Biggest Gaming Event in History: Halo 3 has arrived

[Wiglaf]

Some reviews of Halo 3 (note metacritic put all of these as at 90% or higher, when they should really be like 7.5-8.5):

Gamer 2.0

The story just isn’t put-together well enough, the graphics are disappointing, and the levels have you constantly running back and forth. Yes, if all of these things were rectified, the game would be spectacular. But they’re not.

Yahoo games

Yahoo! Games
The game's end sequence, to put it mildly, is an eight-car pileup. Fans of the series will recognize it as a poorly veiled swipe of a sequence in the original Halo, a challenge highlighted by a series of goofy circumstances and improbable level design meant to create an explosive end. The end result, however, is fairly absurd, as the whole shebang reeks of game developers wracking their brains to come up with the cleverest, most exciting finish, and shattering the fourth wall in the process.

Gamedaily

Despite Halo 3's overall greatness, we can't help but feel somewhat let down by the narrative's lackluster conclusion (but stay tuned after the credits roll for a coda that hits just the right note).

I'm a little wary of some of these big sites saying "OMFG BEST GAME EVAR." They did it before with Halo 1 and 2, despite there being huge shortcomings in each game. Any site that puts its image over an impartial review once, shouldn't be trusted again.

Even gamespot admits the kids ruin the mulitplayer, and that Halo 3 extremely similar to its predecessors. Oh, but it adds a level editor and some new guns, some of which even make you slow down when you carry them. TRULY A REVOLUTION IN VIDEO GAMING

[Agathon]

I'll probably buy it. I doubt it will get as much MP time as Warhawk though.

On the other hand, I've spent most of the weekend playing Tiger Woods PGA 08. The last golf game I ever played was Microsoft Golf for Windows 3.1. Things have improved in the 13 years since then.

[Nikolai]

Some mized reviews in Norway.

Gamer.no gives it 9/10, but an additional shorter review from another person on the same site gives it 7/10, because of some of it's shortcomings.

VG.no gives it 5/6, but only because of the multiplayer. SP alone is only worthy 4/6 they say.

Nettavisen.no gives it 4/6, because it "feels old, the graphics are not very impressing, the game cheats sometimes and the game has few tops." Much the same the others complain about.

Gamereactor.no OTOH, gives the game a perfect 10/10. But then again, they often follow the hype.

[Jon Miller]

My favorite FPS:

HalfLife 1 (for the MP although the SP seemed cool (Didn't finish it))
Golden Eye (for the MP)
CounterStrike (And Source) MP only
Halo (for Coop, and MP)
Team Fortress Classic (MP obviously)

Honestly, I liked MP in Halo better then Halo 2. I know that Halo 2 had more options/etc but I liked the actual mechanics (not the game options) of Halo better. How does Halo 3 compare? (not that I have an XBox or an XBox 360, nor will have one for quite some time unless I do something stupid, but my freinds have XBox and XBox 360 and I expect I will play this game at som epoint).

JM

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Some reviews of Halo 3 (note metacritic put all of these as at 90% or higher, when they should really be like 7.5-8.5):

Gamer 2.0


Yahoo games


Gamedaily


I'm a little wary of some of these big sites saying "OMFG BEST GAME EVAR." They did it before with Halo 1 and 2, despite there being huge shortcomings in each game. Any site that puts its image over an impartial review once, shouldn't be trusted again.

Even gamespot admits the kids ruin the mulitplayer, and that Halo 3 extremely similar to its predecessors. Oh, but it adds a level editor and some new guns, some of which even make you slow down when you carry them. TRULY A REVOLUTION IN VIDEO GAMING

As for kids ruining multiplayer -- which zone do you guys play in? If you play in Pro or Underground you get all kinds of douches. I play in "Recreation" and get very casual people that are generally very nice, and if they're not there's the mute button for each player that's easy to turn on. Besides this, I usually just play with friends.

Regarding the reviews, everyone has a different opinion. The Gamer 2.0 is the only one I've actually read (I trust Yahoo Games reviews just as much as I trust the Wall Street Journal's games reviews), and it was exceptionally poorly written. I clicked to find out more about the author and he's a kid who just barely turned 20 and judging from his previous articles on Halo 3 hyping it up to be the penultimate game, I'd say he just let the hype get the better of him.

And your comment on them giving the game a lower score than they did in lieu of those comments is ridiculous. Clearly they thought it was still an excellent game if all of them gave 90%+ ratings to the game despite some grievances.

[lord of the mark]

Tom Chick's review (he runs a very good gaming site, one whose forums are filled with folks who work in the industry)

http://www.quartertothree.com/

edit: correction

"Firstly, Falcon, it wasn't a review so much as my musings after finishing the campaign. Halo 3 is very much built for online multiplayer gaming, which I won't be able to experience until it goes live. I was simply posting comments on the part of the game that I've been able to play."

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Remember guys, this snoopy (the dumb one, the other snoopy is intelligent) also thinks Civ4 is the worst game in the series because the graphics suck. I don't think his opinion is particularly meaningful.

Thanks Kuci

... but play nice

One of these days I should get an FPS I guess... but it probably will wait until there's one worth playing with a light gun or something equivalent. I just can't play a shooter without something in my hand with a trigger... arcade games have spoiled me

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Tom Chick's review (he runs a very good gaming site, one whose forums are filled with folks who work in the industry)

http://www.quartertothree.com/

edit: correction

"Firstly, Falcon, it wasn't a review so much as my musings after finishing the campaign. Halo 3 is very much built for online multiplayer gaming, which I won't be able to experience until it goes live. I was simply posting comments on the part of the game that I've been able to play."

You don't need to explain who Tom Chick is. And there's a reason no gamers read his reviews.

The fact that he reviewed the game without playing multiplayer is suspicious. If he actually had a review copy, he'd have been able to play lots of online multiplayer with other reviewers who are on a special XBL. Further, he displays some profound ignorance of gaming history with his little speech about how Halo "proved console shooters could work, but Perfect Dark did that first". Goldeneye did it first, and Goldeneye was a far more popular game (and, IMO, better game) than Perfect Dark. He's also expecting a radical departure in gameplay from the previous Halo games? Is he ****ing crazy? Does he know how many people LOVE Halo as it is?

Sounds like a attention-grabbing "review".

Let's not forget just who Tom Chick is: he plays the odd minor character on TV shows. His most famous character is Oscar's lover Gill on The Office...

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Asher

You don't need to explain who Tom Chick is. And there's a reason no gamers read his reviews.

The folks on his site arent gamers? As for who he is, Im sure some folks here dont know.

The fact that he reviewed the game without playing multiplayer is suspicious. If he actually had a review copy, he'd have been able to play lots of online multiplayer with other reviewers who are on a special XBL. Further, he displays some profound ignorance of gaming history with his little speech about how Halo "proved console shooters could work, but Perfect Dark did that first". Goldeneye did it first, and Goldeneye was a far more popular game (and, IMO, better game) than Perfect Dark.

Someone said something here about tastes varying?

He's also expecting a radical departure in gameplay from the previous Halo games? Is he ****ing crazy? Does he know how many people LOVE Halo as it is?

Thats discussed in the thread there. He accepts that its gonna make ****loads of money and sell a gazillion copies. He just thinks an opportunity was missed.

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
The folks on his site arent gamers? As for who he is, Im sure some folks here dont know.

No, I think the "gamers" on his site are more likely to be people like you. And no offense, but you're not exactly a "gamer" as is popularly used -- you do play games, sure, but typically you're 5-6 years behind the curve.

Someone said something here about tastes varying?

No, that's not it at all. Goldeneye proved it could work because it was far and away the first really good shooter on consoles. This isn't a taste thing, even if you hated Goldeneye you have to acknowledge that it opened the door to other console FPS. Hell, Perfect Dark was the spiritual successor to Goldeneye....

Thats discussed in the thread there. He accepts that its gonna make ****loads of money and sell a gazillion copies. He just thinks an opportunity was missed.

Missed opportunity to do what? Piss off the millions of people who love the game and its gameplay?

If you don't like Halo gameplay, here's a novel thought -- don't play it. It would be completely ridiculous if Bungie changed up Halo's gameplay in any radical way given how popular and widely loved it is (the reviews speak for themselves).

Tom Chick is, to be frank, a colossal moron if he thinks Bungie missed an opportunity to change Halo substantially. Make another game if you wish, but don't **** with Halo.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Asher

No, I think the "gamers" on his site are more likely to be people like you. And no offense, but you're not exactly a "gamer" as is popularly used -- you do play games, sure, but typically you're 5-6 years behind the curve.

Judging by the zillion threads there on Bioshock, Id have to say thats not correct. Also that some of them are do in fact work in the games industry in one form or another. I also seem to recall Brad Wardell posting over there.


Perhaps you should register there and share your abundant wisdom.

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Judging by the zillion threads there on Bioshock, Id have to say thats not correct. Also that some of them are do in fact work in the games industry in one form or another. I also seem to recall Brad Wardell posting over there.


Perhaps you should register there and share your abundant wisdom.

The site looks second rate, just like Brad Wardell. The "review" is bad enough and suspect enough (it's been said by others at more reputable sites that they think the guy hasn't played Halo 3 at all) that it's worth avoiding.

If you want an informed site with real industry professionals (including people who worked on BioShock, Doom/Quake, Final Fantasy, Heavenly Sword, etc), check out Beyond3D.

I'm pretty sure his entire review is a way to increase his site's profile, and I'm not going to give him that.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Asher

The site looks second rate, just like Brad Wardell. The "review" is bad enough and suspect enough (it's been said by others at more reputable sites that they think the guy hasn't played Halo 3 at all) that it's worth avoiding.

If you want an informed site with real industry professionals (including people who worked on BioShock, Doom/Quake, Final Fantasy, Heavenly Sword, etc), check out Beyond3D.

I'm pretty sure his entire review is a way to increase his site's profile, and I'm not going to give him that.

Have you followed the site before the Halo musings? The site isnt flashy, but it has lots of interesting opinions (many of which completely disagree with Chick, on this as well as other issues) I doubt its going to pick up publicity cause of this one review - hes had controversial views in the past - the folks who like the site, like it.

I havent heard anyone actually disagree with what he said about the SP game, just contest whether SP is that important for Halo.


BTW, Brad Wardell is the designer of Gal Civ and Gal Civ2, and is a publisher as well. Thats a bigger credential than most folks who post on gaming sites. You may not like his games, but you surely cant say hes not a "gamer".

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Have you followed the site before the Halo musings? The site isnt flashy, but it has lots of interesting opinions (many of which completely disagree with Chick, on this as well as other issues) I doubt its going to pick up publicity cause of this one review - hes had controversial views in the past - the folks who like the site, like it.

I havent heard anyone actually disagree with what he said about the SP game, just contest whether SP is that important for Halo.

Considering that only game reviewers have it, how can people "disagree"? His comments do fly in the face of literally EVERY SINGLE other review, which is very suspicious to say the least.

BTW, Brad Wardell is the designer of Gal Civ and Gal Civ2, and is a publisher as well. Thats a bigger credential than most folks who post on gaming sites. You may not like his games, but you surely cant say hes not a "gamer".

I know who Brad Wardell is. I do consider him a PC gamer, though I consider him a second-rate game developer as he makes second-rate games for a third-rate company.

From looking at that site, it seems to be predominantly about PC gaming. I can see why he's still bitter about Halo, then. Still, worthless site and review.

His comment on how he wants "bots" in Halo is equally priceless. This guy just doesn't get it.

[Asher]

BTW: Famitsu, THE gaming magazine in Japan, gave Halo 3 93%: http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=135108