What Order Should I Play the Halo Games?

K

kingkiller33

CAGiversary!
I just never had time to get into the Halo series. I bought the first one in like 2005, and only made it halfway through.

I want to play through the whole series, but as far as storylines and chronological order, how should I play the games? I heard Halo Reach events actually occur before the original Halo. Where does Halo wars and ODST fall into the timeline?
 
I say just play them in the order they were released. Maybe everyone will hate me for saying so, but I don't think the storyline is exactly the high point of the franchise. The gameplay is great and playing them in the order they came out will be fine for following the plot.
 
Timeline order:

Halo Reach -> Halo 1 -> Halo 2 -> Halo ODST -> Halo 3

I think that's right. Someone can feel free to correct me as needed, though Halo ODST sort of runs in parallel to Halo 3, though a little ahead of Halo 3's timeframe.
 
I had a similar question, never played a Halo game before but I own ODST from the Forza 3 combo and was wondering if I should try it first since I already own it or worry about digging up the original game to start with.
 
I'd play order of release as well. I think it would be hard to go back and play H1 and H2 after playing the 360 games and getting used to the graphics etc.

Also will make more sense plot wise. Yeah, story isn't a high point, but still might as well play them in order.

You can always jump into Reach multiplayer now while plaything through the campaigns in order if you don't want to get behind the curve on MP.
 
I'm with the others as far as 1, 2, and 3 go. ODST / Reach in my opinion don't really matter. I haven't touched reach yet, but if ODST is any indication, I'm assuming there's not that much of a connection to the master chief trilogy.
 
[quote name='shrike4242']Timeline order:

Halo Reach -> Halo 1 -> Halo 2 -> Halo ODST -> Halo 3

I think that's right. Someone can feel free to correct me as needed, though Halo ODST sort of runs in parallel to Halo 3, though a little ahead of Halo 3's timeframe.[/QUOTE]

If you want to get esoteric, I think ODST actually pretty much happens totally within the timeframe of Halo 2's story. So to be completely chronologically correct, you'd have to play the beginning of Halo 2, play through ODST, then go back and finish Halo 2 :).

I'd say play them through in order of release too- and having recently revisited the storyline, I am actually pretty impressed at how much depth there is, and the quality of some of the characters and dialogue.
 
Just play the first two. 3 and ODST are terrible. ODST's story is piss poor.
 
Do not play them in release order.

Try this:

Halo
Halo 2
Halo 3 ODST
Halo 3
Halo Reach

That'll keep the story in the order it was intended other than the beginning being the end, but if you try to go from Reach to original Halo, you're probably not going to like the experience of the first game. That said, they're all worth playing.
 
I think it's always best to play games or watch movies in the order they were released. You should never try to go in chronological order in my opinion.
 
I actually wouldn't mind seeing a Halo 1 and 2 re-release, although I doubt they'd be budget releases... but more so a Halo 1 remix.
I guess the PC release is close enough though...
 
Chronologically...

Halo Wars
Halo Reach
Halo: Combat Evolved
Halo 2
Halo 3: ODST
Halo 3

...Personally, I would say that if you haven't finished any of the games now, just play Reach. You'll be fine.

[quote name='Blank Earth']I had a similar question, never played a Halo game before but I own ODST from the Forza 3 combo and was wondering if I should try it first since I already own it or worry about digging up the original game to start with.[/QUOTE]

You'll be fine. Try it out and see what you think.
 
Halo 1 and 2 are practically unplayable if you have no nostalgia for them. Grunts are worse than Jar Jar Binks or Ewoks and could possibly ruin the series for you. Just play Reach and then go back and play the other games if you get into the story.
 
[quote name='shrike4242']Timeline order:

Halo Reach -> Halo 1 -> Halo 2 -> Halo ODST -> Halo 3

I think that's right. Someone can feel free to correct me as needed, though Halo ODST sort of runs in parallel to Halo 3, though a little ahead of Halo 3's timeframe.[/QUOTE]

And Halo Wars precedes Reach if you care about that. FYI I think the best campaigns are ODST, Reach, and Halo 1. 2 and 3 aren't the greatest campaigns IMO.
 
Honestly, I would play all of them in order of release. The changes to the game and the engine would make it tough for me to go from Reach all the way back to the first game.

Except for ODST. I think you could play that one after 2. Then play 3, and then Reach.
 
[quote name='jkanownik']Halo 1 and 2 are practically unplayable if you have no nostalgia for them. Grunts are worse than Jar Jar Binks or Ewoks and could possibly ruin the series for you. Just play Reach and then go back and play the other games if you get into the story.[/QUOTE]

Are you kidding? The difference is that you never get to smash Jar Jar Binks or Ewoks with the butt of an assault rifle. That reason alone makes Grunts awesome.
 
Someone already stated something like this, but I agree so I'll restate it:

Halo
Halo 2
ODST (if you feel like it)
Halo 3
Reach
Halo Wars (if you feel like it)

Even though Reach takes place before Halo 1, you won't enjoy the other games if you play Reach first. Reach is by far the best of the games. You'll feel disappointed in the others.

ODST and Halo 3 are based on the same engine. ODST takes place during Halo 2 and Halo 3, but is separate from the storyline involving Master Chief. You can switch ODST and Halo 3 if you'd like. You may want to go straight into Halo 3 after the ending of Halo 2 just because you'll want to finish the Master Chief storyline.

ODST was not exceptionally good. It was rather dull actually. I would even argue that you could skip it altogether.

Halo Wars is just a different kind of game. It takes place before all of the FPS games (even Reach). It's really not terribly necessary, and I'd only play it if you like RTS games.
 
In terms of multiplayer.... Halo 1 had didn't have online. Halo 2 had online, but it is no longer supported. Halo 3 multiplayer is fun but somewhat limited. Halo3 ODST multiplayer is merely Halo 3 + a gimped firefight mode. Halo: Reach has the best online experience of the entire franchise.

For the single player, I'd suggest starting with Halo 1, and go in order of release. I wasn't a big fan of Halo2, although it does set up some plot points in Halo3.
 
[quote name='Morphx2']Just skip the Halo games. Overrated[/QUOTE]

Wait.. so you mean I'm not the only one!?

But yeah, if you really wanna play Halo then go for release order I guess, makes the most sense to me.
 
[quote name='shrike4242']Timeline order:

Halo Reach -> Halo 1 -> Halo 2 -> Halo ODST -> Halo 3

I think that's right. Someone can feel free to correct me as needed, though Halo ODST sort of runs in parallel to Halo 3, though a little ahead of Halo 3's timeframe.[/QUOTE]

That's definitely right, but you would definitely be better off playing Halo 3 before ODST if you ask me. Playing ODST before Halo 3 just gives away what happens at New Mombasa and then Halo 3 doesn't have the same effect on you. You're never wondering "What the hell happened?"

@OP - Just play them in the order they were released. It's better that way.
 
Yeah I still say order or release as H1 and H2 just don't hold up well graphically or gameplay wise IMO.

It would be very tough to play Reach, which is the most refined/polished Halo game, and go back to H1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top