What the "Halo"?

[DanJW]

OK OK I apologise for the Goldeneye comments, I'm sure it's a great game. But when it came out and all the morons at my school were going delirious over it, I was left slightly unimpressed. Sorry, but thats how it was.

In other news:

Own up - who here is Gay for the Chief?

[Roderick]

@ Ben; I'm not arguing with you over semantics. I confess that I used the term 100% wrongly. I'm just explaining why this mistake is so common with Gears of War and that a case could be made for grouping it in with those games. Not with the term describing those games, but their gameplay.

[Roderick]

Also, in French, Master Chief is 100% culinary. Maître Chef. Awesome

[Ben]

@ Ben; I'm not arguing with you over semantics. I confess that I used the term 100% wrongly. I'm just explaining why this mistake is so common with Gears of War and that a case could be made for grouping it in with those games. Not with the term describing those games, but their gameplay.

I see. Thanks for explaining that; i did understand your point about the game play in some way informing the style to such a degreee that it would seem to allow for such a comparison/classification to be made. I guess I just find it frustrating when I see the reference made, understandable or not, because it reads to me like lazy categorisation and even lazy journalism (rather than an easy grouping based on game play mechanics).

[SpiderMonkey]

Okay, so now I've played through, what, half the campaign in two player coop? Up until the bit from the very first trailer for the game, anyway (

the "Ark", is it? opening up and firing or whatever

). The boss battle before this part (

the Scarab tank

) was irrefutably seriously badly designed (as well as far less epic than they thought it was -

hey guys, let's base our boss battle on the Wild Wild West!

), and the whole thing has been stunningly mediocre so far. I guess the 10/10s mean the multiplayer or something? Because right now the single player is a 7. I went into this game trying to find the awesome, and everything - I wasn't trying to be cynical, but this is kinda depressing.

[Wrestlevania]

I went into this game trying to find the awesome, and everything - I wasn't trying to be cynical, but this is kinda depressing.

I finished Campaign in single player last night. Overall I'd say it's a solid 8/10 for me: Halo was never really about the story, it was about running around various types of environments and shooting stuff. Lots of stuff.

Both the weapons and the enemies have seemingly been rebalanced for the final game--somewhat subtly, but it's definitely more enjoyable for it compared to the previous two. Where grinding frustration gave way to outright apathy for me in the last two single player experiences, Halo 3 wasn't so ridiculously unbalanced as to stop me from reaching the end without first slamming my head against a brick wall for 3 hours more than necessary.

That said, the squad-mate AI is fucking abysmal, and now seemingly incapable of driving vehicles in any semblance of normality. Twice I had to restart entire sections because the AI simply cannot control the Warthog with any consistency: driving headlong into boulders in the middle of fields, careening into other scenery way off track, or just simply trying to drive up the steepest part of necessary inclines and failing. Then rinse and repeat -- it's screaming-at-the-screen awful.

That aside, the rest of the game is excellent. There's a new type of enemy late in the game that's extremely cheap in its hit-and-run tactics - seeing as it can scale walls and leap vast distances - but otherwise the on-foot combat is really enjoyable. Grouping up with several Elite later in the game to take on the Flood is especially enjoyable.

The settings too, whilst still using staples from the previous games, are more varied and more interesting than before--notably at the start and end of the story.

Overall, it was 9 hours gaming well spent. However, I think replaying the campaign in 2+ co-op will put the single player experience firmly in the shade. It's just a shame the friendly AI wasn't more polished.

[Ginger]

First-Person Shooter = played in the first person perspective.

Third-Person Shooter = played in the third person perspective.

What would a SPS(second person shooter) be? Seeing things through the 1st person but not having any direct control, i.e. spectator modes. Or maybe seeing the character that you control through the eyes of one of his companions, the SPS is a sadly neglected genre of gaming (IMO)

[Wrestlevania]

What would a SPS(second person shooter) be? Seeing things through the 1st person but not having any direct control, i.e. spectator modes. Or maybe seeing the character that you control through the eyes of one of his companions, the SPS is a sadly neglected genre of gaming (IMO)

No -- looking through the eyes of your victim would be 2nd person I think.

[DanJW]

Yes, second-person would be the point of view of your victim or attacker.

A Japanese survival horror game, Psiren, had second-person sections which sounded quite scary.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Yes but... it's not an FPS. [sorely tempted to use the "disapproval cat" image again.] It's a very simple concept, let me summarise:

First-Person Shooter = played in the first person perspective.

Third-Person Shooter = played in the third person perspective.

It's very black and white my friends. Control mechanics, game play feedback and immediacy and so forth are all very well and good; but you can't change the laws of the English language and its definitions just because something feels like something else.

Sorry, but it's clearly moved on past its original definition to now define a style of gameplay. That's language for you!

[DanJW]

I prefer it to the awful phrase "run and gun".

[Ben]

Sorry, but it's clearly moved on past its original definition to now define a style of gameplay. That's language for you!

"Clearly" according to who? And furthermore, "clearly" how exactly - "clearly" in the sense that everyone agrees? 'Cause if so, then that's clearly not true, seeing as I disagree.

That's semantics for you!

[Wrestlevania]

Sorry, but it's clearly moved on past its original definition to now define a style of gameplay. That's language for you!

This is an entirely different discussion.

[ThunderPeel2001]

"Clearly" according to who? And furthermore, "clearly" how exactly - "clearly" in the sense that everyone agrees? 'Cause if so, then that's clearly not true, seeing as I disagree.

That's semantics for you!

No, not "clearly" as in everyone agrees, as I was responding to someone who didn't agree. That's having common sense for you!

[Ben]

No, not "clearly" as in everyone agrees, as I was responding to someone who didn't agree. That's having common sense for you!

Then in what sense did you mean it? Your attempt to continue the "That's <x> for you!" thing and be an ass has meant you've failed to actually explain yourself. Nice one. I'll just quote Eljay from the other thread as he has summed it up well:

"ThunderPeel you are being supremely arrogant about this, handing down decrees that language has changed. Personally I think it's stupid to call Gears an FPS, the term FPS exists to distinguish between perspectives in the shooting genre, what benefit is there to strip it of its meaning?

Just because you are lazy enough to accept a bad classification doesn't mean everyone else has to be."

[ThunderPeel2001]

If you've read my post in the other thread, were I explain myself quite clearly... why are you asking me here?

[Roderick]

Yesterday I actually played some Halo 3 so I can give a bit of more polished reaction to it. Nothing really about the core gameplay. It looks fun enough, though very standard and nothing we haven't seen before. What struck me however is how perfectly nice everything looks. Going from the very negative reactions about the visuals I had expected it to look like crap, but there're actually some really good things going on there. The textures are amazingly sharp up close and the poly count it nothing to scoff at. Why is everyone droning on about it? I certainly couldn't clearly see that it was that much uglier than, say a Gears of War of Bioshock, despite there obviously being differences in design quality.

[Ben]

If you've read my post in the other thread, were I explain myself quite clearly... why are you asking me here?

Simple answer to that really... you hadn't made that (second longer) post explaining your position when I made my previous post. In any case, I pretty much disagree with everything you've stated, including the area bolded as being "fact". One last thing from me: I do understand how people arrive at a place where they incorrectly label games such as Gears of War; I was simply pointing it out for the incorrect labelling that it is.

[Wrestlevania]

What struck me however is how perfectly nice everything looks. Going from the very negative reactions about the visuals I had expected it to look like crap, but there're actually some really good things going on there.

I think the fact that it's the most important release for the system to date but doesn't look as good as "lesser" titles that came before it.

I'm on my second play-through at the moment and it's lost none of its initial "ooh pretty!" impact at all. It's a good-looking game and Bungie should be getting credit for this.

[Roderick]

Well, Halo will polarise opinions, whether positive or negative, I guess.

[Salka]

I spoke to someone on Friday who knew someone who works at SOME GAME REVIEW SITE, apparently they'd been given a goody bag along with their review copy of Halo 3, the goodie bag included an xbox 360.

He could have been lying though.

[Spaff]

Anyone saying anything positive about Goldeneye is banned.

Or Halo.

The Fascist has spoken.

[Wrestlevania]

Facist!

Took this puppy (i.e. Halo 3) online on Friday night, joined a friend's custom multiplayer game of 'Zombie' and much hilarity ensued.

For those not familiar, 'Zombie' is a gametype where all-but-one of you start on one team, with one person being the zombie (the opposing team). Zombies are only allowed a melee weapon, humans usually having shotguns--for thematic accuracy, natch. And when a zombie kills a human, they obviously resurrect as a new zombie. The game ends when everyone is a zombie.

Anyway, this time was a bit different and a bit special: zombies were set to 200% running speed, 2x jump height and given gravity hammers. Charging around the map, 11-on-1, trying to get the last human - who was tearing about the place on a Mongoose for dear life - has been the highlight of playing Halo 3 so far.

We should have a Thumbs Halo 3 night - it would r0x0r.

[Roderick]

Sounds like fun! I hope to get my Xbox 360 at long last in a month or so, when I'm a bit more secure in my cash flow.

[Spaff]

We should have a Thumbs Halo 3 night - it would r0x0r.