Halo 3

agent 47

Is it me or was Halo 3 a big disappointment. The multiplayer is great no question but the single player mode was too short and used a throw-away plot. Like to hear your opinions

cold_filter

Yeah I wasnt a big fan of it, though i have yet to play online. I thought halo2 was very good, yet to play halo1,.

IMO Quake is a far more enjoyable game

TheDoc

think this has been done over and over

single player was a total let down..multiplayer was jsut halo2, nothing particulary wrong with it, but cod came along and washed it away

ranking up was more about playtime then playskill, which annoys me and id say it annoys alot of gamers...who cant dedicate their life to halo


a massivly hyped game, that was a pure let down

Shiminay

Too short (a non-regular, non-360-owning player like me finished it in about 10 hours tops). Didn't get to play the multiplayer online yet, I'd say it'd be alright.

But cold_filter's right, Quake's way better

kaimera

I loved the SP.

Improved on both H1 & H2 and it worked so well. Really enjoyable and some memorable levels and set pieces for me. Never bothered with the MP, rather 4p split screen myself.

Just waiting on a second controller to arrive to go thru SP in co.op

BlitzKrieg

Quake's way better

quake's always better

appletartman

anyone here have the recon armour for halo 3?

Creamy Goodness

[DM]-TheDOC- wrote: »

a massivly hyped game, that was a pure let down

just one hyped game?

the whole series is ****ing over rated piece of ****e it's worse than daikatana in my list of fps tbh.

steviec

The problem wasn't so much the game as it was the hype surrounding it. It's an above average console FPS and nothing more.

djkeogh

was never a huge fan of the Halo series but picked this up and went through the first level the other day. Can't say I'm all that interested in continuing with it. COD4 blows it out of the water

mayordenis

over hyped but still a good game, like if it wasnt halo and wasnt as hyped would people give out **** about it? no, as it stands, and viewed as it is, what comes in the box, is a very accomplished game.

Kiith

I quite like the single player mode. Wasnt anything new or revolutionary, but it was a sold enough FPS with a decent story (i'm a story whore). Havent played multiplayer, but i was never a big fan of getting shouted at by 12 year old americans, something which i hear happens alot in Halo.

johnny_ultimate

I thought Halo 3 was better than the last two. I had fun playing the singleplayer, and fun playing the multiplayer. Just fun. Nothing more.

Better series out there such as Half-Life etc.. Far worse ones too. Not deserving of the hype, but if it wasn't for the brand name, I wouldn't say it would attract half the support / half the hatred Halo inevitably does.

conzy

omg its like the bestest game ever!!!!!!!

But not really....

COD4 puts it to shame

Creamy Goodness

conzymaher wrote: »

omg its like the bestest game ever!!!!!!!

But not really....

COD4 puts it to shame

daikatanta puts it to shame tbh.

Cuddlesworth

Cremo wrote: »

daikatanta puts it to shame tbh.

That was harsh.

thelordofcheese

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

That was harsh.

But not harsh enough.

MooseJam

so whens this coming to pc, it's old enough now that the exclusivity to xbox doesn't matter much, I'd be slightly curious.

Creamy Goodness

pm from appletartman wrote:

Hi can you tell me how to get the recon armour?

Thank you.

i don't think i couldn't of been any clearer on my opinon of the game heheh.

Seeker

I enjoyed both the Single Player and multiplayer. I absolutely love the Halo series. I played it on Heroic and it took me well more than ten hours , which is about the length of time I like playing most games ( unless its something like a Mario or Zelda game) One thing I noticed was that I think the controls in Halo 1 with the Duke controller were more accurate than Halo 3 with the 360 controller.

The story hugely dissapointed me though. I thought the secrets of the Halo universe would be blown right open. Instead we were given absolutely nothing on the Forerunners except for one comment by the Prophet. In the Cortana Letters I was given the impression that Cortana would be a dangerous foe. Instead all she did was give the chief hallucinations. I also thought that those blue beams that were shot up into the sky in Halo 1 would be explained. Silly me

0ubliette

conzymaher wrote: »

omg its like the bestest game ever!!!!!!!

But not really....

COD4 puts it to shame

You could argue that cod4's MP is better alright, but halo 3's SP absolutely pisses all over cod4s. Respawning terrorists with homing grenades, 100% linearity, scripted to death pile of ****cock was all cod4 was. Halo 3 at least had some diveristy and freeform approach to its SP. Its light years ahead of the same old tried and tested clunky 'play it our way or not at all' approach to playing thast cod4 has. Most overrated game in recent memory is cod4. SP wise its barely changed at all since cod1

Cuddlesworth

0ubliette wrote: »

You could argue that cod4's MP is better alright, but halo 3's SP absolutely pisses all over cod4s. Respawning terrorists with homing grenades, 100% linearity, scripted to death pile of ****cock was all cod4 was. Halo 3 at least had some diveristy and freeform approach to its SP. Its light years ahead of the same old tried and tested clunky 'play it our way or not at all' approach to playing thast cod4 has. Most overrated game in recent memory is cod4. SP wise its barely changed at all since cod1

What part of Halo 3's single player campaign was not linear?

Retr0gamer

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

What part of Halo 3's single player campaign was not linear?

There was a part in the game were I had to circumnavigate a rock that split the path. I could have walked left around it but I choose to go right.

CoD4 SP pisses all over Halo 3 for one simple reason, it didn't have the flood.

0ubliette

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

What part of Halo 3's single player campaign was not linear?

lets see, there was the scarab battle. I couldve used a mongoose and rode around the map and let the AI companion blast at the scarab with a rocket launcher, or i couldve nicked a warthog and used the gun turret on it myself against the scarab, or just abandoned vehicles altogether and ran for the rocket turret and taken it down from there. Hell if i wanted to i couldve just hidden in a corner and all my AI teammated would eventually knock it down.
Ditto for the second scarab fight, i could choose to use tanks, hornets, warthogs, or just run up to the scarabs and try and board them myself.
Or on more or less any level of the entire game where i have the option to wade in guns blazing, or snipe, or drive a vehicle through it, or basically do whatever the **** i want to be quite honest.

So lets compare that to cod4 shall we? Where your options are shoot everything until you get funneled down the next corridor to the next choke point, then get funnelled down another corridor until the next choke point, and 5 hours later youre done.

Retr0gamer wrote:

There was a part in the game were I had to circumnavigate a rock that split the path. I could have walked left around it but I choose to go right.

complete bollocks.

thelordofcheese

0ubliette wrote: »

Retr0gamer wrote:

There was a part in the game were I had to circumnavigate a rock that split the path. I could have walked left around it but I choose to go right.

complete bollocks.

No, he's right, i remember the rock. However i went left. Made for a totally different and not-linear-at-all game.

Retr0gamer

0ubliette wrote: »

lets see, there was the scarab battle. I couldve used a mongoose and rode around the map and let the AI companion blast at the scarab with a rocket launcher, or i couldve nicked a warthog and used the gun turret on it myself against the scarab, or just abandoned vehicles altogether and ran for the rocket turret and taken it down from there. Hell if i wanted to i couldve just hidden in a corner and all my AI teammated would eventually knock it down.
Ditto for the second scarab fight, i could choose to use tanks, hornets, warthogs, or just run up to the scarabs and try and board them myself.
Or on more or less any level of the entire game where i have the option to wade in guns blazing, or snipe, or drive a vehicle through it, or basically do whatever the **** i want to be quite honest.

Wow, What a game! Do you mean to tell me that in Halo 3 you can use different weapons to kill the bad guys and it changes the experience? I didn't know that the AI was so good in the game that they could take down a scarab let alone a Brute. I never let them when I played since above the first difficulty level they kept dying from their own stupidity on me or standing around taking ineffectual pot shots.

This is amazing, my memory might be a bit hazy but CoD4 definitely only had one weapon to use on the bad guys and no AI team mates to help you out.

johnny_ultimate

Neither CoD4 or Halo 3 are stellar examples of single player FPS experiences. CoD4 is fun, but so many annoyances - the invisible triggers would be the most irritating aspect of it in my opinion, and damages the game considerably. Some great set pieces though (opening tanker,

nuclear fallout level, sniping, All Ghillied Up

), and it is probably the best squad based single player Ive played (although it is a genre not praised for one player). Same could be said of Halo 3. Terrific moments (the airship Scarab fight being a highlight, due to great production values e.g. soundtrack) but overall little more than a slightly above average shooter. Oh, and the Cortana level was the single worst level in a game I have ever had the displeasure to push through. They are both good single-player games, but nothing spectacular. In multiplayer, they are both wonderful experiences (although CoD4 is considerably superior in my opinion, due to the superbly realised levelling up system). But if you want single player FPS experiences, just play Half Life 2 or BioShock or something. Much better.

armour87

0ubliette wrote: »

You could argue that cod4's MP is better alright, but halo 3's SP absolutely pisses all over cod4s. Respawning terrorists with homing grenades, 100% linearity, scripted to death pile of ****cock was all cod4 was. Halo 3 at least had some diveristy and freeform approach to its SP. Its light years ahead of the same old tried and tested clunky 'play it our way or not at all' approach to playing thast cod4 has. Most overrated game in recent memory is cod4. SP wise its barely changed at all since cod1

Bollocks. Im a big Halo fan but Halo 3s SP was the worst SP off the whole series. I cant seperate them for MP, I might even just tip Halo as it is perfectly balanced imo. But to say it has a better SP is just wrong.

Sarky

thelordofcheese wrote: »

No, he's right, i remember the rock. However i went left. Made for a totally different and not-linear-at-all game.

Don't forget you could jump over the rock for the crazy THIRD option! Man, that rock was great...

The scarab bits were interesting, but not nearly enough to save the rest of it, which has been done before just as well if not better in other games. It played almost exactly like Halo 1, which was hardly amazing but was solid enough to enjoy until the flood came along and turned it into a steaming digital turd. I played Halo in coop rather than stay up drinking port until 6am. Looking back I made the wrong decision.

Cuddlesworth

0ubliette wrote: »

lets see, there was the scarab battle. I couldve used a mongoose and rode around the map and let the AI companion blast at the scarab with a rocket launcher, or i couldve nicked a warthog and used the gun turret on it myself against the scarab, or just abandoned vehicles altogether and ran for the rocket turret and taken it down from there. Hell if i wanted to i couldve just hidden in a corner and all my AI teammated would eventually knock it down.
Ditto for the second scarab fight, i could choose to use tanks, hornets, warthogs, or just run up to the scarabs and try and board them myself.
Or on more or less any level of the entire game where i have the option to wade in guns blazing, or snipe, or drive a vehicle through it, or basically do whatever the **** i want to be quite honest.

So you were funnelled into a area with a selection of weapons and the objective was to kill the scarab to move into the next area. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but there is only 1 proper way to kill a scarab, shoot the core, yes? And if you choose not to?

0ubliette wrote: »

So lets compare that to cod4 shall we? Where your options are shoot everything until you get funneled down the next corridor to the next choke point, then get funnelled down another corridor until the next choke point, and 5 hours later youre done.



complete bollocks.

You do realize that both Halo3 and COD4 are completely linear single player games? And that you have just described pretty much every fps ever created and the mechanics for around 90% of games created?

Let me guess, you like Halo a lot right? And refuse to obey the laws of logic when in a argument casting suspicion about it?

TheDoc

i think the criticsms that come from it are that it was a letdown, but when you look and look its hard to wonder what more people wanted.

i never played a halo, picked up H3 and the single player was ok, it wasnt amazing for me, it was decent enough

then i went onot halo3, found it VERY easy to start of well, but after a while it got a tad boring, only playing it with mates made it enjoyable.

But it has the cod4 syndrome, you play with mates online you are going to win every game, no exceptions.

i would rate cod4s sp higher and its multiplayer.

halo3 simply rewards those who can spend all their life on a game, atleast cod4 gives the opportunity for the player to level up quickly.

( yesterday went from 1 to 33 prestige level 1)

halo did however manage to pull me deeply into my xbox that pretty much gathered dust...

however i think its abnormaly strong MP population will disagree, however there is an alarmingly large portion of players that got halo for mp and never touched single player.