Further Blurring of the Lines – Halo Interactive Strategy Game

I noted last week on the blurring of the lines between gamer games and non-gamer games. Some people commented on the site and others told me in person that they agree that things are changing and for the most part it’s a good thing.

That’s right! I’m not a fan of Halo! I didn’t like the original and I avoided the others like the plague! I don’t care how many frat boys it pulled into the video game hobby I still think its a lousy game! There, I said it!

Yesterday in Wal-Mart I saw this, the Halo Interactive Strategy Game. I think this is yet another example of the blurring and it even bumps into the idea of mixing electronic games and standard table top games. The “Interactive” in the games title is apparently a CD that can, if you choose to go that route, replace the rolling of dice and drawing of cards. The description of this made me wince more than someone asking me if I wanted to play one of the Halo video games. Shudder.

Still, the game has gotten fair reviews over at the geek and while I doubt I will be picking it up I found its existence interesting enough to comment on.

    jim Says:

    reminds me of the old interactive games that used VHS. Most notable there was an old D&D one that i remember. It’s not a new concept. just a different medium.

    Matt Says:

    Well I’m not a frat boy (although I do own the entire series of Jackass, the two movies, and the supplimental DVD so I guess that almost makes me one), and I thought Halo was a great game. It was the first real successful console FPS, it had a decent storyline, and it was the game that blew open the doors for online gaming on the console and in general. For that it has my respect and a place as one of the games to remember. However it does need to be said that compared to other FPS games it’s not the best series.

    Anyways, that board game to me just seems like the chance to cash in on the Halo name thus it makes a lot of sense it would be in main-stream stores.

    Colin Says:

    I don’t know, I’d say Goldeneye and the First Perfect Dark (for N64) were pretty successful, and a bit before Halo existed.

    jim Says:

    what colin said. there were some earlier success before halo. but with the way gaming has gotten more mainstream, Halo is the poster child for this current setting.

    Matt Says:

    I should have clarified my statement a little more. While I agree Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were very good games I really don’t consider them real FPS because they are missing a major element, multiplayer. Yeah they did have split screen modes but Halo was the first one to offer good gameplay, splitscreen, and a fantasic online experience (something you would have only found before on PC games of that genre).


    I would go more with Halo being: nigh unplayable, split screen (can’t really argue with that) and don’t give a crap about the online play since I’m not a high school jock. :oP


    Zero Tolerance on Sega Genesis. I even played co-op over system link and two TVs + Genesises (Genesii?) in the same room.

    I’m a Halo fan. I can’t speak to the community online but online play has almost never been my thing. But it’s an FPS with a story and a fantastically-paced campaign.

    Split screen does fine for me in co-op, on any decent-sized TV. This is coming from someone who plays PC games these days only very rarely. Plus, I always felt like playing with friends on separate PCs, even in the same room, just missed some aspect of bonding, comraderie, that a few people together in front of a single screen capture perfectly. Whether it’s something like Halo co-op, San Francisco Rush 2049’s battle mode, partying with Fuzion Frenzy, or Worms hotseat.

    Anyway, I’d agree with Matt that this seems likely to be another franchise cash-in attempt. Though it would be neat to be proven wrong.