Halo 3

[shadow skill]

The southpaw argument is not a VALID argument with regards to why Halo 3 is generic and not worthy of it's success. Bioshock doesn't have the southpaw configuration and yet it certainly deserves it's success.

Right it has everything to do with Halo 3 not being a good game. But of course you only reply like this because you don't read. What I have been doing in this thread is pointing out that calling Halo generic is a valid statement, whether I agree with that statement or not is immaterial.

I played Bioshock on the PC (Where incidentally you can configure the controls any way you want.) and I found the game to be vapid. While nice to look at I did not appreciate the art style, and I felt that the story was lacking in so far as making me feel connected to the player character.


To answer your question Jef when I hear the term Covenant I picture somewhat menacing beings worthy of at least respect if not fear, not small pygmies that run away from you on sight as you shoot them multiple times. I don't know I just couldn't shake the feeling that I was the mean kid who likes to kick dogs whenever I shot them....

 

[Mursam]

The southpaw argument is not a VALID argument with regards to why Halo 3 is generic and not worthy of it's success. Bioshock doesn't have the southpaw configuration and yet it certainly deserves it's success.

Right it has everything to do with Halo 3 not being a good game.

Because storyline, plot, atmosphere, setting, graphics, gameplay, innovation all pale in comparison to whether or not Southpaw players have a comfortable time or not

But of course you only reply like this because you don't read. What I have been doing in this thread is pointing out that calling Halo generic is a valid statement, whether I agree with that statement or not is immaterial.

Lets see what I wrote:

The southpaw argument is not a VALID argument with regards to why Halo 3 is not worthy of it's success.

Lets see what you wrote:

if people want to CLAIM THAT THIS OR ANY OTHER GAME IS A GREAT GAME it better allow the user to create his or her own layout of buttons if the game bothers to let you change sticks in the first place, rather than insult player intelligence by not doing so but allowing other options that beg for this kind of thing.)

So yes I think I did read.

I played Bioshock on the PC (Where incidentally you can configure the controls any way you want.)

not on the console version

and I found the game to be vapid. While nice to look at I did not appreciate the art style,

Because you expected a underwater city built in the 1940's to NOT have an art deco style?

and I felt that the story was lacking in so far as making me feel connected to the player character.

Did you even finish the game? Or pick up the audio diaries? Either you didn't and you missed out a hell of a lot, or you did and there must be some other game that has enormous amounts of interesting backstory explorable in the game that makes bioshock's history of rapture seem 'vapid' by comparison

To answer your question Jef when I hear the term Covenant I picture somewhat menacing beings worthy of at least respect if not fear, not small pygmies that run away from you on sight as you shoot them multiple times.

Because the entire game consists of shooting small pygmies running away from you. The idea is that the lowest ranks of this alien collection were drafted and are being forced to fight. Not so with the elites who are actually a dangerous foe.

I don't know I just couldn't shake the feeling that I was the mean kid who likes to kick dogs whenever I shot them....

I think you put it on a too low difficulty.

 

[shadow skill]

I'm not saying that Halo is generic in this thread, what I am saying is that its not a very good game mostly because the controls are so bad, and the team failed to have the decency to give players the same level of control they give people playing the game on the PC. It even goes beyond the console version of Bioshock omiting these kinds of options entirely because it gives users a half choice which is just insulting. The controls are the most important part of gameplay, if you find yourself fighting the controls to a game what is the point of even playing? So exactly how is it not valid to say that Halo 3 specifically is not a great game when the controls fall apart again? The issue isn't whether its comfortable for southpaws or not the issue is whether or not the game still functions if you start using the options the developers made available to you in the first place.

Should I call The Darkness a good game even though its stupidly easy to trigger a game ending bug on both platforms it is on. If you do the harmonica sidequest BEFORE the final chapter, the final chapter will not load and you are fucked unless you happen to remember what chapter you were in before you did the sidequest and go back and play that chapter again and avoid doing that sidequest until the final chapter. I didn't keep a log of what sidequest I did in what chapter and I was not going to go back and play the entire game again because of a stupid ass bug like that. That is not what I would call a good product since they missed something so obvious during testing. (It is also one of the many games that have problems simillar to Halo with respect to the controls.) The sad thing is that I was genuinely interested in finishing the game because I was interested in Jackie as a human being unlike Bioshock.

No I didn't finish Bioshock because I found it too boring to even bother with it. I've never liked steampunk and I didn't even know it was set in the sixties until right after it came out because I make it a point not to follow a game that I am interested in too closely.


Everyone should keep in mind that te major reason Lair was lambasted by the reviewers was because of the controls and the fact that there was no option to turn off the motion controls at all. This of course is not all that different from my problem with Halo 3's control options. I actually did not mind Lair's controls too much but I found certain movements overly difficult to do with the motion controls, and the motion sensing woefully inaccurate in situations where you would want accuracy. I totally understand where people's hatred of the game comes from, and think that the jackass from Factor Five who was busy calling everyone stupid for not liking his bad controls should do us all a favor and patch the game to use the sticks and then kill himself.

 

[Mursam]

I'm not saying that Halo is generic in this thread,

I'm sorry about the mistake

what I am saying is that its not a very good game mostly because the controls are so bad,

you mean uncomfortable for a minority of gamers

and the team failed to have the decency to give players the same level of control they give people playing the game on the PC. It even goes beyond the console version of Bioshock omiting these kinds of options entirely because it gives users a half choice which is just insulting.

So in your opinion, you would rather they alienate those who prefer inverted control AS WELL as those who prefer southpaw. Isn't that a tad stubborn?

The controls are the most important part of gameplay, if you find yourself fighting the controls to a game what is the point of even playing? So exactly how is it not valid to say that Halo 3 specifically is not a great game when the controls fall apart again?

The thing is, they don't fall apart. They are just not made to suit a particular and uncommon style of playing, and then didn't make the control stance changebale (well they did, just not to suit your category of southpaw gamers). It just seems to me that while that is a valid complaint, you cannot take one flaw that applies to a minority of gamers and use it to justify why that game is not very good, without providing any other reason at all.

The issue isn't whether its comfortable for southpaws or not the issue is whether or not the game still functions if you start using the options the developers made available to you in the first place.

Well, yes the game still functions if you use the optons the developers made available

Should I call The Darkness a good game even though its stupidly easy to trigger a game ending bug on both platforms it is on. If you do the harmonica sidequest BEFORE the final chapter, the final chapter will not load and you are fucked unless you happen to remember what chapter you were in before you did the sidequest and go back and play that chapter again and avoid doing that sidequest until the final chapter. I didn't keep a log of what sidequest I did in what chapter and I was not going to go back and play the entire game again because of a stupid ass bug like that. That is not what I would call a good product since they missed something so obvious during testing. (It is also one of the many games that have problems simillar to Halo with respect to the controls.) The sad thing is that I was genuinely interested in finishing the game because I was interested in Jackie as a human being unlike Bioshock.

So you're comparing the fact that the developers left out the ability to screw around with the controls to suit a minority of gamers, to the fact that when ANYONE does a sidequest when they are not supposed to that screws up the entire game. Once again it is a valid complaint but it is not the decider of whether or not the game is great or not.

Everyone should keep in mind that te major reason Lair was lambasted by the reviewers was because of the controls and the fact that there was no option to turn off the motion controls at all. This of course is not all that different from my problem with Halo 3's control options.

No I didn't finish Bioshock because I found it too boring to even bother with it. I've never liked steampunk and I didn't even know it was set in the sixties until right after it came out because I make it a point not to follow a game that I am interested in too closely.

So let me get this right. You're passing judgement on a game, and a character when you just admitted you not only didn't finish it and witness the construction of a brilliant backstory, plot and twist but didn't even bother with it?

 

[swift tongued]

I'm torn, on one hand for the longest time i absolutely hated the halo, series because of how over hyped it was by people who never played a computer shooter, one the other hand the games are all fun as hell and i love playin them so-op with a friend, or multiplayer, their fun games, over hyoed by retards, forge is just gary's mod, but still truely incredible games that kinda make me regret choosing wii over 360, oh well i'll get over it when brawl comes out

 

[shadow skill]

If you find a game boring then how could you consider the game great? How does that make sense? The point is that the developers caused the game to break if you decided you wanted to play a game in a way that was allowed by the team who created the game. How does this not affect the quality of the experience? "But, But , But only a minority like this option.." does not fly when you have games like Lair which are almost universally hated for giving users shit controls. I found it comical when the jackass from Factor Five criticized Warhawk for their motion controls even though they were smart enough to make the motion controls entirely optional! At the end of the day no one has any real idea how many people use one option or another and something like hand dominance is basically fifty fifty so the correct thing to do is give users full control and call it a day. Not half control. But not liking the controls which deal directly with the gameplay is magically irrelevant to whether the game is a good product or not...right.

 

[swift tongued]

holy crap shadow, what do you do, you have like 30 friken posts, in any case that reason halo was so famous is before that console shooters sucked at controlling. Stop! don't say golden eye, that game is fun, but it also auto aims, odd jobs was the best charecter just because the slight hieght change made shooting him hard as hell, so yes the controls were great, new, but great, as for grunts and flood? they vary the shooting, with grunts kill the elite and ur safe, flood were new though, new because you found yourself in a corner surrounded by corpses praying you had enough bullets

 

[shadow skill]

Halo auto aimed as well......

 

[Keyvias]

Holy Hell, that was a lot of info to take in (been offline for a couple of days)
Here's what I see from reading over all these from a 3rd person point.
1)left handiness, I'm addressing this because if I hear it mentioned again I'll ram a plasma grenade in my mouth. I'm not left handed so personally this doesn't bother me, but the person who taught me to play halo (yes I sucked at the game before my friend decided to teach me how to play) is left handed and he doesn't seem to mind and he's pretty good.
2)Story line, first things first, I believe playing a shooter for the story line is like playing mass effect for it's 'porn scene' If that's what you're looking for you will be disappointed. While Halo's story line is competent. The fact that books are required to enjoy the story line is disgusting. I read one of the books, good book, but I want that level in depth in my games, but! I do not expect that in a shooter
3) Hype, companies love it, not much we can do about it. Get over it
4) On running grunts If they didn't run away I would've held it against the game. I am a bloody god, die or get out of my way.
5)Multiplayer, I believe in Halo's multiplayer. It can be infuriating, but it's the quickest and most efficient form I've seen so far. So what if I have to play a 10 minute game of oddball if it's really that bad I can quit and lose 3 xp (I don't know the exact number)

 

[Ichimaru]

I think you're asking why it's so extremely popular for being what seems to be just, above average. The hardcore fanboys (I know of) come from two areas...

1. A reasonable amount of people who read the books and follow the story. It has a long and seemingly intresting story line if you go back through the books and play all three games (I haven't read the books but enjoyed the three game storyline just fine).

2. The almighty multiplayer fanbase. The reason I think that Halo gets all this hype is because the first one was released at a time when Microsoft needed a hit, and Halo: CE was an above average shooter. Thus it got all kinds of PR from Xbox owners and Microsoft, netting a larger playerbase. The thing people enjoyed most who hadn't read the books? The multiplayer. It seems to me (or so I have heard) that 16 people would sit in different rooms of the same house just to play this game with friends. This wasn't Joe gamer, but people who had only a interest in console gaming, I.E.people who had not heard the term "LAN party." Thus was the start of non-hardcore gamers getting into networked action, and showing them the orgasm of joy that is fast paced multiplayer FPS's with more than the 4 people sitting next to you. Thus online play in Halo 2 was that multiplayer experience without the social interaction or the hauling of equipment. Basically I think it's just the game that got networked gaming to the masses, and people stuck with what they knew and assumed Halo was the best at this function. As I said, these wouldn't be the types to read reviews so much, but more prone to listen to the hype.

But that's merely speculation(It also was the first console FPS with good networking and fanbase).
The reviews come from the need of the corporations who publish them to comply in some way with the general will of the masses. Most people I know (non-gamers) don't read the review unless it's bad, and a game they want to like, or like, anyhow. My personal view is Halo is more good than bad, especially in multiplayer, but I like the Team Fortress games way more in that capacity.

 

[shadow skill]

There were people who really liked Lair's controls or did not mnd them. Does that mean that magically there wasn't a problem? It's the same argument that the factor five jackass used when he tried to defend his own massive stupidity. That guy claimed that "only hardcore gamers" had a problem with the controls and judging from the problems pointed out in eviews in publications that are not really gaming centric I would tend to think that he is full of shit and just doesn't want to admit that Factor Five made a really bonehead move by not allowing people to use the sticks to control flight.

 

[the_carrot]

I am greatly confused by the success that halo 3 has had. I mean I enjoy the game and I've spent time playing though both campaign and at least 10 hours of multiplayer. I am looking for a fanboy because I've heard everyone argue against the game. A lot of those complaints I agree with, but that's besides the point.
Can someone come here and rant for a paragraph or two on halo 3 so I can try to understand what you see in it

I can really understand. I enjoy halo, but not very much (though I've not played 3) but I really hate the art, the gameplay seems sluggish, and it's written for a military enthusiast or a 3 year old. It strikes me as really maudlin, but there's plenty of polish to halo. It runs well, since it's all run on identical hardware. And the glitches are largely amusing and pretty rare, as in you have to search for them. I'm not sure what makes it popular.

 

[shadow skill]

I have no problems with the controls. I've played against other people who have no problem with the controls. I've played lefty Southpaw lovers who have no problems with the controls. You're complaining doesn't stem from Bungie's 'lack of attention' to lefties, but from the layout of the controller itself. Buttons on the right, sticks to the left. That doesn't leave you with a lot of freedom.

And as for menacing covenant- Elites?? Predators with energyshields and plasmaguns? Or how about Brutes, basically lead absorbing Yetis?? That do nothing for ya??

So the fact that they Bungie did not at the least leave a map that mirrored the face buttons from the right side of the controller IE the exact oppossite of the default configuration is a function of the design of the controller now? You can't be serious, even Orange box has a broken but functional solution: In the Orange box you are free to change the button map however there is a bug in this in that they allow you to map the DPad as well but you cannot map weapon classes to any other buttons. In short you are able to break the game in that you can make it impossible to switch weapon classes because for some unfathomable reason they hardcoded the weapon class switching to the dpad but still let you assign other things to the DPad. Nevertheless I was able to actually come up with a mapping that worked for me since I was able to put the actions most important to me in decent places.

In UT3 you can map the Dpad to any actions that are mapped to the rigt side face buttons. The same is true for Resistance Fall of Man, it's also true for Black on the PS2, hell even Max Payne 2 on the PS2 allowed for customization of this kind although you cannot map the dpad buttons to individual face button actions which is a shame. Also from what I understand the Timesplitters games have full customization.

This is most definetly not a hardware manufacturer problem.

 

[greygelgoog]

I have no plans of getting Halo 3. My primary complaint is what I've heard about campaign mode. I've been following Halo ever since it was first announced by way of cryptic e-mails to one of (if not "the") biggest Marathon fan-sites out there. And Marathon wasn't primarily a multi-player game. It was like reading a full sci-fi novel with interactive shooting segments. And Halo was in many ways the spiritual successor to Marathon. AIs of dubious loyalty, multi-racial alien empires with genocidal tendencies, invincible cyborg hero, and the Marathon logo strewn across the game. Halo was meant to be a single player game with some multi-player features tacked on. That was actually in an interview and I need to find it.
Then came the Microsoft buy-out. And as you watch the credits in the Halo games, you can feel the old timers fleeing in horror. I know it's still Bungie Studios, but how many of the people behind the original Halo are still in the credits of Halo 3? Halo was originally meant to be Marathon on the X-Box. Now it's just Counter-Strike with aliens.

 

[GrungeHead]

The most attractive thing about Halo is that it is so solid. The story is well written and everything fits in nicely. Its not anything new, but neither is anything esle these days (Nintendo).

 

[Duck Sandwich]

Melee attacks as a secondary weapon function were in Perfect Dark - Goldeneye's spiritual sucessor.


may i also add that sticky grenades are essentially timed mines - also from Perfect Dark

In Perfect Dark, you could only melee with a few of the weapons, and to do so, you had to hold B for a second to switch to Pistol Whip mode before you could actually pistol whip. Then you had to hold B again when you wanted to go back to shooting.

Melee and Grenades in Halo aren't innovative features themselves, but what is innovative is how they're always at the ready - you don't have to press a button to switch to them (unless you're switching from Frag Grenades to Plasma or vice versa).

 

[voodoo65]

"Finish the fight!" comes to mind. We needed closure to the story that started with the launch title of the original Xbox.

 

[VanderHuge]

I read this forum and I felt like I needed to say something...
Ive played Halo 1 & 2 (I would probably of played 3 but I prefer my PC over buying a 360). Now I dont hate the game I just think its not as good as what other people say.

Halo 1 was great dont get me wrong I felt that it was a brilliant FPS. All I used to do was play Halo 1 and I couldent wait for the sequal. Halo 2 was a MASSIVE disapointment it seemed that everything I loved about Halo 1 was gone. I used to play Halo 1 co-op on legendary and it was great becouse you had to play almost tacticly. Halo 2 just seemed to cram so many enemys into such small levels that legendary was just no fun at all. Also I've read on these forums people saying that Halo 1, 2 and 3 were inovative. NO Halo 1 was inovative halo 2 didnt add ENYTHING new, well exept for duel weilding weapons but there have been many FPS's that have done that before hand. Now I've seen that Halo 3 has added more things like movable gun turrets and such but I am not impressed.

Also just to address people arguing about whats "Generic" or not what my opinion about the term is that if a game JUST has killing and shooting and brings nothing new to the table then its generic. Halo 1 was not generic becouse it brought many great FPS elements together and Polished them to a mirror shine. Halo 2 WAS generic becouse Halo 1 already did everything Halo 2 did and in my opinion better. And to say that every FPS is generic is just wrong. FEAR is not generic, Unreal Tornament is not generic, Stalker is not generic. I can list more but I feel like I've ranted enough.

Now Im not trying to piss anyone off (exept for the twelve year olds... I HATE THEM) this is just my opinion.

 

[Zeddicus Zhul Zorander]

Alrighty then, first of all, I enjoyed the Halo series. Secondly, I loved Halo 1. Thirdly, I hated and despised Halo 2. Fourthly, I loved (though not quite to the same extent as Halo 1) Halo 3. I'll tell it to you like this. When Halo 1 came out I was a wee little lad with no money. A couple of my friends with money were playing it, but since I was coming out of N64 room where I played Goldeneye and Turok 2, I sucked at the controls. Later on in my life I had reason to go back to the wonders of Halo 1 and I started learning the controls. I'm still not as good as some, but I can manage. I got really excited by the story line. Obviously, me being rather young (and rather poor and relatively bad at games) I hadn't gotten the chance to learn about all these story lines and innovations that I keep hearing Halo ran amok with. It does merit the question, "How does a little known game publisher come out with a game on a new system (that apparently has a lot of games with the same sort of controller scheme) get so much hype that we can all bicker about it like eight year old school boys who think girls have coodies and therefore stay away from them like the plague?" From my standpoint I can't really think of hearing about Bungie before Halo, and I believe that back in the day, they made games for Macintosh. So I'll add to the question. How does a game get all the hype to get game of the year and gather enough of a following for the third and final installment to get record sales in the history of MANKIND, without having something new and innovative? (Notice I'm not using the "millions of people play that" line, sino the "why do millions of people play that?") I mean, come on, it's not like it has sex. I like the freedom of the controls (two sticks instead of one stick and C-directions from N64). Also, people keep saying that Halo steals from a smorgasboard of different games. Now, to make a point, in the martial arts community the dojos with the biggest numbers recently are MMA (mixed martial arts). Why? Because people want the best of everything to defend themselves. Halo combines a lot of innovations from other games, throws in a few of its own, and comes out with MFPS (mixed first person shooter). Why? Because most people want the best of everything. I admit, I could be a little lost on the story if I hadn't read the books, but they were damn good books. If I want crazy amounts of backstory in a game I'll go play an RPG, and Cortana does give some backstory as you toddle along. The storyline wasn't half bad, but it could draw parallels to the Marathon series (Bungie's FPS for Macintosh that came out around the same time as Doom, and beats Doom shitless, if you ask me.) In all, while Halo has its flaws, why do people play it? Because they enjoy a mediocrity competition? No, because they actually like the game. They find it easy to immerse themselves into the storyline. They like the controls, they like the gameplay. They just FUCKING LIKE IT. And if you don't, nobody's asking you to.