The Escapist Review Of Halo 3

mcgovern

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

They're online features. What about the people playing offline? They're the majority (Microsoft estimate that only 40% of Halo 3 players will go online, which is a fairly generous estimation considering Halo 2's paltry percentage).



Is there any evidence of this actually being the case, or are you just making stuff up? From Yahtzee's review:

"Halo 3 is by no means bad. What it is is average, boilerplate, run of the mill. A competent shooter, its only remarkable feature being the degree to which its stuck up it's own arse."

To me, that sounds more like a concise, fair assessment from someone speaking with experience, rather than an ignorant rant.

Read this thread for plenty of examples of people saying "Halo 3 is crap, haven't played it but its Halo so it must be". Not exactly hard to find.
And not playing the Multiplayer is almost as bad. So what if not everyone uses it? The fact is, its there, and its done very well and thus deserves praise.
And the 40% is unlikely to be a generous estimate, within 12hrs of launch over 1million people had logged on

How many people here who think its average or worse
a) have the game
and
b) love FPSs
?
I bet the number is very small.

P.S. Regarding the map editor for Far Cry, it totally ruined the MP for me. Nothing worse than joining a user made map, only for you to be stuck in an area with no weapons while the map creater sits on top of a unreachable platform with a sniper rifle and stacks of ammo.

TheAlmightyArse

ntlbell wrote:

But he didn't play 1 or 2 and only played parts of 3? or am I wrong?

He says Halo 3 is all the Halo he's played, which is enough to review Halo 3.

mcgovern wrote:

Read this thread for plenty of examples of people saying "Halo 3 is crap, haven't played it but its Halo so it must be". Not exactly hard to find.

You said that most critical reviews of Halo 3 were from people who hadn't even played it. A few flimsy posts in this thread from obviously bitter people isn't demonstrative of this.

mcgovern wrote:

And not playing the Multiplayer is almost as bad. So what if not everyone uses it? The fact is, its there, and its done very well and thus deserves praise.

Conversely, if someone finds the single player campaign lacking, shouldn't they say? And why should they tack on praise for an online mode they have no interest in, regardless of how well implemented it is?

mcgovern wrote:

And the 40% is unlikely to be a generous estimate, within 12hrs of launch over 1million people had logged on

Of course it's likely to be generous; it's not like Microsoft are unbiased here. Regardless, 40% is still a minority. It leaves online play meaningless to 60% of players.

mcgovern

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

You said that most critical reviews of Halo 3 were from people who hadn't even played it. A few flimsy posts in this thread from obviously bitter people isn't demonstrative of this.

I've not seen any critical comments apart from forums like this one, so it is very demonstrative.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Conversely, if someone finds the single player campaign lacking, shouldn't they say? And why should they tack on praise for an online mode they have no interest in, regardless of how well implemented it is?

There is a diffence between stating your opinion and writing a review. A review should be about all aspects, not just the parts you do or don't like. In other words a real review can say "This gets 8/10 instead of 9/10 because I found the single player lacking" but a real review should not say "I'm giving this 5/10 because I only bothered to review 1 piece of it, and the one that was always going to be least groundbreaking at that".

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Of course it's likely to be generous; it's not like Microsoft are unbiased here. Regardless, 40% is still a minority. It leaves online play meaningless to 60% of players.

The only esimate for number of units sold I could find was 2.8million for the first week.
More than 1.4million played it online in that period, or 50%.
There is also the fact that it is not meaningless, since the multiplayer functions are available in local play and system link etc.
A lot of people who don't have broadband will still play Halo 3 multiplayer with friends on the one Xbox for instance. I had 3 friends over on Friday night and we had a great time playing Halo 3 and FIFA 08 without ever logging into Xbox Live.

humanji

mcgovern wrote:

There is a diffence between stating your opinion and writing a review. A review should be about all aspects, not just the parts you do or don't like. In other words a real review can say "This gets 8/10 instead of 9/10 because I found the single player lacking" but a real review should not say "I'm giving this 5/10 because I only bothered to review 1 piece of it, and the one that was always going to be least groundbreaking at that".

Conversly, should a game get a high review because the reviewer only enjoyed one part of it and was't too bothered by the other part? Many of the people who are big Halo fans are fans of the MP side of it. If this is good and the SP is just a bog standard FPS game, then why should it get such huge praise when only one part of it is anything special?

Dcully

Ive always said Halo is THE most overated fps series on any format.
Its not a bad game as has been said,its only average.
While i personally havent played Halo 2 or 3 ive heard nothing good about either except from those who do not own or play pc fps titles.
I used to have Halo for xbox and PC and thoroughly enjoyed multiplayer on both ,for obvious reasons the pc versions was a lot better but thats for another day.

To xbox owners Halo may seem all conquering but to seasoned pc gamers they have seen it all before hence why very few pc gamers ooh and aah at Halo.

Jack Sheehan

Well I dont think anyone thinks that halo 3 is inherently 'BAD' but its not worthy of the same score as hl2 or Super Mario Bros. It is as he said 'average, boilerplate, run of the mill....it's only defining feature being the degree to which it's stuck up it's own arse'.

It's multiplayer is fun but certainly not TEH BEST EVA as everyone i know seems to be calling it. You cannot give 10/10 to a game simply because it's multiplayer is so good. If It has a short, mildly good single player it is not worthy of 10, or indeed 9.

also: 'I left my heart to a starship trooper....'

ntlbell

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

He says Halo 3 is all the Halo he's played, which is enough to review Halo 3.

I was under the impression he didn't play all of halo 3 nor did he play the mp side of it if it is this case, that is not enough to review it

ntlbell

Dcully wrote:

To xbox owners Halo may seem all conquering but to seasoned pc gamers they have seen it all before hence why very few pc gamers ooh and aah at Halo.

Yes because it's impossible for a xbox owner who posts on boards to possibly have a pc and have played PC games.

This PC snobbery is getting a tad dull.

motherboard,RAM,PROC,GPU,HDD an xbox IS a pc ffs!

Dcully

Yes because it's impossible for a xbox owner who posts on boards to possibly have a pc and have played PC games

I can post on boards on my mobile,i just cant play pc fps titles on it

This PC snobbery is getting a tad dull.

motherboard,RAM,PROC,GPU,HDD an xbox IS a pc ffs!

Not Pc snobbery at all,i cant play wii tennis on my pc but can on the wii.
I suppose thats called Wii snobbery ?

TheAlmightyArse

mcgovern wrote:

There is a diffence between stating your opinion and writing a review. A review should be about all aspects, not just the parts you do or don't like. In other words a real review can say "This gets 8/10 instead of 9/10 because I found the single player lacking" but a real review should not say "I'm giving this 5/10 because I only bothered to review 1 piece of it, and the one that was always going to be least groundbreaking at that".

Reviews are entirely about opinion. A good reviewer should give their informed opinion, based on their time with the game and in the context of the wider genre, carefully explained and entertainingly written. It should be what they think, because they can't possibly know what you'll think.

Otherwise every bad review would end in "... but then, maybe you'll love it. 7/10"

mcgovern

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Reviews are entirely about opinion. A good reviewer should give their informed opinion, based on their time with the game and in the context of the wider genre, carefully explained and entertainingly written. It should be what they think, because they can't possibly know what you'll think.

Otherwise every bad review would end in "... but then, maybe you'll love it. 7/10"

A real review contains a combination of opinions and facts. Not just a opinion about 1 facet of the item being reviewed. It does not need to be entertainingly written, if I'm looking to buy a new toothbrush and I want to know whats best one on the market, I don't care that someone wrote a witty review, I'd rather one that short and to the point. An entertaining review makes it more readable, but it doesn't add to the creditablity of the review.
And using your definition, the Escapist's Review can't be called a review since it a) doesn't take into consideration the context of Halo 3 in console FPSs and b) is not carefully explained.

Halo 3 is not the best game ever, CoD4 for instance will most likely be better, but it has done things never done on a console before, and done them well. It is enjoyable to play and a few years from now when people have forgotten Bioshock and STALKER etc, people will still be playing it, other console games will still by copying it and most likely people who have never played will still be belittling it.

Kiith

mcgovern wrote:

It is enjoyable to play and a few years from now when people have forgotten Bioshock and STALKER etc, people will still be playing it, other console games will still by copying it and most likely people who have never played will still be belittling it.

That says a lot more about the people playing the games, then it does about the games themselves.

ntlbell

Dcully wrote:

I can post on boards on my mobile,i just cant play pc fps titles on it



Not Pc snobbery at all,i cant play wii tennis on my pc but can on the wii.
I suppose thats called Wii snobbery ?

try dictionary.com for the word snob, then re-read your posts and re-read mine and try and concentrate you will work out the points eventually your a pc gamer you can do this!

mcgovern

Kiith wrote:

That says a lot more about the people playing the games, then it does about the games themselves.

Does it? Why would you go back and play Bioshock in a years time? To hear the same story again?

humanji

ntlbell wrote:

I was under the impression he didn't play all of halo 3 nor did he play the mp side of it if it is this case, that is not enough to review it

mcgovern wrote:

And using your definition, the Escapist's Review can't be called a review since it a) doesn't take into consideration the context of Halo 3 in console FPSs and b) is not carefully explained.

The Escapist reviews are done for their entertainment value. Even though Yahtzee points out major problems with all the games he reviews and usually focuses on them, he glosses over the main points of the games for the simple reason they're not as much fun to take the piss out of. And as such, you can't judge it the same as proper reviews. Sure, if I listened to his Bioshock review, I'd of never bought Bioshock and just reinstalled System Shock 2 instead (which reminds me, I've to reinstall System Shock 2 ).

mcgovern wrote:

It is enjoyable to play and a few years from now when people have forgotten Bioshock and STALKER etc, people will still be playing it, other console games will still by copying it and most likely people who have never played will still be belittling it.

And I'd disagree with this for the simple reason that the next three Halo games are in the works

But you have a good point about people saying it's crap without playing it. But you also had people saying it was the greatest game ever made before it was released. And you get people saying it's the best thing ever when only playing the MP side. And you get people saying it's crap by only playing the SP side. The problem is that it seems few people are interested in reviewing it as a whole.

ntlbell wrote:

Yes because it's impossible for a xbox owner who posts on boards to possibly have a pc and have played PC games.

This PC snobbery is getting a tad dull.

As is console fanboy elitism. Dcully had a good point. When Halo came out on the xBox, PC gamers had the likes of Half-life for about 4 years before, and I think Deus Ex came out in the same year (I'll look it up). So, although Halo was incredible for console gamers, to someone who was used to PC games, it offered very little.

Dcully

LOL ntlbell do you take everything in life so seriously?

Get some form of humour will ya :rolleyes:

ntlbell

humanji wrote:

As is console fanboy elitism. Dcully had a good point. When Halo came out on the xBox, PC gamers had the likes of Half-life for about 4 years before, and I think Deus Ex came out in the same year (I'll look it up). So, although Halo was incredible for console gamers, to someone who was used to PC games, it offered very little.

I hope you're not referring to me as a fanboy, lets get a few things straight.

I do most of my gaming on the PC but I have also owned every console since the 2600bar the ps3.

Add to the fact *I* don't even like halo!

My point is a lot of console owners are also PC gamers and MOST of us are not stupid enough to think halo is the be all and end all of the FPS genere.

Jack Sheehan

mcgovern wrote:

Does it? Why would you go back and play Bioshock in a years time? To hear the same story again?

Er..I think yes is the simple answer to that. Why not? Do you think Bioshock has limited replay value, even with the tremendous (nice word) amount of options as regards big daddy fights etc.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying people won't play Halo3 aswell but people still play SS2 don't they?



At least, I do...

humanji

ntlbell wrote:

I hope you're not referring to me as a fanboy, lets get a few things straight.

I do most of my gaming on the PC but I have also owned every console since the 2600bar the ps3.

Add to the fact *I* don't even like halo!

My point is a lot of console owners are also PC gamers and MOST of us are not stupid enough to think halo is the be all and end all of the FPS genere.

It was in reference to your implying DScully was a PC snob. It's randomly making assumptions and tagging people because of it.

Kiith

humanji wrote:

(which reminds me, I've to reinstall System Shock 2 )

Hang on a minute...you deleted System Shock 2? Blasphemy!! :mad:

0ubliette

Dcully wrote:

Ive always said Halo is THE most overated fps series on any format.
Its not a bad game as has been said,its only average.
While i personally havent played Halo 2 or 3 ive heard nothing good about either except from those who do not own or play pc fps titles.
I used to have Halo for xbox and PC and thoroughly enjoyed multiplayer on both ,for obvious reasons the pc versions was a lot better but thats for another day.

To xbox owners Halo may seem all conquering but to seasoned pc gamers they have seen it all before hence why very few pc gamers ooh and aah at Halo.

i play and own pc fps titles. Ive played pretty much every major pc fps game in the last 4 years. Everything from RTCW to doom 3, to half life 2 and deus ex, far cry, and quake 4. And Halo 3 is easily among the best the pc could offer. Id rate it higher than most pc games ive played and it easily deserves a place up there with HL2 as an all time classic. And thats just for SP.

Kiith

0ubliette wrote:

i play and own pc fps titles. Ive played pretty much every major pc fps game in the last 4 years. Everything from RTCW to doom 3, to half life 2 and deus ex, far cry, and quake 4. And Halo 3 is easily among the best the pc could offer. Id rate it higher than most pc games ive played and it easily deserves a place up there with HL2 as an all time classic. And thats just for SP.

They are going to eat you alive for that comment

0ubliette

Kiith wrote:

They are going to eat you alive for that comment

Who? The people who have never played halo 3 but are just saying it couldnt possibly be as good as anything on pc?

humanji

Kiith wrote:

Hang on a minute...you deleted System Shock 2? Blasphemy!! :mad:

Eh, I was young and foolish, and needed the money. A bigger boy made me do it. STOP LOOKING AT MEEE!!!!!!

Retr0gamer

0ubliette wrote:

Who? The people who have never played halo 3 but are just saying it couldnt possibly be as good as anything on pc?

I for one will say that Halo 3 isn't a patch on the best that the PC can offer in terms of FPS. Multiplayer maybe be fun but games like Day of Defeat source, Team Fortress 2, the battlefield series, Half-life deathmatch, Unreal Tournament etc. are just leagues ahead. As for a single player experience the PC has had System Shock 2, Deus Ex, HL 1 and 2, Farcry for years before Halo 3 and all of them are better games. Even on the xbox 360 you have Rainbow 6 Vegas and Bioshock which for me were much more enjoyable experiences in single player. Co-op is fun but it's really something I would play once with my mate. Doom co-op is something that never gets old with me and my mates.

mcgovern

Retr0gamer wrote:

I for one will say that Halo 3 isn't a patch on the best that the PC can offer in terms of FPS. Multiplayer maybe be fun but games like Day of Defeat source, Team Fortress 2, the battlefield series, Half-life deathmatch, Unreal Tournament etc. are just leagues ahead.

TF2 is not released yet, and will be on consoles.
Battlefield games are available on consoles.
Not sure about Half-life deathmatch, but I'm pretty sure its available on consoles.
Many of the Unreal Tournaments are available on consoles and the new one also will be...

Retr0gamer wrote:

As for a single player experience the PC has had System Shock 2, Deus Ex, HL 1 and 2, Farcry for years before Halo 3 and all of them are better games. Even on the xbox 360 you have Rainbow 6 Vegas and Bioshock which for me were much more enjoyable experiences in single player. Co-op is fun but it's really something I would play once with my mate. Doom co-op is something that never gets old with me and my mates.

Wow, imagine what console gamers are missing out on, they don't have Farcry or Deus Ex or HL1 or HL2. Oh wait, they are all on consoles...


Yeah, console gamers definitely have nothing good to compare Halo 3 to.

Retr0gamer

mcgovern wrote:

TF2 is not released yet, and will be on consoles.
Battlefield games are available on consoles.
Not sure about Half-life deathmatch, but I'm pretty sure its available on consoles.
Many of the Unreal Tournaments are available on consoles and the new one also will be...

Wow, imagine what console gamers are missing out on, they don't have Farcry or Deus Ex or HL1 or HL2. Oh wait, they are all on consoles...


Yeah, console gamers definitely have nothing good to compare Halo 3 to.

Those game franchises may be available on the consoles but they are much different games than the PC versions. TF2 is out in beta form and is still a better multiplayer game than Halo 3. Battlefield Modern Combat is available on the consoles but is a different game than the PC versions. Hlaf-life is available on the consoles in butchered form, there is no online play and the deathmatch arenas are small terrible maps because they need to only support 4 player split screen. Hl2 is on the xbox but with no multiplayer. The Unreal Tournaments are available on most consoles but again in butchered form. Farcry is on the xbox consoles as farcry instincts, a different game to the PC game and made by a completely different developer. Then there is Deus Ex which got a dreadful console conversion.

Try again next time after you have done some research. When Unreal Tournament 3 and Orange Box are released shortly on the consoles Halo 3 won't get a second look.

humanji

Well you have to take into account that they're sometimes released years later on PC. When they come out, PC's have moved on. And just because they've been ported, doesn't mean they're any good.

koneko

The Halo and console hatred is strong with some people. Unfortunate really. Personally I care more about the games than what platform they're on, but to each his own. I think the Halo series is overrated by some/many, but the way some talk about it you'd think it molested their mother or something, I guess hype makes some people run a mile in the opposite direction.

A few points though:

Farcry should not be mentioned in the same sentence as HL1 &2, SS2 or Deus Ex. That should be a crime

I would bet money that Halo 3 will be the most popular online XBL game for a good while yet.

Blowfish

koneko wrote:

Farcry should not be mentioned in the same sentence as HL1 &2, SS2 or Deus Ex. That should be a crime

Agreed, in fact it's almost as overhyped by some as the halo series.

For the record, I've completed both Halo 1 and 2 on heroic. If I was the one reviewing them they would have gotten somewhere between 6.5-7.0 out of 10. The fact that a huge number of places gave them far higher scores, makes me not trust their high scores for Halo 3.