PDA

View Full Version : [HALO 3] a thorough review



ICEE
November 5th, 2007, 09:09 PM
im posting this on every forum about halo 3, hence the minor introduction.

hello, i am IronClad, and i have longsince been a member of the halo community. i have played the trilogy, and lived through its good and its bad. i am a veteran of all kinds of battles, i have beaten all three games on Legendary mode, and have played the online and multiplayer aspects of all three games. i have been a modder of halo one (custom edition, legal stuff only please) for quite some time now, and have some experience in modeling and animation, so i know some of the aspects of the game's setup, capabilities, etc, and can often use that knowledge to accurately judge aspects of halo 3. this little paragraph about me, is simply to let you know that i am not some random person complaining, i am a dedicated fan and modder who would like his voice to be heard.


I enjoyed getting all i could out of halo three's campaign mode, and truly enjoyed it as i had for the past games.

The story: its the average story of alien invasion, and earthly hero who defends his home. However, there are of course twists. One of the alien breeds is shunned from the rest, and joins humanity's fight for survival, but things get worse when a horde of alien zombies (flood) attack as well. i wont post spoilers, but i was very pleased with the story line, and the epicness of the cutscenes and music (love you marty)

upon replaying the campaign on legendary mode, i was very disappointed by how easy it was. I have always been a lone wolf, and played alone. without any help i had no trouble beating the game, even with a high fever. this upsets me. the first game was nearly impossible to beat on legendary mode, and gave me a real thrill that the third did not. furthermore, the third game's combat is totally unlike the other two, because your enemies are far weaker. now that elites arent in the covenant, the game has completely changed. the brutes lack the energy shields that kept elites from even flinching when struck by a bullet. when a brute runs to cover, there is no urge to chase him, you KNOW that he has no shields that may recharge, making him a fully formidable opponent again. you KNOW that sneaking around to catch him has no penalty, as he lacks the elite's lethal melee attack. you also know that you can take him down in 3 melee strikes. overall, i really wish some of the elites had remained on the covenant.

enemies:

grunts: the same lovable beasts provided little challenge alone as always, but the flurry of plasma that hurdles toward you from a group of 3 or more can really get you down, more so than it ever did in halo 1 or 2. this was pleasant to me, for i love a challenge. other changes that i loved, were their ample ability to drive ghosts in battle WITHOUT making themselves an easy target, and their new kamikaze attack. these things caused grunts to kill me many times on legendary, a feat they rarely accomplished in the prequels.

jackals: they were ultimately the same, cowering behind shields and using pistols to take down yours. they provided little challenge as always, until they picked up a sniper rifle. the only real changes were the colors of their shields, and their new ability to fire carbines. carbine-jackals rarely killed me, even on legendary. they were able to pin me down quite effectively however, but their weapon's contrail(piece of art that it was) made it easy for me to find them. i can see that the jackals seemed to change a bit to fill in for the lack of elites, as they're taller and more imposing, but it doesn't change the fact that a single round from a battle rifle or carbine will take him down.

Brutes: truly disappointing foes. when i saw the brute viddoc, i assumed that they would be the "formidable adversaries" that were promised to me, but alas they are the same bullet sponges that they have always been. brutes have minuscule aiming prowess, the incredible accuracy with thrown grenades that they showed in halo 2 has gone. they are nearly incapable of being dangerous in a brute chopper. a grunt in a ghost makes me cringe far more than they. they lack energy shields, and their power armor is pathetically weak unless the tilt skull is active. I was truly disappointed by this. brutes with sniper rifles can be dangerous, but are not as dangerous as a jackal with a sniper, because they lack the stealth of the jackals, and make their heads so vulnerable to a countersnipe. their chieftains are dangerous, when armed with a gravity hammer, though they lack the ferocity of tartarus and his fist of rukt. they cower behind the other brutes and wait until the entire pack is dead before they strike. when they DO attack, it is no difficulty to dodge the hammer, or guess their path. i was, however, pleased that plasma and spike grenades bounce off the armor, rather than cause INSTANTDEATH. i was however, satisfied with their dialog. truly brutal.

hunters: i only have positive things to say, aside from their rarity throughout levels. less than 15 hunters exist in the game. hunters were vicious warriors from the start, but with their enhanced weaponry and armor, they are a real task to defeat. i found that a touch of their mace/shield, or a single spurt from their beam weapon was instant death, and i really enjoyed battling them.i even found myself having to run away occasionally on legendary. kudos.

Allys:

marines: marines were FAR improved from halo 2. they have more accurate firing, more effective close quarters techniques, and more realistic dialog. thanks, i enjoyed this. also, they were threatening in vehicles at all times.

elites: they were to weak! the shields took too little damage before collapsing, and their armor could take next to no punishment before the elite collapsed. however, they were extremely effective in close combat and long distance alike. i was glad to have them. they had glitches however, such as being incapable of swinging a gravity hammer, and an elite seated in the passenger seat of a hornet whilst wielding a plasma rifle, the arms fold behind the elite and the plasma rifle floats.

the arbiter: He is a fine ally, whether controlled by an AI or a friend.I set aside my old dislike of him from halo 2. however, i have complaints. he is incapable of swinging a gravity hammer, and firing a spartan laser or sniper rifle. overall i enjoyed having him. though it seems a little bit unhaloesque to have a constant ally who never dies.


weapons:

i was extremely disappointed by the grenades of halo 3. for the first 3/4 of the game, you only have 3 grenade types, and therefore 6 grenades max. this is extremely lame! fire grenades, when present in the level, are extremely rare, and mostly useless. i was angered by the fact that they aren't present in any multiplayer maps. spike grenades however make a nice addition to gameplay. i just wish that spike and plasma grenades could be used together more frequently in multiplayer. they have totally different uses, but because they both stick someone at bungie decided not to have them together.

assault rifle: glad to have my old friend back

smg: this weapon is almost NEVER present in campaign, and even if it were it is only useful when dual wielded. i was glad that its power was increased, and its recoil diminished from halo 2, however.

spiker rifle: this weapon was useless, truly. an smg defeats it thoroughly. it was sad watching brutes attempt to fight with it.

plasma rifle: why does this weapon barely damage an unshielded spartan? this is annoying. however, i loved how effective this was against flood. in the levels cortana and floodgate, it was my LIFELINE.

plasma pistol: this weapon was fun to use, though it upsets me that its charged shot cannot kill. this makes it USELESS against grunts, drones and hunters. the main firing is so incredibly weak its not funny.

battle rifle: i have one word to describe this weapon: omgwtfbbq. this weapon is so great in campaign, but so useless in multiplayer. the bullets hardly damage, but are capable of headshots, which is its saving grace.as an animator i can honestly say that i am dissapointed. it uses the exact same animations as the assault rifle, and that is saddening.

carbine: i love it as i always did. i am upset that its melee animation mirrors that of the assault rifle and battle rifle's and beam rifle's horizontal melee. thats right i noticed.

magnum: do not want. this weapon is pathetic and unrealistic. how can a gun so weak fire so slow? also i noticed that one of its melee's is mirrored by the mauler's melee and the smg's melee (when used by the arbiter)

mauler: i love maulers. they're fun to use in multiplayer and campaign alike. they're well balanced, i really have no complaint here. i love the firing sound.

shotgun: it is unbalanced. i can shoot 50 rounds of smg lead into a man and die in one shot from this shotgun. also, i am angered by its flawed vertical melee attack. it doesn't end in the same frame that it begins in, and so left thumb jolts unnaturally. bungie's animators are talented, why would you make this type of mistake?

energy sword: this is far more balanced. no complaint. i do enjoy punching with them when they break as well :D

gravity hammer: this weapon is irritating. we don't need more close ranged weapons in multiplayer. the master chief is capable of beating a fully armored spartan down in 2 punches, why do we need to supplement that even further? also, it angers me that it uses the same melee animations as the CTF flag, though there is a perfectly deadly blade on the back that goes unused.

brute plasma rifle: hahah just kidding its gone. yay


missile pod: i retract my accusations of unbalanced gameplay that i spewed about during the beta. i enjoy using it in valhalla

machine gun: see missile pod

flamethrower: i am disappointed by the fact that flood can catch fire and jump onto you. this makes it not worth using in campaign, but camping with it in multiplayer is fun.

vehicles:

i only really have to complain about the hornet, so for the sake of my carpal tunnel ill just talk about that

hornet: the hornet causes graphical glitch in elites, my favorite covenant. this is upsetting. also, they are far to powerful in campaign, and ruins some of the epicness. i am glad they were excluded from multiplayer


thank you for reading, i dont need comments about how big a loser i am for critiquing so harshly. but im sure theyll come anyways.

i do overall enjoy halo 3. i believe it is the best of the series... but it could have been more

a diehard fan, IRONCLAD



if you read this entire thing, i applaud you.

Emmzee
November 5th, 2007, 09:25 PM
Way to jump on the fucking bandwagon. Halo 3 sucks.

ICEE
November 5th, 2007, 09:31 PM
I'm not on the bandwagon, I just posted my opinion. i am all for disrupting the flow of public opinion. thats fun :D

Hurrvish
November 5th, 2007, 09:32 PM
Yahtzee presents his review in a much more entertaining way :)

ICEE
November 5th, 2007, 09:36 PM
are you saying im a halo 3 fanboy, or exactly the opposite? because that big BRICK of words up there was basically a list of grievances.

Masterz1337
November 5th, 2007, 10:18 PM
You need to learn how to play the game. BR worthless? It's a must have gun.

Terin
November 5th, 2007, 10:20 PM
I think there's bandwagons for both, actually. There's those who say Halo 3 is fun and it is teh bezt game evar, and then there are groups of people who say Halo 3 could be improved, or that itz teh sux.

I personally like Halo 3. I had fun on it. I'm not a super-hardcore gamer at all. I can barely do Heroic on all Halo games. And Halo 3 made it more about having fun than being a monumental challenge, although I know people who want that. You're entitled to your opinon, though, Ironclad, and you want to play different things than people like me. But I think Bungie balanced it out very well in the end.

ExAm
November 5th, 2007, 10:48 PM
Your opinion is nothing short of glowing. Let's look at so-called "popular" opinion, shall we?

Game Rankings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Rankings) 93
MetaCritic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetaCritic) 94
G (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameSpy)ameSpy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameSpy) 5 of 5
1UP.com (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1UP.com) 10 of 10
Edge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_%28magazine%29) 10 of 10
Electronic Gaming Monthly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Gaming_Monthly) 10,10,9
Eurogamer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurogamer) 10 of 10
Official Xbox Magazine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Xbox_Magazine) 10 of 10
Game Informer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Informer) 9.75 of 10
GameSpot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameSpot) 9.5 of 10
IGN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IGN) 9.5 of 10
Famitsu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famitsu) 37 of 40
Not to mention the raving fanboys I'm so fucking sick of hearing at school and on the Internet. Sure seems like a bandwagon to me.Or maybe a lot of people just happen to like the game? I like it myself.

Also, I'm fine with the magnum. It's not the horrible killing machine it was in Halo 1, and when dual wielded it is just as deadly, if even more. It's got several uses. I pick one up whenever I can.

Jay2645
November 5th, 2007, 11:43 PM
If those so-called "useless" weapons you have there, Iron Clad, you need to seriously rethink them, or at least develop strategies when using them. There's a trick to each weapon:
1. Assault Rifle: Most people go full auto on this thing. Yes, that DOES kill people, but slowly and inefficiently. Short, well-aimed bursts, like those in Halo 1, bring down any target quickly and with at least half a clip to spare.
2. Magnum: As powerful as Halo 1's, only without the zoom and lower accuracy. I got a Killing Frenzy using 2 Magnums ONLY. The trick is to Dual-Wield, and when you can't fire one, fire the other. Well-aimed shots bring down anything FAST.
3. Plasma Pistol/Rifle: These guns are meant to be used against shields mainly. They bring them down quite fast (Plasma Pistol takes one charged shot), and a Battle Rifle to the head finishes the job nicely. Against vehicles, the Plasma Pistol is an invaluable asset against vehicle whores, allowing you to kill them, then kill them/hijack their vehicle.
4. Battle Rifle: The animations differ slightly from the Assault Rifle's, actually. But if one way is efficient to kill someone, why change? If you have 2 different models of Sniper Rifles that reload the same way and weigh about the same and you were in the Military, would you do anything differently for both of them?
5. Spiker: I use these quite a lot, actually, and they are quite useful. Dual-wielding, a guy with an Assault Rifle has little hope unless they are firing in bursts, and this is a weapon it is OK to go full auto on. Same applies for the SMG, though I prefer the Spiker to the SMG still.
6. Shotgun: I like this weapon still. Keep out of range, and you can kill him. Back off and use well-aimed bursts from a Battle Rifle and the Shotgun is rendered useless. Wait until he has to reload before you try to melee him.
7. Gravity Hammer: An awesome weapon. It should take up twice as much ammo as it currently does, though, making it lose ten rounds per firing like the sword. It is easy to defeat a guy with a Gravity Hammer using the same techniques as avoiding a Shotgun, except you may want to back off farther to avoid the lunge.

And here's my additions:
8. Needler: Fun to kill people with, as always. Pretty well-balanced, you can die if you aren't on alert, and if you see them coming you can avoid them pretty easily.
9. Spartan Laser: Well balanced. Most people say they use it as an anti-vehicle weapon, I tend to see it as an anti-infantry weapon. Splash damage is good enough, there is fair warning as well. This is a good substitute for the Fail Rod and balances the Rocket Launcher nicely.
10. Rocket Launcher: Nowhere NEAR as much fail as H2. No more homing, and the rockets have been slowed down enough to actually have a fair fight against a RL noob. Not to mention a person with a well-aimed and well-timed Gravity Hammer can send the rocket flying back to it's sender.

Also:
Hornets: I like these things. Missiles had pretty good homing, the chaingun was nice, and I just liked them overall. Someone who is proficient in the art of Banshee flying can take one of these out quickly and easily with a burst from the Fail rod, a loop to avoid any missiles, and a close-range attack. I play on a Sandtrap variant with my friends where we have Banshee vs. Hornet wars.

Just my 2 cents. Or is that 11 cents? I don't know.

JDMFSeanP
November 6th, 2007, 12:09 AM
Ironclad that is just a post of hate, not a review.

Only thing I'm pissed at is the melee system, but bungie has to do what they have to do to get rid of host advantage.

Arteen
November 6th, 2007, 12:18 AM
I certainly agree that the Brutes don't adequetly replace the Elites. Elites are just more interesting to fight.

The enemies are weaker in Halo 3 than Halo 2, but they had way too much health in Halo 2, and melees and grenades did too little damage in it, so I think the health and damage is more balanced, like it was in Halo 1.

The Elites only killed with one melee in Halo 2 (Heroic and Legendary). I found that to be ridiculous (seriously, what's the point of the sword then?) and not fun. I'm glad they changed that.

I thought that Halo 1 had the easiest Legendary of the three. H1<H3<H2 difficulty-wise, but if you want a harder game, turn on some skulls. That seems like a fair tradeoff.

What no love for the Drones? Actually, I loved the H2 versions of the Drones, but I really don't like what Bungie did with them in H3.

I think that the Hunters were just detrimentally difficult. You only end up fighting them four times, too. H1's Hunters were certainly too easy, but I liked how there were multiple ways to fight them effectively, and that they were much more common foes. In think Bungie should have made them weaker but more common.

"also, they were threatening in vehicles at all times."
Yes, to everyone. I really don't appreciate when they come out of nowhere and splatter me.

"though it seems a little bit unhaloesque to have a constant ally who never dies."
Well, H2 did have Johnson and Spec-Ops who were invincible.

I do agree that the player should have been able to carry around a few more grenades. Maybe 3 max of each, or 4 frags and 2 of everything else, with the incendiary grenades more common would've been better.

I wish that the plasma pistol just acted the same way it does in H1. It was perfect.

Magnums in both H2 and H3 SP were more-or-less useless, unfortunately.

I don't really like the feel of the Shotgun. It just doesn't feel right; I loved it in Halo 1.

I wish Bungie didn't remove everything awesome from H1 when making H2, and then restore only half of it in H3.

Also, if you want to read some fascinating reviews of Halo 2 and Halo 3, check out Bad Cyborg (http://freespace.virgin.net/bad.cyborg/). The author goes into a lot of detail about all of the little nuances of the games and how so much was lost in the transition from Halo 1 to Halo 2 and 3. I recommend anyone to check them out.
Halo 2 disappointment (http://freespace.virgin.net/bad.cyborg/Halo2Disappointment.html)
Halo 3 - Game on! (http://freespace.virgin.net/bad.cyborg/Halo3.html)

His overall feeling about the games is something I strongly agree with.

It was all a huge shock to me. The brilliance of the original had given me the impression that Bungie was completely on the ball. Yet somehow, amazingly, they'd gone and reinvented everything but the kitchen sink, and in the process they'd utterly lost the gameplay magic, for me at least. It was as if they'd never actually understood the elements that made so many of us love and appreciate the original. It was bizarre and I couldn't take it - especially the altered Elites and Grunts and Jackals, which clashed so badly with the characters already established. Not having any interest in multiplayer at the time, I traded my disc back to the shop within a month and resumed battle with the real deal, 'Halo: Combat Evolved'.

n00b1n8R
November 6th, 2007, 04:55 AM
You need to learn how to play the game. BR worthless? It's a must have gun.

If he finds it easy without it, it's hardly a "must have" gun for him :downs:

ICEE
November 6th, 2007, 05:09 PM
If he finds it easy without it, it's hardly a "must have" gun for him :downs:

lawl. also, arteen, i agree with most of the things you said, and its nice to have a thought out reply, that isnt just there to contradict me to defend the game hype. props for that.


as for jay, i never said assault rifles were useless, nor did i say gravity hammers or shotguns were.

i love assault rifles, but i think that having maulers, swords, shotguns, ultra-powerful melee and the ever godly hammer all in one game is just to much close range power. halo 3 is all about who can get in the first smack, and that disappoints me.



Ironclad that is just a post of hate, not a review.

Only thing I'm pissed at is the melee system, but bungie has to do what they have to do to get rid of host advantage.

did you read the entire thing? i talked a lot about the positives of the game, and i certainly dont hate it. i like halo 3 a lot, and will continue to play it as a party game, and on line occasionally.

Warsaw
November 7th, 2007, 05:55 PM
Fail Rod

Noes u.

Also, I agree with the quote in Arteen's post.

jngrow
November 14th, 2007, 06:56 PM
One thing: Remember that battle in CE on AOTR? when you come out, see the hog over to the left, the shade on that cliff, and the wraith to the right
? Not one H3 battle that epic. 20 vehicles on screen at once is a lot more lackluster then bungie thought. that final dual scarab battle was so dry... if it wasn't for the music i would have had 0 fun.

the AOTR battle had variety. foot soldiers, turrets, and vehicles. Every "epic" halo 3 battle just had a bunch of ghosts and choppers running around.

Botolf
November 15th, 2007, 12:54 PM
One thing: Remember that battle in CE on AOTR? when you come out, see the hog over to the left, the shade on that cliff, and the wraith to the right
? Not one H3 battle that epic. 20 vehicles on screen at once is a lot more lackluster then bungie thought. that final dual scarab battle was so dry... if it wasn't for the music i would have had 0 fun.

the AOTR battle had variety. foot soldiers, turrets, and vehicles. Every "epic" halo 3 battle just had a bunch of ghosts and choppers running around.
Fighting Scarabs isn't more epic than the standard battles in Halo 1? And I recall seeing battles with turrets, vehicles, and foot soldiers running around in H3 as well :eyesroll:

Timo
November 15th, 2007, 01:57 PM
I found some of the massive battles on Halo 1 better, although the best ones were when you tricked halo spawning more dudes. Like jumping to the bottom of the silent cartographer room from the very top with an overshield, and having all the reinforcements spawn with the enemies already there. The other thing I didn't like about the big battles in Halo 3, you could'nt tackle any of the big fights on foot, like you could in Halo 1

I was pretty gutted when I picked up the shotgun and went to take some flood out with it, it was my number one go-to weapon in Halo 1 and 2 versus the flood, and now it seems useless :-(. It's pretty silly that you can get head shots off on the flood too. Also, it was retarded that you had to drill so much ammo into the big pure form flood dudes, but once sword slice takes him down easily.

*goes and plays AotCR*

Pooky
November 15th, 2007, 04:04 PM
One thing: Remember that battle in CE on AOTR? when you come out, see the hog over to the left, the shade on that cliff, and the wraith to the right
? Not one H3 battle that epic. 20 vehicles on screen at once is a lot more lackluster then bungie thought. that final dual scarab battle was so dry... if it wasn't for the music i would have had 0 fun.

the AOTR battle had variety. foot soldiers, turrets, and vehicles. Every "epic" halo 3 battle just had a bunch of ghosts and choppers running around.

Assault on the Room?



I think that the Hunters were just detrimentally difficult. You only end up fighting them four times, too. H1's Hunters were certainly too easy, but I liked how there were multiple ways to fight them effectively, and that they were much more common foes. In think Bungie should have made them weaker but more common.


That's at least better than the pitifully easy Hunters in Halo 1 and 2. In Halo 1 I simply meleed them to death and in Halo 2 I jumped over them and shot them in the back once with a beam rifle. :\

ICEE
November 15th, 2007, 05:23 PM
That's at least better than the pitifully easy Hunters in Halo 1 and 2. In Halo 1 I simply meleed them to death and in Halo 2 I jumped over them and shot them in the back once with a beam rifle. :\


my sentiments exactly, hunters have always been the (second) coolest aliens in halo, but in the first and second games they were just to weak.

also, i DID beat the ark on legendary without using a vehicle, and that was pretty epic. i used plasma pistols on ghosts, and on wraiths i basically just prayed and got lucky, or let my marines do it. i totally prefer foot combat, but sometimes its cool to have vehicles COVER you, not dominate the fight. as for scarabs, they were to easy, and sort of dumb looking. the scarabs from halo 2 were awesome, and the beam meant death. i think that in h3, even on normal, a scarab beam should be an instant kill. if you think about it, that massive cannon of plasma blasting into you does less damage to you than a spartan laser. the splazer is no slouch, but this is a heavy HEAVY vehicle mounted beam we're talking about here. also, why is it that the covenant insist on having large death dealing vehicles with an external weakness that is so easily exploited? did they learn nothing from starwars? the scarab has that huge power core that is only guarded by a wall, that fails to stop a well placed sniper round or missile. also that wall was so easy to knock off. you'd think that the covenant would have stronger vehicles? another gay thing, the scarabs drove themselves. every brute on board could be dead but it would still be stomping about.

ExAm
November 15th, 2007, 08:51 PM
I found some of the massive battles on Halo 1 better, although the best ones were when you tricked halo spawning more dudes. Like jumping to the bottom of the silent cartographer room from the very top with an overshield, and having all the reinforcements spawn with the enemies already there. The other thing I didn't like about the big battles in Halo 3, you could'nt tackle any of the big fights on foot, like you could in Halo 1

I was pretty gutted when I picked up the shotgun and went to take some flood out with it, it was my number one go-to weapon in Halo 1 and 2 versus the flood, and now it seems useless :-(. It's pretty silly that you can get head shots off on the flood too. Also, it was retarded that you had to drill so much ammo into the big pure form flood dudes, but once sword slice takes him down easily.

*goes and plays AotCR*Flood headshot = shoot the infection form in the chest cavity with one or two bullets :/

Arteen
November 15th, 2007, 11:54 PM
It seems to me that vehicles seem to do too much damage to the player when fighting them on foot. This is extremely frustrating on The Storm specifically. In the first hallway with the Ghosts at the end, fire from the Ghosts can kill you before you even know what's going on. In Halo 1 and 2, this was never an issue. I don't know why Bungie decided to change it. All it does is frustrate the player and limit the player's options.

A very odd, very upsetting feature from Halo 1 and 2 left out in Halo 3 was 3- or 4-way battles. Except for a <5 min segment of the final level, all the battles in Halo 3 were two-way. I loved the epic battles in Two Betrayals, Keyes, and The Maw. I liked the three-way fighting in Gravemind and High Charity. Where did these scenarios go? They were one of my favorite parts of Halo. The battle with the Flood vs Covies with the two Wraiths at the end of TB was a blast. The battles on the twin bridges were awesome. Seeing Spec-Ops Elites take on the Flood in the blob room of Keyes was awesome. All the fighting going on inside of the PoA during the Maw was great. Watching Elites, Brutes, and Hunters battle in the mausoleum was a lot of fun. The inner sanctum battle in High Charity was fun. It's such a disappointing ommission.

**DANGER: rambling ahead**
Out of all the SP levels, AotCR was definitely the best from all the games. That was the must-play level whenever I felt an urge to play Halo 1. In Halo 2, it was Delta Halo or Outskirts/Metropolis (although it neither were as good as AotCR). Halo 3 really doesn't have any must-play level for me though. Most of the levels are fun, but none of them are exceptional.

Covenant is probably the closest, the gameplay is too choppy. (i.e. you 're forced to switch too often between short foot battle, ground vehicle section, short foot battle, short air vehicle section, short foot battle, ground vehicle section, short air vehicle section, short foot section). It's great if you have attention problems and get bored easily, but it just wasn't quite as fun as AotCR. In AotCR, after the first on-foot section, you're given the choice of a Warthog, Ghost, or Scorpion (or Banshee) and some marines. I usually go through the effort of preserving the sniper marine and another marine so that they can join me in the Warthog. It takes some effort, but the work put into it has a huge payoff, since you get to use that vehicle and those marines for a good long while. You put in effort, you get a reward.

Let's compare this to Tsavo. It takes a lot of effort to customize your group of marines (to all carry FRGs and one sniper), and then the payoff doesn't feel worth it because you're forced to discard the vehicle, then you get a brand new vehicle and brand new marines later on, for another vehicle segment, so you have to put in the same effort again for another relatively short-term gain. I'd prefer that the two vehicle segments were just stitched together, so the level would feel more rewarding, rather than adding unnecessary frustration.

It's not that breaking up the combat is so much the problem, but that there really isn't any rewarding carryover between battles. Certainly, AotCR had the underground room that changed the gameplay temporarily, but the game didn't force you to discard your vehicle or marines. As soon as you finished the fight, the three of you could get back in the Warthog and back to vehicular battles; the player isn't forced to get another vehicle and scavenge for new marines, as he can just carry them over seamlessly into the next fight. The Ark has this problem too; it's unnecessarily chopped up into three separate vehicle segments. You can't effectively carry over your marines between section one and two because they seem to not want to rejoin you. Halo 2 also had this problem. In Quarantine Zone, as awesome as it is to outfit two of your Elites with rocket launchers for your Spectre of death, the effort is unrewarding because the two vehicle segments are forced apart with an on-foot segment.

Another problem I have with some of Halo 3's levels is that ammo for certain weapons is scarce. To bring up Halo 1 again, in T&R, you only get one SR, but there is ammo for it well-spaced throughout the level, so if you put in the effort to lug it around even if it's empty, you're rewarded with more ammo. Ammo for the RL and SR is similarly spaced in AotCR. The player is rewarded for the effort of lugging around those weapons. In Halo 3, there is no extra ammo spaced out throughout the level, so the player is forced to discard certain weapons. It limits players' options and is unnecessary. They pulled it off well in Halo 1, so I don't see why they couldn't pull it off in Halo 3.

I wish that Bungie fully understood what they did right in Halo 1. Judging by Halo 2 they were clueless, and judging by Halo 3 they were closer but still off the mark.

Oh, fighting Elites is rewarding and amazingly fun. Brutes are interesting to fight, but they aren't rewarding to kill. I don't feel any sense of accomplishment by killing them. Brutes simply aren't an adequate replacement. I went back through and played some Halo 1 and 2, and Elites are simply more fun to fight.


the AOTR battle had variety. foot soldiers, turrets, and vehicles. Every "epic" halo 3 battle just had a bunch of ghosts and choppers running around.
That was an issue in Halo 2 too. Both games liked to form epic battles simply by throwing Ghost after Ghost or Chopper after Chopper or a group of Wraiths at you. The hill assault in AoTCR had three Shades, a few Ghosts (in an on-foot battle, even! Not something you'd see in Halo 3), and a Banshee; TB had two Wraiths and a Shade in its massive battle at the end of the level; both felt at least as epic as any "epic" battle in Halo 3. When properly set up, the rockslide megabattle in Halo (level 2 of Halo) is probably the most fun and most epic battle in the trilogy.

Pooky
November 16th, 2007, 03:59 PM
why is it that the covenant insist on having large death dealing vehicles with an external weakness that is so easily exploited?

I've never understood why the Covenant vehicles don't have shields...

but then again Halo and realism get along like bullets and your face

I_Am_Error117
November 16th, 2007, 05:08 PM
I liked but forge need more awesome.


Campaign was too short, and Johson died and the story was condensed. Plus flood gate is all of what 5 minuiteds long. Arbiter should have sacraficed himself to save the universe. Needed more half jawShould have had Johnsen and Chief coming back to earth in a lone pelican fading to a sun set. IMO

Multiplayer the OS is useless, the maos have too much camping, and the shields are weak compared to H1 and H2.

9.3/10


Compare to other popular games
9.5/10 Halo 2
9.7/10 Halo
9.1/10 Gears of War

TeeKup
November 16th, 2007, 06:15 PM
It seems to me that vehicles seem to do too much damage to the player when fighting them on foot. This is extremely frustrating on The Storm specifically. In the first hallway with the Ghosts at the end, fire from the Ghosts can kill you before you even know what's going on. In Halo 1 and 2, this was never an issue. I don't know why Bungie decided to change it. All it does is frustrate the player and limit the player's options.

Thank you!!

When going through legendary the only problems I face were the Chieftans and those godforsaken over-powered ghosts. God it pissed me off when I killed everyone on that building only to die within 2 seconds from a ghosts who fired off like 5 rounds. Jesus Fucking Christ. -_-;


Oh, fighting Elites is rewarding and amazingly fun. Brutes are interesting to fight, but they aren't rewarding to kill. I don't feel any sense of accomplishment by killing them. Brutes simply aren't an adequate replacement. I went back through and played some Halo 1 and 2, and Elites are simply more fun to fight.

The brutes are anything but intelligent, they ramble on and use sneaky tactics. The Elites had somewhat a sense of honor and their voice's were just downright cool. I have no idea what they did with the secondary voice you heard in Halo 2, it was lighter toned but just as intimidating as the gruffer voice, the only voice you now hear in Halo 3. Personally that was my favorite elite, he seemed to kick so much more ass in Halo 2.

Bungie really killed the elites in Halo 3, I really find it insulting. They should have just done 4 missions on Earth and the rest of the game on the Ark and the new Installations 04; would have given the chance for more allied encounters with the elites, and more breathtaking environments of the Ark.

ICEE
November 17th, 2007, 12:07 AM
Thank you!!


Bungie really killed the elites in Halo 3, I really find it insulting. They should have just done 4 missions on Earth and the rest of the game on the Ark and the new Installations 04; would have given the chance for more allied encounters with the elites, and more breathtaking environments of the Ark.

THANK YOU. elites are my favorite aliens, but in halo 3 they ruined them. they have little melee talent, which is BS. in halo 2 they were machines! they could kill you in a single punch. now, they have these bullshit weak shields, and next to no flesh vitality. also, it might have been cool to see a change in the elite's arsenal. i mean, keep the plasma rifles and the carbines, but maybe add in some assault rifles and battle rifles etc. i know this is backwards, but they just split up with theyre main government, and rebels generally wont have the funds to make a lot of weapons, so it would make sense that they borrow human guns. in a cutscene, the arbiter takes several rocket launchers and a flamethrower to the elites, but they never use human weapons? bull.

also, in response to that "arbiter should have sacrificed himself to save the universe" comment, BULL. the arbiter is a pillar of peace and reason between humans and elites. half jaw says at one point "were it not for the arbiters council, i would have glassed your entire planet!", which makes it obvious that the arbiter is the reason that humans and elites get along. without him, possibly MOAR WAR.

and i think we all agree that brutes are lame by comparison to elites. theres so little strategy in fighting them, and their armor breaks off so easily. even the chieftains didnt fasten their hat on well enough to protect their head.

the only weapons i didnt really see enough ammo for were SMG, mauler, shotgun, and sniper. however, the latter 3 are weapons you can conserve rather easily if you try.

ExAm
November 17th, 2007, 01:06 AM
The "little melee talent" thing doesn't ring true for me. I was fighting a group of flood with them, and they pulled off some pretty awesomely targeted stompings and beatings.

ICEE
November 17th, 2007, 02:11 AM
have them betray you, and then see how tough they are

Dole
November 19th, 2007, 08:56 AM
because that big BRICK of words up there was basically a list of grievances.

Ironclad that is just a post of hate, not a review.Wrong thread. You said this was a review, so where is it?

There is already a designated thread for inconsistencies and/or inconveniences.


I've never understood why the Covenant vehicles don't have shields...
I was pretty sure they did in the books (although that might just been Seraphs and Cruisers) but I was disappointed to find it excluded from both H2 and H3, especially on the Wraith. It would've made more sense to burn out a shield after tearing out the hatch before being able to plant a grenade in the engine's generator.


Considering that the Hornet (Kestrel), Mongoose, and Flamethrower made it off of H2's cutting room floor for H3 and the Silenced SMG made its way into H2V five months prior, I was half expecting other Halo 2 exclusions to end up in retail Halo 3, like the melee combos from H2E303, weapon customization based on dual wielding (silencers and attached grenade launchers for different weapons were shown in The Art of Halo as a feature that didn't make it into Halo 2, except of course for the half-done SSMG in H2V), and selective fire as shown in H2E304.

I also would've liked some Seige of Madrigal through the 24-piece choir / orchestra ensemble Marty was so excited about. :(

supersniper
November 19th, 2007, 04:04 PM
The only thing I wish about Halo 3 is that I want the Fuel Rod Cannon in Multiplayer. I mean come on the missile pod, rocket launcher, many grenades. I would love to see the Fuel rod cannon in action in multiplayer. I just think that the covenant weapons need some explosive weapon. Also where is the beam rifle? Is it even in multiplayer??

Timo
November 19th, 2007, 04:37 PM
Off the top of my head I think it's only in Snowbound, although it's probably in a couple of others

ExAm
November 19th, 2007, 05:48 PM
The only thing I wish about Halo 3 is that I want the Fuel Rod Cannon in Multiplayer. I mean come on the missile pod, rocket launcher, many grenades. I would love to see the Fuel rod cannon in action in multiplayer. I just think that the covenant weapons need some explosive weapon. Also where is the beam rifle? Is it even in multiplayer??The answer? FORGE.

ICEE
November 19th, 2007, 06:24 PM
im not too bummed about the lack of a plasma cannon in mp. i really would have liked to see some fire grenade action though. forge is fine and dandy, but that wont get it on matchmaking.