A Decade of Writing Halo

Halo Reach Has Energized The Gaming Community For Over 15 years.

Bungie knew they were on the right track with Halo when, in developing the original game, a tester looked at art of the ringworld arcing over a lush jungle scene and told the developer: "I don't know what this game is about, but I want to be there right now." This is because Bungie realized early on that narrative success hinged on the creation of place, not plot. That was one of the many points made this morning at "Writing the Whirlwind," a discussion of ten years crafting the Halo narrative by Joseph Staten, writer and design director at Bungie.



What Staten means by valuing place over plot, is that Bungie understood that if you create a proper playground, you can get any number of stories out of it. You can see the success of that in the simple fact that the Halo universe has been a decade-long phenomenon that spans multiple games, from the original Halo to the ODST side story to Bungie's final Halo adventure, Reach. If Bungie had sat down to create the exact narrative of Halo, they may have very easily painted themselves into a corner.



The second part of the equation is giving the player an accessible window into that place. That window is the Master Chief. When crafting the Master Chief, Staten made sure to set up the iconic hero as the ultimate "straight man." If you think about it, can you really describe the Master Chief in more than a sentence or two? No, unless you do something Bungie is quite happy about – you start filling in the blanks with your own interpretation of the Master Chief. That hooks you right into the soul of the narrative. Yes, there is a story. Yes, there are key events. But do you care more about those things, or do you care about a great way to experience the Halo universe?







Halo in Five Minutes



But lest folks think that Bungie deals wholly in high-minded discussions of narrative, Staten said that Bungie understood the core of Halo is, as he put it, "shooting stuff." And he knew that as he was writing the Halo universe. Staten understood that – and this was his estimation – 95-percent of Halo players don't care about much of the narrative. They don't explore it at all. And the best game writers understand that.



But it sounds like Staten understands Bungie itself forgot it when they built Halo 2. Staten said despite its success, Halo 2 was indeed Bungie's "dreaded sophomore slump." He recognized that Bungie never should have ended that game on a cliffhanger because it put narrative over the base desire to get in, shoot stuff, and have a great time.



According to Staten, Halo 2 also suffered from a "technical overreach" that also hampered the delivery of a good story. He likened it to "watching a cathedral self-assemble in a hurricane." Amazing how success loosens the tongue (after all, Halo 2 is a few games back and if I recall, didn't do too shabby at retail), but it is always refreshing to see even a giant like Bungie admit failings.



But things got better as Bungie swung toward Halo 3 and the later Halo projects. Staten credits Halo's flirtation with Hollywood as a major positive because it exposed the team to different talents and storytelling techniques. Was it frustrating to have the movie and the Peter Jackson Halo projects fall apart? Sure, but without that experience, Staten says ODST and Reach would have not been written so well. However, Staten didn't move on from his brief discussion of Halo and Hollywood without taking a swipe at the studios. "I dunno if games will crush movies in ten years, but g-----n we're throwing some punches," said Staten with a smile. (And speaking of the Halo movie, the latest rumor is that Steven Spielberg and Dreamworks are hungry for Halo.)





Ranking the Best Halo Campaigns



As everybody knows, Reach was Bungie's last Halo. Staten says that Bungie is at peace with the decision to move on to its new game – which Bungie loosely teased during the session. When crafting Reach, Bungie returned to its original thrust: place over plot. "Planet Reach was a strong compelling place," said Staten. It was a place where Bungie could close the circle of the Halo canon, which was very important to them. And if you have questions over various parts of the canon after Reach, well, that was intended. Instead of just leaving strings dangling, Bungie cut them. Staten says the decision not to go overboard and tie up every loose thread of the Halo story should be emulated by more writers. That kind of obsession over the plot can get in the way of creating a good video game experience.



Staten's discussion wound down with a series of questions from the audience, which touched on things like how Bungie kept the canon straight while expanding the Halo universe over ten years and what inspired Cortana ("Smart women are extremely sexy," said Staten). But one thing stuck with me as I left the room and walked to my next panel. According to Staten, Bungie "wrote Halo as if it would be the only game they ever made." Obviously, that didn't happen. But by not treating the first Halo as a commodity that it could hopefully spin into a mega-franchise, Bungie created not just a great one-time video game, but also a seed of a place that gamers forced open into a universe they wanted to experience again and again in different ways.



And it will be exciting to see if Bungie can do it again.

Matchmaking Gets Tweaked And Adds A Few Gametypes

Halo: Reach, Bungie’s final Halo effort, hit shelves almost a month ago. The title won rapt reviews across the board and did over $200 million in sales in its first 24 hours of availability. While the developer is currently working on a new universe with Activision, next on the docket for the studio is continuing to support Reach's matchmaking mode.



The first Halo: Reach matchmaking update has been sent to Xbox Live. The playlist update addresses a plethora of multiplayer issues, tweaks some core game types, and is just the first step in what Bungie is calling a continuing effort to support Reach.


Playlist update addresses numerous issues, tweaks some core game types; second update, which adds matchmaking for the game's campaign, coming Oct. 12 or 19.


Halo: Reach's multiplayer component just got overhauled.

Specifically, Team SWAT--a game mode where players have no shields or sensor, and headshots reign supreme--now has a dedicated playlist like it did in Halo 3. Previously, Team SWAT appeared as just one of many game types in the Team Slayer playlist.



For a full rundown of the tweaks now live in Halo: Reach, check out the playlist update page at Bungie.net.



Bungie also said it will release the next update for Reach on October 12 or 19. That update will bring matchmaking support to the game's campaign, which is a first for the series. With campaign matchmaking, players won't ever have to fight alone, as they will be able to enlist the help of another through Xbox Live.

The Best And Worst Of THe Halo Maps

 We all know that maps make the multiplayer experience and most Halo fans would concur with me that Halo 2 had the best multiplayer experience because of the quality maps available for gameplay. If you have great maps in a game, then everything is more enjoyable and the action is non-stop!! We all remember Headlong, Valhalla, And Sanctuary and the awesome moments that we shared with our friends on  those maps. Then we frown at the maps Epitaph, Snowbound, And Backwash because of their cheap design or outlandish design. So , what makes a good map. A good map has to have two bases; one for each team, it has to have strategic weapon spawns that bring out the battle from the beginning, and they have to evoke open, combative game play that has certain characteristics fitting for team play. Well, for starters I give you the worst maps of Halo Through Halo 3 and then move on to categorizing the new maps of Halo Reach.










Hemmorhage

Swordbase

Worst maps in Halo series:

Backwash

Elongation

Epitaph [Worst]

Isolation

Powerhouse

Snowbound

Guardian

Assembly

Foundry

 Rat's Nest


Reflection



Gemini

Boneyard

Desolation



Spire

 Chiron TL34

Sandtrap

Paradiso

Best maps in Halo series:

Beaver Creek


Hang em' high


Midship

Zealot

Burial Mounds


Lockout


Coagulation


Warlock


Pinnacle

Ascension

Sanctuary

Sidewinder


Ivory Tower


Relic

The Cage

Containment

Halo Reach Maps
 
The Good:
 
Boneyard
 
Paradiso
 

Asylum

Countdown
 
Boardwalk
 
Hemorrage
 
The Cage
 
Pinnacle
 
Swordbase
 
Powerhouse
 
 The Bad


Boardwalk



 

Countdown

Asylum

 

Zealot

 

Spire

 

Reflection


Halo Reach Gaming Gear Below!!! Sale!!



Hemmorhage



Which Halo Campaign Toughest



Halo Reach Had Some Interesting Foes

 

Halo Reach Didn't Have Much Of A Plot For Their Campaign




There Was Some Overpowered Lasers In The Campaign



The Campaign Was Not Even Close To The Difficulty Of Halo 2's

  
With Halo: Reach being Bungie's swan song for the series, it seemed the right time for a group of Halo experts to figure out which Halo game is the hardest. Among the committee that spent dozens of hours debating (and by hours, I mean minutes) are Halo aficionados Hilary Goldstein (that's me!), Will Tuttle, David Clayman, Erik Brudvig, Arthur Gies, and Nate Ahearn.

We judged the overall campaign difficulty for each game, considering both the single-player experience and the co-op experience. And always with a mind on the Legendary difficulty, since that's the true measure of each Halo experience. Co-op difficulty was a major influencing factor in the overall rankings, since many of the single-player experiences are fairly comparable for most of the games in the series.

Here are our picks from easiest to hardest.

Halo: Combat Evolved

Difficulty:
Scared Little Grunt It might have seemed tough nine years ago, but give Halo: CE a try now and you'll likely find yourself giggling at how easy it is to take down the Covenant. Despite the lack of cool moves like vehicle jacking, the weapons hold a ton of ammo, you can stock up on grenades, and the assault rifle is a beast. All the years of playing Halo make the original a cake walk. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. The series should continually get tougher.

Halo 3
Difficulty:Really Hard
Non-Sniping Jackal Even Bungie admits that Master Chief had turned into a super hero by Halo 3. Though the single-player may be comparable in difficulty to some of the other games (Flood snipers, really?!), the challenge is negated the minute your friends join in. Halo 3's co-op campaign doesn't scale. That means the challenge is three times less when you have three friends playing with you. Not an exaggeration: We beat Halo 3 on Legendary with four players in just a couple of hours at the review event.

Halo 3: ODST
Difficulty:Normal
Angry Brute Putting you in the shoes of an ODST meant your character's abilities had to be stifled. No more super-human Master Chief stuff. You get one weapon to wield and, in the spirit of the first Halo, you have health that doesn't automatically regenerate but requires health packs. ODST is actually toughest at the outset, because it's hard to accept that, as a lone wolf ODST, you just shouldn't try and stand toe-to-toe with every enemy you encounter. It takes some time to acclimate, and once you do, caution is often the smarter choice over the usual Halo bravado.

Halo 2
Difficulty:Almost Too Hard
Sword-Wielding Elite Those God damned Jackal snipers, am I right? Anyone who played Halo 2 on Legendary can attest to how incredibly annoying those snipers could be. They could snipe the pixel off a gnat. But where Halo 2 gets really tough is when you play co-op. When one person dies, you're both sent back to the last checkpoint. When you have some truly tough (and unfairly accurate enemies) this can make progression through the campaign with a buddy close to impossible at times.

Halo: Reach
Difficulty:Easy
Many, Many Hunters Bungie promised that Halo: Reach was the hardest Halo game and that was no lie, due to scaling cooperative play. The campaign has some tough difficulty spikes towards the end, but nothing a seasoned vet can't fight their way through. It's hard, don't get me wrong, but it's not impossible on your own. However, the difficulty scales in co-op, meaning that if you have three friends in tow, the game is basically three times as hard. Considering that Halo: Reach is already a pretty hard game to beat, upping the difficulty provides, well, a legendary challenge that only the best group of Halo players can hope to overcome. Halo Reach had a very good campaign but I put all of the skulls on and beat it with a bud in just one night [my night being 18 hours]!! This is astonishing compared to Halo 3 which took atleast three days on legendary. I think all of the weapons and the fact that by now Halo fans have become consummate at the halo campaigns are contributing factors to why it seemed so easy to beat Halo Reach campaign even on the toughest of difficulty settings. Halo Reach indeed has a few more challenges to come just not with the easy campaign. Overall, my opinion is that Halo 2 had the hardest campaign because they were parts with overpowered elites and vehicles with no effective artillery to combat them. Of course maybe the real fact is disappointment in Halo Reach Campiogn because the ending with the covenant ships attacking the tower and you having to destroy the halo or whatever that red thing was, was not too impressive of a bang to go out on. The previous halos had a special combo of bosses or left the toughest part for last, but in this campaign in Reach; I didn't die once barely on the last level [well, maybe twice to the spikers]. Point being that Halo Reach has it all when it comes to matchmaking but maybe one year is not enough time to create a challenging enough campaign.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Which Halo game did you think was the toughest? Give us your thoughts in the comment section below.

Halo Reach Ranking System

I am NOT an employee of Bungie nor one of Microsoft, and my views and opinions do not necessarily reflect those of either of the aforementioned entities.
Also, thanks for sticking this Bungie, I hope it is useful.

There is one caveat to consider before we get under weigh. Bungie is not likely, nor or ever, to release the true inner workings of the Halo 3 ranking system, but as it is based somewhat on the Microsoft Trueskill system, this is a fair approximation of the way skill ranking works in Halo 3.

What is the Trueskill system?
The Trueskill system is a player skill rating system for Xbox Live. Halo 3 uses a version of the Trueskill system in order to make the matches fairly even.



How Does Trueskill Work?
Trueskill assigns skills on a normal distribution (bell curve, Gaussian). The Trueskill system has two main variables to consider. They are your player skill level (Mu) and your uncertainty factor (Sigma).

Mu is an approximation of your skill level based upon past performance. Win games to raise Mu, and lose games to lower Mu.

Sigma is the numerical representation of the range in which your true skill could lie. Play really consistently, and you have a low Sigma. Play streakily, and you have a higher Sigma.

After a win, the Trueskill system adjusts your skill ranking based upon the Mu and Sigma of all the players in the game. We'll go deeper into how much it is adjusted later.

Trueskill systems use a conservative ranking Ranking = mu - (K * Sigma) so your skill is likely to be higher than the actual number represented in your Halo 3 highest skill level. K is a constant assigned an arbitrary value by the developers of the game.



Why don't I level up after winning X games in a row? / Why does my friend go up three levels a game and I don't?
Mu increases after a win. Always. The increase is proportional to the winner's Sigma and the Mu difference between the winner and the loser. So, if your Sigma is high, you will proceed faster through the ranking system (in BOTH directions). If your Sigma is low, you will both gain and lose rank more slowly.



So, I want a high Sigma value?
While it sounds as though a high Sigma value is desirable, it CAN be a double edged sword. A high Sigma can mean you increase by one level for every win. It also means you decrease by one level for every loss. In addition, a high Sigma means that your skill ranking will be significantly lower than your actual skill owing to the conservative nature of the Ranking = mu - (K * Sigma) ranking equation.

Also, Sigma value starts out VERY high. So, if this is your friend's first time in a particular ranked hopper, and he wins consistently, his rank will rise meteorically due to his high Sigma.



Myth Busting
Trueskill DOES NOT take into evaluation performances inside the game. The ONLY statistics that Trueskill takes from a game are the Mu and Sigma values of all the players, and how you placed.

This means that out of all of these statistics:
Getting the MVP
Having a High K/D ratio
Getting the most medals
Skill levels of those you killed / killed you
Weapons you used
Headshots
Captures, detonations, stops, ousts, etc.

NONE of them matter when calculating the Mu increase/decrease. Any link between any of these and the skill ratings are purely correlative and not causative.

For example. When I play Team Slayer with my buddies on my alternate gamertag, much of the time I end up carrying the team. I created this tag to play with my buddies, and as such, have only ever played on that party with that tag. I ranked up to the level of my friends within 20 or so games, while it had taken them 50 to 100 games to reach their level. My friends thought that it was because of my frequent MVP status and my high K/D ratio that I leveled up so fast.

Wrong. I leveled up fast because A) I initially had a very high Sigma, making my Mu more variable after each win, B) Starting out at a 1 and playing people in the mid teens gave me a considerable boost every time I won, and C) We won more frequently than they had in the past.



Summation
If you're worried that you're not getting your fair shake in the ranking system, look at the last 50 games that you've played in that hopper. (If you haven't played 50 games, play more. The system needs more data.)

Take your win/loss average. If it's 65% or above, and you've been in that playlist for a while, you've probably increased in level 2 or more times over the last 50 games (or you will in the next 20 or so). Otherwise you are going to be hovering around the same level or dropping in rank.



Addendum, Opinion, and Technical Notes
In strict Trueskill systems, Sigma only decreases. I believe the "momentum" system in Halo 3 means that Sigma can be increased through consistent winning or losing. This is total conjecture, but I think that Sigma in Halo 3 matchmaking hoppers is proportional to the absolute value of the win/loss ratio of your last X number of games. The formula probably looks a little like: Sigma = C ( | wins - losses | ) where C is an arbitrary constant. This would explain why when some people go on a win streak with two or more different parties, their skill goes up faster than their teammates' skill.

I also believe that the system is weighted so that the peak of the normal distribution is around level 20, not level 25. That means it will take more wins to level through 1-25 than it will 25-50. Which makes a bit of sense, if you don't want the highest levels too terribly crowded.

The higher the Sigma of your opponents, the less Mu you gain from beating them.

Predictable outcomes (e.g. win against a lower ranked opponent) are treated as statistically less significant. Upsets are given more weight. So, winning against lower ranked opponents doesn't do much for your Mu rating. Neither does losing against higher ranked ones. But beat a team that's 6 or more ranks above you and at least someone on your team will rank up.

Trueskill ratings have no discernable correlation from hopper to hopper. When you play on a hopper you've never played on before, you are starting with a fresh Mu and a high Sigma.

Team Mu and Team Sigma are the summation of the Mu and Sigma values of all the players on the team. When calculating the skill of an opponent in a team game, the system uses the Team Mu and Team Sigma values in calculation wherever rational.



"Why do I win 10 games and not level up, then delevel when I lose 2? Help!"

There are several possible explanations for this. The easiest one, and the one that fits the Trueskill system EXACTLY as explained by Microsoft, is that losing against a team that is X (I believe 6 or more, but experimentation is needed to determine the true value) skill points below you can cause you to lose as much as 5 times the Mu value that winning against even level teams gains you. Of course, winning against a team that has X more skill levels than you can net you as much as 5 times the Mu gain. The reverse is true as well. Winning against a weak team can count as little as 1/5th of an even skill win.

Second, and this is enlightened conjecture, your Sigma value was low at the beginning of your streak, and since your win streak is raising it, the conservative ranking system (Remember, Rank = Mu MINUS (K times Sigma)) is kicking in to reduce your apparent skill level. Your real Mu is higher, but your higher Sigma is having a negative impact.

mo0vaf00 writes: (edited to clarify intent)
So is there some kind of value that requires you to be inconsistent to rank up? If I win 1 game going even and win the next going +10 do I have more of a chance of ranking up than just winning 2 games getting the same score?

This conclusion is popping up fairly frequently. The answer is no. The system does not look at "In Match" statistics. At all. These stats are all included in a list above. The game only looks at your wins and your losses, and the strength of the opponents you play against.

Also, the system does not "reward" you for having a high Sigma value. There is ONE positive associated with high Sigma, and there are TWO negatives.
Positive: Your level can move up faster through winning.
Negative: Your level can move down faster through losing.
Negative: The conservative ranking system ranks you lower when your Sigma is higher.

Higher Sigma simply means your level is more fluid. Sigma is good to have high when you are still reaching your appropriate skill level, but good to have low once you've reached it and are working on improving.

Halo Reach Gametypes

Invasion Mode

If you asked me what I was most excited for before the beta dropped, it was Invasion. Spartans defending changing objectives against Elites, similar to Gold Rush in BFBC, except Halo style – what could go wrong? Unfortunately, a lot of things. I haven’t really read other reviews so I don’t know if I’m in the minority, but I really, really, REALLY dislike the way Bungie did Invasion mode. Let me count the ways.

1 – It is an objective based game where you don’t switch sides. So if you spawn as Spartans, you play through the game as Spartans, once, and when the game is over it’s over. After that you’re spit back into the lobby, but unless all 12 players decide to stick around, you can’t run it back on opposite sides. I cannot for the life of me think of the rationale behind this.

2 – Your team of six is split up into three squads of 2, which makes teamwork pretty difficult. I guess ideally everyone works together in pairs, but since everyone is partied up there isn’t much cross communication going on, and teamwork is pretty important. What’s worse is I joined a game with a party of 4 and they put us on separate teams. Seriously?

3 – The game is more chaotic than fun. In my 6 or 7 games, I mainly found myself running long, long distances to get to the objective, only to get killed in a spray of gun or plasma fire. The map Invasion is being played on is so expansive that you spend a lot of time running, and that’s no fun. Oh, and by the way, the objectives are pretty unclear too. The first couple games you really have no idea what’s going on.

4 – Tons of frustration, very little fun. Maybe I’m stupid.

Anyway, there are a couple of cool things, like evolving armor ability choices as the game goes on, and Invasion Slayer is actually pretty fun (although the scoring system makes no sense to me), but overall, Invasion is a major disappointment. Man, I’m still upset at how badly it failed to meet my expectations. It’s like sports teams I root for, expectations always = disappointment.

Generator Defense Mode:

Well, if you can’t tell, I hate Invasion mode. But if you take all the hatred I feel for Invasion mode, flip it on its head, and call it love – that’s how I feel about Generator Defense mode! If that’s too unclear, know this: Generator Defense is awesoooomeeee. It’s another objective game, 3 Spartans vs. 3 Elites, except it makes sense. The 3 Spartans are tasked with guarding three generators, which the Elites need to destroy by shooting them, punching them, grenading them, whatever. The strategy comes into play when Spartans “lock down” the generators, making them invincible for a short amount of time. You can do this an unlimited number of times in the game after a brief cooldown. To win a round the Elites need to destroy all three generators. Generator Defense, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways.


Generator Defense is awesome!

1 – It is an objective based game with tons of strategy involved. Three players defend three generators. Three attackers are trying to take out those generators. Which generator do you rush first? Do you split up or stick together? Do you send a two person diversionary team while a third player sneaks in and destroys a generator? Do you station one Spartan at each generator or just let them take two and hold out for the final one? These are the questions that you need to answer in the span of seconds, and it’s tons of fun trying to figure out the strategy that works best for your team.

2 – In Invasion you get to choose where you respawn, but it isn’t very useful. Plus the map is so big it barely matters. In Generator Defense, choosing your respawn point is very strategic. Generator Charlie is under attack? Spawn by the yard. You want to rush Alpha? Spawn by the waterfall. It is a subtle layer of strategy added on top of the game that rewards players who want to take the time to figure out the nuances.

3 – Generator Defense features random weapon drops which are completely random. In one game I found a sniper rifle, in another a rocket launcher. These random drops ensure that you can’t get totally locked in to one strategy. For example, let’s say the Elites love going stealth, and sneakily are trying to creep up on a generator in stealth mode. Well, if there is a random rocket launcher on the playing field, that is a triple kill waiting to be had. The random weapon drops keep things fresh.

4 – Tons of fun, little frustration! This game mode is like the exact opposite of Invasion for me. I dropped into the game, knew exactly what was going on (because it’s designed so well), and knew exactly how I wanted to play things. Objectives are clear, spawn points are clear, and strategy is fun to figure out. This is everything that a multiplayer mode should be, and Bungie absolutely knocked this one out of the park. For me, Generator Defense and Stockpile totally make the beta worthwhile.