When i think of halo multiplayer i think of a flaming warthog flying in the air, two teammates on a mongoose launching themselves , and just overall crazy stuff happening
No way I literally was thinking the same thing the other day, except I was thinking more about the single player not mp. I was playing Prodeus (definitely try it if you like og doom) and thought why haven't this many CE clones been made
@@xBOBOxFebreez Does Prodeus *feel* like single player Halo? Been thinking about getting it. I don't find Doom to be enjoyable and Prodeus seems like it either leans into Doom or Halo CE, but I can't tell from the reviews and videos alone.
@@AlHyckGaemsTAD its not really like halo honestly but you should still try it. It still feels good by modern standards, its not just trying to be retro
I think it’s because of Halo’s RTS roots. A lot of “Halo killers” totally missed the sandbox focus of Halo, the wide open environments, the “dance” and the golden triangle, etc. The old Star Wars Battlefront is the closest thing to Halo, IMO.
I remember making a custom game in halo reach called: “Halo: Arena Shooter”. I had the speed increased massively, very fast TTK weapons only, no regenerating shields, health and weak overshield pickups and I created a map on forge where it’s very based on old doom and unreal tournament maps from the 90’s. It felt entirely different from how halo actually plays, I wanted to re-create this in halo infinite but well.. we all know what happened with that idea.
@@michaeljeffreyjordan4966 They work well enough 99% of the time but it definitely does feel janky sometimes I agree. It is not bad to the point where you can't use it though.
As someone who called halo an arena shooter, I have to admit, you won me over with the points you made. I’m not surprised that halo’s identity is put in the spotlight this passed couple of years considering the state that the franchise is in.
I think this is actually a very important discussion because Halo's identity crisis is so severe that not even the fans can agree on what the core mechanics should be. The amount of debates I've seen particularly on the sandbox and the concept of "utility weapon" is astronomical. For us to know what Halo should be, we have to know what it has historically been like in its greatest moments, and how to replicate and enhance those beloved intangible aspects of the Halo feel going forward.
The only reason there is internal debate amongst fans is because 343i has been allowed to spread misinformation and ultimately shift the identity towards the realm of uncertainty. Additionally, debate currently exists because there exist fans of the 343i games, and they will contort any and all information to support their ideals and stance. They even go so far as to demean the name, viability, and identity of Halo so that they don't have to demean 343i as a studio. The debate is between fans of Halo and fans of 343i, period. They are not fans of Halo.
you seem to forget elements that do make halo like an AFPS -stuff like the omni-directional movement with advanced options (like grenade jumping and ghandi hopping, even halo infinite has the repusor that basically can act as a full rocket jump, with a sprint that's more for other mobility options rather than a base-movement crutch) -some weapons have the DNA too (like the sentinel beam, and the snipers being also good railguns) -forge is basically the modding PC AFPS has had since its inception, just streamlined and for consoles. -and speaking of consoles, that may be part of alot of the differences too, some things are hard to translate to consoles, and AFPS in the most traditional sense is way harder (and busted AA would either not help, or need to be so overtuned id be unironic aimbot and feel like the game was playing itself, only maybe gyro aim would do the trick, but that was way after halo). id say it doesn't perfectly fit as someone that comes from an older FPS backround, it can even feel opposite in many cases, but strong similarities are there.
Thank you all for your patience. I've actually had this video done for a little bit but needed to get some stuff situated before I started releasing content again. This topic was met with a lot of controversy when I first brought it up a couple months ago and it prompted me to make the commentary you see before you. As time passed I questioned the necessity to release it and thought it might not be worth it as the topic is ultimately...not something worth arguing about. But I believe I have made my case in a non combative way and ultimately think the video has value in that it hopefully encourages you to think about Halo in a unique way. And that thought process is one I would like to establish going forward because a lot of future content will be discussing what makes Halo unique and will attempt to challenge your perception of the franchise in interesting ways. Hopefully you will find this interesting and I'd love to hear your thoughts on it in the comments below!
I find this and interesting topic and love seeing your perspective (even if I still consider halo an arena shooter, to atleast some extent) but I'm trying to find the skill fos games video but can't find it. Can you give us a link?
Well by Definition Halo would be an Arena Shooter because of the Arena style maps and Halo is a shooter. But I understand what you mean Halo doesn't play like an Arena Shooter or at less not like it's contemporaries that you have pointed out. However many of those same contemporaries play more like a Twitch Shooter that requires the skills of a Crack Addicted Chimpanzee with a Rifle. Mostly do to the speed of the Game Play and the The Skill and Precision that one needs in order to be good at it. Is Halo an Arena Shooter Yes and No.
You're 100% right. I've tried to explain it to people it's more like if Nintendo made Doom,it was 2001 and I was basically still a child,but I wasn't too far off- they'd make it more simplified for mainstream audiences so turning it into a party game was genius. It's pace is SO important to it's game design. you sir have found the right way to express this "magic feel" Halo formula.
The beginning portion where you've gotta assure people you're not trying to piss them off by having an opinion is such an unfortunate necessity in the sad reality where people can't handle having their conceptions being challenged by anyone ever, even when it's just a pretty casual discussion over something which, indeed, doesn't matter. It's so trivial. People are soooo... TOUCHY. I love discussion like this! You actually changed my view on it by educating me on this, I always called it an arena shooter, but admittedly I uhhh, I never even looked into what the fuck that meant beyond "not like COD" lmao
@@UltraEgo2000 ah I wouldn't really view it precisely like that. I mean I don't think his intention is to divide people, he's just talking, so far as I'm aware anyway. But even if someone was trying to divide the community with any kind of senseless takes, and those takes actually divide the community, the community didn't have a very strong union in the first place and is probably falling apart even without someone else's intention to divide it. At least that's how I see it. Like, if this video of his causes division in a negative and catastrophic way, we got bigger problems deeper within xD I don't really know though, I don't look at every single one of his social media posts and I don't watch every single video he posts, maybe you're more informed than me, but I don't get a malicious feel from him. I thought this video in particular was harmless and actually educational on what arena shooters even are.
@@CommanderAkio eh you don’t have to take that “ultra ego” guy seriously. He’s pretty much the resident troll going around anything related to Halo. Also he pretty much described himself in that comment he made.
@@MrCrasherdog yeahhh I guess his was just plain aggressive, kinda trollish. I just don't like shutting people down immediately in a space of discussion. You're probably right though, fuck it
@@UltraEgo2000 oh i see now, you want everyone to lower their expectation so 343 can be even lazier and more incompetent, yeah that’s good for future of Halo, totally
I absolutely adore your Halo takes dude. Actually my favorite Halo youtuber. You have a way to express my feelings about the series better than I ever could. The Halo savior for sure. Thanks for this video 🤝
Yeah especially with the physics of the older games with the explosions And vehicles Always thought BTB on CE was special times compared to any other kind of halo MP
Yeah I find 4v4/2v2 prescison slayer or snipers/swat is for the more hardcore/sweaty players, and BTB or FFA slayer/CTF is more of a party style fun time/chill experience. All overall fun but much different in thier nature of playing
Halo as a party game is the best description for halo I've heard. Halo isn't as competitive as other arena shooters like quake and unreal tournament and it is a joke to compare halo to those games. The more I think about it, the more it can be compared to games like super smash bros, Mario party and Mario kart. Now looking at it in this light, I understand why split screen is needed. The problem isn't that a small percentage of people use it, or modern technology making it irrelevant, it's that they've been changing halo to be an ultra competitive shooter, when that was just one facit of the experience. I don't think to invite my buddy's over to play halo like I did 10 years ago, but I still do with stuff like Mario party/kart etc.
If anyone thinks Halo is a pure Arena Shooter, they just don't know what they are talking about. It has and has had various Arena Shooter elements, but it's a happy medium between Arena and Tactical Shooter by definition.
Not sure if you are aware of this but CS 1.6 was a very casual game with mapmakers making weird shit like de_rats or poolday and surf, it pretty much had the original "custom games forged maps" if you think about it that way. There aren't really many casual counter strike servers left and that game was nothing like the competitive sweatfest grind to global elite game it is now.
@@WonderMePartyStrip I didn't mean it in how hardy designed it, but rather if you were aware that there's a big distinction between CS having way more casual avenues back then and CS pretty much exclusively being competitive now.
Always exciting to see you come out from the shadows. Hope you stay a bit longer this time but i get it since Halo has been beyond meh and life is crazy
I think you nailed it, and, being totally honest, the only reason I even come close to suggesting the concept - I usually say "Halo is LIKE an Arena Shooter", indicating notable differences - is because Halo itself is REALLY hard to define. It's not a cover-shooter by most standards, and it isn't a Mil-sim, obviously. The closest thing I can think of, when put on the spot and in need of a short, easy to digest answer for someone else, is to put it next to the Arena-Shooter genre. If I had the time to go into it, I'd definitely not do that, but as a quick-fire 'What is Halo like?' kind of response, that's all I have really come up with, because anything else is even farther off the mark.
Agreed Halo is more than a competitive arena shooter. Always saw halo as a fun sandbox experience to have laughs with my friends. At the same time the game could be competitive and fun. 343 never understood halo. Was completely baffled when one of the 343 multiplayer heads recently said that halo ce was a competitive shooter. As if that was the only reason people enjoyed it lol.
Thank you for this video in particular, I think it's a really healthy talking point for the community. And again, thanks for sharing your well-thought opinion.
This is the "every square is a rectangle, but not every rectangle is not a square" -type of argument. It's just mental gymnastics at this point. Halo is at it's heart an arena game. You're even proving this point for more than half the video. More games should be made based off of Halo 2, 3, and 5...and maybe parts of 4 if I'm being generous. It's really not all that difficult. It can still mainly be a competitive arena game, with social party modes. Any other arguing is nonsense.
Halo is in a league of it's own. A game like it never existed before and has not existed since. At the time of Halo's peak success, other were trying to copy Halo with their infamous 'Halo killers'. It's telling that none of them were able to successfully recreate the feeling of Halo. Also telling that they used the term 'killer' in contrast to, say, 'Doom-clone' or 'Souls-like'.
Yeah Party shooter or sandbox shooter if you want to be more refined,but it gives me Doom+Super Smash Bros. Vibes like it meant a to be invite friends over and kill each other that’s simplified and more object oriented so it appeals to mainstream. Smash Bros. did that for fighters and Halo did that for shooters.
Love your vidsand take on things brotha, wish they would come out more often! Would love to hear your take on the community creations and forge so far for infinite. Cheers bud!
eloquently stated. excellent reasoning. compelling points. I knew there was a vast difference between UR, Quake and Halo, but quantifying it was difficult. But I think you did superb job explaining your point. The question now is, what new genre term should or could Halo be called?
I see this video as the beautiful case for the art of rationalization that it is, the example of explaining the reasoning for the choices we make and argue for. As someone who DIDN'T grow uo pmaying the original Doom games and only tried them much later, I find those who vehemently disagree with your simpme post to be VERY biased. Very glad I found your channel. I got here from Deadbeat Dave.👌🎮
Great video, favyn. I've followed your channel for years and always appreciated your opinions. I wish, you could dedicate more time on creating more opinion videos.
I've always thought of halo as an arena shooter because the diversity in gameplay experience comes from the environment of the match rather than direct player control (picking loadouts or "heroes"). To me the fps genre is broken down into 3 groups: arena shooters with an emphasis on maps, hero/loadout shooters with an emphasis on player individuality, and battle royales with an emphasis on last man standing style survival over point scoring .... this video has def gotten me to re-evaluate how I categorize games within the genre tho
But that’s kind of the exact opposite of an Arena Shooter like Unreal Tournament. Those games are all about direct player control through extremely fast movement and aim. They’re pure skill expression. Halo is a sandbox shooter. The fun comes from interactions between the levels, weapons, vehicles, enemies, etc.
@@deriznohappehquite Stfu. Sandbox shooter is not a real genre. you are literally making this up. Are you saying that other shooters don't have interactions between maps, weapons, and objects on the map? That is just exclusive to halo? Please.
@@EthanRom by some definitions r6 is a hero shooter, you have a ton of characters with specific abilities, ie, gadgets and weapons. The point I was trying to make was, r6 has as much in common with hero shooters as halo does with arena shooters. And I'd think most people wouldn't call r6 a hero shooter
@@profesnol5552 Well it wasn't a hero shooter, but it did evolve into one. It's also somewhere in between a class based and a hero. The thing about labels is you can have multiple. We shouldn't feel bad that Halo is called an arena shooter it's just one of the many things to describe it
Obviously it depends how one chooses to define what is an “Arena Shooter.” Even starts & map pickups are common associations to most peoples understanding of what is an “Arena Shooter.”
That's like saying arena shooters normally are in first person so therefore Battlefield is an arena shooters. "even starts" Is a term used only after Call of Duty became so big. It's not something that defined Doom, or Quake or Unreal tournament.
Very interesting topic for a video at this time of gaming(the dark ages) I’m not even subbed to your channel but I find myself looking to see if you’ve posted a new vid more often than not. Great video man. I’m not a fanboy of no1 or nothing. I just like seeing good content. You’re a top 3 gaming youtuber in my book. In this video you were correct in everything you said. P.S. post more quality videos like this one!!! The last dozen or so have been bangers.
I like to call Halo a “Party Shooter” It’s not meant to specifically be sweat-fest for pro gamers to play while snorting G-Fuel sitting in their race car chairs (but it sort of can be if you want). Whether you’re casual or hardcore, if there’s enough controllers and a big enough couch, anyone can play with a bunch of people and just have a good time (like Smash or Mario Kart).
So I’m curious now with loose rumors floating about, do you think H:I would benefit or suffer switching engines? Halo has always been a game with its own engine, I think that’s something that has always kept it unique and distinct but what about the idea of moving from SS to UR5?
I think the main problem here is that we have one word that we're trying to decide what specific games exactly to slap on to it. The thing is... Consider other genres. Hey, you know what, let's consider the Strategy genre. Compare Civilization to Starcraft and anyone will tell you how different they feel. Obviously, that's not in question. But at the same time, we don't have any issue putting those games under the same overall genre of Strategy because at the end of the day, you have an overhead view of a map and you're commanding units. And I think we can do the same with the Arena Shooter genre. Yeah, Unreal Tournament and Halo play pretty differently, but at the end of the day, it's equal starts with on-map pickups that still emphasizes map control. And yes, even Gears of War I wouldn't mind putting in the Arena Shooter bucket. HOWEVER, these games are, of course, very different in their sub-genres. Gears of War is a cover-based arena-shooter. Unreal Tournament is a fast-paced/movement-based arena shooter. Picture a tree with Arena shooter at the bottom. The main "node", and the other sub-genres branch off from that main overall genre.
Sure this makes sense but arena shooter is already a sub genre in it of itself. So now we have sub genres within sub genres and it might be beneficial to have a bit of separation
@@FavynTube "So now we have sub genres within sub genres" Yep, but what's wrong with that? Isn't that exactly the separation we want? If you go to any library, you'll see that they don't restrict themselves to monolithic genres but have sub-genres in genres. Maybe even four levels deep. (If I remember correctly.) If we don't do this, then we start grouping games together where they don't belong.
I think my beef with this is that there's a couple ways to categorize an FPS, one related directly to the mechanics of play and one related to "game mode" type stuff. From a "game mode type stuff" perspective, hell yeah Halo is an arena shooter. And the thing is, that's generally how shooters are categorized. Team Fortress 2 is rooted deeply in Quake, but it' a "hero shooter" just like Overwatch and others despite actually playing very differently from those games. (Or, like, remember Monday Night Combat?) CoD, Battlefield and Titanfall are all seen as being in "the same wheelhouse" whatever it'd actually be called, which no one has a name for, because they're pretty similar in how they handle gamemodes, player choice, etc., kitchen sink shooters? I don' know. Anf of course BRs. Apex Legends and goddamn PUBG are part of the same genre in most people's eyes. So even though I agree with your point in the sense that the "arena shooter" moniker sometimes pushes Halo in a direction other than it's own, I'd call it an arena shooter above all else. Just an arena shooter with a very different vibe. Unreal Tournament got big vehicle maps in it's later years too.
I still consider Halo to be its own form of Arena shooter but not completely. It has a lot of similarities such as: - Even starts - Power ups - Power Weapons - Similar game modes The first 3 alone often make the game play similar to Arena shooters. Like Quake, you start off with a set weapon, the goal is to get a powerup (Armor/Quad damage in Quake, Overshield/Active Camo or Spartan abilities in Infinite) and then control the power weapons (RailGun/Rocket Launcher etc in Quake, Sniper/Rockets in Halo). Whilst the pacing of the classic Arena shooters is much faster, Halo still retains a similar style at a slower pace. That said, it’s the larger game modes that I prefer in Halo such as BTB with vehicles, which breaks up the Arena style gameplay. This is what I usually think of first when I think of Halo, not the competitive Arena style modes. I do think you made some great points and I also respect the original vision for CE as a party game but I definitely think the game has a lot of Arena shooter elements in its design.
favyn when are we getting another upload? seasonal content model is dropped for something light, bunch of rumours dev is focused on new title, what’s your thoughts on it as h6 may be in the limelight? i’ve enjoyed competitive movement tech but weapon variety has been dreadful for comp play
Awesome vid. I think "Sandbox shooter" is a good first stab at a genre classification. Unclear whether that's even necessary as Halo still is the only game really like it.
The gameplay of Valorant is nothing like the gameplay of Apex. That doesn't make them both not hero shooters. The gameplay of gears of war is nothing like halo. And that doesn't make them both not arena shooters. It's about the competition / way in which the game puts these players as pieces on the board to compete that makes them what they are. The finer details of how those players fight over the map and fight eachother are not entirely relevant. To me the most important facet of an arena shooter will always be equal loadout starts, and map control. 4v4 halo has always been primarily an arena shooter. But of course, it's just an argument of semantics and I respect your opinion.
ummmm wow thanks for wrecking my point of view hahaha never really looked at it that way and to honor you I will not call the older halos arena shooter, and tbh having you explain it like you did it was a DUH moment which I already knew but did not really think about it. Nice Video!!!
As a Quake and Halo player, they actually feel pretty same. Of course Quake is much fast paced but the map control and weapon control is still there. For me Halo is an Arena Shooter also.
Good opinion, I agree with you. I love how Halo originally is a party sandbox game, but you can tweek the options to make it a competitive "arena shooter."
I see what you mean but think you missed the main thing, simply break down the AFPS term. Arena, first person, shooter. Emphasis on the word ARENA, classic Halo maps are mostly arenas. Other than that, for me classic Halos hits five other main things that I associate with AFPS and yes, the first two are the things you mentioned Halo player would say but besides lifetime Halo fan I've around 800h across Quakes and played plenty smaller AFPS as well, anyway here's the list: 1. even starts 2. map pickups 3. no aiming penalty while moving at any speed 4. map control is key 5. TTK is longer than your average shooter Back to the arena thing, map design/layouts play a big factor how "AFPSish" a game feels. Out of all the classic Halo games I would say CE is the most AFPS with its vertical maps, the most arena stylish layouts and in competitive, the map control is everything with how often (compared to other Halos) there are major pickups spawning on the map, you're always trying to setup for the next thing or trying to deny the other team. You pointed out that Quake Champions is considered as an AFPS even without even starts but if it did not carry the name Quake, I would argue that people would not consider it as such so easily, for me it's a hero shooter, still an AFPS in its fundamental core but a hybrid.
i always considered Halo as an unorthodox arena shooter, specifically the ranked arena portion. I personally don't count any of the games post-Reach as AFPS - just the trilogy. On the arena shooter spectrum, traditional games like DOOM, Quake and Unreal Tournament would be on one side while 'pseudo-AFPS' such as Descent, Tribes, Lawbreakers, DOOM 2016, Eternal Battlemode and of course Halo would fall on the latter side. Halo's base movement speed is undoubtedly slower, but skilled players can navigate through the maps with such precision utilizing crouch-jumps, fusion coils and nade jumps to gain the advantage. It's fascinating to see all the secret trick jumps. One reason why hardcore arena players don't consider Halo as an AFPS is because of it's two weapon limit. I think the two weapon limit is a myth; melee and grenades should count as weapons just like they do in the traditional AFPS. The reason why I believe each grenade type should count as it's own weapon is because 1. you hold it in your inventory and it kills enemies and 2. they're not fundamentally different from the Quake 2 hand-thrown nades or any of the grenade launchers across those franchises. The average weapon limit for an AFPS is 10, but since most players don't count melee or hand-thrown weapons, the amount is decreased. Discounting melee weapons, Quake 1 would have 7 guns while DOOM 1993 would have 6 guns. So since Halo technically has a 5-weapon limit, it's much closer to its brethren than most assume. And we can't talk about arena shooters without bringing up the useful glitches. Despite glitches being unintentional, they increase the skill gap tremendously. Quake's iconic tele-fragging, rocket-jumping, plasma gun wall-climbing, strafe-jumping and 'additive jumping (basically a double jump) were glitches and have been in every single game. UT had Impact Hammer launching and elevator bouncing and Tribes had Spinfusor launching. Halo has plenty of ways to propel yourself, most notably hammer launching and sword-flying. While I can't think of any button combo glitches in AFPS, the closest equivalent would be UT2K4's adrenaline meter which allowed you to choose various powerups depending on the combo you inputted. I believe CE's backpack reload and weapon-tossing and H2's infamous button combos multiplied the skill gap in a way that other AFPS didn't. This is primarily why I believe it belongs on the same spectrum as other AFPS. When it comes to utility weapons, classic AFPS and Halo are definitely in this aspect. As I mentioned above, several weapons can boost your momentum, but in addition to those, the Quake Gauntlet has a knockback effect, Unreal Tournament always had the Translocator (a personal teleporter) and UT2K4 introduced the Shield Gun which deflected projectiles and boosted you just like the Impact Hammer, the Ball Launcher which allowed you to throw objectives much farther and finally the Link Gun can repair vehicles and power nodes in Onslaught mode. These weapons' utility functions are equally important to combat as Halo's utility weapons are. In Combat Evolved, all plasma weapons stunned enemies, the plasma pistol could EMP, the H2 energy sword functioned as a pseudo-grapple etc... A major feature Halo had that other AFPS lacked was the 1-50 ranking system. None of the other games at the time even had ranks. Lastly, another reason why players don't consider Halo a true arena shooter is due to it featuring so much more content than strictly arena combat. It has a dozen party modes, Forge, Theater, action sack, BTB, Infection and so much more. These features are why it succeeded and prospered for a whole decade before they were slowly ripped away. I can totally understand why a player who has only seen very little gameplay of Halo to denounce it as an arena shooter, but if they watched professional gameplay or rank 50 gameplay, perhaps they'd think twice.
The points you made make a good argument for me to think about it differently. The only thing about it is iv lost my love for the game. But I hold on to my hopes maybe one day it will come back.
What a title! This is something I never thought anyone would argue for, but you made an interesting case. It definitely makes one think whether or not “arena shooter” is an appropriate term for Halo.
cod is considered an Arena shooter too so I always had the assumption even starts wasn't something that made a game an arena shooter. Games that have respawn mechanics and the fact that you're in an arena styled map like you mentioned. You might say cod and games like gears have single life modes but those games were built around respawning
In my head. Arena: closed map with weapons scattered about for player to fight over to the death. Sandbox: open map with different areas that facilitate different gameplay (like fps and vehicles).
Design intent and end result are two different things in many instances, and while Hardy reached something close to the more casual utility based sandbox he was going for in Halo CE, it still fits the arena shooter formula. There is most certainly a hierarchy of weapons as he describes and anyone who plays Halo competitively will tell you that a dominant strategy is indeed to control power weapons and player spawns as he ascribes to arena shooters. It's a slower kind of game and it definitely has different attributes to it, but Halo is at its core an arena shooter. Just as Starcraft 2 and Dawn of War are both base building RTS games. This DOES NOT invalidate Halo's viability as a shooter in the current market, nor does it mean that is isn't distinct from games like Quake. But it is still part of that genre and separating them in that way is ultimately pointless. Halo's issues currently are many-fold. The community can never agree and doesn't know what it wants, the Devs are incapable of organizing, Microsoft is pressuring 343 into cash grabby marketing, it lacks the levels of innovation it used to be known for, etc., etc., etc. But its identity as an arena shooter is far from that.
I've always called Halo a slow-paced arena shooter, and will likely continue to do so, though the various comments mentioning "Sandbox Shooter" is something to consider. At the highest level, Halo is an FPS. At the lowest level, it's entirely it's own thing, but that's not the point of having genres and sub-genres to categorize games, so I don't really see the point in splitting hairs here. "Slow-paced arena shooter" is descriptive enough for people to have a loose understanding of what the game is without having to fully explain it.
It's really insane seeing so many people being so certain of the fact that Halo is an Arena Shooter as someone who remembers Arena Shooter fans shitting on Halo for not being that
@@Ja.abbatta_V There are elitists in every genre. Halo elitists call the game an arena shooter because of the thoughts people have with the genre. "the daddy of competitive FPS" but the truth is, Halo is something else, it's a bit classic but innovated many areas of gameplay design that few games have replicated in a fun way. The reason AFPS fans give Halo fans shit is because their most vocal players tend to make false claims in order to advertise it as something else, in order to appeal to potential players from other sub-genres, which evidently resulted in the developers doing the same for the sake of advertising. (Similar to Destiiny being marketed as an MMO (max player lobby of 12))
recently i heared the term "methode shooter". that does fit. the puzzle piece to the tactical shooter,that is not an arena shooter: instead of building a tactical set before and then executing, you apply a methode to a dynamic map to build a loadout on the fly. similarily gunfights are less set up tactic, but more about ongoing methode. tactical shooters frontload descissions, methode shooters spread them in the match.
I broadly agree with you and have always been kind of hesitant to call Halo an arena shooter (though I have used the term for it a few times). I think Halo does have some arena shooter DNA, specifically the slower-paced Unreal Tournament rather than Quake, as that was simply the zeitgeist of the early 2000s. Much like most modern shooters have DNA from Call of Duty and Titanfall; assumptions of how a multiplayer experience works are more or less set within a particular time and place. But yeah, I think the regenerating health, two weapon limit, and, to a lesser extent, the slow movement fundamentally change how the game is played enough to separate Halo from "true" arena shooters. At least from the perspective of an individual player. That said, I think on a macro scale Halo is actually quite similar to an arena shooter in competitive 4v4 Slayer where each team functions as a single player in an arena shooter. By being in more than one place at a time a coordinated team performs the same functions as the individual does in an arena shooter: control the important items on the map by arriving at key locations first, winning exchanges, and using that leverage to pin down the opponent(s) to deny them a pivot. The style is not the same, but the heart is there. This was kind of a ramble, but I love Halo and arena shooters. Honestly, my ideal game would be somewhere in the middle of them. But the fact that there IS a middle implies that they aren't the same thing.
Halo is the middle. It was clearly inspired by the 90s. Doom and Unreal, but it was in transition to modern FPS hence the recharging health and weapon limit
I've always thought of arena shooter as part of a spectrum. The FPS spectrum looks like Arena ShooterMilsim. So holding only two weapons and walking normal speed are examples of milsim core values, but weapon pick-ups, health regen, extreme speed, and an emphasis on mechanical skill over tactics are examples of Arena shooter values, or at least components. We really only have those two terms to describe shooters broadly. Call of Duty isn't arena or milsim, it's very much in the middle of the spectrum somewhere, with past games like Cod4 being closer to milsim than it is now (faster sprinting for example in newer entries). Battlefield has always been just slightly to the right of CoD on that spectrum, less perks, or at least unrealistic ones like "cold blooded," being a shining example. Halo definitely is unique, but I think it still fits on the spectrum and I would place it somewhere left of CoD for sure, primarily due to its higher TTK which goes back to arena shooters being defined by high mechanical skill.
Yo wait. Did Doom Eternal get a proper multiplayer? Great vid by the way. I kinda feel like Halo is a sandbow shooter. When I pictured where Halo would be now 10 years ago, I imaged massive space battles between players and forgable campaigns. A script system like we have too, and I can't wait to see what that brings. But we're missing the rest rn.
5:28 - I define it as BOTH. It's a party game first, with arena shooter mechanics. It's not as sweaty as quake, until halo 5, because you're generally not moving as fast, which imho is GOOD. Ever watch a highly-skilled ut99 player? It's a very dizzy-ing experience. Albeit halo ce does get sweaty (hang-em high with pistols-only is not for the faint of heart), it's nowhere near ut99/quake -- by design. It's meant to give people breathing room so that the "intense focus" needed to play at a decent level comes in ebbs and flows, vs being constant (like ut99/quake). I prefer this. I love ut99, but it gets exhausting after awhile. Halo? I can breath.
Honestly “THE HALO EXPERIENCE “ is defined By its grenades. No other games has the grenade act as a defense utility in the same way. There is no better feeling than hitting a perfect grenade and finishing the kill with a headshot and that is a uniquely HALO experience.
You know ironically I was literally just thinling of you earlier today in past videos and such saying this and also thinking its really a combination of multiple different genres of FPS games into something unique. Then boom, this video shows up. lol
Huge halo fan, never got into community stuff or forums or anything didn’t have internet much back then, I’m surprised people think of halo as an arena shooter imo that seems surprising
I’ve never been one to call halo an arena shooter, the two genre’s seemed similar but distinct. You can tell this most easily by the fact that vehicles… exist in halo whereas they don’t in virtually every arena shooter out there. Maps are too small, and characters are too fast and too lethal for a vehicle to have any reason to exist in an arena shooter.Players are able to run off too fast for any amount of cohesion amongst a team. There’s no real co-operation. Any map that could accommodate a vehicle would be derided for creating a kill box as that is essentially what a wide open space is in an arena shooter. Arena shooters are fast an kinetic, two words I would never use to describe halo, not that that’s a bad thing. Afps matches are built around players trying to acquire as much gear as possible and combat happening in the blink of the eye. Halo to me is something called a “modular fps” which is a term I just made up while watching this video. Halo’s mechanics are so simple that they can work for virtually any style of gameplay. Close quarters arena style gameplay. Asymmetrical attack and defend maps. Large scale battles. Halo’s combat is far too tactical and far too Freeform to be an arena shooter. I would say that halo is to arena shooters as smash is to traditional fighting games.
I don't understand the point of this video. I don't think it expresses any clear ideas, maybe I missed something? If the only intention was to prove Halo and other arena shooters are different, just thirty seconds of gameplay clips would have sufficed.
Defining what makes Halo special is important for the next set of game developers who can re-discover and re-make this unique, genius formula. Whether it's a game in the HALO IP or something new this is vital knowledge for a challenging task. 343 had their chance and squandered an entire generation for Halo. We must look to the future for hope and try to make ready those who are up for it.
You made great points. The Arena shooter label doesn't capture the Halo magic at all. Those who think that "HALO" type of games are dead are fools. With the right execution, it's still a billion-dollar idea... Microsoft kind of recognized that but unfortunately as showcased by 343 they are absolutely way in over their heads. With hindsight, we now know that M$ were extremely lucky to be publishing partners with Bungie back in the 2000s.
I've always kinda defined Halo as a "different take" on the format of an arena shooter. I don't define an arena shooter in a strict way, but instead based on very broad principles; long kill times, emphasis on movement (even if Halo is a slower, methodical game, the fact that combat emphasizes you trying to dodge and outpace the enemy's shots in the middle of combat, that helps it fit the categorical mold of an arena shooter), weapon design that doesn't conform to realism, and the even starts and map control where players fight for dominance over the map to acquire resources on it to become stronger As far as Halo being a slower, more methodical game than other arena shooters, I justify it like this: every arena shooter (well, ones that aren't lazily made or just intended as Quake 3 clones) tends to have their own sort of "rhythm" or approach to movement. Doom for example, the base speed is extremely fast and there is very little in terms of "advanced" techniques to speed up that movement further; players just move lightning fast by default and the movement game is more about trying to blindside, circle around, and flank someone with that crazy fast movement. Quake has a slower base speed but allows the player to accelerate to higher speeds through the use of bunnyhopping and other techniques, as well as finding shortcuts through the map like rocket jumping or plasma climbing, and overall the movement is more about learning the map, having good timing, and finding a route that allows you to keep your momentum. Meanwhile UT is far more methodical compared to the latter two and the movement is based more on actual mechanics rather than physics trickery (dodge-jumping, double jumping, and wall-jumping). The movement is more situational and based around the context of your environment versus the "blazing fast speed" that Doom or Quake permits. Halo is simply like, "another style" of movement in contrast to these other three games. Lastly, as far as Halo having more modern mechanics like 2 weapon limits or the regenerating shields, I guess that just depends on how "loose" your definition of an arena shooter is. I wouldn't call something "not an arena shooter" just because it experiments or changes or tries something different with specific aspects of how the gameplay works. Some people though, when they define "arena shooter", all they're really talking about is Quake 3 and they'll simply use the term "arena shooter" to refer specifically to games that are almost exact copies of Quake 3 (many of which exist). I think the problem with "arena shooter" as a genre label is similar to what you see with the term "character action game" or heck, even "survival horror", where the parameters are just extremely vague. People can agree on the basic idea of the terms but few can seem to agree where the line should be drawn. Some would define God of War as "character action" but more hardcore fans of character action games would say that God of War isn't because the combo system is too basic. Some people would say that the Resident Evil games post-RE1 are no longer "survival horror" because there's too many power fantasy moments where you blow shit up and feel like a badass (even starting in RE2); other people would find those claims absurd. Meanwhile there are people with a very broad definition of survival horror that would place games like Dead Space in it.
I liked this video I would say Halo barely has any relation to Quake or Doom style games however I would say (thanks to Hardy's comment) that Halo is a little more related to Goldeneye and Perfect Dark (and even Half Life) which have some fun sandbox elements.
The best way to describe Halo at it's core is a sandbox party game shooter, that understands how to be an arena shooter. Halo can be played in so many ways, that some of the most fun ways don't even involve guns. Jenga and Trash Compactor from Halo 3 or even Speed Halo from Reach show off that Halo is designed around the sandbox and the physics first. Halo is a jack of all trades that manages to be good at most of the stuff it does instead of trying to be a master of one or even all of it's features.
Quake 3 is an arena shooter, UT is an arena shooter... DOOM *was* an arena shooter, not so much anymore but still has elements of it in the single player
I grew up playing all the classic games + Halo and I think the comparison can be seen, but Halo was unique. 343 was handed the golden ticket to the greatest FPS of all time and one of the greatest game series of all time when all they had to do is improve upon Halo 3, but instead it’s like they were paid billions to destroy it
It's not an Arena shooter, if your understanding of "Arena shooter" is defined by the PC FPS games of the 90s. But I think it's definitely the evolution of the Arena shooter. The OG Halo devs took what would work on a controller from classic Arena shooter design, tossed out everything that wouldn't work on a controller, and then added some really neat design innovations on top.
@@FavynTube I think both "90s shooters" and Halo can both be seen as "barebones" shooters. You run, jump, shoot, etc. the same as everyone else, and the only big differences are personal skill. Halo is just designed so that it's more forgiving. But the consequence of being barebones is that when you add player creativity now you can have nearly infinite custom game modes by tweaking inherent player values or powerups etc. But basically, Quake vs Halo is like comparing trilobites to horshoe crabs. Yes, they're different, but only in a few small, but significant ways. They're so simple they tend to evade classification imo
Like you said, I don't thing AFPS fans even consider Halo anything close to an arena shooter. Hell they probably consider it closer to call of duty than quake at this point. Another thing CoD basically has even starts nowadays with how everyone uses the same god damn guns anyways.
When i think of halo multiplayer i think of a flaming warthog flying in the air, two teammates on a mongoose launching themselves , and just overall crazy stuff happening
Two guys on a Team. One goes 20-1. The other goes 0-20. Balance of life.
all while playing the theme song in your head and laughing untill you die and go flying across the map
@@skettinbutter3635 that happened to me. Team doubles on halo 3. Buddy was way better than me. He had 44 kills I had 2.
@@skettinbutter3635 perfectly balanced, as all things should be.
I hope a genre "Halo Clone" similar to the term "Doom Clone" forms 'cause there's no other games that scratch my Halo itch besides maybe Splitgate.
No way I literally was thinking the same thing the other day, except I was thinking more about the single player not mp. I was playing Prodeus (definitely try it if you like og doom) and thought why haven't this many CE clones been made
Agree, but Splitgate still feels a bit too much like an arena shooter to me at times
@@xBOBOxFebreez Does Prodeus *feel* like single player Halo? Been thinking about getting it. I don't find Doom to be enjoyable and Prodeus seems like it either leans into Doom or Halo CE, but I can't tell from the reviews and videos alone.
@@AlHyckGaemsTAD its not really like halo honestly but you should still try it. It still feels good by modern standards, its not just trying to be retro
I think it’s because of Halo’s RTS roots.
A lot of “Halo killers” totally missed the sandbox focus of Halo, the wide open environments, the “dance” and the golden triangle, etc.
The old Star Wars Battlefront is the closest thing to Halo, IMO.
I remember making a custom game in halo reach called: “Halo: Arena Shooter”. I had the speed increased massively, very fast TTK weapons only, no regenerating shields, health and weak overshield pickups and I created a map on forge where it’s very based on old doom and unreal tournament maps from the 90’s. It felt entirely different from how halo actually plays, I wanted to re-create this in halo infinite but well.. we all know what happened with that idea.
What happened?
@@nubbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbin forge doesnt exist
@@Seedonator still have custom games though so you can do the first part
@@nubbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbin custom games don’t work consistently
@@michaeljeffreyjordan4966 They work well enough 99% of the time but it definitely does feel janky sometimes I agree. It is not bad to the point where you can't use it though.
As someone who called halo an arena shooter, I have to admit, you won me over with the points you made.
I’m not surprised that halo’s identity is put in the spotlight this passed couple of years considering the state that the franchise is in.
I think this is actually a very important discussion because Halo's identity crisis is so severe that not even the fans can agree on what the core mechanics should be. The amount of debates I've seen particularly on the sandbox and the concept of "utility weapon" is astronomical. For us to know what Halo should be, we have to know what it has historically been like in its greatest moments, and how to replicate and enhance those beloved intangible aspects of the Halo feel going forward.
The only reason there is internal debate amongst fans is because 343i has been allowed to spread misinformation and ultimately shift the identity towards the realm of uncertainty. Additionally, debate currently exists because there exist fans of the 343i games, and they will contort any and all information to support their ideals and stance. They even go so far as to demean the name, viability, and identity of Halo so that they don't have to demean 343i as a studio.
The debate is between fans of Halo and fans of 343i, period. They are not fans of Halo.
you seem to forget elements that do make halo like an AFPS
-stuff like the omni-directional movement with advanced options (like grenade jumping and ghandi hopping, even halo infinite has the repusor that basically can act as a full rocket jump, with a sprint that's more for other mobility options rather than a base-movement crutch)
-some weapons have the DNA too (like the sentinel beam, and the snipers being also good railguns)
-forge is basically the modding PC AFPS has had since its inception, just streamlined and for consoles.
-and speaking of consoles, that may be part of alot of the differences too, some things are hard to translate to consoles, and AFPS in the most traditional sense is way harder (and busted AA would either not help, or need to be so overtuned id be unironic aimbot and feel like the game was playing itself, only maybe gyro aim would do the trick, but that was way after halo).
id say it doesn't perfectly fit as someone that comes from an older FPS backround, it can even feel opposite in many cases, but strong similarities are there.
Thank you all for your patience. I've actually had this video done for a little bit but needed to get some stuff situated before I started releasing content again. This topic was met with a lot of controversy when I first brought it up a couple months ago and it prompted me to make the commentary you see before you. As time passed I questioned the necessity to release it and thought it might not be worth it as the topic is ultimately...not something worth arguing about. But I believe I have made my case in a non combative way and ultimately think the video has value in that it hopefully encourages you to think about Halo in a unique way. And that thought process is one I would like to establish going forward because a lot of future content will be discussing what makes Halo unique and will attempt to challenge your perception of the franchise in interesting ways.
Hopefully you will find this interesting and I'd love to hear your thoughts on it in the comments below!
I find this and interesting topic and love seeing your perspective (even if I still consider halo an arena shooter, to atleast some extent) but I'm trying to find the skill fos games video but can't find it. Can you give us a link?
Should be linked in the description
WELL well worth the wait my man. Please don’t ever quit RUclips.
Well by Definition Halo would be an Arena Shooter because of the Arena style maps and Halo is a shooter. But I understand what you mean Halo doesn't play like an Arena Shooter or at less not like it's contemporaries that you have pointed out. However many of those same contemporaries play more like a Twitch Shooter that requires the skills of a Crack Addicted Chimpanzee with a Rifle. Mostly do to the speed of the Game Play and the The Skill and Precision that one needs in order to be good at it. Is Halo an Arena Shooter Yes and No.
You're 100% right. I've tried to explain it to people it's more like if Nintendo made Doom,it was 2001 and I was basically still a child,but I wasn't too far off- they'd make it more simplified for mainstream audiences so turning it into a party game was genius. It's pace is SO important to it's game design. you sir have found the right way to express this "magic feel" Halo formula.
The beginning portion where you've gotta assure people you're not trying to piss them off by having an opinion is such an unfortunate necessity in the sad reality where people can't handle having their conceptions being challenged by anyone ever, even when it's just a pretty casual discussion over something which, indeed, doesn't matter. It's so trivial. People are soooo... TOUCHY. I love discussion like this! You actually changed my view on it by educating me on this, I always called it an arena shooter, but admittedly I uhhh, I never even looked into what the fuck that meant beyond "not like COD" lmao
Oh really? In a very divided community he wants to even further divide it by takes that don’t even make sense and far from true.
@@UltraEgo2000 ah I wouldn't really view it precisely like that. I mean I don't think his intention is to divide people, he's just talking, so far as I'm aware anyway. But even if someone was trying to divide the community with any kind of senseless takes, and those takes actually divide the community, the community didn't have a very strong union in the first place and is probably falling apart even without someone else's intention to divide it. At least that's how I see it.
Like, if this video of his causes division in a negative and catastrophic way, we got bigger problems deeper within xD
I don't really know though, I don't look at every single one of his social media posts and I don't watch every single video he posts, maybe you're more informed than me, but I don't get a malicious feel from him. I thought this video in particular was harmless and actually educational on what arena shooters even are.
@@CommanderAkio eh you don’t have to take that “ultra ego” guy seriously. He’s pretty much the resident troll going around anything related to Halo. Also he pretty much described himself in that comment he made.
@@MrCrasherdog yeahhh I guess his was just plain aggressive, kinda trollish. I just don't like shutting people down immediately in a space of discussion. You're probably right though, fuck it
@@UltraEgo2000 oh i see now, you want everyone to lower their expectation so 343 can be even lazier and more incompetent, yeah that’s good for future of Halo, totally
I absolutely adore your Halo takes dude. Actually my favorite Halo youtuber. You have a way to express my feelings about the series better than I ever could. The Halo savior for sure. Thanks for this video 🤝
Don’t ever stop making videos.
Adore?
@@huntertownsend21 adore yes, very fond of, respect
I don’t think I’ve ever disagreed with anything this man has said. This stands true even after this video
He has such a way with proving his points with pure facts.
Same.
Then you should form your own opinions. Every take of his is just downright terrible.
@@UltraEgo2000 not disagreeing with someone doesn’t mean you don’t have your own opinion. lol.
@@UltraEgo2000 bruh your username makes me think you believe you’re the smartest person in any given room
Thankyou! Halo was nothing like Quake or Unreal Tournament. I could NEVER get my friends to play those. But everybody had fun with this.
I commented this before I even watched the video or argument :D.
2 words:
Party - Shooter
And it's a hell of a time when It's done right!
Yeah especially with the physics of the older games with the explosions And vehicles
Always thought BTB on CE was special times compared to any other kind of halo MP
PFPS - Party First Person shooter
Sounds good
Yeah I find 4v4/2v2 prescison slayer or snipers/swat is for the more hardcore/sweaty players, and BTB or FFA slayer/CTF is more of a party style fun time/chill experience. All overall fun but much different in thier nature of playing
@@Matanumi BTB on CE is my favorite Big team experience, and overall one of my favorite modes of Halo
Nahhh man that'd be nonsense like ScreenCheat
Halo as a party game is the best description for halo I've heard. Halo isn't as competitive as other arena shooters like quake and unreal tournament and it is a joke to compare halo to those games. The more I think about it, the more it can be compared to games like super smash bros, Mario party and Mario kart. Now looking at it in this light, I understand why split screen is needed. The problem isn't that a small percentage of people use it, or modern technology making it irrelevant, it's that they've been changing halo to be an ultra competitive shooter, when that was just one facit of the experience. I don't think to invite my buddy's over to play halo like I did 10 years ago, but I still do with stuff like Mario party/kart etc.
I guess Halo has a lot more in common with Splatoon.
If anyone thinks Halo is a pure Arena Shooter, they just don't know what they are talking about. It has and has had various Arena Shooter elements, but it's a happy medium between Arena and Tactical Shooter by definition.
I'm glad we're getting another video from you after so long
Hardy said in the Act Man's video interview that Halo's MP was inspired by Counter Strike, because he played a lot of it.
Not sure if you are aware of this but CS 1.6 was a very casual game with mapmakers making weird shit like de_rats or poolday and surf, it pretty much had the original "custom games forged maps" if you think about it that way. There aren't really many casual counter strike servers left and that game was nothing like the competitive sweatfest grind to global elite game it is now.
@@potato1499 That's what Hardy said. He did not say if he made the MP sweaty or not.
@@WonderMePartyStrip I didn't mean it in how hardy designed it, but rather if you were aware that there's a big distinction between CS having way more casual avenues back then and CS pretty much exclusively being competitive now.
This felt like the most random upload. Glad to have you back
Always exciting to see you come out from the shadows. Hope you stay a bit longer this time but i get it since Halo has been beyond meh and life is crazy
Halo Infinite is beyond Meh*
been saying this, favyn hits the nail on the head yet again
This dude never misses
always good to hear this guy talk, the nigthfire refrence i liked a lot
I think you nailed it, and, being totally honest, the only reason I even come close to suggesting the concept - I usually say "Halo is LIKE an Arena Shooter", indicating notable differences - is because Halo itself is REALLY hard to define. It's not a cover-shooter by most standards, and it isn't a Mil-sim, obviously. The closest thing I can think of, when put on the spot and in need of a short, easy to digest answer for someone else, is to put it next to the Arena-Shooter genre. If I had the time to go into it, I'd definitely not do that, but as a quick-fire 'What is Halo like?' kind of response, that's all I have really come up with, because anything else is even farther off the mark.
when I think about Halo multiplayer, the first thing that comes to mind is insane sniper overkill clips.
Super fun and totally not sweaty! 😃
Agreed Halo is more than a competitive arena shooter. Always saw halo as a fun sandbox experience to have laughs with my friends. At the same time the game could be competitive and fun. 343 never understood halo. Was completely baffled when one of the 343 multiplayer heads recently said that halo ce was a competitive shooter. As if that was the only reason people enjoyed it lol.
Thank you for this video in particular, I think it's a really healthy talking point for the community. And again, thanks for sharing your well-thought opinion.
Brilliant! Very well articulated. I feel dumb now for unquestionably accepting the premise being disputed this whole time!
This is the "every square is a rectangle, but not every rectangle is not a square" -type of argument. It's just mental gymnastics at this point. Halo is at it's heart an arena game. You're even proving this point for more than half the video. More games should be made based off of Halo 2, 3, and 5...and maybe parts of 4 if I'm being generous. It's really not all that difficult. It can still mainly be a competitive arena game, with social party modes. Any other arguing is nonsense.
Thank you
Halo is in a league of it's own. A game like it never existed before and has not existed since. At the time of Halo's peak success, other were trying to copy Halo with their infamous 'Halo killers'. It's telling that none of them were able to successfully recreate the feeling of Halo. Also telling that they used the term 'killer' in contrast to, say, 'Doom-clone' or 'Souls-like'.
Patiently awaiting your next video on this game!
I’ve been thinking on this for a little while actually and what I’ve started to call Halo personally is a *Open Sandbox* Shooter.
Yeah Party shooter or sandbox shooter if you want to be more refined,but it gives me Doom+Super Smash Bros. Vibes like it meant a to be invite friends over and kill each other that’s simplified and more object oriented so it appeals to mainstream. Smash Bros. did that for fighters and Halo did that for shooters.
Didn't the original devs called it something in the line of "party shooter"?
I'm on board with that!
Nowadays is different i think. It was morphed into something completely different.
Yeah party shooter and sbmm was there but way weaker so it wasn't slap, get slapped, slap, get slapped
Love your vidsand take on things brotha, wish they would come out more often! Would love to hear your take on the community creations and forge so far for infinite. Cheers bud!
eloquently stated. excellent reasoning. compelling points. I knew there was a vast difference between UR, Quake and Halo, but quantifying it was difficult. But I think you did superb job explaining your point. The question now is, what new genre term should or could Halo be called?
I see this video as the beautiful case for the art of rationalization that it is, the example of explaining the reasoning for the choices we make and argue for.
As someone who DIDN'T grow uo pmaying the original Doom games and only tried them much later, I find those who vehemently disagree with your simpme post to be VERY biased. Very glad I found your channel. I got here from Deadbeat Dave.👌🎮
Honey wake up, favyn uploaded another halo video
dude i love your video takes!! missed your uploads 🥲
Good to see you, Fav! Welcome Back.
I think it depends on how you define arena shooter, but generally good video with good arguments
Great video, favyn. I've followed your channel for years and always appreciated your opinions. I wish, you could dedicate more time on creating more opinion videos.
It’s my lucky day. You dropped a video.🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🔥🔥🔥
It has arena shooter elements, but yeah there's significant differences.
I've always thought of halo as an arena shooter because the diversity in gameplay experience comes from the environment of the match rather than direct player control (picking loadouts or "heroes"). To me the fps genre is broken down into 3 groups: arena shooters with an emphasis on maps, hero/loadout shooters with an emphasis on player individuality, and battle royales with an emphasis on last man standing style survival over point scoring .... this video has def gotten me to re-evaluate how I categorize games within the genre tho
But that’s kind of the exact opposite of an Arena Shooter like Unreal Tournament. Those games are all about direct player control through extremely fast movement and aim. They’re pure skill expression.
Halo is a sandbox shooter. The fun comes from interactions between the levels, weapons, vehicles, enemies, etc.
@@deriznohappehquite Stfu. Sandbox shooter is not a real genre. you are literally making this up.
Are you saying that other shooters don't have interactions between maps, weapons, and objects on the map? That is just exclusive to halo? Please.
great vid and i agree with you now, but that fail nade at 16:15 though 💀
calling halo an arena shooter is like calling rainbow 6 a hero shooter. Thanks for bringing this perspective to my eyes.
Isn't it a class-based shooter. What comes to mind with the word Hero Shooter is Overwatch and Valorant
@@EthanRom by some definitions r6 is a hero shooter, you have a ton of characters with specific abilities, ie, gadgets and weapons. The point I was trying to make was, r6 has as much in common with hero shooters as halo does with arena shooters. And I'd think most people wouldn't call r6 a hero shooter
@@profesnol5552 Well it wasn't a hero shooter, but it did evolve into one. It's also somewhere in between a class based and a hero. The thing about labels is you can have multiple. We shouldn't feel bad that Halo is called an arena shooter it's just one of the many things to describe it
@@profesnol5552
Sucks it turned into hot garbage instead of an actual Rainbow Six game.
Obviously it depends how one chooses to define what is an “Arena Shooter.” Even starts & map pickups are common associations to most peoples understanding of what is an “Arena Shooter.”
fortnite the arena shooter
That's like saying arena shooters normally are in first person so therefore Battlefield is an arena shooters. "even starts" Is a term used only after Call of Duty became so big. It's not something that defined Doom, or Quake or Unreal tournament.
15:20
Very interesting topic for a video at this time of gaming(the dark ages) I’m not even subbed to your channel but I find myself looking to see if you’ve posted a new vid more often than not. Great video man. I’m not a fanboy of no1 or nothing. I just like seeing good content. You’re a top 3 gaming youtuber in my book. In this video you were correct in everything you said.
P.S. post more quality videos like this one!!! The last dozen or so have been bangers.
I like to call Halo a “Party Shooter”
It’s not meant to specifically be sweat-fest for pro gamers to play while snorting G-Fuel sitting in their race car chairs (but it sort of can be if you want).
Whether you’re casual or hardcore, if there’s enough controllers and a big enough couch, anyone can play with a bunch of people and just have a good time (like Smash or Mario Kart).
100% a party shooter
That's what I would call it as well. Custom games are an extension to this
yeah, halo is a sandbox shooter. 👍
Also, glad to see you upload again Favyn, it's been a while
So I’m curious now with loose rumors floating about, do you think H:I would benefit or suffer switching engines? Halo has always been a game with its own engine, I think that’s something that has always kept it unique and distinct but what about the idea of moving from SS to UR5?
I think the main problem here is that we have one word that we're trying to decide what specific games exactly to slap on to it. The thing is... Consider other genres. Hey, you know what, let's consider the Strategy genre. Compare Civilization to Starcraft and anyone will tell you how different they feel. Obviously, that's not in question. But at the same time, we don't have any issue putting those games under the same overall genre of Strategy because at the end of the day, you have an overhead view of a map and you're commanding units. And I think we can do the same with the Arena Shooter genre. Yeah, Unreal Tournament and Halo play pretty differently, but at the end of the day, it's equal starts with on-map pickups that still emphasizes map control. And yes, even Gears of War I wouldn't mind putting in the Arena Shooter bucket. HOWEVER, these games are, of course, very different in their sub-genres. Gears of War is a cover-based arena-shooter. Unreal Tournament is a fast-paced/movement-based arena shooter.
Picture a tree with Arena shooter at the bottom. The main "node", and the other sub-genres branch off from that main overall genre.
Sure this makes sense but arena shooter is already a sub genre in it of itself.
So now we have sub genres within sub genres and it might be beneficial to have a bit of separation
@@FavynTube "So now we have sub genres within sub genres"
Yep, but what's wrong with that? Isn't that exactly the separation we want? If you go to any library, you'll see that they don't restrict themselves to monolithic genres but have sub-genres in genres. Maybe even four levels deep. (If I remember correctly.) If we don't do this, then we start grouping games together where they don't belong.
I think my beef with this is that there's a couple ways to categorize an FPS, one related directly to the mechanics of play and one related to "game mode" type stuff.
From a "game mode type stuff" perspective, hell yeah Halo is an arena shooter.
And the thing is, that's generally how shooters are categorized.
Team Fortress 2 is rooted deeply in Quake, but it' a "hero shooter" just like Overwatch and others despite actually playing very differently from those games. (Or, like, remember Monday Night Combat?)
CoD, Battlefield and Titanfall are all seen as being in "the same wheelhouse" whatever it'd actually be called, which no one has a name for, because they're pretty similar in how they handle gamemodes, player choice, etc., kitchen sink shooters? I don' know.
Anf of course BRs. Apex Legends and goddamn PUBG are part of the same genre in most people's eyes.
So even though I agree with your point in the sense that the "arena shooter" moniker sometimes pushes Halo in a direction other than it's own, I'd call it an arena shooter above all else. Just an arena shooter with a very different vibe. Unreal Tournament got big vehicle maps in it's later years too.
I still consider Halo to be its own form of Arena shooter but not completely. It has a lot of similarities such as:
- Even starts
- Power ups
- Power Weapons
- Similar game modes
The first 3 alone often make the game play similar to Arena shooters. Like Quake, you start off with a set weapon, the goal is to get a powerup (Armor/Quad damage in Quake, Overshield/Active Camo or Spartan abilities in Infinite) and then control the power weapons (RailGun/Rocket Launcher etc in Quake, Sniper/Rockets in Halo). Whilst the pacing of the classic Arena shooters is much faster, Halo still retains a similar style at a slower pace.
That said, it’s the larger game modes that I prefer in Halo such as BTB with vehicles, which breaks up the Arena style gameplay. This is what I usually think of first when I think of Halo, not the competitive Arena style modes.
I do think you made some great points and I also respect the original vision for CE as a party game but I definitely think the game has a lot of Arena shooter elements in its design.
favyn when are we getting another upload? seasonal content model is dropped for something light, bunch of rumours dev is focused on new title, what’s your thoughts on it as h6 may be in the limelight? i’ve enjoyed competitive movement tech but weapon variety has been dreadful for comp play
Awesome vid. I think "Sandbox shooter" is a good first stab at a genre classification. Unclear whether that's even necessary as Halo still is the only game really like it.
The gameplay of Valorant is nothing like the gameplay of Apex. That doesn't make them both not hero shooters. The gameplay of gears of war is nothing like halo. And that doesn't make them both not arena shooters. It's about the competition / way in which the game puts these players as pieces on the board to compete that makes them what they are. The finer details of how those players fight over the map and fight eachother are not entirely relevant. To me the most important facet of an arena shooter will always be equal loadout starts, and map control. 4v4 halo has always been primarily an arena shooter. But of course, it's just an argument of semantics and I respect your opinion.
ummmm wow thanks for wrecking my point of view hahaha never really looked at it that way and to honor you I will not call the older halos arena shooter, and tbh having you explain it like you did it was a DUH moment which I already knew but did not really think about it. Nice Video!!!
I just miss playing as elites. 😂😢
When you first said it I didn't know how I really felt about it. But nah I definitely see where you're coming from now
As a Quake and Halo player, they actually feel pretty same. Of course Quake is much fast paced but the map control and weapon control is still there. For me Halo is an Arena Shooter also.
Agreed
I'm glad I decided to hear you out. I tend to agree with your points on this.
Good opinion, I agree with you. I love how Halo originally is a party sandbox game, but you can tweek the options to make it a competitive "arena shooter."
I see what you mean but think you missed the main thing, simply break down the AFPS term. Arena, first person, shooter. Emphasis on the word ARENA, classic Halo maps are mostly arenas.
Other than that, for me classic Halos hits five other main things that I associate with AFPS and yes, the first two are the things you mentioned Halo player would say but besides lifetime Halo fan I've around 800h across Quakes and played plenty smaller AFPS as well, anyway here's the list:
1. even starts
2. map pickups
3. no aiming penalty while moving at any speed
4. map control is key
5. TTK is longer than your average shooter
Back to the arena thing, map design/layouts play a big factor how "AFPSish" a game feels. Out of all the classic Halo games I would say CE is the most AFPS with its vertical maps, the most arena stylish layouts and in competitive, the map control is everything with how often (compared to other Halos) there are major pickups spawning on the map, you're always trying to setup for the next thing or trying to deny the other team.
You pointed out that Quake Champions is considered as an AFPS even without even starts but if it did not carry the name Quake, I would argue that people would not consider it as such so easily, for me it's a hero shooter, still an AFPS in its fundamental core but a hybrid.
Favyn I would love to hear your thought on Halo Infinite right now. Lots of maps and content and playlists. I’m loving it.
Lol have fun with it. You deserved it
I like pumpkin pie :D
i always considered Halo as an unorthodox arena shooter, specifically the ranked arena portion. I personally don't count any of the games post-Reach as AFPS - just the trilogy. On the arena shooter spectrum, traditional games like DOOM, Quake and Unreal Tournament would be on one side while 'pseudo-AFPS' such as Descent, Tribes, Lawbreakers, DOOM 2016, Eternal Battlemode and of course Halo would fall on the latter side.
Halo's base movement speed is undoubtedly slower, but skilled players can navigate through the maps with such precision utilizing crouch-jumps, fusion coils and nade jumps to gain the advantage. It's fascinating to see all the secret trick jumps. One reason why hardcore arena players don't consider Halo as an AFPS is because of it's two weapon limit. I think the two weapon limit is a myth; melee and grenades should count as weapons just like they do in the traditional AFPS. The reason why I believe each grenade type should count as it's own weapon is because 1. you hold it in your inventory and it kills enemies and 2. they're not fundamentally different from the Quake 2 hand-thrown nades or any of the grenade launchers across those franchises. The average weapon limit for an AFPS is 10, but since most players don't count melee or hand-thrown weapons, the amount is decreased. Discounting melee weapons, Quake 1 would have 7 guns while DOOM 1993 would have 6 guns. So since Halo technically has a 5-weapon limit, it's much closer to its brethren than most assume.
And we can't talk about arena shooters without bringing up the useful glitches. Despite glitches being unintentional, they increase the skill gap tremendously. Quake's iconic tele-fragging, rocket-jumping, plasma gun wall-climbing, strafe-jumping and 'additive jumping (basically a double jump) were glitches and have been in every single game. UT had Impact Hammer launching and elevator bouncing and Tribes had Spinfusor launching. Halo has plenty of ways to propel yourself, most notably hammer launching and sword-flying.
While I can't think of any button combo glitches in AFPS, the closest equivalent would be UT2K4's adrenaline meter which allowed you to choose various powerups depending on the combo you inputted. I believe CE's backpack reload and weapon-tossing and H2's infamous button combos multiplied the skill gap in a way that other AFPS didn't. This is primarily why I believe it belongs on the same spectrum as other AFPS.
When it comes to utility weapons, classic AFPS and Halo are definitely in this aspect. As I mentioned above, several weapons can boost your momentum, but in addition to those, the Quake Gauntlet has a knockback effect, Unreal Tournament always had the Translocator (a personal teleporter) and UT2K4 introduced the Shield Gun which deflected projectiles and boosted you just like the Impact Hammer, the Ball Launcher which allowed you to throw objectives much farther and finally the Link Gun can repair vehicles and power nodes in Onslaught mode. These weapons' utility functions are equally important to combat as Halo's utility weapons are. In Combat Evolved, all plasma weapons stunned enemies, the plasma pistol could EMP, the H2 energy sword functioned as a pseudo-grapple etc...
A major feature Halo had that other AFPS lacked was the 1-50 ranking system. None of the other games at the time even had ranks.
Lastly, another reason why players don't consider Halo a true arena shooter is due to it featuring so much more content than strictly arena combat. It has a dozen party modes, Forge, Theater, action sack, BTB, Infection and so much more. These features are why it succeeded and prospered for a whole decade before they were slowly ripped away. I can totally understand why a player who has only seen very little gameplay of Halo to denounce it as an arena shooter, but if they watched professional gameplay or rank 50 gameplay, perhaps they'd think twice.
The points you made make a good argument for me to think about it differently. The only thing about it is iv lost my love for the game. But I hold on to my hopes maybe one day it will come back.
As a Quake player: Halo is an arena shooter.
What a title! This is something I never thought anyone would argue for, but you made an interesting case. It definitely makes one think whether or not “arena shooter” is an appropriate term for Halo.
HE IS BACK
cod is considered an Arena shooter too so I always had the assumption even starts wasn't something that made a game an arena shooter. Games that have respawn mechanics and the fact that you're in an arena styled map like you mentioned. You might say cod and games like gears have single life modes but those games were built around respawning
In my head.
Arena: closed map with weapons scattered about for player to fight over to the death.
Sandbox: open map with different areas that facilitate different gameplay (like fps and vehicles).
Design intent and end result are two different things in many instances, and while Hardy reached something close to the more casual utility based sandbox he was going for in Halo CE, it still fits the arena shooter formula. There is most certainly a hierarchy of weapons as he describes and anyone who plays Halo competitively will tell you that a dominant strategy is indeed to control power weapons and player spawns as he ascribes to arena shooters. It's a slower kind of game and it definitely has different attributes to it, but Halo is at its core an arena shooter. Just as Starcraft 2 and Dawn of War are both base building RTS games.
This DOES NOT invalidate Halo's viability as a shooter in the current market, nor does it mean that is isn't distinct from games like Quake. But it is still part of that genre and separating them in that way is ultimately pointless.
Halo's issues currently are many-fold. The community can never agree and doesn't know what it wants, the Devs are incapable of organizing, Microsoft is pressuring 343 into cash grabby marketing, it lacks the levels of innovation it used to be known for, etc., etc., etc. But its identity as an arena shooter is far from that.
When’s the full campaign review
I've always called Halo a slow-paced arena shooter, and will likely continue to do so, though the various comments mentioning "Sandbox Shooter" is something to consider.
At the highest level, Halo is an FPS. At the lowest level, it's entirely it's own thing, but that's not the point of having genres and sub-genres to categorize games, so I don't really see the point in splitting hairs here. "Slow-paced arena shooter" is descriptive enough for people to have a loose understanding of what the game is without having to fully explain it.
It's really insane seeing so many people being so certain of the fact that Halo is an Arena Shooter as someone who remembers Arena Shooter fans shitting on Halo for not being that
Because they're elitist
@@Ja.abbatta_V There are elitists in every genre. Halo elitists call the game an arena shooter because of the thoughts people have with the genre. "the daddy of competitive FPS" but the truth is, Halo is something else, it's a bit classic but innovated many areas of gameplay design that few games have replicated in a fun way.
The reason AFPS fans give Halo fans shit is because their most vocal players tend to make false claims in order to advertise it as something else, in order to appeal to potential players from other sub-genres, which evidently resulted in the developers doing the same for the sake of advertising. (Similar to Destiiny being marketed as an MMO (max player lobby of 12))
@@comfyzenny Halo was just the first FPS game that was popular enough for some people to play it semi-professionally.
I don't even care about this specific topic very much, but I love hearing your thought process on it. Keep up the good work!
Yeah this one’s a big “who gives a shit” for me but I still enjoyed the video.
recently i heared the term "methode shooter".
that does fit.
the puzzle piece to the tactical shooter,that is not an arena shooter: instead of building a tactical set before and then executing, you apply a methode to a dynamic map to build a loadout on the fly.
similarily gunfights are less set up tactic, but more about ongoing methode.
tactical shooters frontload descissions, methode shooters spread them in the match.
I broadly agree with you and have always been kind of hesitant to call Halo an arena shooter (though I have used the term for it a few times). I think Halo does have some arena shooter DNA, specifically the slower-paced Unreal Tournament rather than Quake, as that was simply the zeitgeist of the early 2000s. Much like most modern shooters have DNA from Call of Duty and Titanfall; assumptions of how a multiplayer experience works are more or less set within a particular time and place.
But yeah, I think the regenerating health, two weapon limit, and, to a lesser extent, the slow movement fundamentally change how the game is played enough to separate Halo from "true" arena shooters. At least from the perspective of an individual player. That said, I think on a macro scale Halo is actually quite similar to an arena shooter in competitive 4v4 Slayer where each team functions as a single player in an arena shooter. By being in more than one place at a time a coordinated team performs the same functions as the individual does in an arena shooter: control the important items on the map by arriving at key locations first, winning exchanges, and using that leverage to pin down the opponent(s) to deny them a pivot. The style is not the same, but the heart is there.
This was kind of a ramble, but I love Halo and arena shooters. Honestly, my ideal game would be somewhere in the middle of them. But the fact that there IS a middle implies that they aren't the same thing.
Halo is the middle. It was clearly inspired by the 90s. Doom and Unreal, but it was in transition to modern FPS hence the recharging health and weapon limit
I've always thought of arena shooter as part of a spectrum. The FPS spectrum looks like Arena ShooterMilsim.
So holding only two weapons and walking normal speed are examples of milsim core values, but weapon pick-ups, health regen, extreme speed, and an emphasis on mechanical skill over tactics are examples of Arena shooter values, or at least components. We really only have those two terms to describe shooters broadly. Call of Duty isn't arena or milsim, it's very much in the middle of the spectrum somewhere, with past games like Cod4 being closer to milsim than it is now (faster sprinting for example in newer entries). Battlefield has always been just slightly to the right of CoD on that spectrum, less perks, or at least unrealistic ones like "cold blooded," being a shining example. Halo definitely is unique, but I think it still fits on the spectrum and I would place it somewhere left of CoD for sure, primarily due to its higher TTK which goes back to arena shooters being defined by high mechanical skill.
i think people who call halo an arena shooter
think arena shooter is purely you are in a arena and shoot.
Yo wait. Did Doom Eternal get a proper multiplayer? Great vid by the way. I kinda feel like Halo is a sandbow shooter. When I pictured where Halo would be now 10 years ago, I imaged massive space battles between players and forgable campaigns. A script system like we have too, and I can't wait to see what that brings. But we're missing the rest rn.
No
5:28 - I define it as BOTH.
It's a party game first, with arena shooter mechanics.
It's not as sweaty as quake, until halo 5, because you're generally not moving as fast, which imho is GOOD.
Ever watch a highly-skilled ut99 player? It's a very dizzy-ing experience.
Albeit halo ce does get sweaty (hang-em high with pistols-only is not for the faint of heart), it's nowhere near ut99/quake -- by design. It's meant to give people breathing room so that the "intense focus" needed to play at a decent level comes in ebbs and flows, vs being constant (like ut99/quake).
I prefer this. I love ut99, but it gets exhausting after awhile. Halo? I can breath.
He's back😭, time to be enlightened, once again
Honestly “THE HALO EXPERIENCE “ is defined By its grenades. No other games has the grenade act as a defense utility in the same way.
There is no better feeling than hitting a perfect grenade and finishing the kill with a headshot and that is a uniquely HALO experience.
You know ironically I was literally just thinling of you earlier today in past videos and such saying this and also thinking its really a combination of multiple different genres of FPS games into something unique.
Then boom, this video shows up. lol
Man the first 5 minutes you are disarming the haters. Don’t give them that time of day. Express yourself! ❤great take.
Quake Champions is a hero shooter. It doesn't deserve to be called an arena shooter
Huge halo fan, never got into community stuff or forums or anything didn’t have internet much back then, I’m surprised people think of halo as an arena shooter imo that seems surprising
This is why I think Cyberpunk 2077 is secretly a visual novel >:)
I’ve never been one to call halo an arena shooter, the two genre’s seemed similar but distinct. You can tell this most easily by the fact that vehicles… exist in halo whereas they don’t in virtually every arena shooter out there. Maps are too small, and characters are too fast and too lethal for a vehicle to have any reason to exist in an arena shooter.Players are able to run off too fast for any amount of cohesion amongst a team. There’s no real co-operation. Any map that could accommodate a vehicle would be derided for creating a kill box as that is essentially what a wide open space is in an arena shooter. Arena shooters are fast an kinetic, two words I would never use to describe halo, not that that’s a bad thing. Afps matches are built around players trying to acquire as much gear as possible and combat happening in the blink of the eye. Halo to me is something called a “modular fps” which is a term I just made up while watching this video. Halo’s mechanics are so simple that they can work for virtually any style of gameplay. Close quarters arena style gameplay. Asymmetrical attack and defend maps. Large scale battles. Halo’s combat is far too tactical and far too Freeform to be an arena shooter. I would say that halo is to arena shooters as smash is to traditional fighting games.
I don't understand the point of this video. I don't think it expresses any clear ideas, maybe I missed something?
If the only intention was to prove Halo and other arena shooters are different, just thirty seconds of gameplay clips would have sufficed.
Defining what makes Halo special is important for the next set of game developers who can re-discover and re-make this unique, genius formula. Whether it's a game in the HALO IP or something new this is vital knowledge for a challenging task. 343 had their chance and squandered an entire generation for Halo. We must look to the future for hope and try to make ready those who are up for it.
You made great points. The Arena shooter label doesn't capture the Halo magic at all. Those who think that "HALO" type of games are dead are fools. With the right execution, it's still a billion-dollar idea... Microsoft kind of recognized that but unfortunately as showcased by 343 they are absolutely way in over their heads. With hindsight, we now know that M$ were extremely lucky to be publishing partners with Bungie back in the 2000s.
Have you ever played Marathon 2: Durandal, Myth, or Oni? It seems like it’d be worth it to take a deep dive into Halo’s background.
I've always kinda defined Halo as a "different take" on the format of an arena shooter.
I don't define an arena shooter in a strict way, but instead based on very broad principles; long kill times, emphasis on movement (even if Halo is a slower, methodical game, the fact that combat emphasizes you trying to dodge and outpace the enemy's shots in the middle of combat, that helps it fit the categorical mold of an arena shooter), weapon design that doesn't conform to realism, and the even starts and map control where players fight for dominance over the map to acquire resources on it to become stronger
As far as Halo being a slower, more methodical game than other arena shooters, I justify it like this: every arena shooter (well, ones that aren't lazily made or just intended as Quake 3 clones) tends to have their own sort of "rhythm" or approach to movement. Doom for example, the base speed is extremely fast and there is very little in terms of "advanced" techniques to speed up that movement further; players just move lightning fast by default and the movement game is more about trying to blindside, circle around, and flank someone with that crazy fast movement. Quake has a slower base speed but allows the player to accelerate to higher speeds through the use of bunnyhopping and other techniques, as well as finding shortcuts through the map like rocket jumping or plasma climbing, and overall the movement is more about learning the map, having good timing, and finding a route that allows you to keep your momentum. Meanwhile UT is far more methodical compared to the latter two and the movement is based more on actual mechanics rather than physics trickery (dodge-jumping, double jumping, and wall-jumping). The movement is more situational and based around the context of your environment versus the "blazing fast speed" that Doom or Quake permits. Halo is simply like, "another style" of movement in contrast to these other three games.
Lastly, as far as Halo having more modern mechanics like 2 weapon limits or the regenerating shields, I guess that just depends on how "loose" your definition of an arena shooter is. I wouldn't call something "not an arena shooter" just because it experiments or changes or tries something different with specific aspects of how the gameplay works. Some people though, when they define "arena shooter", all they're really talking about is Quake 3 and they'll simply use the term "arena shooter" to refer specifically to games that are almost exact copies of Quake 3 (many of which exist).
I think the problem with "arena shooter" as a genre label is similar to what you see with the term "character action game" or heck, even "survival horror", where the parameters are just extremely vague. People can agree on the basic idea of the terms but few can seem to agree where the line should be drawn. Some would define God of War as "character action" but more hardcore fans of character action games would say that God of War isn't because the combo system is too basic. Some people would say that the Resident Evil games post-RE1 are no longer "survival horror" because there's too many power fantasy moments where you blow shit up and feel like a badass (even starting in RE2); other people would find those claims absurd. Meanwhile there are people with a very broad definition of survival horror that would place games like Dead Space in it.
"emphasis on movement" THANK YOU. Movement speed is literally a non factor when it comes to determining arena shooter or not
I liked this video I would say Halo barely has any relation to Quake or Doom style games however I would say (thanks to Hardy's comment) that Halo is a little more related to Goldeneye and Perfect Dark (and even Half Life) which have some fun sandbox elements.
The best way to describe Halo at it's core is a sandbox party game shooter, that understands how to be an arena shooter. Halo can be played in so many ways, that some of the most fun ways don't even involve guns. Jenga and Trash Compactor from Halo 3 or even Speed Halo from Reach show off that Halo is designed around the sandbox and the physics first. Halo is a jack of all trades that manages to be good at most of the stuff it does instead of trying to be a master of one or even all of it's features.
Quake 3 is an arena shooter, UT is an arena shooter... DOOM *was* an arena shooter, not so much anymore but still has elements of it in the single player
I grew up playing all the classic games + Halo and I think the comparison can be seen, but Halo was unique.
343 was handed the golden ticket to the greatest FPS of all time and one of the greatest game series of all time when all they had to do is improve upon Halo 3, but instead it’s like they were paid billions to destroy it
It's not an Arena shooter, if your understanding of "Arena shooter" is defined by the PC FPS games of the 90s. But I think it's definitely the evolution of the Arena shooter. The OG Halo devs took what would work on a controller from classic Arena shooter design, tossed out everything that wouldn't work on a controller, and then added some really neat design innovations on top.
Sounds unique to me!
@@FavynTube I think both "90s shooters" and Halo can both be seen as "barebones" shooters.
You run, jump, shoot, etc. the same as everyone else, and the only big differences are personal skill. Halo is just designed so that it's more forgiving.
But the consequence of being barebones is that when you add player creativity now you can have nearly infinite custom game modes by tweaking inherent player values or powerups etc.
But basically, Quake vs Halo is like comparing trilobites to horshoe crabs. Yes, they're different, but only in a few small, but significant ways.
They're so simple they tend to evade classification imo
Like you said, I don't thing AFPS fans even consider Halo anything close to an arena shooter. Hell they probably consider it closer to call of duty than quake at this point.
Another thing CoD basically has even starts nowadays with how everyone uses the same god damn guns anyways.
Halo is neither an arena shooter nor a party shooter. Halo is a pretty cool guy who shoots the aliens and doesnt afraid of anything