Why does everyone hate Halo 3?

[cuddly_tomato]

It doesn't suck. It's just bland and unintuitive.

I wouldn't call it unituitive, not at all.

It is pretty bland though.

My beef with it is the fact the single player was heavily watered down to make room for multiplayer. A lot of people just don't like playing games online, as your level of enjoyment is then dependant to a large extent on other people. Other people who might be complete assholes. Halo 1 and Halo 2 had good single player, Halo 3s was painfully short.

 

[lukemdizzle]

People hate halo because people debate about why other people like Halo more than a year after it came out

Its a fun game so if you like it fine and if you don't don't make fun of people that do

 

[superbleeder12]

Personally, I don't like it because it was a rehash of the second one with a few more weapons, updated graphics, and some new maps. It just felt same-ish to me. I still have it, and I still play it. But it felt like a halo 2 mod.

 

[hem dazon 90]

it was good but Halo two was the jesus halo game

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

I wouldn't call it unituitive, not at all.

It is pretty bland though.

I agree, I hate the game but even I think the controls are incredibly intuitive. Hell, most FPSs modeled their control scheme after Halo (not that it was the first with that control scheme) due to its accessability.

 

[I Am The Party]

It got over-hyped, that was both it's downfall and it's salvation. It's got a massive fan-base but people who aren't in that fan base just regard it as another shooter, it'll be interesting to see how the series goes.

 

[jebussaves88]

I don't. i just hate the further discussion of a game that came out over a year ago. I've defended it enough. I like it, some dont for one or more of several reasons.

a) Genuine dislike or not clicking with it. Prefer different kinds of shooters, or anything but a shooter
b) See it as representing Microsofts over eagerness to make money
c) Are old school playstation owners who dislike it perhaps because it saved playstations new rival from eating dirt.
d) Were expecting more from a sequel to one of the most influential, groundbreaking and potentially best FPS's of the early part of the decade
e) Many were dissappointed with Halo 2, so Halo 3 isn't going to really change their minds, seeing as Halo 3 is more Halo 2 than Halo 1.
f) People don't feel it deserves all the attention it gets (which should be a lot less seeing as it has now been over a year) and get a bad taste in their mouth when they think of people placing it as number 1 gmae of all time in their living memory
g) People mistakingly think the multiplayer consists of 1.5 million 12 year olds, and them.

People like it because:
a) Mulitplayer is very good, so long as Halo floats your boat
b) They like the first halo, so why fix whats not broken? If you want something new and revolutionary (which admitedly, in my honest opinion, there hasn't been anything huge and infinitly better in some way since Halo 1) play something else.
c) The story may be no Fahrenheit/ Indigo Prophecy, but it holds together and I for one was satisfied enough.
d) They have come to terms with the fact that it is merely in the top ten Xbox games in most people's lists, rather than being a favourite, and even if some people do like it over Half Life 2, then that is their choice and they should respect it.

I like Halo 3. It's in my top ten, but I suppose the biggest reason people dislike it now is

h) People won't shut up about it on forums.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Because Halo 3 killed my father and raped my mother!

Sorry, I had to say it.
I think people dislike it because it's consider "mainstream." Gamers like to be exclusive and elite and everyone and their brother plays Halo 3, so its not exclusive at all.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

It doesn't suck. It's just bland and unintuitive.

I wouldn't call it unituitive, not at all.

It does't bring anything that hasn't been seen in literally hundreds of other games. I'll give you that the original was the pacesetter for console multiplayer games but this has been happening on the PC for a decade beforehand so it was bound to happen on the console at some point, this was just the one that was latched onto. that was Halo: CE anyway, Halo 3 brought nothing interesting at all. It was just like Halo 2 which was just like Halo: CE, which was less fun than other games of a similar time like FarCry and Half Life (or were they a few years after? Time merges into one horrific memory).

 

[cuddly_tomato]

It doesn't suck. It's just bland and unintuitive.

I wouldn't call it unituitive, not at all.

It does't bring anything that hasn't been seen in literally hundreds of other games. I'll give you that the original was the pacesetter for console multiplayer games but this has been happening on the PC for a decade beforehand so it was bound to happen on the console at some point, this was just the one that was latched onto. that was Halo: CE anyway, Halo 3 brought nothing interesting at all. It was just like Halo 2 which was just like Halo: CE, which was less fun than other games of a similar time like FarCry and Half Life (or were they a few years after? Time merges into one horrific memory).

Ahhh... That's not what we mean by intuitive. Sorry I know English isn't the first language of a lot of folks here. Intuitive is the fluidity and ease of the gaming experience. How well balanced the controls are, how 'natural' they feel to use them, how well they mesh with your reflexes, how much sense the information on the screen makes, how easy it is to interpret that data and adjust your gameplay accordingly. It would also apply to things like menu functions. Does the menu make sense? Is equipping armour or weapons handled simplistically and easily or is it frustrating as hell?

I think you probably mean innovative? That it brings nothing at all new to the genre but just upgrades what has gone before. In this case I agree entirely.

 

[Tattaglia]

Halo 3 is a gigantic distraction from close-to-perfect games that deserve attention. I blame the pew-pew-pew lasers and flying mobiles.

 

[TerraMGP]

Because the Halo series are sub-par shooters that brought in an element that, much like the 'casual' gamers now, dropped the level of work that people put into games by drawing in people with lower standards. Halo 1-3 have rather bland weapons, poor story, annoying gameplay curves and the only real feature is the multiplayer which again only served to hurt the industry as a whole.

I guess what I'm saying is that its a sub par game and if you enjoy it you are entitled to, but youd best not bash 'casual gamers' as you most likely belong to a subset that came into gaming later and ruined alot of it for those of us who have been doing it for ages.

I would probably be annoyed by the claim that I contributed to ruining the industry by buying a game. But since it's you're group that seems to be so crushed by a shooter's popularity, I can wear the title proudly.

All I am saying is that if you enjoy the games thats fine, but the frat shooters seem to make up alot of the people trying to paint themselves as 'hardcore' and putting it forward that things like the Wii are bad because it has fewer games for the shooter and 'hardcore' market. The new influx of games does what Halo did to us, so no room to complain.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

Ahhh... That's not what we mean by intuitive. Sorry I know English isn't the first language of a lot of folks here. Intuitive is the fluidity and ease of the gaming experience. How well balanced the controls are, how 'natural' they feel to use them, how well they mesh with your reflexes, how much sense the information on the screen makes, how easy it is to interpret that data and adjust your gameplay accordingly. It would also apply to things like menu functions. Does the menu make sense? Is equipping armour or weapons handled simplistically and easily or is it frustrating as hell?

I think you probably mean innovative? That it brings nothing at all new to the genre but just upgrades what has gone before. In this case I agree entirely.

Haha, I'm British you silly sausage.
But anyway, what I meant was intuitive and thoughtful game design rather than intuitive controls. The introduction of game mechanics or features that have been overlooked or not used before at all in a way that benefits the game. Take the physics puzzles and the gravity gun from the Half Life series or the fear factor in Silent Hill. The Half Life examples were totally new and different and gave the game something different and the Silent Hill psychological horror took that idea and did it properly for the first time I can remember. And that's just keeping it in the whole running about with guns genre.

And yes, retrospectivly innovative would've been a better word to use, but there you are.

 

[Lord Krunk]

The main problem with Halo is that It's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid] been [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-Life_(video_game)] done [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(film)] before [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predator_(film)].

That's only to name a few, but the thing is, Halo is unoriginal, and doesn't really provide anything to the games industry, or the FPS. Nonetheless, the games are pretty good, but no where near the best.

To paraphrase the Bible: "Nothing is original, everything that is has already been"

Yeah, but it's like they don't even try.

 

[Signa]

Halo 3 is a gigantic distraction from close-to-perfect games that deserve attention.

this is very true.

I think Yahtzee summed it up nicely when all other FPSs started trying to be more like Halo. Since I think we mostly all agree here that Halo is good, but not great, trying to be more like mediocrity isn't going to win you any awards. Before Halo, other FPSs were trying to be Doom and Goldeneye. Neither of them were anything close to mediocre, so even if you failed at being a great game along side Goldeneye and Doom, you still could hope that falling short would put you somewhere decent. Now, with Halo, if you fall short of achieving Halo's level of playability, you have a shitpile with no advertising and hype to float you up to some manageable level of shame. In that respect, I think Halo is even worse of a game than most of us are giving it credit for.


There was a similar instance with the PS2 Neopets game. I don't know what drove me to pick it up as I never played the online game, and instantly wrote it off as a Pokemon cash-in. Anyway, the gameplay ended up being Zelda. It was a damn good game! It wasn't as good as Zelda, but it aimed high and was a very respectable game.

Then I asked no questions when the PSP Neopets game came out and UGH it was bad! In this version, they were aiming for Untold Legends. UL was also a mediocre game, and though playable itself, it was not a mold to base your game off of.

 

[Not Good]

The main problem with Halo is that It's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid] been [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-Life_(video_game)] done [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(film)] before [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predator_(film)].

That's only to name a few, but the thing is, Halo is unoriginal, and doesn't really provide anything to the games industry, or the FPS. Nonetheless, the games are pretty good, but no where near the best.

To paraphrase the Bible: "Nothing is original, everything that is has already been"

Yeah, but it's like they don't even try.

Do I need to repeat myself? Look, all I'm saying is that while your point is justifiable, it's hopelessly pointless. One cannot judge the originality of a game by the use of old things, but by the likeability of the seemingly new things and the likeability of the characters.

 

[LOOY]

First decent console shooter.

 

[AceDiamond]

Because the Halo series are sub-par shooters that brought in an element that, much like the 'casual' gamers now, dropped the level of work that people put into games by drawing in people with lower standards. Halo 1-3 have rather bland weapons, poor story, annoying gameplay curves and the only real feature is the multiplayer which again only served to hurt the industry as a whole.

I guess what I'm saying is that its a sub par game and if you enjoy it you are entitled to, but youd best not bash 'casual gamers' as you most likely belong to a subset that came into gaming later and ruined alot of it for those of us who have been doing it for ages.

I would probably be annoyed by the claim that I contributed to ruining the industry by buying a game. But since it's you're group that seems to be so crushed by a shooter's popularity, I can wear the title proudly.

All I am saying is that if you enjoy the games thats fine, but the frat shooters seem to make up alot of the people trying to paint themselves as 'hardcore' and putting it forward that things like the Wii are bad because it has fewer games for the shooter and 'hardcore' market. The new influx of games does what Halo did to us, so no room to complain.

So the fact I like Halo but also like the Wii would really torpedo your argument right about now. Which I do.

Not every person who plays an FPS is an idiot frat boy. Not every person who plays Halo is an idiot frat boy. Begrudgingly I have to say the same about Gears of War despite it being far more of a dumb frat shooter than Halo (shitloads as a unit of measurement, anyone?). In fact I'd say the people who only look at the surface value of Halo's story and mythos and dismiss it as "100% uninspired" or whatever are far more guilty of dumbing down the game than any 12-year-old with an XBox Live account. Again I'm not saying it's the greatest story ever told, but it's a lot better than people give it credit for.

And perhaps ironically it's the people who complain about it that are continuing to perpetuate the popularity of the game that they're complaining about being so popular in the first place.

First decent console shooter.

Goldeneye. A thousand times Goldeneye. Without Goldeneye there would be no Halo.

 

[TerraMGP]

Because the Halo series are sub-par shooters that brought in an element that, much like the 'casual' gamers now, dropped the level of work that people put into games by drawing in people with lower standards. Halo 1-3 have rather bland weapons, poor story, annoying gameplay curves and the only real feature is the multiplayer which again only served to hurt the industry as a whole.

I guess what I'm saying is that its a sub par game and if you enjoy it you are entitled to, but youd best not bash 'casual gamers' as you most likely belong to a subset that came into gaming later and ruined alot of it for those of us who have been doing it for ages.

I would probably be annoyed by the claim that I contributed to ruining the industry by buying a game. But since it's you're group that seems to be so crushed by a shooter's popularity, I can wear the title proudly.

All I am saying is that if you enjoy the games thats fine, but the frat shooters seem to make up alot of the people trying to paint themselves as 'hardcore' and putting it forward that things like the Wii are bad because it has fewer games for the shooter and 'hardcore' market. The new influx of games does what Halo did to us, so no room to complain.

So the fact I like Halo but also like the Wii would really torpedo your argument right about now. Which I do.

Not every person who plays an FPS is an idiot frat boy. Not every person who plays Halo is an idiot frat boy. Begrudgingly I have to say the same about Gears of War despite it being far more of a dumb frat shooter than Halo (shitloads as a unit of measurement, anyone?). In fact I'd say the people who only look at the surface value of Halo's story and mythos and dismiss it as "100% uninspired" or whatever are far more guilty of dumbing down the game than any 12-year-old with an XBox Live account. Again I'm not saying it's the greatest story ever told, but it's a lot better than people give it credit for.

And perhaps ironically it's the people who complain about it that are continuing to perpetuate the popularity of the game that they're complaining about being so popular in the first place.

I'm not saying that everyone who likes an FPS is an idiot frat boy, I think your missing what I am trying to say entirely. What I am trying to say is that it WAS the influx of said frat boys more than any other factor that drew FPS games away from the well done single player RPG laced masterpieces they were heading towards and instead over to things like Halo which did not have those elements at all. You can like the Halo series, Heck I love DBZ: BT2. What I am trying to say is that while those people are obviously gamers now, the 'hardcore' crowd bashing the wii and 'casual' gamers is wrong because the influx of halo fanatics who obsessed over Multiplaying more-luck-than-skill games caused a huge drop in games that people like myself would consider quality.

long story short Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. that is my argument.

 

[Xyzgon]

The main problem with Halo is that It's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid] been [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-Life_(video_game)] done [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(film)] before [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predator_(film)].

That's only to name a few, but the thing is, Halo is unoriginal, and doesn't really provide anything to the games industry, or the FPS. Nonetheless, the games are pretty good, but no where near the best.

To paraphrase the Bible: "Nothing is original, everything that is has already been"

Yeah, but it's like they don't even try.

No, it's like they do what any other sequel would do and keep the basic controls while sprinkling on improvements, new weapons, basically overhauling the dressing but keeping the core that makes it a Halo game intact. Gears1 and 2 have the same core gameplay Cod 2, 3, 4, and world at war have the same core gameplay same with resistance and just about every other shooter franchise out there. I have truly tried to see why people seem to see this as bad with Halo. I really can't see the reasoning. It's a sequel. OF COURSE IT'S LIKE THE OTHER ONE'S. Hell, Halo 1 was hugely innovative and the following kept to that like any good sequel. Soon everyone and their dog was copying them yes but that doesn't mean it's Halo's fault. It'd be absolutely idiotic to drastically change the core gameplay. So (though i fear i'm starting to sound like a broken record) they did what any good sequel would do and they improved things like graphics, added new weapons, new maps, new campaign ect. ect. and thus Halo 2 and 3 were born.