The units look the same, but the control scheme has changed…a good or bad thing?
The day before Halo Wars launched, a friend of mine told me that one of his coworkers was incredibly excited that a new Halo game was coming out. When told that it wasn’t a first person shooter and Master Chief wasn’t involved, the coworker walked away with a sad face. This seems to be a recurring theme around Halo Wars, people are excited for a Halo game but don’t know what to think about it being a real-time strategy game. The fact that RTS games aren’t very popular on consoles and the lack of Master Chief only add to this.
Unlike the general population, I was aware of all these details about Halo Wars and still was really excited about the game. Even though I’m not that good, I’ve always loved RTS games, and I’m a big fan of the Halo universe. Halo Wars was marketed to the gaming press as a RTS game built specifically for consoles, and for the most part it delivers a very fun experience. The campaign is pretty short but like Halo 3 it has been designed to have pretty good replay value. It’s a shame there are so few people playing multiplayer, because the multiplayer matches I’ve played have been very entertaining.
Is Halo Wars worthy of the Halo brand name? I think so. See why after the break. As an added bonus, espion4ge will give his Halo NOT-fan second thoughts as well!
The Good
- control scheme makes game easily accessible to newer players but is sufficient for advanced players
- level designs in campaign provide a variety of interesting mission types
- multiplayer matches are a lot of fun
The Bad
- unit pathing sometimes seems broken
- single player campaign is too short, no Covenant campaign
- the control scheme sometimes feels too oversimplified
