Topic: Halo 3!

[Jedi]

Me and my Bro' are getting this and we're also going to drink our selves stupid as we play through the SP campaign via split screen. So basically if it does suck we won't care too much 

[angrykeebler]

omg i cant wait

[scottws]

I could give a crap about this game.  Everyone I tell this to stares at me, aghast.  My take is that the single player campaign is pretty mediocre and the multiplayer -- while good for a console -- is nothing compared to some of the things some online PC shooters have to offer (for free, I might add).

[Ghandi]

Halo 2 was vastly overrated. I'm wondering if this will be more like the original or the second. I played the multiplayer beta and it was o.k.

[idolminds]

Halo 3 branded Mountain Dew "Game Fuel"



That pretty much sums up the who and why of Halos popularity.

[scottws]

Sometimes I truly wonder if Halo was actually a good game at all, even on a console.  I mean the title was highly anticipated, almost like nothing I'd ever seen.  Why?  I mean it's not like people were feeding off of the popularity of some awesome, earlier Bungie title (from what I understand they were a Mac game dev?) or a previous iteration in the series.

It was a brand new property from a relative unknown developer on a platform that was a newcomer in the console race that was widely predicted to be a catastrophic failure.

I just don't get why it is so huge.  There have got to be other console games with better multiplayer or something that people just aren't playing.  Halo does nothing new or different and in fact I'd say it's a good five years behind online PC games in terms of what it offers players.

I just think it's all hype and popularity.  Too many people don't question its shortcomings or see what else is out there.

[idolminds]

At this point its popularity in multiplayer is so deep that its hard to unseat it. Its the Counter-Strike syndrome. Are there better multiplayer games? Yeah, but they won't surpass CS in player numbers because the players are so comfortable with the game they will never leave it. Why try another multiplayer game where you'd be the "n00b" again when you can just keep playing Halo/CS and "pwn" instead?

[MysterD]

Sometimes I truly wonder if Halo was actually a good game at all, even on a console.  I mean the title was highly anticipated, almost like nothing I'd ever seen.  Why?  I mean it's not like people were feeding off of the popularity of some awesome, earlier Bungie title (from what I understand they were a Mac game dev?) or a previous iteration in the series.

It was a brand new property from a relative unknown developer on a platform that was a newcomer in the console race that was widely predicted to be a catastrophic failure.

I just don't get why it is so huge.  There have got to be other console games with better multiplayer or something that people just aren't playing.  Halo does nothing new or different and in fact I'd say it's a good five years behind online PC games in terms of what it offers players.

To sum it up: X-Box and PS2 didn't really have many ½ way decent FPS's on their system, at that time.

X-Boxers found their first FPS to be somewhat decent to fall right on their lap -- and that was Halo: Combat Evolved. Back then, SP and MP FPS's weren't a big genre on the console system, really. And the XB was definitely lacking in that genre.

When PC gamers got Halo PC, they weren't too thrilled w/ it b/c everything Halo had done, it had been done before -- and done a hell of a lot better before, too.

I just think it's all hype and popularity.  Too many people don't question its shortcomings or see what else is out there.

Halo SP's first half was pretty good, w/ lots of variety in action; sniping, run and gun shooting, etc etc. But, it really lost its steam and everything it had going for it, when the Flood came. Suddenly, the game felt like more like Serious Sam w/ its actions, many of the INDOOR levels looked like cut & paste of each other (hence the spaceship levels and the Monitor levels), there were levels w/ backtracking, the checkpoint save system sucked, and the game just had "rushed" written all over it.

Just then throw on top of all of that the fact that it ran like shit out-the-box on most brand-new powerhouse PC's on release, and you got yourself a mediocre shooter, at best.

[Ghandi]

Sometimes I truly wonder if Halo was actually a good game at all, even on a console.  I mean the title was highly anticipated, almost like nothing I'd ever seen.  Why?  I mean it's not like people were feeding off of the popularity of some awesome, earlier Bungie title (from what I understand they were a Mac game dev?) or a previous iteration in the series.

It was a brand new property from a relative unknown developer on a platform that was a newcomer in the console race that was widely predicted to be a catastrophic failure.

I just don't get why it is so huge.  There have got to be other console games with better multiplayer or something that people just aren't playing.  Halo does nothing new or different and in fact I'd say it's a good five years behind online PC games in terms of what it offers players.

I just think it's all hype and popularity.  Too many people don't question its shortcomings or see what else is out there.

The reason that I loved it so much was largely due to my environment -- The last few years of high school, and all my close friends were really good at it. The competition was intense. Plus, the multiplayer is nearly perfect. The graphics aren't top notch but the gameplay is.

But yeah, the game itself isn't amazing -- it's good. But when you have a ton of fun people to play with and great competition I think it makes it that much better.

[gpw11]

I'll take a bit of the middle ground here;  Console gamers give Halo too much credit, PC gamers give it too little.  The reason the first was so popular when it came out was because it honestly deserved it.  No one else had done an FPS on a console as well as Bungee did with Halo.  Beyond that, the graphics and combat (for the first half) were far above anything we had seen on a console, and a lot better then most PC FPS games at that time.

At the same time, it wasn't as revolutionary as some people would have you believe, and it has many, many problems.  They're good games, and I'll probably play through the first one, but I personally think it's a little interesting how the franchise is so polarizing.

[Quemaqua]

My first and only play through Halo was fairly underwhelming, even for the time.  There was definitely cool stuff mixed in, no question, and it had moments of greatness, but the experience as a whole really didn't work for me.  It was one of those games that seemed cool at first, and then became a huge disappointment.

And many of the people who truly love the franchise love it for the MP, and to me that's really the only reason it does so well.  There's nothing inherently wrong with that, either, as MP-focused games have a place in the world.   To be honest, I've tried the MP and wasn't impressed there either... but I chalk that up to taste rather than lame design.  It seems perfectly functional, I just prefer something faster.

[Ghandi]

It seems perfectly functional, I just prefer something faster.

In terms of fps's, pc games seem to go faster than console games, just because of the medium. Using a controller for fast paced movement in these games just isn't ideal. Of course, we had this crazy korean in our group of friends who turned up his sensitivity to 10 and was just a crazy asian.

But the multiplayer is very methodical, if you know what you are doing. One pistol clip = 3 kills if you are good enough. xxy = reload while swtiching weapons, know your jumps. Add them all together, etc.

*sigh*, I miss my Halo 1 days.

[Cobra951]

I can't figure out why there's so much resistance to good FPS control on consoles.  There has to be a way to do it, and thumbsticks ain't it (at least not for aim/look).  Everything else is covered.  How about a mouse and a tabletop pad of some sort?  Track ball?

I can't deny that I'm curious about Halo 3.  MP doesn't interest me, but I do wonder about the SP campaign.  I haven't rented a game in a long time.  This may be the one to break the trend.

[scottws]

I've said for years that console controlers should have a trackball instead of a 2nd stick.  They only genre I could think that would be hurt by this move are flight games.

[idolminds]

Yeah, trackball would be great. It wont happen because you'd have to keep it clean, and kids (heck, most people) are pigs.

[MysterD]

My first and only play through Halo was fairly underwhelming, even for the time.  There was definitely cool stuff mixed in, no question, and it had moments of greatness, but the experience as a whole really didn't work for me.

Halo PC had some great controls for when in a vehicle -- and that's with the KB/mouse, which was a surprise. The KB/mouse controls turned out great.

It was one of those games that seemed cool at first, and then became a huge disappointment.

Agreed.

The game started off so good w/ loads of a variety....
Then fell apart, losing what made is so good in the first place.
A damn shame.

And many of the people who truly love the franchise love it for the MP, and to me that's really the only reason it does so well.  There's nothing inherently wrong with that, either, as MP-focused games have a place in the world.   To be honest, I've tried the MP and wasn't impressed there either... but I chalk that up to taste rather than lame design.  It seems perfectly functional, I just prefer something faster.

Halo PC's MP was solid, but nothing truly special.

What I really dug about Halo PC's MP was that the vehicle combat was fun.

[Ghandi]

I can't figure out why there's so much resistance to good FPS control on consoles.  There has to be a way to do it, and thumbsticks ain't it (at least not for aim/look).  Everything else is covered.  How about a mouse and a tabletop pad of some sort?  Track ball?

I can't deny that I'm curious about Halo 3.  MP doesn't interest me, but I do wonder about the SP campaign.  I haven't rented a game in a long time.  This may be the one to break the trend.

I agree with you completely, it just all comes down to marketing. Why take a risk with something like a track ball when you can stick with the current control stick theme and play a commercial with pretty graphics?

We know how the current industry works. Nintendo has taken some risks, but everyone else pretty much just goes with what makes money. It sucks but it's to be expected.

I would still probably buy this if I owned a 360, though. The single player campaigns are usually pretty fun, especially with other people.

[MysterD]

9.5 from IGN for Halo 3

[K-man]

I know a few people who have somehow been able to grab this early.  They all say it is worth every bit of the wait and hype, and does an excellent job of wrapping up the story arc.

But, I expect people will still hate on it because it's cool to do so.


And once you spend some time with the control stick setup it becomes second-nature, at least it did for me. 

[MysterD]

IGN gave the Lasting Appeal Score a TEN

Lasting Appeal
The campaign won't take you long to complete, but this is a game that can be played for years. There are so many things to do, and it's so much fun to do them.

They make it sound like the SP is some sort of fuckin' RPG here....
....yet, they say the SP portion's only 10-13 hours....

Presentation
An amazing replay editor, four-player online co-op, map editor, and community support make this the most robust feature set ever in a videogame.

Maybe on the X360, yeah -- but most of that shit, it's been done before by numerous other FPS's on the PC....

[MysterD]

Lots of reviews for Halo 3, boys....

9.5 from GameSpot
5 stars (out of 5) from GameSpy
10 (out of 10) from 1Up
9 from GameDaily (out of 10)
GamePro's review -- high scores, of course...
9.7 (out of 10) from CAVG
9.8 (out of 10) from GameTrailers.com

[idolminds]

Yeah well...thats what they rated Halo 1. So I don't really trust reviews on this one.

I did read that the SP is short as hell, though. Like one guy said he plowed through it in 5 hours. So we'll see if thats true or not. Insert "they stopped cut and pasting levels which made the game shorter" joke here.

[angrykeebler]

you guys just suck.. die in a fire

WOO HOO HALO 3!! ALMOST MINE!!

[MysterD]

Yeah well...thats what they rated Halo 1. So I don't really trust reviews on this one.

I did read that the SP is short as hell, though. Like one guy said he plowed through it in 5 hours.

Sounds like expansion pack length, if that's the case!

From what I've read on reviews, most of all have said this -- it also sounds like the default difficulty is TOO EASY.

So we'll see if thats true or not. Insert "they stopped cut and pasting levels which made the game shorter" joke here.

Hehe.

From what I've read from the reviews, seems like the overall complaint of the SP is around "10-13 hours" in length, though they went all-out for the MP. Given that, I'm wondering when Bungie will stop doing SP components and start doing just only MP side for Halo series -- like say Unreal Tournament and Quake Wars.

[Cobra951]

I did read that the SP is short as hell, though. Like one guy said he plowed through it in 5 hours.

It looks like a rental then.  There's no way I'm spending full price on that.

[idolminds]

Who knows, the reviews say longer. Could have been some dude just hating on it and exaggerating.

I thought this was great and will be relevant to this games release:

[Quemaqua]

haha, idol wins the thread.

[scottws]

But, I expect people will still hate on it because it's cool to do so.

People hate on the Halo franchise because of its massive, possibly unearned popularity.  People act like it is the best game of all time, and it isn't even really all that good.  In my opinion, the single player isn't very good at all.  I can't speak for the multiplayer too much since I wasn't part of a clique of people that played it.  But I've seen it played and it looks like a horrific cross between Counter-Strike (bunny-hopping and mind-blowingly annoying idiots), a simple Battlefield (vehicles), and Unreal Tournament (team deathmatch).

Now I don't contend that people aren't having fun with it, but I do contend that a lot of these people have simply not given better games a chance.  They certainly haven't played any of the good PC multiplayer games, practically all of which make Halo's gameplay seem like it was conceived 20 years ago.  Instead they are told that Halo is the greatest game ever, drink their Game Fuel, and blindly believe it.

I mean Nintendo milks their franchises too and has their own blind sheep, but at least most people acknowledge that Super Mario Sunshine, for instance, kind of sucked.

[iPPi]

I really don't care about Halo 3 at all.  I didn't like the first since the PC experience was very underwhelming.  I never bothered with Halo 2.

I might pick up Halo 3 in the future, but I want to finish up Bioshock first if I do.  Not to mention Mass Effect and Assassin's Creed are coming out within two months.

[Pugnate]

I thought Halo's singleplayer was pretty much excellent at the time of the game's release... i.e. until the flood showed up.

[idolminds]

More reviews!

[Pugnate]

Both IGN and G-Spot gave it 9.5 

[Cobra951]

Hmm.  OK, so, should I go through idol's flowchart and see if my branch has the word "faggots" in it or not?  Without Kasavin in the picture, I'm tempted.

10-15 hours for "most" people to complete single player.  What does that really mean?

Dammit, I wish I could trust them.

[MysterD]

I thought Halo's singleplayer was pretty much excellent at the time of the game's release... i.e. until the flood showed up.

The Flood = pretty much the 2nd half of the SP game.

So, basically, you're telling me it's half of a SP...

[MysterD]

ORIGINAL POST:
QuarterToThree rips on Halo 3.

Halo 3: The Juggernaut, or Nothing You Read Here Will Make a Whit of Difference
TomChick - News - 09/23/07 - Link

So, yeah, Halo 3. Biggest gaming event of the year, I suppose. Last night, I got from it everything I'm going to get from the single player game. It's short. I finished the Normal mode in a single evening, clocking maybe eight or ten hours, most of them out of a sense of obligation rather than wanting to know what happens next.

Ouch.

I could complain again about how Bungie has never put bots in the game, but no one expects it and it's no longer any surprise, given that Microsoft wants Halo to move Xbox Live accounts. And, to be honest, I am looking forward to jumping online when the game goes live Monday night. But I still wish I could practice the maps on my own.

Okay.

But as far as a single-player experience, Halo 3 is a colossal disappointment, largely for how little it's advanced since the series began. The big hook for Halo 1 was that it proved that console shooters could hold their own against PC shooters. Or "re-proved", considering Perfect Dark had already demonstrated this, but only for the subset of gamers who had an N64, which is not the subset of gamers who was playing shooters on the PC. Halo laid the ground work for the the genre to thrive on console systems, at the other end of gamepads, on big screens television and home theater audio systems. Bungie showed everyone how it could be done: solid graphics and sound, liberal use of autoaim, carefully laid out battles that didn't involve too much 180 degree turning, not too many weapon choices, and enough personality to give it some kick.

Ouch.

But like id with their engines, Bungie struggles with the creative part of the equation. Nowhere is this more evident than in Halo 3. Six years later, it's still repeating the formula established in Halo 1. Virtually every single moment and location is recycled from the first two games (the "new" area was done just as well in at least two other games). The engine doesn't even look much better and, frankly, the gunplay is so very 2001. This is the same Halo you knew and loved, or didn't love, as the case may be. I'm sure it'll be a wonderful multiplayer game, mostly because millions will play it. But as a single player game, it's a classic case of the arrested development that makes our hobby the domain of teenage boys, grown up and otherwise.

I'm hoping Id will come through w/ something a little different from their past few games -- Rage.

The story is at once convoluted and glib, an unholy partnership of exposition and assumption. There's no attempt to catch up players who don't remember the specifics of the previous games. Even reading the little "Story So Far" section in the manual will leave the average non-Halo fan scratching his head. Instead, Halo 3 banks on everyone being a Halo fan. A hardcore Halo fan who would understand why Master Chief wakes up in a crater. Duh.

Hehe.

What bothers me most is that Bungie still can't tell a story worth a damn. Because it's an established franchise with enormous hype, this is going to be a huge game. Like Metroids and Zeldas, it'll get unswervingly positive reviews from people who wouldn't know narrative from nonsense, people who make sweeping misguided assumptions about the average guy jumping online and having a grand ol' time getting teabagged and called a faggot. And for those average guys and the occasional average girls, whether they play online or not, this single player story will be the face of gaming: as retarded, confusing, and juvenile as ever.

Ouchie.

About The "Two Relationships" In The Game

(click to show/hide)

There are at least two interesting relationships that should have been explored in Halo 3: Master Chief and Cortana and Master Chief and the Arbiter. Each gets a single moment. Yep, one single moment. The supporting cast gets some obligatory maudlin war movie moments, which include Ron Perlman being saddled with the phrase "howling dark" at exactly the wrong moment, and a random half-hearted boss battle without explanation when someone turns out to the obligatory bad guy. And for Zod's sake, if you're going to have Terence Stamp fill in for John Hurt, don't obscure his voice behind some sort of filter.

LMAO!

More Viciousness, w/ Spoilers...

(click to show/hide)

It's no wonder Halo isn't exactly a hot movie prospect. At this point, it's nothing but a suit of armor, a set of guns, and a handful of supporting characters. Alex Garland's rejected script had some nice moments between Master Chief (unmasked, by the way) and Cortana. Bungie has no concept of this as anything beyond a convenient device. "Always protect her, Chief," a dying character says about Cortana, who is, umm, just an AI, so like, what's the big deal?

Damn....

It's hard to look past the blatant corridor level design. I use the term quite literally. Bungie gets a lot of mileage out of reusing entire areas. You'll get a few instances of "go here and do this", followed by "now go back where you were before through respawned monsters, which will save our level designers some time". At one point, you have to revisit a copy of an area. Bungie makes no bones about it. Three teams split up, each to pull a lever in an identical area. What do you know? One of the teams couldn't make it so you get to replay exactly the same area to pull exactly the same lever!

WTH....?

Then there's the "ledge" level design. It's really a corridor, but if you drop one side off into a skybox, it makes it seem more open. Mombasa? Ha ha. Right. I've seen a more convincing Africa in low-budget studio backlots.

Ouch

There are terminals hidden in the game, but Halo was never about exploration, and it's clearly not built for that sort of gameplay. In fact, when it comes to visiting alien worlds, the contrived and cramped Metroid has a far better sense of plunging you into boxes and making them feel vast. Halo is almost entirely the same places you've been already.

It's worth noting that my expectations for the single-player game weren't very high. I was looking forward to it, but didn't expect anything too different from the last Halos. I got exactly what I was expecting: Halo in HD, a few new weapons and vehicles, and not much more. Yeah, I'm looking forward to trying co-op, but not because of anything in the actual game. The feature interests me more than anything about the content.

It'd be cool if more games had a Co-Op mode where you could tackle a campaign ONLINE.

Finally, the BioShock factor can't be overlooked. Irrational's "masterpiece of the art form" (if ever there was a game deserving that phrase...) raised the bar for what we can expect not only from our shooters, but from our games at large. Halo 3 is five years behind in terms of clearing that bar. In a world that rewards talent instead of hype, BioShock would be the big holiday hit. Instead, we get an impassive gold faceplate aimed vaguely in the direction it's supposed to be staring thoughtfully while I wonder just what the heck is supposed to be going on. Oh well. I'll just shoot some more grunts until I get to the end of Bungie's idea of a ring trilogy.

Would you kindly say that Bioshock was freakin' awesome?
Yeah, I'd say....

EDIT:
I guess you really can't have a new Rated M game w/out Jack Thompson trying to get involved.
Next for Thompson to go after -- Halo 3.

[gpw11]

"Or "re-proved", considering Perfect Dark had already demonstrated this, but only for the subset of gamers who had an N64, which is not the subset of gamers who was playing shooters on the PC."

Lost me there.  That faggot wouldn't know a good game if it came up and bit him on his ass.

[sirean_syan]

I'm only chiming in on the 8-10 hour deal. If that's true, which seems to be the general consensus on the deal, then what exactly are people complaining about? That's only a bit shorter than what was more or less understood as the standard game length from the entire last generation, if not more. Given the huge multiplayer focus of Halo 3, how is that even an issue?

I'm not really trying to defend Halo 3, but that's just an example of a larger issue here. That is, people are going too far in both directions with the game. It seems there are very few voices who can just say the games have been cool and leave it at that.

Of course, Halo is pretty much the polarizing game of the times and it has to be a appreciated on that level. For a while it was Final Fantasy and whenever a game came out you'd have huge groups line up on both sides saying how great the game was while the other saying while the other would try to debase it on the basis that it doesn't deserve the popularity it has. Sound familiar? It guess its at least entertaining on that front, although I really wouldn't put any other Halos with your average Final Fantasy in terms of quality.

Oh, and Mr D. We get it. You can stop repeating your usual stock of one-liner rips on Halo.

[angrykeebler]

who that fuck are Quartertothree?

stop linking trash, D

[Cobra951]

I'm only chiming in on the 8-10 hour deal. If that's true, which seems to be the general consensus on the deal, then what exactly are people complaining about? That's only a bit shorter than what was more or less understood as the standard game length from the entire last generation, if not more. Given the huge multiplayer focus of Halo 3, how is that even an issue?

It's only an issue for me, and whoever else cares only about the single-player components of the game.  Bungie opted not to provide AI opponents for deathmatch or other typically MP components.  That leaves them out of the picture for someone with no interest in playing against strangers.  The SP campaign is all that remains, and if that is thin, it's not worth $60 to me.

I guess it depends on whom you believe.  If the focus is multiplayer at the expense of solo play, then it's not for me.  If the SP campaign is a reasonable game on its own, then it may be worthwhile.  I still don't know who tells the whole truth on this game.

8-10 hours is short, period, I don't care which generation it hails from.  If a game is going to be that short, then it needs to be exceptional, or appropriately cheap.  It's not cheap.

[gpw11]

You do bring up a good point though.  I don't think 8-10 hours is deal breaking short.  I'm fairly certain I finished the first God of War in about the same amount of time, and I'd probably get the same amount of enjoyment out of a Halo game - nothing awe-inspiring, but entertaining from start to finish.

As with Cobra, if I was to play the game I'd probably rent it because of the length - why buy it now when I know I can beat it in a few days, wait a few months and buy it for less then half the price if I decide to.  That, however, doesn't say anything about the overall quality of the game. Something a lot of people would have you believe otherwise.