StarDestroyer.Net BBS

At first, I was exited by the trailers released. I thought, "Holy shit. This looks to be the best game in the series. I hope they refined it like they acted they did." Then they released the beta, and I looked at the screenshots. Suprisingly, it didn't look that much different from Halo 2. I still held some hope that it would be massively better. Then I started watching the vidoes of the beta. And it looked barely changed.

This is a good example of what I'm talking about. The graphics? Meh. Barely changed from Halo 2. The weapons? Meh. A few new ones. The old ones are the same. The gameplay? Meh. A few minor new features that don't impact the gameplay and could have easily been implemented in Halo 2. The effects? Meh. Some, like the plasma grenade, actually look worse in my opinion than their predecessors on an older system.

Of course, the fanboys immediately came to Bungie's defense that, being a beta, even though it looks pretty much finished, and I've played betas that are almost exactly like the finished product, Bungie will pull some deus ex machina out of their ass and somehow make everything totally different and better in every way.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that I want to play Halo 3 damn bad. But look at the transition from Halo: CE to Halo 2. The graphics and gameplay were refined, polished, and ended up making the sequal several orders of magnitude better looking and more advanced. Now they've had generally the same amount of time to work on the end of this trilogy. And it's not that different. I look at games like Dead Rising, Perfect Dark Zero, and Lost Planet. They all look better and generally appear and play different from Xbox games, as well as Halo 3. When I look at Halo 3, it looks more like an expansion pack of sorts to Halo 2, rather than a sequal that made large, noticeable changes to the series. I just don't feel like Bungie is delivering something that deserves all the fanfare and attention it gets. It seems more that people are going crazy over Halo 3 just for being Halo 3.

In short, you're afraid it's going to be more Halo 2.5 than Halo 3.

I'm not enthused about Halo3 for basically this reason. I don't care about the story or whatever, but after playing newer, more modern shooters with different features, MC + twitch shooter just doesn't really interest me.

SAMAS wrote:In short, you're afraid it's going to be more Halo 2.5 than Halo 3.

Exactly. Almost everything different basically just looks like what they could have put in Halo 2, or presented in an expansion pack. I mean, look at the Battlefield series. They released expansions for almost all of the series. Much like Halo 3, it has features that, while impacting the game play in new ways, doesn't really change much. While they are pretty much obligated to say that it "does not resemble the final product", how many of you have played betas that ended up being noticeably different from the gold version? I haven't. I have not played them, nor seen them.

I will admit, after playing the Beta a few times, I didn't get the impression that Halo 3 was going to be enormously different from Halo 2, either.

So what?

I can understand if, like Stark, you don't favor the Halo series' variety of gameplay; that's just a matter of personal preference. If that is the case, however, I have to ask, why do you even care about the sequel at all? If you, on the otherhand, enjoy the gameplay system and style of the previous installments, what's the problem with retaining the same general structure? I certainly don't expect Halo 3 to reinvent the series. I want better graphics, new and expanded maps and game types, refined weapons, new enemies and an engaging storyline; by all apperances, Halo 3 will give us just that. Honestly, Halo 2's gameplay worked for me, and if Bungie doesn't feel the need to fundamentally change it, I don't see a problem. Call it a "mere expansion" or whatever you like; I'll be more than willing to shell out full price for it come September.

And I am willing to buy it on release as well. I've already got my copy reserved. However, technology has advanced considerably since Halo 2, and pretty much every new game is taking advantage of it, as well as the power of the Xbox 360 compared to the Xbox, which would mean that making the game better would be little to no trouble, especially for a game that has been in development since Halo 2's release. It just feels like almost the whole game is a repeat of what made it popular three years ago. It feels old, and not the nostalgic, fun old that makes Pac-Man and Geometry Wars popular. I mean the old that makes it feel like a rehashed concept that isn't as fun now as it was in it's time, like Pong.

I'm not buying for more advanced graphics, a huge new chunk of weapons, or any gameplay gimmicks: I'm buying because I'm expecting a better-assembled single player and refinements to various things, such as AI. In short, I'm not concerned if it's "the same old shit," so long as it's FUN shit, preferrably shit that is more fun than 2's single-player mode.

Also, for the love of FPSes, Bungie, add some recoil to guns besides the SMG.

I just read part of the article in TIME magazine released in March. Bungie claims that want to "set a new high-water mark" for the genre. This is why I am confused, as they claimed that the new game would set the bar for the FPS higher when it's barely different from Halo 2. By that line of reasoning, Halo 2 set a "high-water mark" for the current genre and it hasn't been changed by, say, Ghost Recon, or Perfect Dark Zero.

Tanasinn wrote:Also, for the love of FPSes, Bungie, add some recoil to guns besides the SMG.

Clearly this is a gameplay gimmick. Like shotguns that are semi auto and effective beyond 6 metres!

I'm not sure if any Halo fan really expects a seachange - I mean, Halo2 was not a big step. From an outsider's perspective it's just great that Halo3 will have none of the features of the most popular modern shooters and will simply succeed on pure brand-power.

The last 'high mark' in FPSes for me were set by Half Life 2 for ambition and detail, and to Call of Duty for scripting cinematic singleplayer. I can't see how on earth Halo 3 is at all groundbreaking, aside from being the third in a series whose sole fame is that they made the control scheme survivable on a console.

Oh. And their never-before-seen plot about a faceless space marine who shoots inhuman aliens on distant planets with an assortment of large weapons.

Tanasinn wrote:I'm not buying for more advanced graphics, a huge new chunk of weapons, or any gameplay gimmicks: I'm buying because I'm expecting a better-assembled single player and refinements to various things, such as AI. In short, I'm not concerned if it's "the same old shit," so long as it's FUN shit, preferrably shit that is more fun than 2's single-player mode.

Also, for the love of FPSes, Bungie, add some recoil to guns besides the SMG.

You're a half-ton power-armored cyborg elite special-forces cyborg who can sprint while shooting a sniper rifle. Recoil shouldn't even be a problem given that regular soldiers can shoot the SMG and not get ker-thunked in the face with the ironsights.

Nephtys wrote:The last 'high mark' in FPSes for me were set by Half Life 2 for ambition and detail

Pardon? Textured-on doors calling on line 6?

Nephtys wrote:and to Call of Duty for scripting cinematic singleplayer.

'Scripted' isn't just a swear word?

Nephtys wrote:I can't see how on earth Halo 3 is at all groundbreaking, aside from being the third in a series whose sole fame is that they made the control scheme survivable on a console.

Eh? Halo has the exact same controls as every other console shooter (except the Xbox controller's failure at melee + turning due to 2 shoulders). Oh and except Nintendo ones because their controllers have always been wierd.

Nephtys wrote:Oh. And their never-before-seen plot about a faceless space marine who shoots inhuman aliens on distant planets with an assortment of large weapons.

Dude that's cutting edge.

Matt Huang wrote:You're a half-ton power-armored cyborg elite special-forces cyborg who can sprint while lugging a rocket launcher. Recoil shouldn't even be a problem given that regular soldiers can shoot the SMG and not get ker-thunked in the face with the ironsights.

It's pretty damning that the *SMG* is the gun that suffers recoil - it's like it was cribbed out of Quake 2. It'd be kickin rad if it had GoW-style co-op, but one guy is MC and the other isn't... so you get awesome 'MC can fire this from the hip while running and you can't' stuff. Oh well, nobody said Halo had to make sense - rather it just has to have this green guy and this nekkid purple chick and some maybe some aliens.

Stark wrote: It'd be kickin rad if it had GoW-style co-op, but one guy is MC and the other isn't... so you get awesome 'MC can fire this from the hip while running and you can't' stuff.

Your formidable powers of discourse have defeated me.

What are you talking about?

Besides the bubble shield and some new guns, I dont really see anything new with the new Halo. The only new "exciting" features I can recall right now are, man-cannons, and some wierd shield wall things, how is that an improvement? (Unless Bungie is hiding some ultra-secret FPS grounbreaking game implement that will shatter everything we knew about FPSes... or I missed something.)

Either way, I never cared for Halo, never knew why so many people thought it was that great anyways, all I ever felt like doing in that game was killing enemies, and running from room to room, how is that awesome?

I've seen some game reviews that give low scores for repetetive (sp?) gameplay, yet Halo always gets great reviews?

That's because video game journalism is full of shit.

Honestly, at this point FPS games as a genre are about as innovative as the fucking Amish. The only distinction that any particular FPS game can draw for itself is a compelling story and interesting or interactive maps. That's all I'd hope for with Halo 3. Halo 2 was a minor improvement from Halo 1 in terms of graphics and gameplay and an almost insignificant one in terms of story and level design, which is why it was a disappointment.

And the Halo 1 title screen is awesome. The Halo 2 title screen is a complete disappointment.

What was the Halo 2 title screen? I remember the first one had that cool view of the Halo, but what was 2 about?

You are right, if I cant remember a title screen, it wasnt worth remembering.

Darth Ruinus wrote:

And the Halo 1 title screen is awesome. The Halo 2 title screen is a complete disappointment.

What was the Halo 2 title screen? I remember the first one had that cool view of the Halo, but what was 2 about?

You are right, if I cant remember a title screen, it wasnt worth remembering.

Halo 2 had a poor-quality overfly of what may or may not be New Mombassa. It's hard to tell, as it had less detail than the hologram of Theed from Episode 1.

Darth Wong wrote:Honestly, at this point FPS games as a genre are about as innovative as the fucking Amish. The only distinction that any particular FPS game can draw for itself is a compelling story and interesting or interactive maps. That's all I'd hope for with Halo 3. Halo 2 was a minor improvement from Halo 1 in terms of graphics and gameplay and an almost insignificant one in terms of story and level design, which is why it was a disappointment.

I can't stand FPS games on consoles anyway, so there isn't much they could do in terms of gameplay that would appease me. But I thought the story was outstanding. Getting a look at the Covenant's society was really cool.

Darth Wong wrote:Honestly, at this point FPS games as a genre are about as innovative as the fucking Amish. The only distinction that any particular FPS game can draw for itself is a compelling story and interesting or interactive maps. That's all I'd hope for with Halo 3. Halo 2 was a minor improvement from Halo 1 in terms of graphics and gameplay and an almost insignificant one in terms of story and level design, which is why it was a disappointment.

The only real 'innovation' in FPS beyond constantly improving graphics is really the movement of features from the niche market into mainstream titles. All FPS's used to be Unreal-style circlestrafe rocketjumpfests except a few wierdo games like Rainbow Six, but slowly those kind of features have crept in and twitch shooters are less prominent in the market. Cover, slower movement, weapon customisation, NPC squads, 'utility' weapons (smoke etc), have all more or less been moved into the 'normal' shooter space from the tiny niche market they started in.

Can't say this is surprising, game play wise Halo 2 was basically Halo with slightly less repetitive stages, a few weapon tweaks and a massive amount of hype.

Stark wrote:It'd be kickin rad if it had GoW-style co-op, but one guy is MC and the other isn't... so you get awesome 'MC can fire this from the hip while running and you can't' stuff.

*cough*Arbiter*cough*

Vendetta wrote:*cough*Arbiter*cough*

Hey yeah! That would be a feature that might actually prompt me to buy a Halo game.

Seeing how well Halo:CE and Halo 2 sold, I think Bungie is a tad too worried to change much. They probably figure their fans want more of the same...

Durandal wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:Honestly, at this point FPS games as a genre are about as innovative as the fucking Amish. The only distinction that any particular FPS game can draw for itself is a compelling story and interesting or interactive maps. That's all I'd hope for with Halo 3. Halo 2 was a minor improvement from Halo 1 in terms of graphics and gameplay and an almost insignificant one in terms of story and level design, which is why it was a disappointment.

I can't stand FPS games on consoles anyway, so there isn't much they could do in terms of gameplay that would appease me. But I thought the story was outstanding. Getting a look at the Covenant's society was really cool.

How about that idiotic "we planted a bomb on your ship and now you have to stop us from detonating it" plot device? It turns out that the look we got at Covenant society was more along the lines of "Hey, we can beat these guys after all because they're fucking retards". And then the Flood came back, which annoyed me to no end. I thought we'd left them behind after the first game, but noooooo ... it turns out that the fucking dumbshit "Forerunners" actually stored Flood specimens all over the goddamned galaxy. And of course, this means the Flood will figure prominently in the next game too. Yippee ...