The story for the first one was plenty, the introduction of "Delta Halo" and the cliffhanger ending of the second one felt cheap, but the gameplay was leagues above the first game and introduced online multiplayer
3 took things further in both directions and (in my opinion) only existed because of how 2 was handled. It wasn't even a launch title for the 360 despite being Microsoft's mascot IP for their hardware
I’m pretty sure guilty spark refers to the halo as “installation 04” in CE, so the delta halo thing was not a pivot or retcon. And the rest of H2s story is so fucking good it’s crazy to say it’s bad just because it had to end on a cliffhanger because Microsoft wouldn’t let bungie delay. I also think H2 takes a considerable step BACKWARDS in terms of gameplay (in campaign at least). Obviously there’s the infamous legendary balancing, but even beyond that the gameplay philosophy is just conflicted between the dance-like combat of CE and trying to be more of a tactical hide behind cover type shooter. Which was actually an early design goal before being toned down and reconsidered during development.
You are entitled to your opinion, just as I am entitled to mine. I answered your question but did not frame my answer as fact. I will not be changing my mind, but consider this tangential thought: Imagine if Bungie had stayed independent of Microsoft and Halo remained a Macintosh-exclusive strategy title instead of a first-person shooter
21
u/Big_Z_Beeblebrox 12h ago
Halo