if halo 3 came to ps3 would u buy it?

[jthm]

After reading your response, I'm not sure we have played the same Killzone 2. The one I've played has a team mate who walks directly into a room filled with plainly visible turrets and promptly gets mowed down and whines for me to come save him for ten minutes while I kill the guys on the turrets, thus ruining the game experience for me.

Considering the Halo 3 friendly AI will drive me into a wall whilst getting blown to sh*t, I'd say the AI is much better, mainly because it won't kill me.

The controls are fine for you perhaps, but given the sheer number of complaints on this board and others, I think we can safely say that not everyone agrees with you and in fact the majority may be on my side here. Fact is, no one had those complaints about any game in the Halo franchise. Why? Because they did it right the first time and Guerrilla clearly hasn't.

Halo did it 'right' because it hasn't changed since 2001. Jump, crouch, and move. If you can't get that right, there is something seriously wrong. Most people?s complaints are about how you have to re-scope every time you come up out of cover. Again though, it's realistic. Last time I checked soldiers didn't emerge with a gun plastered to their eye.

Realism is over rated, that's why we play video games in the first place.

Just preference. I like a challenge, and realistic games are better at providing one I find.

As to story, Weapons of mass destruction, religious extremism and allies of necessity are very "realistic" (there's that word again). Colonial war with evil mutated humans who look like Nazi storm troopers? Nah. Why invade if they're this evil force? Just nuke the planet from orbit. But that's all beside the point. We can each interpret the stories from these games until they suit our arguments, but the fact is that these games are SHOOTERS. If I cared about a story, I'd be playing Final Fantasy right now. I have and do play KZ2 to do just one thing. Shoot at stuff.

Kind of need to research the Killzone story there. The ISA are retaliating, not just a random invasion, and looking like former soldiers seems to be realistic. The Nazis were based on the Romans remember. Though realism is a preference.

Games are not about "you vs. the enemy". They're about having fun, and playing with friends is a lot more fun than playing alone. Even playing a bad game co-op is a ton of fun just so you can share the funny moments mocking the game and the badass moments where you and another person act in concert to accomplish a goal and it comes off seamlessly, then you turn to said other person and say "hell yeah."

Games are about you vs. the enemy/competition, the result of which is fun. With no competition, it's not a game, more of a hobby like art, which clearly isn't the case. As for a bad game co-op, I find them infuriating as it's a bad game, regardless of company. Though no game would be harmed by having coop.

I won't argue that Halo 3 was a good game, because I'd be on the wrong side of that argument. It wasn't a bad one either; it just didn't live up to the expectations the previous 2 set. I'm saying Killzone 2 wasn't much (if at all) better. Stop defending it because the console doesn't have many good exclusives and you really want to like it and just look at it for what it is.

By the way, spellchecker is your friend. Use it.

Tsk, shot yourself in the foot there. Apart from the pedantic closing remark, saying the console doesn't have many good exclusives really shows you don't have a PS3 or Killzone 2. Fact is where I'm staying at the moment; all I have is multiplatform PS3 games, about 15 of them. And if I could, I'd trade them all in for my collection of exclusives:
Resistance 2
Motorstorm: Pacific Rift
Killzone 2
Wipeout HD

Oh and if you think there are no good exclusives coming out, just ask Indigo_Dingo what he thinks about that.

It keeps getting implied that I don't own a PS3. My PSN name is jthm1. Look me up. Last played game, Street fighter 4 and before that I played KZ2, and before that MGS4 or LBP. I do own the system and the games. That said, I only bought one because I got a great deal on it (315 dollars for the 80 gig model that is fully backwards compatible with both previous playstations) and that if I'd had to pay full price I still wouldn't own it.

I can think of exactly one good exclusive coming that I want for PS3 which God of War 3 and most likely it will be the next, if not only, game I purchase for the system because my friends all own 360s and I prefer to play with people rather than alone.

I haven't played resistance 2 yet because I was not wowed by the first one. It moved faster than I prefer, was only in shades of grey and brown and as I said, even with a good control scheme, the Dual Shock feels wrong on FPS games.
Now, to your points:

1. At least the Halo AI has the decency to die, rather than cry to be revived after getting themselves shot. I'd rather die and start over (and maybe frag some allies if necessary) than hear 10 minutes of looped "come help me comments."

2. Yes, Halo's controls haven't changed since '01. That's not a bad thing. KZ2 tried exactly one new thing and it failed. Halo's controls are old. Doesn't change the fact that they're better. By the way, Soldiers do come up aiming if they're doing it right. I had my buddy from the 182nd Airborne play (that's Army Ranger FYI). He doesn't like the controls either.

3. I'm aware it's a retaliatory invasion. I just don't care. It does not matter. What matters is the shooting and mechanics aspects of the game. As stated several times now: It's a shooter, the story is irrelevant. But just for the sake of arguing, That still doesn't explain why they don't just glass the planet from orbit with nuclear missiles. The multiplayer makes it pretty clear that the ISA has them and the Helghast don't.

4. You're right that no game is harmed by having co-op. Many are helped. However a game can suffer from the lack of co-op. This one does. Imagine RE5 with no Co-op. It would harmed. This game needs co-op and I honestly can't regard it as a complete FPS until it has it.

5. A list of 4 games is not many good exclusives. Hell, only 3 count since we're arguing about the 4th. I'll do you one better and add MGS4 and LBP to your list bringing it to six.
360:
Gears
Gears 2
Fable 2
L4D (rumor is we might see this for PS3, but valve really isn't hot on the idea)
Star Ocean
Halo 3 (counts as long as KZ2 does for your list)
Ninja Gaiden 2
DOA4
Mass Effect
Lost Odyssey
Infinite Undiscovery
Blue Dragon

And the thing is I could keep going, I just don't feel inclined to look up all the other 360 exclusives.

I want to reiterate that I don't want to see one system do better than another, I profit from them both doing well. My original point you fanboyishly fanatic poster you, was that this game is not as good as was hyped, Is not as good as it should be and is not better than Halo3 in any way that matters. Graphics are very nice, but they do not a good game make.

 

[Da_Schwartz]

No. games like halo attract ppl like halo players. And as far as i concerned they can stay on xbox live. tyvm.

And no i don't despise ALL things 360. if gears ever made it to the ps3 i'd give it another shot. It was fun for a little while, never played the second but honestly got a lil bored with the 1st about halfway through. As for Halo, if i never played that game again i wouldn't care.

 

[xXGeckoXx]

Halo 3 online is (Cough cough) Fun. Very so with actual friends houses online with big teams and guest hosting. But to tell you the truth the game is designed for the 360 controller. It just seems to feel nicer to shoot things on that controller and the whole shape of the controller goes well with the brightly colored stuff being catapulted out of the screen into your eyes. But i dont think the PSN would be able to deal with in the same way as XBL does.

 

[DeadWaker718]

No, I don't have a PS3, I have a 360 for that

 

[oliveira8]

How do you know we wont be able to move tea cups with our minds. The human brain only uses a very small part of its potencial.

Also 2001: A Space Odyssey according to you is a realistic film?

There is no evidence for physic abilities, meaning that it is entirely speculation. Yet space flight is easily possible, making it realisitc to presume in say, 100 years we would be able to successfully travel to Mars.
And the 70's were not a time of accuracte prediction, as they had very little clue on space flight. Now we have been to the moon & back, it's easy to say what is acheiveable in a given time span.

Its cause in the 60's we went to the moon & back people thought that we by the year 2010 would have at least managed to build a spacestation on it and tripped crews to Mars.

Instead we have people that think the Earth is flat, the moon landings were staged and theres a evil society running every major goverment behind the scenes. To be honest we wont have space stations in Mars in a hundreds years time if this keeps going.

 

[Killing_Time]

Yes, because it's multiplayer is better than any of the PS3 shooters. Resistance 2's multiplayer was extremely dissapointing, but Killzone 2's is just a notch below Halo 3's.

 

[PTSpyder]

Nope. I wish that I liked FPS games, but I just cant stand any of them.

 

[Da_Schwartz]

Killzone 2 would of lived up to it's hype if it was actually released two years ago when they said it would be. Still a good game tho.

 

[Syntax Man]

oh christ the fanboyism is thick enough to cut with a knife here

Hmm, let's see...

1. Inferior graphics to Resistance 2.

2. Inferior weaponry balance to Resistance 2.

3. Inferior weaponry in general to Resistance 2.

4. Smaller games than Resistance 2.

5. VASTLY inferior single player mode to Resistance 2.

6. No Class-based gameplay, unlike Resistance 2.

7. More bugs than Resistance 2.

8. Less Character Customisation than Resistance 2.

okay in order then

1. bollocks, colour with lower rez textures and lower poly models>high rez grey

2. um...just no

3. um...matter of opinion

4. that makes it better?

5. bullshit

6. since when is that necessary for fun?

7. not really, Halo 3 is polished to a mirror shine

8. again, why is this an issue?

and killzone 2 does nothing new, it uses a gears style cover system in first person "omg it's like new or something" and it has pretty graphics, not really a 'halo killer'

 

[oliveira8]

4. You're right that no game is harmed by having co-op. Many are helped. However a game can suffer from the lack of co-op. This one does. Imagine RE5 with no Co-op. It would harmed. This game needs co-op and I honestly can't regard it as a complete FPS until it has it.

So CoD 4 is a lesser game due to no co-op? It would be nice to have a buddy play with you, but not needed to make the game better.

5. A list of 4 games is not many good exclusives. Hell, only 3 count since we're arguing about the 4th. I'll do you one better and add MGS4 and LBP to your list bringing it to six.
360:
Gears not exclusive, actually better on PC
Gears 2
Fable 2 likely to come to PC, devs word
L4D (rumor is we might see this for PS3, but valve really isn't hot on the idea)not exclusive
Star Ocean
Halo 3 (counts as long as KZ2 does for your list) almost 100% that it will come to PC
Ninja Gaiden 2 been announced it's coming to PS3
DOA4
Mass Effect not exclusive
Lost Odyssey
Infinite Undiscovery
Blue Dragon

And the thing is I could keep going, I just don't feel inclined to look up all the other 360 exclusives.

I want to reiterate that I don't want to see one system do better than another, I profit from them both doing well. My original point you fanboyishly fanatic poster you, was that this game is not as good as was hyped, Is not as good as it should be and is not better than Halo3 in any way that matters. Graphics are very nice, but they do not a good game make.

Killzone 2 is better than everyway than Halo. The gameplay isn't dated. Halos run & gun, no cover, pew pew guns has been the same since 2001. It didn't do anything to the genre, whereas K2 polished the genre to a great gleam and at least raised a few bars.
Plus my list of 4 games where the exclusives I own, not the PS3 exclusives. Indigo would be able to provide you with an indepth list if you wanted one.

I didnt even knew that there was a PC version of Gears of War 1...

 

[Flap Jack452]

Halo will never be on the PS3, just like mario will never be on the 360. Thats just the way it works.

 

[jthm]

I haven't played resistance 2 yet because I was not wowed by the first one. It moved faster than I prefer, was only in shades of grey and brown and as I said, even with a good control scheme, the Dual Shock feels wrong on FPS games.

Just becuase you don't like the pad doesn't make a game bad, or better if it's a good pad. And resistance 2 is plenty colourful, may want to give it a rent if that was your only niggle with it, the 30 vs 30 is worth putting up with the pad.

1. At least the Halo AI has the decency to die, rather than cry to be revived after getting themselves shot. I'd rather die and start over (and maybe frag some allies if necessary) than hear 10 minutes of looped "come help me comments."

I'd rather have around 3 minutes of whining rather than the flow of the game being broken by bad AI.

2. Yes, Halo's controls haven't changed since '01. That's not a bad thing. KZ2 tried exactly one new thing and it failed. Halo's controls are old. Doesn't change the fact that they're better. By the way, Soldiers do come up aiming if they're doing it right. I had my buddy from the 182nd Airborne play (that's Army Ranger FYI). He doesn't like the controls either.

All that shows is Halo 3 hasn't done anything new to the genre, not even a sprint button. Simple does not mean better, just less options. The Killzone controls are easy, anyone with an inabilty to press 3 buttons at once has serious issues. And think about it; you can't be looking down a scope while in cover, and raise in that state.

4. You're right that no game is harmed by having co-op. Many are helped. However a game can suffer from the lack of co-op. This one does. Imagine RE5 with no Co-op. It would harmed. This game needs co-op and I honestly can't regard it as a complete FPS until it has it.

So CoD 4 is a lesser game due to no co-op? It would be nice to have a buddy play with you, but not needed to make the game better.

5. A list of 4 games is not many good exclusives. Hell, only 3 count since we're arguing about the 4th. I'll do you one better and add MGS4 and LBP to your list bringing it to six.
360:
Gears not exclusive, actually better on PC
Gears 2
Fable 2 likely to come to PC, devs word
L4D (rumor is we might see this for PS3, but valve really isn't hot on the idea)not exclusive
Star Ocean
Halo 3 (counts as long as KZ2 does for your list) almost 100% that it will come to PC
Ninja Gaiden 2 been announced it's coming to PS3
DOA4
Mass Effect not exclusive
Lost Odyssey
Infinite Undiscovery
Blue Dragon

And the thing is I could keep going, I just don't feel inclined to look up all the other 360 exclusives.

I want to reiterate that I don't want to see one system do better than another, I profit from them both doing well. My original point you fanboyishly fanatic poster you, was that this game is not as good as was hyped, Is not as good as it should be and is not better than Halo3 in any way that matters. Graphics are very nice, but they do not a good game make.

Killzone 2 is better than everyway than Halo. The gameplay isn't dated. Halos run & gun, no cover, pew pew guns has been the same since 2001. It didn't do anything to the genre, whereas K2 polished the genre to a great gleam and at least raised a few bars.
Plus my list of 4 games where the exclusives I own, not the PS3 exclusives. Indigo would be able to provide you with an indepth list if you wanted one.

Okay, this is getting sad. I keep stating the point and either through obtuseness or sheer stubborn determination to cling to this game like a rat to wood in a river, you keep not getting it. Let me spell it out as clearly as I possibly can.

BY NO MEANS IS HALO 3 BETTER THAN KILLZONE 2. THAT SAID, BY NO MEANS IS KILLZONE 2 ANYWHERE NEAR THE GAME IT WAS HYPED UP TO BE.

It does not and will not ever kill ANY established FPS franchise.

 

[J.E.T.]

I have a PS3, a 360, and a Wii [yes I am white] and though I didnt buy halo 3. Due to the fact that I dont have Xbox live, (and a fellow 360 owner said it sucked) it would sell. But still no sony fanboys {and you know who you are no offence} would buy it though I may rent it and see about the online play because I hear the single player is only 8-10 hours long [Yahtzee said it not me] I doubt that I would buy it though unless the online play proved as good as or better than CoD4/BadCompany (and I dont play them much either)

 

[PersianLlama]

No, because I don't enjoy Halo, nor do I enjoy Killzone 2 like most people would think. They both suck in my opinion, and I probably like Halo more only because it has colors other than black, brown and gray.

I also particularly hate Resistance 2, and don't see how it's enjoyable.

Edit:

It doesn't matter whichever console YOU think has the better exclusives, it matters what the person making the decision thinks. People have different tastes. I personally prefer the PS3 exclusives such as Valkyria Chronicles and Disgaea 3, while others may prefer 360 exclusives, such as Gears of War and Halo 3.

 

[Hyperactiveman]

hmm... Yes but only if ps3 was compatible with Xboxes... And since both those things will never happen... Nope!

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

A few points in Halo's defense:

1 - Vehicles (in multiplayer especially, I know Killzone 2 has that mech thing)

2 - The campaign is a little shorter than the previous two only because Halo 3 has no "dear god when will it end" Flood levels, I know very few who are overly fond of "dear god when will it end" Flood levels (that and the geometry is less buggy than CE and 2)

3 - Realism and innovation don't equate to good, Halo 3 has more than enough of both to make it fun and reasonably distinctive

4 - It has the color purple (think about that for a second)

And as for the OP: No, and "lern 2 inglishh"

 

[ChainsawEnima]

There is a ridiculous amount of immature and annoying children already playing Halo 3 on xbox live, if online was free (PS3) then it would be unplayable for anyone looking for a decent game experience.

Halo 3 is overrated.
No I would not buy it for PS3.

 

[bad rider]

Anyone else feeling the flames?

Come on sing with me "Kum Bay Yah, My Lord, Kum Bay Yah"

Wow I got to post this twice today.