So I've decided to play the Halo series...

[alvarado52]

...for it's story. Should I or shouldnt I? I kinda feel like its about the multiplayer, but I wanna give it a fair shake because everyone said the same about the Modern Warfare games, and I loved the single player story.

So, what say you men?

If i do, i'll be posting in here with questions or comment during the process.

[LoDownM]

It's worth it for the story.

I would say start with Reach, then the others, since it's a prequel and the ending is sorta important.

[alvarado52]

Good call. I played ODST but dont really remember the story...should I add that to the list? Or can I get along fine without ODST story wise?

[Kalyx triaD]

Reach
Halo Anniversary
Halo 2
Halo 3/ODST (whichever order you want)
Halo 4

[LoDownM]

Good call. I played ODST but dont really remember the story...should I add that to the list? Or can I get along fine without ODST story wise?

I honestly don't remember ODSTs story all that well lol. Kalyx's list is the way to go though.

[RoXer]

No. You play them in the order they were released.

Halo (Anniversary)
2
3
Odst
Reach

[Emperor Smeat]

If he's playing them just for the story then Reach goes first, then Halo 1, Halo 2, ODST, and then Halo 3.

Although you could skip ODST and still understand the story since its more of a quick filler than anything major like Reach was.

[RoXer]

You don't tell someone who has never watched Star Wars to start on the prequels.

And you don't start on Reach.

[Kalyx triaD]

Why not?

[RoXer]

Because it's not the way it was intended. It's hard to know why an event leading up to an event is important before you even know what the event it leads to is.

In Reach, why would Alvarado give 2 craps about the significance of delivering an AI to Autumn? It would have more of an impact if he knew the story in the order it was intended.

[Requiem]

Gotta agree on 'in order of their release'. If they wanted you to be aware of the history at first, they would have released a game about the history first.

[Miotch]

Shoulda made the poll public.

Yes, great story, and play them in the order they were released.

[alvarado52]

Would if I knew how. I don't create many threads so I never knew how to edit them.


Gotta consider the order of play. Rox Nx Req have a good argument, but I also see how playing in story order also makes sense.

[RoXer]

I don't know what you're saying. I hope you're saying I'm right.

In instances of video games or movies or tv shows where they add a prequel, watching or playing them in "Chronological Order" does not make sense in almost every situation I can think of.

Did you start Lost on Season 6 Episode 15 where you learn about the origins of MIB and the island?

[Fignuts]

Not to mention that Reach is just a much better game than the others. AT least in my opinion. I really enjoyed Reach, but halfway through the other ones, I got bored.

[Emperor Smeat]

I don't know what you're saying. I hope you're saying I'm right.

In instances of video games or movies or tv shows where they add a prequel, watching or playing them in "Chronological Order" does not make sense in almost every situation I can think of.

Did you start Lost on Season 6 Episode 15 where you learn about the origins of MIB and the island?

To be fair, Reach's story came out as a novel shortly before the first Halo was released so it was always there and not something that suddenly pops up later as filler.

There are other books but I think Reach is the only one with a direct link to Halo 1 and not as a filler.

[Requiem]

Just played some Reach earlier for the first time in over a year. Got 1st 3 times and 2nd 3 times in some rumble pit. Was actually tearing it up.

[RoXer]

To be fair, Reach's story came out as a novel shortly <S>before</S> the first Halo was released

Because.

The book was released because the new and marketable project Microsoft had been working on for some time was finally getting released and a short story to flesh out a few details before the main story of this new video game was approved.

Without the game, the book probably wouldn't have been released. It may have been, but I doubt it would have seen the success it has now.

From a storytelling POV, you still start with 1 and play Reach last (until 4 comes out)

[RoXer]

Not to mention that Reach is just a much better game than the others. AT least in my opinion. I really enjoyed Reach, but halfway through the other ones, I got bored.

Fine, but he's not in this for gameplay.

[Extreme Angle]

I'd say play in order of release...

[Kalyx triaD]

My thing is, playing it in my suggested order gives a linear feel that still keeps events important. You deliver the package and then after that you boot up Halo 1. I don't think it hurts the story at all. I watched all six Star Wars in chronological order one week and I didn't feel like I was cheating nor did the characters seem less important for me. I also watched X-Men Origins Wolverine right before X-Men 1 and found it legitimized his arc in that movie. I don't find it a problem at all.

[Kalyx triaD]

I like your Lost example, though, but bear in mind there's a difference between revealing origins on a show where everything's a mystery and how movies/games/TV shows do that more for filler - not as a 'now you get the truth' sense.

[Requiem]

My thing is, playing it in my suggested order gives a linear feel that still keeps events important. You deliver the package and then after that you boot up Halo 1. I don't think it hurts the story at all. I watched all six Star Wars in chronological order one week and I didn't feel like I was cheating nor did the characters seem less important for me. I also watched X-Men Origins Wolverine right before X-Men 1 and found it legitimized his arc in that movie. I don't find it a problem at all.

Pretty sure you didn't see the Star Wars in chronological order the first time you ever watched them though. And if you did, it would be a completely different experience.

Watching the original trilogy and then the prequels is how they were intended because of how the story reveals certain information. If you watch the prequels first then it completely spoils the big reveal about Luke and Darth Vader.

Thought this part of the argument was pretty in your face obvious.

[Kalyx triaD]

I don't think Alva is looking for that in the experience, since he's fairly versed in Halo lore. Also keep in mind Halo has no such spoilers to protect by playing them by release dates. The biggest reveal in the first one has no mention in Reach (Flood), and the Reclaimer stuff actually got more attention in the Anniversary addition.

[RoXer]

I watched all six Star Wars in chronological order one week and I didn't feel like I was cheating nor did the characters seem less important for me. I also watched X-Men Origins Wolverine right before X-Men 1 and found it legitimized his arc in that movie. I don't find it a problem at all.

Pretty sure you didn't see the Star Wars in chronological order the first time you ever watched them though. And if you did, it would be a completely different experience.

Exactly. You weren't going into it with fresh eyes. You knew what to expect. It's a different experience the first time.

I don't think Alva is looking for that in the experience, since he's fairly versed in Halo lore.

And I don't think this is right either because, you know, he just said he wants to play them for the story. He may have a general idea as most of us do as in "aliens attack, you're a super soldier, you shoot them" but that might be it.

[RoXer]

BTW, I've voted that you should just read the wiki. I really don't think it's worth the time to play these games just for story. There's nothing memorable in my mind and honestly, I couldn't spit out maybe more than a paragraph about it. But then again, I'm not the biggest Halo fan and you might feel otherwise when you play it.

If you do decide to, then you play them in the order intended, as always. With... well anything. I'm still trying to think of something where you should not start in the order the author intended.

[Fryza]

If you just want the story, read the Wiki. Cheap and easy.

If you want to play the games and see the story that way, just pick up Anniversary and Reach and go from there. Two, Three, and ODST are easy enough to find, as well.

[Extreme Angle]

I think the single player has an ok story, but it's enviroments and gameplay is where it shines.

[Kalyx triaD]

Some epic encounters in the Halo games, usually in the middle of the campaign.

[alvarado52]

still split on this. I mean, I remember playing Halo 2, 3, and ODST when they were released and not being pulled into the story like I would have, but I feel like maybe I didnt give them the attention they really deserved.

[Extreme Angle]

It's quite a broken story if i'm honest...
Good though.

Epic battles are epic.

Play on legendary Alvy... Play on Legendary.

[M-A-G]

If you're a sci-fi fan, then, yes, go for the story. Otherwise, don't bother. COD and Halo are really two fruits from different trees. I've always preferred the campaigns in COD over the ones presented in the Halo games (with Reach as the exception). In addition, COD doesn't have all of that extra 'universe' nonsense where there's books and mini-series and a bunch of other crap that ties in with the games but apparently wasn't important enough to actually be in the games.

[Kalyx triaD]

You have a problem with Extended Universe media?