Halo 3--because this needs to be said

Recommended Videos

RentCavalier

New member
Dec 17, 2007
334
0
0
Halo 3 is ridiculous and fun.

Let me emphasize right now that when I say that, I do not mean "ridiculously fun". I mean, the game itself is RIDICULOUS, and the basic gameplay of "shoot everything that moves" is fun. Unfortunately, the former drowns the latter out in a bucket of its own filth and makes the fun seem contrived, trite, and utterly pointless.

Halo 3 is pretty much the most popular game of the past...year, and if you liked previous Halos, you likely already own this game, so this review likely will mean very little to you, but to those ten people who still haven't bought this game, let me tell you right now that, unless you are able to engage in wildly fantastic multiplayer bouts with all of your multitudes of friends, this game has NOTHING to offer you.

Single Player is a joke and a half, designed as a love letter to...itself. The game oozes unwarranted arrogance, which is most obscenely summed up in a little letter that Bungie writes us in the end credits thanking us for helping them in their goal of world domination, which would be funny except that I sort of had the feeling that Halo 3 had punched me solidly in the nuts with steel knuckles for the past two hours, so I wasn't feeling inclined to shower laughter and adoration onto the fucktards who had tried to pass off this cheap entertainment as something even remotely "average".

I love Halo, and I love Halo 2--even with its shitty ending, I found the package satisfying because it's long, varied, and can offer a variety of different challenges to keep you on your toes the whole way through. It's easy, but not THAT easy--and of course, Legendary is basically so hard that the game ceases to be fun and starts to be a terrible, terrible chore. That is how Halo worked, and it was fine because between Halo 1 and Halo 2 they added enough new things to keep the stale formula looking fresh. Halo 3, however, offers little new besides a few new guns, a few new vehicles which are basically alien clones of previous vehicles, and a new emphasis on the "plot"--something that has been, while prevalent, never a full focus of the game.

That has been a very good thing, because when Bungie decides to make something plot-driven and epic, they proceed to make utter ASSES of themselves. The storyline is a series of overwrought, melodramatic monotonies that drive the plot forward with all the subtlety of a crochet mallet. Every line of dialogue is unintentionally funny, because the writing is so terribly BAD that it only serves to drive into sharp relief how utterly IDIOTIC the plot is. The entire storyline is a back and forth, with the entire first half of the game repeating the exact same scenes just with different characters over and over and over and over again, and after THAT, the game's plot just turns to focus on the tragic romance between Master Chief and the robot girl who lives in his head.

Bungie basically opened up the "big book of cliches" and rammed them into the game with a forklift. It's so bad that, after awhile, the plot ceases to be important at all, despite its attempts to the contrary, and you are basically just biding time till you kill things again--and, in that respect, this game features the six same enemies over and over and over again. Sure, the other Halo games are guilty of this too, but this one is really bad because you don't every actually fight the series' famous Elites, the Master Chief clones who served as the ultimate and definitive enemy of the other games. They were smart, strategic, well-protected and oftentimes were capable of using a variety of strategies for any given situation, making them terribly dangerous enemies to face.

They are gone, the events of which are nicely explained in Halo 2, and they are instead replaced full on with the Brutes, who are NOT the same thing, because the Brutes come in two flavors--stupid and STUPIDER. There's one type of Brute that shoots you and another that is slightly tougher and either shoots you or wails on you with a giant Hammer, and both of them can be beaten in exactly the same way, every time, ANY TIME, and it gets very, very old very very quickly.

The Flood, which are oftentimes played up as the series' TRUE villains, are played up here with a bunch of new abilities, crafty forms, and shape-shifting that ultimately proves useless because you fight the Flood in maybe FOUR missions, and in only two of those are they the actual focus of gameplay.

Speaking of missions, the missions in this game are very short--compared to the monstrous missions of Halo 1 and the pseudo monstrous missions of Halo 2, this is rather surprising, and it would be a welcome change of pace except that by the time you are really enjoying killing the same enemies over and over again, the game decides to abruptly END. The game is short--so short in fact that I purchased the game yesterday and was able to beat it AND throw in about twelve Deathmatches in exactly twenty four hours, as well as beat a mission on Heroic in co-op. The game's short length leaves you feeling cheated, especially with the game's slavish obsession with making itself look and feel "epic". Where I wanted a grand and glorious conclusion to the Halo trilogy--the most explosive of them all, combining everything the series had done right--I instead got this half-baked expansion pack whose true enjoyment can likely only be gotten by playing it and Halo 2 in conjunction, because they are pretty much the EXACT SAME GAME.

I've ranted here, I know, but it should be said that this is the first time a Halo game has ever been abyssmally AVERAGE to me--and not only that, this game has also shown just how fragile the delicate balance between fun and repetition that the other games have tightwalked so far really is.

Rent this game if you don't already own it, or else just play a friend's. It's just not worth it.
 

Gigantor

New member
Dec 26, 2007
442
0
0
Just a quick tidbit I pulled out of the OED:

The words inflammable and flammable both mean 'easily set on fire'. Inflammable is formed using the Latin prefix in- which has the meaning 'into' (rather than the more common use of in- to indicate negation), and here has the effect of intensifying the meaning of the word in English.

I'm inclined to agree with some of what you say, although the frequent lapses into CAPS when you wanted to MAKE a point started to grate a bit. I've found that the vehicles, such as they are, have their own interesting characteristics, rather than just being clones of the other race's to balance things out. The Brute Chopper doesn't really play like any human vehicles, it's more like a melee vehicle. The Mongoose is nippy in it's own right but doesn't play like any Covenant vehicles.

I'm going to ponder it for a little while whilst this thread explodes into a fiery conflagration- I'll be back. With a fire extinguisher.
 

Talisker

New member
Jan 31, 2008
117
0
0
Gigantor said:
I'm going to ponder it for a little while whilst this thread explodes into a fiery conflagration- .
Agreed.

Since I'm lucky enough to have stumbled upon this before said conflgration, I'll simply say this.
You have hit the nail on the head as far as Halo 3 is concerned. I really don't understand why this game seems to be recieving perfect scores for simply being marginally better than its predescessors.

Oh look, I've dropped myself in the fire with you.
 

Novan Leon

New member
Dec 10, 2007
187
0
0
Strangely enough, all of the faults you find with Halo 3 are the reasons I never got into Halo 1 or Halo 2. Everyone must just have their own limit when it comes to stupid action and cliche-ness, mine just happens to be lower than yours, and yours just happens to be lower than the majority of Halo fan-dom.
 

Moroha

New member
Feb 9, 2008
28
0
0
I like the cliché part of Halo.
But I'm more into it because I keep thinking that Marathon is somehow connected to Halo even though bungie claim it isn't..
 

broadband

New member
Dec 15, 2007
437
0
0
we all know that halo is not what claims and try to look to be, but pitfully is already too late for stop it, also i think the reviewers where bribbed for give perfect scores to the game
 

The Potato Lord

New member
Dec 20, 2007
498
0
0
I believe Halo opinions can be summed up this way... Games are like cake, some people like lemon and some people don't like lemon and enjoy chocolate there's no need to say lemon is an awful monstrosity and anyone who likes lemon cake is dumber than a lemming. they should just enjoy thier chocolate cake and not eat the lemon cake, because eating something just to hate it is a waste of cake.
 

SpiritMacardi

New member
Feb 4, 2008
51
0
0
I still remember playing Halo 1 on the PC... It was a piece of crap. I love shooters, but Halo is just a half-assed attempt to combine the worlds of Alien and Predator with the character design of Metroid. This series has remained in a deep pool of resentment within my mind, and I'd be willing to forgive it for its obvious rip offs of other, much better games if it had good multiplayer, but even that sucked. I remember playing capture the flag, and the moment I got the enemy's flag, "MY" team mates came up and started hitting me with their guns like I had just stabbed baby Jesus or something. That's when I realized just how retarded the game and its fandom was, and promptly uninstalled the game like it was a memory eating virus.

By the sounds of it, not much has changed. Somehow the game is still popular and Microsoft is sitting happily as the collective fanbase gives them a blowjob. Many will object to what I've just said, but nothing is changing my perception that Halo is just a hybrid of Metroid and Half Life, with the masterful storytelling of both having been dipped in acid until they resemble the aftermath of being shot by the particle gun from F.E.A.R.
 

rapidoud

New member
Feb 1, 2008
547
0
0
with the way hes wording it he can make anything sound bad eg. cod4

Its just the old cod with a new package, a few mesaly modern day weapons which behave like the old ones anyway, the same abundance of hackers, and the vehicle-less gameplay. CoD4 is a game that should be at best a $20 buy off ebay, the campaign is short, and the ending was so dumb it made ME look smart. The AI is so stupid to say the least, you just sit behind a little corner, peep out for a split-second, kill someone, pop back and wait for health, and even on the timed levels there's no rush. Only the thing is the last level (epilogues) difficulty is jumped up so insanely high that you will actually hate its ending. Just the "true" ending of the game (Game Over mission) was slightly too easy.

See? I can do it too, Halo3 campaign was better A because it was longer and B was funner.
Besides if it has easy difficulty then why mention its easy? their difficulty names are true which are unlike most games these days, i meet alot of guys better than me at cod4 while myself having done it on veterans.

Edit: Besides, saying halo3 doesnt deserve good scores is your opinion, but if your just saying its slightly better then how come most games dont have aroudn the same margin of players? Then any new game woul;d expect 100,000ish players. That matches your logic.

The formula of MP and TD,CTF etc. has been proven to work then bungie took it a bit further by making the weapons and vehicles fun which other games do too just with different things, and bungie got in early with halo1 being near xbox release and being basically being one of the top fps of its time so that got huge publicity.
 

qbert4ever

New member
Dec 14, 2007
798
0
0
Well, love it or hate it, you have to admit that no other game has caused this much coversation.

That being said, why the hell do you feel that you had to make this thread? Everything you have up there has been said a dozen times over already, and besides, do you really think that you're going to convince anybody that likes that game that it is "Contrived, trite, and utterly pointless"?

Look, I like the game, I do not agree with anything you said. And I'm not alone, just look at the sales and reviews for the blasted game. But, I understand there are people that do not share my oppinion, and I'm fine with that. So, I'm asking all the haters that keep posting repetitive threads like this, and to all the fanboys that have put up fellatio threads for the game (even though I've never seen one, in the sence of fair play I'll include them),

Please. Please. PLEASE.

Stop.
Making.
These.
Threads.

Nobody cares, and all they do is piss people off.
 

gormers

New member
Nov 23, 2007
19
0
0
Another halo 3 thread. Normally this only means bad for everyone, but Ive got to agree a little bit with the threadstarter, even though he is a bit extreme. Halo 1 and 2 had many cliche lines, but not in so many ways that halo 3 had. Ive got to agree, I dont understand why people think halo 3s story are that great. Halo 3 was the only game in the series that made me a little bored while watching the cutscenes. But the gameplay is still fun, and so is the brutes, even though the elites are more fun to fight, and that the game is much shorter.

But let me notify you guys, I love every game in the series, especially halo 1. But if I would put which games I like the most in order it would be Halo, Halo 2, and halo 3.
 

GyroCaptain

New member
Jan 7, 2008
1,181
0
0
The rotting equine still twitches? Whither be mine stick to have at for mine amusement?

Actually, I'm not going to join in this conversation.

Er, nuts.
 

The Bandit

New member
Feb 5, 2008
967
0
0
Why is it that when someone disagrees with something someone else says, they think it's a good defensive argument to say "Hey, nobody cares. Keep your opinions to yourself."? Then they make the metaphors of "I like [insert certain object here, typically flavored food] and you can like [insert opposite of first object]."

Halo 3 didn't live up to the hype. I, like you, was expecting some explosive conclusion. I didn't get it. I just felt kind of empty, and not in the good empty of "Oh, there's no more Halo games" just... empty. I don't really WANT another Halo game. I had fun with it, but I can honestly say I had more fun hanging out with my friends outside of GameStop waiting for it to come out than actually playing the game. The multi-player, which provided me with hours of fun with Halo 2, doesn't do much for me either.
 

RentCavalier

New member
Dec 17, 2007
334
0
0
rapidoud said:
with the way hes wording it he can make anything sound bad eg. cod4

Its just the old cod with a new package, a few mesaly modern day weapons which behave like the old ones anyway, the same abundance of hackers, and the vehicle-less gameplay. CoD4 is a game that should be at best a $20 buy off ebay, the campaign is short, and the ending was so dumb it made ME look smart. The AI is so stupid to say the least, you just sit behind a little corner, peep out for a split-second, kill someone, pop back and wait for health, and even on the timed levels there's no rush. Only the thing is the last level (epilogues) difficulty is jumped up so insanely high that you will actually hate its ending. Just the "true" ending of the game (Game Over mission) was slightly too easy.
Um...I don't really remember mentioned COD4 anywhere in my review...

rapidoud said:
See? I can do it too, Halo3 campaign was better A because it was longer and B was funner.
I am not inclined to start a pointless flame war, but I think you'll notice that in my review I make a point of saying that Halo 3's campaign was A: Shorter and B: More repetative than previous Halos, thus being less fun.


rapidoud said:
Edit: Besides, saying halo3 doesnt deserve good scores is your opinion, but if your just saying its slightly better then how come most games dont have aroudn the same margin of players? Then any new game woul;d expect 100,000ish players. That matches your logic.
That's a stupid comment--not every game gets 100,000 players because not every game is part of an award-winning franchise. The difference here is that Halo 1 was good, and Halo 3 was not. QED, my logic is stating that if the final installment of a trilogy, and the debut, flagship next-gen title for a major console, is inferior to its five year old, prior-gen predecessor, then it should not be awarded "bestest gaem of teh yearz" from everybody and their mum.
 

qbert4ever

New member
Dec 14, 2007
798
0
0
The Bandit said:
Why is it that when someone disagrees with something someone else says, they think it's a good defensive argument to say "Hey, nobody cares. Keep your opinions to yourself."? Then they make the metaphors of "I like [insert certain object here, typically flavored food] and you can like [insert opposite of first object."
I fear you misunderstood me. I never said "keep your opinions to yourself", in fact, I'm a big fan of freedom of speech. What I meant was, there are already 500 trillion Halo love/hate threads out there, and there seems to be no point in making another one about a game that came out four month ago. I mean, do you really care if one more person dicides to profess his love or hate of it?

As to your "metaphor" point, I agree. I hate it when people are tollerant of other peoples beliefs too.
 

qbert4ever

New member
Dec 14, 2007
798
0
0
RentCavalier said:
The difference here, in my oppinion anyways, is that Halo 1 was good, and Halo 3 was not.
Fixed it for you.


Also, you do understand that his CoD4 example was just that, an example, right? Rapidoud was using your logic to create a "review" in order to make a point.
 

RentCavalier

New member
Dec 17, 2007
334
0
0
qbert4ever said:
RentCavalier said:
The difference here, in my oppinion anyways, is that Halo 1 was good, and Halo 3 was not.
Fixed it for you.


Also, you do understand that his CoD4 example was just that, an example, right? Rapidoud was using your logic to create a "review" in order to make a point.
That's a wee bit redundant, isn't it? I mean, considering that, as this is a review, the entire thing is only my opinion...I mean, reviews are meant to express an opinion based upon various aspects of a film, game, song or album that the reviewer found appealing/unappealing. Even if stated as fact, since this is a review thread, it's kind of assumed that anything I say is my opinion. Trying to reiterate that makes you look like a douche.

And, as for the reason why this is posted here, I just got the game yesterday, I haven't posted anything in awhile, and, frankly, it needed to be said.

I think you can "see" that kind of clearly in the actual title of the topic.
 

EtherAMP

New member
Feb 12, 2008
10
0
0
RentCavalier said:
it needed to be said.
It really, really did not. It has already been said numerous times, from many different angles. Some were more eloquent; others were simple, but effective. All in all, however, you didn't really bring anything new to the table.

Furthermore, speaking strictly from a contextual point-of-view, the statement "The difference here is that Halo 1 was good, and Halo 3 was not" is in fact, an opinion statement. It is, however, presented in a factual manner. Yes, yes, "everything in a review is an opinion". Even still, for the sake of making the review seem presentable (especially one that you know will invoke at least a minor backlash), statements like that may as well be prefaced by "in my opinion"; it's not a huge change, but it takes some of the edge off.

Incidentally, for saying that Halo 3 is basically Halo 2 only shorter, and saying that, for the most part, you loved Halo 2, it is surprising to see such sharp dislike. New guns, new vehicles, equipment, more epic-ness for a franchise devoted aimlessly to the "One-Man Army" mantra of "bigger and louder means better"... if you loved the previous installments, I can't quite follow you.
 

Mr. Bubbles

New member
Sep 27, 2007
142
0
0
The following is probably not very coherrent. I apologize, but I'm tired and can't help it. Also note that this is an opinion, and I do not claim that it is absolutely correct. Prove me wrong, and I might even believe you. Well, that's enough covering my ass for one post.

See, now the problem here isn't that you're wrong, TC. I agree with some of what you say. I think that it's more because, despite it's flaws, it's still more fun than most FPS games out there. I don't think that Halo deserves a lot of the hate it gets, but I'll admit that a lot of the complaints levelled against it are well deserved. The real problem isn't with Halo's quality, but with it's popularity. The more popular a game is, the more we nit-pick it, and eventually we just don't find it fun anymore. A lot of the things people don't like Halo for would be ignored - or even praised - in other, less successful games.

In essence, I suppose what I'm saying is shut up and deal with it. If you don't like the game anymore, fine, suit yourself. But don't drag other people with you. They can decide for themselves, and you and I both know this is rant wasn't to save them from buying a sub-par game.

(Remember that ass covering comment from before? Yeah, I lied. Please note that I am not defending Halo because I am a fanboy. I don't play the campaign, which was decidedly mediocre this time around, and the vast majority of Halo's community just plain pisses me off. It's can be a lot of fun in custom games or Forge, and Theater is interesting, but unless you have at least 7 friends that play Halo I wouldn't suggest getting it. I'd recommend TF2 over it any day.)