Halo 3: ODST? Halo 3: MLIA.

Bought this game a couple of weeks ago, not long after release date. Left my local Blockbusters with it in my hand at about 5pm-5.30pm. Got home, stuck it on and played it constantly, with a one hour break for dinner and a little TV. Went back to playing, and by 12.30am-1am I had finished it. Great value for money.

Now don't get me wrong, I understand that the on-line experience, plus the challenge modes, are what add value to a game these days, and that playing through the actual story mode of a game is considered only scratching the surface. But frankly, that bothers me. It used to be the case that the story mode, or campaign, or whatever the developers choose to call it, but effectively the actual game, would be what you purchased and what you paid your money for.

Take for example the Wolfenstein series. Return to Castle Wolfenstein was released in 2001, and followed not long after by the release of Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory. W:ET was an on-line, multiplayer version of the game. And it was given away absolutely free. I'm sure Activision were probably kicking themselves over this, as W:ET proved to be the far more popular of the two. I think the vastly disproportionate success of W:ET over RTCW represents the beginning of the end of the old game model, where you buy an intensely playable, longevous game, and having paid £30+ for it, expect it to last you a while.

Not any more. Now, when you buy a game, you can expect to finish it in no time, and get your money's worth shooting strangers in the face on-line. This kind of quick-fix, pick up and play for five minutes, throwaway gameplay is what has always been associated with arcade games. Now this model is rapidly becoming the norm, while settling down on your own to get stuck into a good old fashioned bit of gaming is on its way out.

Obviously, I realise there are many exceptions to this, but nonetheless, I think the reason I feel so strongly about it is that it's symptomatic of the way most computer games are developed today; style over substance. The challenge, as perceived by games developers today, seems to be by and large to push the boundaries of the platform they are developing for, as opposed to developing a truly engaging experience for the consumer. In contrast, refer for example to Martyn McFarquhar's article, who notes that adventure puzzle games seem to be a dying breed. Don't get me wrong, these games are inherently floored by today's standards, namely, in that they are linear by design, which a lot of gamers find restrictive, and also this fixed nature severely limits their replayability. In spite of this, those of us who played the Monkey Island games, or Broken Sword, or Beneath a Steel Sky, or Flight of the Amazon Queen, or countless others, will always shed a nostalgic tear and mourn the genre's departure.

But that's not to say we can't learn the lessons they taught us. These games challenged you mentally as much as other games do your reflexes, requiring you to solve complex puzzles in order to progress through the game. There are still games with puzzle elements, but in these games the puzzles were incredibly finely interwoven within the overall tapestry of the game, not just a case of walking into a room and working out the correct positioning of some boxes to open a door or reach a window. But far more relevant, especially in the context of the Halo franchise, were the rich storylines, the rounded and engaging characters, the twisting plots, which drew you into the game world, and made you really care about the outcome of the game.

The Halo franchise has always been loved for this. The story about a lone super-soldier fighting for the destiny of not just all mankind, but all life in our galaxy, in a hostile universe, not to mention the shameless political euphemisms, elevated this game to a level above most other FPS games (the notable exception being, of course, Half Life). So when ODST was announced, I was excited. Bungee had already stated that they would not be continuing the Halo franchise in the form of any more Master Chief games, and the lacklustre Halo Wars was a sorry excuse for what was promised to us years ago; an actual, full scale on-line war, consisting of RTS style players on their PCs guiding and commanding individual battles and campaigns, while the troops they commanded would be FPS commandos playing on their Xbox 360s, where each campaign or mission would have a genuine effect on the tide of the overall war. If this sounds like a glorious combination of all the best elements of RTS, FPS, and MMORPG, that's probably because it is, and while this may seem like an unachievable 'Holy Grail' of internet gaming, the technology and capabilities for this are well within our grasp.

Nonetheless, back to the point at hand. Following these disappointments, ODST was announced and subsequently released. I wasn't expecting the all-singing, all-dancing spectacle described above, but what I was expecting was a playable, engaging game, that would at least last me longer than a day. Described as the events of Halo 3, but from the point of view of an ODST, I thought this game would give us a lot more background, and insight into what life is like for an ordinary (well, ok not quite) person living in the Halo universe. And ok, to an extent, this is what we got. Actually, I'll admit the game was a lot of fun, despite being somewhat disorienting to start with (the game is set in two time periods six hours apart, and jumps between them at the end of each level). But it was disappointing. It was highly repetitive, on a level not previously seen in the Halo games, and for such a short game this is astounding.

In sum, yes, it was a fun game, and yes, I enjoyed it. But realistically, I found the entire experience very disappointing. This game would have been better off as a cheap (or even free?) download on Xbox Live, not a full priced game, with all the hype and anticipation attached to it that you would expect with the release of another Halo title. It is, after all, nothing more than a highly refined expansion pack. Nonetheless, I don't want this to seem like a review; it's not, it's a rant about the exploitation of consumers by profiteering publishers. But none of this compares in this regard to the PSPGo. More on that to follow.