can see Bungie have placed at certain points specific throwbacks to the previous games throughout the campaign. In particular, seeing the Pillar of Autumn and its captain Jacob Keyes is a pleasant sight. Joining the story threads in such a way is both clever and thoughtful, allowing the player to understand where the series came from and the events behind that.

Some of the things I tended to wish were not included were the various airfights. Now, don’t get me wrong – I loved flying in Banshees in H:CE. Even in Halo 2 and 3 these were interesting and lovable moments as you could take the fight to the enemy with their own machinery. However, the space jet fighting chapter and the various helicopter fights were too much for me.

I wasn’t interested, I really wasn’t. If I had wanted to play Tie Fighter vs X-Wing I would’ve done so, and that’s kind of what it felt like – A bit of a Star Wars rip off with a gritty Firefly feel to it. To me, I just couldn’t get into this bit. It detracted from the game and despite what is obviously Bungie’s attempt to mix things up, it simply distracts and draws away form the main action of killing grunts and sticking elites.

By the end of the game, which is really what I wanted to get to in order to ‘fulfil’ the conclusion I knew was coming, I found myself to be feeling a little empty, rather than thinking I had achieved something. It just… I don’t know. It’s not to say I didn’t enjoy it. I thought it was in some ways great, but I guess I just don’t think it was as epic as the story I read in the book despite the effort Bungie put in.

I’m not sure what I expected, to be truthful. I had hoped it would be the earthshattering conclusion to Bungie’s involvement in the franchise I had pictured in my imagination. I suppose in my mind I had hoped they could make that final battle of Noble 6’s as emotional an experience as when Aeris was killed by Sephiroth. Sadly, it felt about the same as when I killed Tartarus in Halo 2. Perhaps I expected too much.

One of the major issues I had with the game is the absolute uselessness of the rest of Noble team. I honestly think that Bungie slipped up here, as having a group of Spartans kill almost nothing when in combat simply detracted from the feeling the game had any 'realism' to it and simply frustrated me that I was constantly being forced to be a one man band in a squad of elite soldiers. While it is fine for Master Chief to be 'that good' as he is a lone soldier, I found it annoying and silly that artificially augmented super solders were of no use to me and never lived up to their 'deadly' status.

Another element I found lacking was the sly humour often found in the first, and to an extent the second, in the series. Whether it was a quip by Cortana or an outrageous statement by Sgt Johnson, these elements of humour were always well spaced throughout the game to add a different element to the dialogue and generate a giddy 'closeness' to the characters and game. Banter like the following quotes really didn't seem to exist:

The Covenant also didn't hold the same charm as previous games. This I'm not sure why. I didn't notice the Grunts ever making clever quips or screaming 'They're everywhere!' before running away, although they had the same high pitched voices we'd all become accustomed to. The Elites were serious and always a challenge to go up against, but somehow seemed different. Hunters were a little bit more difficult to kill, so that was a good challenge. And I hate Brutes, which made seeing them in the game a frustration rather than a relief.

Graphically, the game is brilliant. I played it on a full HD TV and the visuals are just grand. Despite what appeared to be a couple of texture issues on occasion, the facial expressions, armour details and overall appearance of the Reach world was amazing. I’ve always enjoyed the colours of Halo as it seemed to always be bright and welcoming as opposed to something like Gears of War or Killzone, which were different settings entirely.

My only gripe with the graphics is that when moving to the multiplayer element, the actual textures of the maps detract from the ability to spot specific key elements within the map you look for when playing competitively. I’ve played a few customs, and I found the maps to be visually beautiful but at times distracting. I was hoping instead to find that they had allowed you the chance to use bland walls and content to build your own maps but it appears that they haven’t done that. I’m hoping an update will come through with this.

Forge itself, however, is enormous. Like, incredibly so. Think Far Cry but twice as big, if not more. So big it has Blood Gulch in part of it and room enough to include another 10 or so. It’s literally massive. The flexibility they give you with the map editor is also quite advanced and looks to have set a new benchmark for console map makers. I can see that MLG will most definitely use this part of the game to its fullest extent.

And so we head to the multiplayer. Bungie have been fairly consistent with the multiplayer element and few tweaks have been made. However the majority of the shift has come from Marcus Lehto, who was one of the major contributors to Halo: Combat Evolved and worked also on the Shadowrun game made by FASA Studios. His influence is noticed immediately by the ‘bloom’ reticule, which expands as you shoot more often to increase your spray and reward more consistent, measured shooting.

Notably, the BR and SMG are distinctly absent with the DMR replacing the BR and the Covenant equivalent replacing the Carbine. The bloom is both a blessing and a curse. It means players will be penalised for simply pumping lead in the general direction of an enemy – this is a good thing. What it does, however, is put someone who has been attacked at a distinct disadvantage as they will have to sacrifice accuracy for speed in order to ‘catch up’ the shots and out shoot the opponent – this is a bad thing.

The movement engine appears to be very much like Halo 2 and 3 as you don’t have the same ‘gravity’ and ‘inertia’ you experienced in Halo: Combat Evolved multiplayer. I was hoping they would have included this as it meant moving through a map required a distinct knack. Instead, it plays more similar to Quake in that you if you’re running in a specific direction you have no penalty for simply flipping 180 degrees and running back. This essentially means the speed of the game is increased, and I for one think this is one of the main issues I have always had with Halo 2 onwards multiplayer – it made it feel more like a PC shooter than a console shooter. I know that sounds weird, but it makes sense in my head and if you follow what I mean and have played a lot of multiplayer throughout the series it will make sense to you too.

The other major addition is the armour equipment you can now use. This replaces the gadgets you could pick up, like the bubble shield etc and instead makes them reusable, armour specific modifications. Things such as sprinting, jet packs and bubble shields are now reusable and add a different element to the game itself.

Weapon wise, I've noticed that the '5 Shot' is going to be the competitive norm. Both the DMR and the Magnum will kill a man in 5 shots to the head. I... I am not sure whether this is a good thing or now. Given the bloom, the additional difficulty of aiming at longer range let alone having additional shots to kill means the player life span is likely to be increased, meaning longer game times. I think, anyway. It will need to be tested out. Still, it's good to see the pistol returning to its former glory in some way.

There appears to be little leading that I could notice and it is in fact quite close to Halo 3 in that if your reticle is blue instead of red you need to inch the curser that little bit farther. I did note that shots with the sniper rifle at this range were quite difficult, and although I was cracking a few off it does look like there is a learning curve there for people to develop competitively.

Plasma weaponry still seems quite bland. By this, the Plasma Pistol appears to have regained its 'freeze' when you're hit by a bolt and you're unable to change weapon or move effectively. Try as I might, the Plasma Rifle doesn't seem to have quite the same effect or at least I didn't notice this yet. I could be wrong as I was doing this on my own and shooting with one controller whilst trying to move with another is never really easy.

The Covenant Sniper Rifle is an interesting change and appears to be very similar to the Pulse Rifle from Unreal Tournament with the 'beam' of energy draining the players shield until it kills the person. Not sure what I think of it, but frankly it doesn't seem entirely useful yet.

The health system is also back, which is a call to H:CE - I must admit this brought a smile to my face and I did quite enjoy this element. I also noticed that fall damage had been reinitiated and 'inertia' from major explosions also put back in. The latter meaning when an explosion or heavy weapon hits you, you tend to be jolted to the side.

The new assassination ability is different. The ability to slice the neck of an opponent looks cool, but in multiplayer I think will see the player killed if he decides to use it. I can already imagine the MLG players doing this as a way of 'showing off' and indeed, if you get killed whilst doing so will no doubt get hoots of 'show off' calls over the mic.

Grenades haven't really changed. They've removed the useless spike and napalm grenades (thank goodness) but still have the silly default of '2 only' unless you change it in Forge. It's good they've given us the option, but I wish they'd have just kept it at 4 and not messed around with it at all.

As far as 'feeling' the game, I can't honestly say that it felt dramatically different to Halo 3. Sure, there were differences in the aiming and reticule and indeed some of the new engine behaved slightly differently, but I still count Halo 2 / 3 / ODST / Reach as very similar, and yet still light years apart from H:CE in terms of the way the game played in multiplayer and how it functioned. I can't pin my finger on it exactly but I'm pretty sure the engine is the main thing.

I think that's about as much as I can comment on really. The whole Firefight mode is back, but really we all knew it would. There's no groundbreaking new feature, or at least not in my mind. The game itself plays and looks like Halo, and the story ties off many loose ends, but I can't help but feel like it isn't the grand stand finish I was expecting.

I'm not sure entirely why but I feel like I've once again been caught out by the machine that is Microsoft's marketing department. This game was billed as the blockbuster of the year, and rightly so - Halo carries a lot of weight behind it and as far as its impact on consoles go's it is surely a title you need to take notice of. But it doesn't push any boundaries, it doesn't... it doesn't leave me with that feeling of awe I got when I finished the original. It doesn't make me want to pour hours upon hours into Xbox Live Match Making with friends, and then travel to different states to compete like Halo 2. It doesn't make me want to play to 'Finish the Fight' and see what happens to Master Chief. And let's not even mention Halo 3: ODST.

See, I already knew the story of Halo Reach, as I've read the book. I knew the epic nature of it and frankly the novel by Eric Nylund was well written and did far more for me than the game did, especially at an emotional level. I have no connection to the Noble team, like I did Master Chief, and the reality of Noble 6's sacrifice never fully dawned on me.

Yes, the multiplayer is what will no doubt keep me coming back but even then it still doesn't have the edge of addictiveness that saw me sink 3 years of my life into competitive gaming. It's not that I don't like it, but it's missing that subtle edge of that for me separates the good games from the great. I'm not sure what that edge is, but it is missing in my opinion.

At the end, I've come to the conclusion that this is a good game. I enjoyed it and so play through the story of Reach was something I'd always wanted to do. There are things I did and didn't like about the game, but in the end I will probably find myself playing it more often than any other game I've got for the 360 yet I don't think it will make me rush home from work and log onto live like the others had made me.

"Wake me... when you need me."

Pros

Forge is amazing. Graphics are great and the soundtrack is incredible and truly deserving recognition. Multiplayer is fun and enjoyable.

Cons

Story doesn't have the same epic nature as the book. Different but the same, meaning there's little in the way of innovation by Bungie. Loading times can get a bit annoying.