• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Explain to me why Halo>Halo 2

J

Johnas

Member
First of all, I am hardly an expert on the Halo series, having only beaten each game for the first time recently. That said, I did finish them back to back, finishing 2 just a few minutes ago (nice "ending"...?). Anyway, in that thread a few days ago about your five favorite this gen games, I noticed some people listing Halo but not Halo 2, saying that they just didn't enjoy 2 as much as the first. Personally, I would not put either in my top 5, but I have to say I thought 2 was a better game.

So I would like to hear opinions on why people thought the first one was better. I could think of a list of reasons to back up my stance on why 2 was more enjoyable to me. I know more does not always equal better, but 2 had more weapons, more levels, more vehicles, more cutscenes, and a generally more robust, more intriguing storyline. Does anybody prefer the first game simply because it is more cogent, more streamlined? One thing I cannot factor in for myself is multiplayer on either game, I haven't played enough of it to really comment. Maybe that is the main difference. Anyway, I'm curious as to your thoughts.
 
i was about to post something similiar. i prefer halo 2 over halo 1, but then again i'm not one that cares about the story. i guess the ending for halo 2 made a lot of people cry. although i have to admit it was pretty ridiculous, but it wasn't like i was playing halo for the story to begin with

i guess i should note that i played halo for the first time just merely weeks before halo 2. and i wasn't too hyped about halo 2 until the week before release
 
I think the first just had more "wow" factor as it wasnt really expected to be that great of a game. Thus for the sequel, people placed a retarded amount of expectations on it. Halo 2 is just as good as Halo IMO. The multi probably puts it over the top for me.
 
Single Player: Halo (Better story, Bigger more fun levels, better physics, no Elites talking in English, Grunts were funny)


Multiplayer: Ever since the auto-update, it's Halo 2. Before the auto-update Halo 1 was still better but Halo 2 has eclipsed it due to BR modes, the grenades, melee damage, better maps etc.
 
It's the multiplayer that most people think is better.

The Halo 1 single player is much harder to make a case for, particularly given its repeating stages and smaller weapon set.
 
halo2 isnt better than halo1 i dont care what you read or who told you.

people are partial to halo1 because when you played with your friends it was more of an event. you set up a night for lan and you had friends bring over their xbox's and tv's it was something you did for a night. now its like a dirty whore and you play it whenever the hell you want and it just doesnt have that special feeling. as a game though halo2 >>>> halo1 no contest.
 
Halo 2 is better in singleplayer, for the most part, anyway.

As for multiplayer before the update and rebalancing, I'd say I sort of lean toward the first game. After the update, Halo 2 smokes the first one in the way it seems it really was meant to.
 
Considering I never played Halo 1 multiplayer aside from co-op, Halo 2 wins by default.

When it comes to the campaign, Halo 1 all the way...
 
Ehhh, too much to say again...so read this.

In short, they nixed the pistol, removed the true effectiveness of plasma weapons, and made grenades useless against vehicles, all of which lead to the downfall of Halo.
 
I liked part 1 a bit more ( I still love part 2 tho) imo it had better levels mp and sp adn better weapons (again imo) the levels were huge and wide open it felt like you were exploring them...I still go back and play some levels, where as in Halo2 I only really play on live. Also the auto aim thing sucks and sweep sniping sucks....and Im not a huge fan of dual welding (or the sword)...I wasn't let down with Halo 2 I think it's a great game but imo the first one was a better game...
 
i prefer halo 2 in singleplayer and multiplayer. but halo's such an exceptional game that it wasn't going to be exceeded by that much on the same hardware. i mean to replay both games soon.
 
Halo 2 just had a much worse story and the flood levels are not something I wanted to play through again either. I didn't really want to go back to another halo, because if I did I'd just replay Halo 1, although that's somewhat what they did in 2. After the Earth levels, which seemed to be the best in the game, the game turned into Halo 1 again, making you do a lot of stuff you already did in 1. Then the story got really incoherent, then came the boss at the end, which shouldn't be in a halo game, followed by the cliffhanger ending that basically said "Ha ha, we just ripped you off! We'll think up an actual ending after we're done with swimming our morning laps through our seas of cash! BWAHAHA!"

I enjoyed the multiplayer as much as H1, especially after the updates, but the single player campaign was pure "meh".
 
MarkRyan said:
Ehhh, too much to say again...so read this.
Click to expand...
Obviously written pre-update....though at least exemplary of the Halo 2 multiplayer complaints (There isn't some uber-powered default weapon therefore it's "unbalanced").
 
MarkRyan said:
Ehhh, too much to say again...so read this.

In short, they nixed the pistol, removed the true effectiveness of plasma weapons, and made grenades useless against vehicles, all of which lead to the downfall of Halo.
Click to expand...

In short this is almost entirely wrong. EDIT: If that was written pre update, I would still argue it's mostly wrong.

The pistol needed to be nixed, BR is there as a suitable but not too overpowered replacement, 4 headshot kills instead of 3 now. plama weapons are in some cases more deadly (plasma pistol anyone?) red brute plasma rifle is totally fatal really fast, grenades are not useless against vehicles.

I can't comment to much on the single player because when I beat halo 1 that was prior to the multiplayer being massive with my friends (and no live component....) Halo 2 multi completely eclipsed the campaign for me and makes it an entirely better game on that one point alone. I did beat the campaign though and had fun doing it. the legendary snipers were a bit silly though.....

And last I checked Halo 2 didn't really fall down anywhere.
 
How on Earth some of you can prefer the original's story over the second is quite beyond me. I think you're all just bitter about the ending, because I was kept very interested in Halo 2's story.
 
Boogie said:
How on Earth some of you can prefer the original's story over the second is quite beyond me. I think you're all just bitter about the ending, because I was kept very interested in Halo 2's story.
Click to expand...

I agree here about the story, it was one of the main things that kept me playing. I played 2 over the course of a week and a half or so, so I ended up forgetting a few things, but during the last third of the game or so I was really intrigued. And I REALLY the swapping back and forth storywise, so to speak.
 
I like Halo 1 better simply because of the weapons. The effed up the plasma pistol, and I could've done without the SMG and battle rifle. I liked the old assault rifle from H1 better. All of the other weapons are pretty cool though.

I like both story lines, but I feel that H1 had better levels overall- not by much though.
 
The Story. It was well told while it lasted. But the end killed it. The end of Halo left you satisfied. The end of Halo 2 left a sour taste in your mouth.

Not to mention that all the pre-release media was pointing toward one type of story when the actual game was totally unrelated to the pre-release "battle on earth" hype.
 
catfish said:
In short this is almost entirely wrong. EDIT: If that was written pre update, I would still argue it's mostly wrong.
Click to expand...
Nah, it's all right, 100%, even after the update. The update did very little--dual wielding is still better than single wielding.

The pistol needed to be nixed, BR is there as a suitable but not too overpowered replacement, 4 headshot kills instead of 3 now. plama weapons are in some cases more deadly (plasma pistol anyone?) red brute plasma rifle is totally fatal really fast, grenades are not useless against vehicles.
Click to expand...
Battle rifle is nothing compared to the pistol. Four BR shots takes about as long as unloading a full pistol clip--it's not just about how many times you have to pull the trigger (and BR is slow). Plus, at longer ranges the BR becomes less effective. Plasma weapons now are utterly unless dual wielded (or PP/BR comboed). In Halo: CE, plasma stun was awesome and a different tactic to use. Totally gone now. The Brute plasma rifle is identical to the regular one except it overheats faster--try it out (unless they changed that with the patch, which I doubt since the Brute rifle isn't on any maps anyway). And yes, grenades are 100% totally and completely useless versus vehicles.
 
It took a dying console genre and gave it psyhics and a new life, as well as an epic experience on a console I never wanted in the first place. One of the best games of all time.
 
First of all, I've been playing Halo 1 for 3 years. I picked up in May before I started college. In college, I met a bunch of other dorks like myself who enjoyed Halo and before long we were playing every night over the LAN in the dorms. I have been playing ever since and have wasted many, many hours of my life on this game amongst friends and tournaments. Also (I'm starting to feel like this is a resume of sorts), my Halo 2 prowess was proven at my school when my 4 man team won the Florida State University 4v4 tournament, the team being made up exclusively of Halo 1 players. There were 15 other competing teams, btw.

I'm gonna talk about the multiplayer first, since it is the defining factor of Halo and Halo 2.

Well, you need to ask yourself something before you can begin differentiating Halo 1 from Halo 2. Are you more satisfied by your individual abilities (to shoot and grenade accurately, and to melee with precision) or are you more satisfied with a good team player (ability to assist teammates, communicate precisely, and out-number opponents).

And that's the difference, when it's all broken down, between Halo 1 and Halo 2. Halo 1 = individual skill. Halo 2 = team skill. You decide which is more satisfying to you.

Now the campaign. In my opinion, the Halo 1 campaign was far, far better. It was far more interesting and made more sense. Halo 2 seemed to put you in fighting situations arbitrarily. You were told to go here, do this, do that. And along the way you inevitably ran into enemies. Whereas in Halo 1, you land on this ring, knowing nothing about it. Fights are not senseless. You are forced to fight in many situations with a good reason (you have to rescue the captain, or get the index, save marines, and eventually escape).

Half the time in Halo 2, I didn't know why my enemies were where they were, why they were trying to stop me. For instance, you land on this planet with Aztec type ruins. Why are the covenant standing out in front of it aimlessly. Why are they protecting this empty ruin which leads to another ruin which leads to a canyon which leads to a lift that leads finally (!) to where the real important thing is?

Halo 1 had one negative to the campaign. Some of the environments were repeatitive. That's the only problem I can think of with the campaign. In Halo 2, I can name plenty. Why does the Warthog handle like crap? Why is the human tank acheingly slow? Why, when you're flying around in banshees on this one level, do other banshees seemingly appear from no where and attack you for no reason (they are, afterall, being swallowed up by a whirlpool of something)? How do they even know you're an enemy, you're flying one of their ships! Why does one of those Oracles/Prophets/whatever keep allowing you to jump onto his chair and beat his ass? Why doesn't he fly away and send more enemies after you who are far superior at fighting than he? I could keep going, but I won't. These situations did not make sense during the game... and honestly, knowing the reason for them now won't do me any good (I've already played the game!). I should've known what the reason was right then and there.

In closing (essay style), I'd like to say that Halo 1 is better because I enjoy satisfying multiplayer. I like being able to do crazy stuff and getting away with it. Halo 2 is Halo 1 with rounded edges, broken and torn seams, and a baby-proof top.
 
I had more fun with Halo 1 in multi than Halo 2. Main reason is that it was more balanced (probably better now with the tweaks), and while dual weilding is cool, it throws the game off balance. Spawn with a SMG and you're fucked, it'd be better if you spawned with a battle rifle. Also, I'm not happy with how Bungie handled the online aspect of Halo 2. Give us a server list for god sakes, I like to choose my games based on a number of criteria...
 
Im not a Halo fan, but i can see why people prefer Halo over Halo 2 even though Halo 2 is technically better in every way.
Graphically, its not that much different. Gameplay is pretty much the same. Halo 2 improves in both cases, but not by enough to seem like a huge difference to the prior game. Whereas Halo came out, not much hype really, nothing expected as such, just a new FPS game on a new console and caught everyone off-guard. For some people it was a huge upgrade from any other game. It was instantly loved by people who played it.
Halo 2 comes out, a tiny bit better, more weapons, levels etc. But it didnt provide the same increase the previous Halo had. Some people where more than happy to have more of the same, with a different story and find it better than the original. Others had unrealistic expectations, which couldnt be met really. Or not on the current hardware.
Atleast thats the way i see it, i feel similar when many series bring out sequels on the same console. GT3 > GT4. GTA3 > GTAVC > GTASA. Splinter Cell > Splinter Cell PT > Splinter Cell Chaos Theory.
But on the next-gen consoles, the new version offers upgrades people want. Although in my GTA SA case, i like it the best in the series, but it was dissapointing still due to just feeling like an add-on to GTA3. Maybe some feel the same with Halo 2.
 
MarkRyan said:
Halo had no hype? Are you kidding? It's the only reason people cared about Xbox back then.
Click to expand...
Halo had alot of anti-hype. Especially after E3. Once the reviews started rolling in tho it was full speed ahead.
 
Single Player: Weapon sets and vehicles sway the arguement towards Halo 2. The story line I'm going to say was a bit better done in Combat Evolved. Halo 2 was decent, but the "ending" really hurt the experience for me. Sure they need something for Halo 3 but still, a bone needed throwing and it wasn't. The level design arguement has been done to death, I still don't mind the Library, I'd liken it to house to house fighting in many WWII FPSs that people so adore. And Halo 2, according to many of the old threads following its release would indicate that there wasn't a great improvement in that area.

Multi-Player: I think over all I had a better time with Halo 1. The LAN experience is always something special compared to XboxLive. There's a certain connection you have with people in a LAN situation that you lack with XBL. Not to mention that dropping, cheating, and other such complaints seem a bit less likely in a LAN set up. The pistol was over-powered but the upshot was that you pretty much always had it, so you sort of had the weapon of choice from the get go.

The BR levels, Colossus especially isn't much different than things used to be with the original Halo, now it just takes longer because you have to shoot somone an extra time or two since you've got the BR not the Pistol.

The grenade fixes won some people over on Halo 2 but I argue that while the frags needed to be upped the plasmas didn't. Plasmas in Halo CE didn't kill you like they do in Halo 2, you actually had to stick the guy, which I'd say is kind of the point of them.

I'd say that the real advantage that Halo 2 offers over Halo CE is the amount of effort required to have a basic multiplayer experience.
 
LoGradeChili said:
Now the campaign. In my opinion, the Halo 1 campaign was far, far better. It was far more interesting and made more sense. Halo 2 seemed to put you in fighting situations arbitrarily. You were told to go here, do this, do that. And along the way you inevitably ran into enemies. Whereas in Halo 1, you land on this ring, knowing nothing about it. Fights are not senseless. You are forced to fight in many situations with a good reason (you have to rescue the captain, or get the index, save marines, and eventually escape).
Click to expand...

Awesome post, but this is my major gripe with Halo 2. There was no real reason for many, if any, of the battles that took place, which is just plain wrong considering the three books that were spunoff of the first game alone just to flesh out the backstory and whatever story there could be leading up to Halo 2. Boo Bungie on this blunder.
 
People just got super attached to the first one. The combat dynamics and balanced changed slightly for the second, and it's hard for some people to readapt.
 
Cerrius said:
Multiplayer: Ever since the auto-update, it's Halo 2. Before the auto-update Halo 1 was still better but Halo 2 has eclipsed it due to BR modes, the grenades, melee damage, better maps etc.
Click to expand...

The multiplayer in Halo 2 was seriously jacked up before the update. Kinda funny to think of all the retards that defended the bad weapon balance before.
 
"People just got super attached to the first one. The combat dynamics and balanced changed slightly for the second, and it's hard for some people to readapt."

That's a pretty good point actually. I'm no expert on these two games, though. I've played the first for about 10 or so hours and the second for about two (I own neither). I've enjoyed them both. But I'd say this is a similar situation to the arguments back in the day about GoldenEye and Perfect Dark. My favorite game of all time is GoldenEye, but surely there are games since then that have been technically "better". As with PD.. it had a ton more weapons, options, bots, levels, etc. etc., and it was an awesome game.. but I just had more fun with GoldenEye. I think a lot of people just had more fun with Halo. It's hard for them to explain.. like it is for me with GE and PD comparisons..
 
Cerrius said:
Single Player: Halo (Better story, Bigger more fun levels, better physics, no Elites talking in English, Grunts were funny)


Multiplayer: Ever since the auto-update, it's Halo 2. Before the auto-update Halo 1 was still better but Halo 2 has eclipsed it due to BR modes, the grenades, melee damage, better maps etc.
Click to expand...

I was going to post a giant list, but this pretty much covers it. Suffice it to say, I played Halo from beginning to end on Legendary over 40 times. I played through Halo 2 three times - once on Legendary. It's just not as fun in SP.

MP - it rules the fucking world.
 
If Halo and Halo 2 were released on the same day, absolutely no one would call Halo 2 better. Halo 2 is technically the better game.

But Halo 2 was released, what, 3 years after the original. Halo 1 gave us something completely new and original. Halo 2 was an update. It was a worthy sequel, but the initial wow factor just isn't there for the majority of sequels- videogame or otherwise.
 
ChrisReid said:
People just got super attached to the first one. The combat dynamics and balanced changed slightly for the second, and it's hard for some people to readapt.
Click to expand...
Nah, Halo: CE multiplayer really is significantly better in design.
 
MarkRyan said:
Nah, it's all right, 100%, even after the update. The update did very little--dual wielding is still better than single wielding.

Battle rifle is nothing compared to the pistol. Four BR shots takes about as long as unloading a full pistol clip--it's not just about how many times you have to pull the trigger (and BR is slow). Plus, at longer ranges the BR becomes less effective. Plasma weapons now are utterly unless dual wielded (or PP/BR comboed). In Halo: CE, plasma stun was awesome and a different tactic to use. Totally gone now. The Brute plasma rifle is identical to the regular one except it overheats faster--try it out (unless they changed that with the patch, which I doubt since the Brute rifle isn't on any maps anyway). And yes, grenades are 100% totally and completely useless versus vehicles.
Click to expand...

Dual weilding is only > than single if you run around a corner and bang into each other. BR + grenades will trump dual most of the time.

The pistol was way way way overpowered. BR has pretty much replaced it as the awesome weapon now and the game is better for it. The BR is very decent from quite far post patch as well. But getting shot dead in 2 seconds from half of blood gulch away wasn't very fun anyway. If you play on coag now, you wouldn't want a H1 pistol to contend with at all, esp if the other team is weilding snipers as well.

1 plasma rifle is about as good as 1 smg sure, thats why you dual them and trust me, play a game on turf and you go up against a guy in a face to face fight with a red pr/smg if you are holding a blue pr/smg and you are going to die unless you are playing stephen hawking.

Also try sticking a ghost and see what happens, or a banshee. And a warthog as well (I think) The tanks and wraiths need to be jacked or rocketed though.

The multiplayer in Halo 2 was seriously jacked up before the update. Kinda funny to think of all the retards that defended the bad weapon balance before.
Click to expand...

H2 was still a fun experience before the update, what killed it was the cheating for me. But yes, the weapons are more balanced now and it is far far better.
 
bigger worlds, Halo felt like a giant world right from the 2nd level.

Halo 2 for some reason was almost exclusively in tight indoor levels. Even the outdoor levels were severely constrained. Hell the outdoor vehicle levels in Halo 2 made you feel like you were forced down a path where Halo 1 had a lot of large fields that you could just mess around in with the Warthog.
 
MarkRyan said:
Nah, Halo: CE multiplayer really is significantly better in design.
Click to expand...


I find it hard to take your opinion on Halo 2's multiplayer seriously when you:

1. don't know how to use grenades against dual wielding opponents
2. Think that brute plasma rifles are the same as the regular versions
3. Think that the brute plasma isn't on any maps
4. grenades useless against vehicles? :lol
 
Well, I haven't played Halo 2 after the update, but the pre-update version almost seemed like an attempt to strip the series of what made the first game so great. The first Halo was different from other FPS games in that it did the best job of making the player feel like a super-soldier rather than a floating gun. In both the multi-player and single player, grenades and melee were incredibly useful and had to be used in addition to simply aiming and shooting to succeed in the more difficult battles. The weapon balance was excellent, and the 2 weapon limit made the player figure out their own fighting style and apply it to the given situation.

Halo 2 weakened grenades and melee, presumably in order to promote dual wielding. Unfortunately, this makes the game more about spraying bullets than learning to use all the skills together (grenades, weapons fire and melee). A number of weapons that required considerable skill to use properly (like the plasma pistol) were made easier to use and more powerful. The game became considerably less about the player's skill than having more firepower than the other guy. I have played the single player campaign of Halo: CE through 13 or 14 times and learned new tactics and ways to use weapons each time I played on Legendary (which I have done 6 times, at least). The combat system of Halo 1 was simply THAT deep. The same is not true of the sequel.

The complaints about the aimless feeling of the single-player campaign are exactly right. The game tries to fit every single kind of gameplay into each level (vehicles, close range, long range, etc) without focusing on any particular area. As a result, the game never excels in any one area for a considerable amount of time. The battles are also less interesting in the single player. In Halo: CE, the enemies come from all angles and often times mount counter attacks so that the player has to switch gears and defend territory they just took control of. In Halo2, the enemies all come from the same direction, making the scenarios tactically less interesting and removing the sense that the enemy is an actual enemy force performing its own manuevers and trying to fight back.
 
The main reason why prefer Halo 1 over 2 is the level/art design. Quite frankly, Halo 2 is an ugly corridor shooter. The open environments in Halo were a joy to traverse, and allowed for more diverse ways with which to engage in combat. Also, while the graphics are technically inferior to Halo 2, they did not really ttempt to do anything outside of the Xbox's capabilities. Halo 2 though...simply FUGLY. Even the few outdoor levels were broken, either because they were essentially tedious multiplayer with-bots style battles, or shrouded in darkness. The plot was also a lot weaker, and I did not like the weapon changes/alterations.

Also, whyt he fuck did they have another library? I mean seriously, Bungie told us that Halo 2 would be Halo - the weaker parts of the game (ie: repetitive level design), but IMO, the whole thing felt like one long library level in confined environments. Additionally, Halo had continuity, it felt like you were trversing a world, but Halo 2 felt heavily segmented, it felt like you were playing "levels", each taking place in totally different environments etc...
 
Cerrius said:
I find it hard to take your opinion on Halo 2's multiplayer seriously when you:
Click to expand...
That's alright, I find it hard to take your opinion seriously when you disagree with me.

"1. don't know how to use grenades against dual wielding opponents" -- Thanks for obligatory unfounded statement.

"2. Think that brute plasma rifles are the same as the regular versions" -- They are--go test them yourself. I already did when the game first came out, so I'm right unless they've changed since the update.

"3. Think that the brute plasma isn't on any maps" -- Name one that it's on (and if it's new, forgive my incredible ignorance--I gave up on Halo 2 a long time ago).

"4. grenades useless against vehicles?" -- Yes, they really are :) Plasmas have a chance versus open vehicles, but they have to stick to the person driving and not just the vehicle. Hardly makes things even, especially when plasmas are rarely default equipment. In short, VEHICLE vs. ON-FOOT results in VEHICLE WINS every time unless someone really sucks.
 
Sathsquatch - Pretty much all your concerns have been addressed in the AU. Although the pp is still to powerful it's harder to get hold of with a br as well (not as many, further apart etc)

Halo 1 didn't really have awesome weapon balance though. best gun in the game being the pistol.
 
Didn't see anyone mention boss battles. Here's what Mike Miller, a briliant Halo player and author of the extensive Halo 2 Legendary Guide over at HBO , writes about them (I'm quoting him since it's easier than typing out my opinion, which is pretty much the same):

Here's his take on the Heretic boss battle:

Apparently, Bungie has heard the ceaseless cries from the legions of fans pleading for boss fights in Halo 2. I know that nary a day went by when I didn't think, "Well, Halo is good and all, but what it really needs are some good old-fashioned video game bosses that behave in a contrived and illogical manner and distort the rules of the game beyond all recognition."

Well, our prayers have been answered; indeed, this battle treats us to many of the traditionally lazy boss fight conventions that we've all come to know and tolerate. Let's see:

* Regenerating supply of disposable henchmen. Still largely unwilling to fight his own battles, the heretic leader will surround himself with holographic duplicates in an admittedly effective attempt to confuse us. Curiously, these holograms seem to do just as much damage as the real thing, which leads one to wonder why the Covenant don't just employ legions of holographic shock troops as a standard tactic.

* Arbitrary invincibility. You're only allowed to kill him when Bungie wants you to kill him. Forget about taking him out back in the elevator room after sticking him with a plasma grenade and blasting him with an entire magazine of fuel rods; you can't even kill him in this battle until the end, no matter what you do. I've watched him get stuck in a corner in the first round of this battle and proceeded to pound him with 30 fuel rods and the energy sword, to no effect.

* Improbable avenues of movement. To add to the confusion, he can use the vents along the ceiling to move conveniently from side to side in a random fashion between each round of the battle.

I'm surprised he doesn't magically change into a more powerful form after we kill him the first time, or at least kidnap our girlfriend or something.
Click to expand...

Tartarus:

And so we come at last to the final battle of our epic, galaxy-spanning quest.

Split-jawed squid head vs. hammer-wielding monkey.

In celebration of this climactic encounter, Bungie has decided to throw consistency and believability completely out the window and fully embrace the lame convention of the video game boss battle in all of its cheesiness.
Click to expand...

There are many issues with the campaign of Halo 2, but the bosses are my biggest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HaloLeaks: Halo 2 & Halo 3 are being remade, yes they will have sprint.No multiplayer, only campaign.Full remakes. Multiplayer is going to be Halo 7
Rumor  2 3
109
1K
KenaiPhoenix replied
Why don't more people play Halo Infinite, MP?
2
97
758
DeVeAn replied
"Halo is on PlayStation going forward," says Halo Studios
News  7 8 9 10 11
537
2K
Crayon replied
Halo 3: ODST Collab coming to Helldivers 2
37
2K
hououinkyouma00 replied
Halo Studios confirms they are using Generative AI in the new Halo games
News 
35
1K
Syphon Filter replied
Top Bottom