Zero Punctuation: Halo 3
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yea, like 5 now. Plus a graphic novel. A movie, sometime in the nearish future. And an RTS eventually.
I really didn't feel like reopening this old thread but a mod locked the thread I made and suggested that I post here so. . .
I never expected Yahtzee to like very much Halo 3, his taste in games has been established as confined to games too concerned with their great story or originality to be very worried about actually being fun. He did bash the series a little before but I always assumed it was for cheap laughs.
Overall, and I think most will agree, Zero Punctuation on Halo 3 is one of Yahtzee's worst reviews. The best joke is in the third sentence ("Jewel encrusted golden gift from the treasure vaults of Xerxes," if you don't remember, unless you like "Quad era demonstandum, said Yahtzee like the big literary fag that he is." better.) Now to compartmentalize the review for review.
First Yahtzee discusses story, citing that he has never played a Halo game and lacks the backstory. It seems to me that if he really felt he needed backstory to fully appreciate the game that he intends to provide a hopefully non-biased review of then he could have found it easily on the Internet. It would take less than five minutes to pull up the appropriate articles on Wikipedia and 20-40 minutes to read the plot summary. And there, you have backstory.
He then moves on to what he figured out without backstory: Master Chief always wears armor, has friend who is the black guy from Predator, evil aliens invade Earth, for some reason some aliens aren't evil, other aliens that are headcrab copies, rings in space that kill things, a twelve-year-old-girl started talking so I stopped caring. It's really a shame that he stopped caring because he might have found it intriguing. I hardly think Miranda Keyes is even reminiscent of a twelve-year-old girl, I think he was just looking for an excuse to skip the rest of the cutscene and all others hereafter so that he could be quickly done with this game he had already decided to hate. The one valid point he made (from the stand-point of this being a review of a game) was that the story was difficult to follow without backstory. As I've said before this is easily addressed and it's not really bad for the designers of a sequel to expect the player to have played the previous installments. And I feel that Yahtzee has taken his love of Half-Life too far, the Flood and headcrabs are not at all ascetically similar. Flood forms are rotting corpses while headcrab zombies are mutated but obviously alive, the only real similarity he could have noticed is that both are "space zombies." This alone is hardly enough to call the Flood "headcrabs in disguise."
Next he complains about how bright and colorful the game is. I never really understood why he would say this (other than finding another thing to bash the game about), most eyes like candy. Looking at more recent reviews I find that Yahtzee complains as much as is reasonable about the drab color schemes of most next-gen games. So when a game is drab and dull he hates it and when a game is bright and colorful he also hates it. I suppose he likes dull and colorful, but I'd rather have the visuals set the right atmosphere than appeal to my ascetic tastes.
His next complaint is that Halo 3 is schizophrenic (as he said) or inconsistent (as he wrote), alternating between moody sci-fi horror and somewhat light-hearted sci-fi action (though he described the latter as "midget aliens running around stupidly acting like Ewoks making *finger quotes* wacky dialogue"). I won't even go into his take on Grunts because Yahtzee seems to fall into the common "intellectual" trap of "I'm smart so I can't laught at childish humor." But as for the schizophrenia, he later praises CoD 4 for changing between gun-ho pitched battle and sneaky stealth combat. The alternation in Halo 3 is similar (though admitedly more extreme) and it's not like it takes 10 hours to establish a mood, 20 minutes is more than enough to create an atmosphere.
Now: "Most of the weapons are manufactured by Matel." Hmm, most of the weapons are either UNSC or Brute, drab and practical. Only Covenant weapons are colorful and even remotely resemble toys, but it fits the Covenant mentality that war and violence are arts, not a necessities, and that their instruments should be works of art themselves. I guess trying to do things a little differently is wrong . . . wait, Yahtzee liked Psychonaughts?! That game was totally different from most things, and gameplay suffered for it.
Next "problem." Inconsistent difficulty curve. I'll guess Yahtzee played on Heroic to spot this issue. On Normal the difficulty curve is nearly perfect and is the best for training. Heroic is optimized for fun throughout (while missions get overall harder sections of them don't necessarily follow the trend), not teaching Halo noobs how to play. Yahtzee seemed to think that the end was too easy, saying that Guilty Spark was a pushover, ignoring the punishingly difficult pyramid climb immediatly before it and the exhilerating run for your life immediatly after. That boss fight was mostly for the story and to put the Sentinels back against you. The series is not known for it's boss battles, treating a boss as an overly tough enemy that must be killed instead of something that requires unique tactics to defeat. Yahtzee suggested that the reason for this odd difficulty curve was "a developing staff large enough to found a small island nation." Hillarilously incorrect, Bungie is a relatively small studio with a staff of around 200 (which includes support jobs like janitors and accountants that do not directly contribute to the development process).
Moving on to vehicle sections. Yahtzee pretended like they were clearly defined sections (like most action games) with no choice but to man the vehicle (like most action games) and no choice of vehicle (like most action games) besides Warthog (which he referred to as "jeep," a useful but inaccurate moniker). Making absolutely no mention of the choice the player can make to get out of the vehicle and procede on foot he describes him driving and his gunner aparently not destroying an enemy tank fast enough (he claimed he was shooting at butterflies, most likely entirely fabricated for a laugh, the tank wasn't destroyed quickly because he was using a .50 turret instead of an anti-armor weapon) so he took the turret and the marine crashed into a rock allowing the Wraith (enemy tank) to destroy them in an impossibly spectacular fashion. I have no problem with hyperbole but blatantly disregarding one of Halo's most fundamental and unique gameplay features is just . . . damnable. I'm talking about seamless transition from First Person Shooting to Third Person Driving, no other game I can think of does that. It's also somewhat interesting to note that he used vehicles from Halo 2 in his animations. Lazines or a subtle trick to imply poorer graphical quality?
Getting close to the end, which reminds me that this particular Zero Punctuation is rather short. Yahtzee says that the campaign is (criminally) short, about 8-10 hours. A fairly standard length for a shooter, forgiveable considering the polish levels and numerous features that add replayability, not to mention the proliferation of games that are as short or shorter. Before I go on I will point out that Yahtzee never chastizes missions, just the campaign as a whole and never points out poor level design or retarded AI (aside from Grunts and Marines, the former being cannon fodder and the latter foolishly expected to perform as well as a human). So he must hold a fairly high opinion of those aspects, since his track record shows he has nit-picking down to a science. Also left conspicuously unsaid (to anyone who's played Halo 3 at least) are Online four player Co-op, the meta-game, skulls, and saved films.
Yahtzee then claims that he "doesn't give a flying shit about multiplayer," but he clearly played Team Fortress 2 more than a little bit for his Orange Box review. I believe in this case he didn't even try multiplayer because no reviewer worth his salt would ever belittle one of the greatest (least infuriating anyway) multiplayer experiences ever created so much. He then makes the mistaken assumption that in the overall experience of Halo 3 the multiplayer is half and the campaign is half. The Halo series has always been multiplayer-centric, be it co-operative or competitive with the single-player campaign being an intergral yet short-lasting part. Yahtzee seems to take this as meaning the multiplayer excuses the campaign for it's shortness, the campaign needs no excuses since anyone who thinks it's any good will play it longer than any other shooter's campaign. Hmm, I'm starting to rant, I'll finish and move on. Good multiplayer doesn't excuse short campaign, they're different experiences and should be regarded seperately first then packaged together to regard the overall game.
Yahtzee then rants a little about how great people think Halo is great and implying that they're wrong and worse as people for it. Then he says Halo 3 is average. I'm fine with that, I can even see sane people thinking that. But then he qualifies his statement, saying everything in Halo has been done before and better. This I cannot abide for it is factually false. I challenge Yahtzee to name a shooter besides and predating Halo that: has quick and easy transistion from foot-pounding to driving, a similar or larger number of weapons with as varied effects, a similar or larger number of driveable vehicles that are as varied, equipment with similarily great impact on battle, an object layout editor, saved films, something functionally similar to Halo 3's skulls, recharging health, sticky grenades, campaign scoring, boarding vehicles, a highly restricted inventory of weapons, or significant and useful online support for many of the aformentioned features. Digging deep into the vaults of gaming history he might find a few of these popping-up here and there in inferior forms.
One final point: It's not totally unforgiveable that Yahtzee chooses to review the game based on single-player only, but it is shameful to do so while ignoring a significant component of the single-player experience. Especially considering his overt and enormous fondness for a good story in a video game.
So, that's what I have to say. Sorry for ranting in some spots, I just feel very strongly that Yahtzee is very biased against Halo.
EDIT: I don't mean this as a direct attack on Yahtzee. When I see people praising Zero Punctuation as though Yahtzee is the Apostle of God Almighty I just want them to realize that what we have here is no infalable divinity descendent from the Higher Planes to enlighten us pathetic mortals. Yahtzee is only human, flawed as is any human. What I have described above shows bias and flaws, but despite these I respect Yahtzee for admitting the game is not as bad as he would have his viewers believe. Now if he would admit and overcome his biases you herded sheep might be somewhat justified in your deifying.
I never expected Yahtzee to like very much Halo 3, his taste in games has been established as confined to games too concerned with their great story or originality to be very worried about actually being fun. He did bash the series a little before but I always assumed it was for cheap laughs.
Overall, and I think most will agree, Zero Punctuation on Halo 3 is one of Yahtzee's worst reviews. The best joke is in the third sentence ("Jewel encrusted golden gift from the treasure vaults of Xerxes," if you don't remember, unless you like "Quad era demonstandum, said Yahtzee like the big literary fag that he is." better.) Now to compartmentalize the review for review.
First Yahtzee discusses story, citing that he has never played a Halo game and lacks the backstory. It seems to me that if he really felt he needed backstory to fully appreciate the game that he intends to provide a hopefully non-biased review of then he could have found it easily on the Internet. It would take less than five minutes to pull up the appropriate articles on Wikipedia and 20-40 minutes to read the plot summary. And there, you have backstory.
He then moves on to what he figured out without backstory: Master Chief always wears armor, has friend who is the black guy from Predator, evil aliens invade Earth, for some reason some aliens aren't evil, other aliens that are headcrab copies, rings in space that kill things, a twelve-year-old-girl started talking so I stopped caring. It's really a shame that he stopped caring because he might have found it intriguing. I hardly think Miranda Keyes is even reminiscent of a twelve-year-old girl, I think he was just looking for an excuse to skip the rest of the cutscene and all others hereafter so that he could be quickly done with this game he had already decided to hate. The one valid point he made (from the stand-point of this being a review of a game) was that the story was difficult to follow without backstory. As I've said before this is easily addressed and it's not really bad for the designers of a sequel to expect the player to have played the previous installments. And I feel that Yahtzee has taken his love of Half-Life too far, the Flood and headcrabs are not at all ascetically similar. Flood forms are rotting corpses while headcrab zombies are mutated but obviously alive, the only real similarity he could have noticed is that both are "space zombies." This alone is hardly enough to call the Flood "headcrabs in disguise."
Next he complains about how bright and colorful the game is. I never really understood why he would say this (other than finding another thing to bash the game about), most eyes like candy. Looking at more recent reviews I find that Yahtzee complains as much as is reasonable about the drab color schemes of most next-gen games. So when a game is drab and dull he hates it and when a game is bright and colorful he also hates it. I suppose he likes dull and colorful, but I'd rather have the visuals set the right atmosphere than appeal to my ascetic tastes.
His next complaint is that Halo 3 is schizophrenic (as he said) or inconsistent (as he wrote), alternating between moody sci-fi horror and somewhat light-hearted sci-fi action (though he described the latter as "midget aliens running around stupidly acting like Ewoks making *finger quotes* wacky dialogue"). I won't even go into his take on Grunts because Yahtzee seems to fall into the common "intellectual" trap of "I'm smart so I can't laught at childish humor." But as for the schizophrenia, he later praises CoD 4 for changing between gun-ho pitched battle and sneaky stealth combat. The alternation in Halo 3 is similar (though admitedly more extreme) and it's not like it takes 10 hours to establish a mood, 20 minutes is more than enough to create an atmosphere.
Now: "Most of the weapons are manufactured by Matel." Hmm, most of the weapons are either UNSC or Brute, drab and practical. Only Covenant weapons are colorful and even remotely resemble toys, but it fits the Covenant mentality that war and violence are arts, not a necessities, and that their instruments should be works of art themselves. I guess trying to do things a little differently is wrong . . . wait, Yahtzee liked Psychonaughts?! That game was totally different from most things, and gameplay suffered for it.
Next "problem." Inconsistent difficulty curve. I'll guess Yahtzee played on Heroic to spot this issue. On Normal the difficulty curve is nearly perfect and is the best for training. Heroic is optimized for fun throughout (while missions get overall harder sections of them don't necessarily follow the trend), not teaching Halo noobs how to play. Yahtzee seemed to think that the end was too easy, saying that Guilty Spark was a pushover, ignoring the punishingly difficult pyramid climb immediatly before it and the exhilerating run for your life immediatly after. That boss fight was mostly for the story and to put the Sentinels back against you. The series is not known for it's boss battles, treating a boss as an overly tough enemy that must be killed instead of something that requires unique tactics to defeat. Yahtzee suggested that the reason for this odd difficulty curve was "a developing staff large enough to found a small island nation." Hillarilously incorrect, Bungie is a relatively small studio with a staff of around 200 (which includes support jobs like janitors and accountants that do not directly contribute to the development process).
Moving on to vehicle sections. Yahtzee pretended like they were clearly defined sections (like most action games) with no choice but to man the vehicle (like most action games) and no choice of vehicle (like most action games) besides Warthog (which he referred to as "jeep," a useful but inaccurate moniker). Making absolutely no mention of the choice the player can make to get out of the vehicle and procede on foot he describes him driving and his gunner aparently not destroying an enemy tank fast enough (he claimed he was shooting at butterflies, most likely entirely fabricated for a laugh, the tank wasn't destroyed quickly because he was using a .50 turret instead of an anti-armor weapon) so he took the turret and the marine crashed into a rock allowing the Wraith (enemy tank) to destroy them in an impossibly spectacular fashion. I have no problem with hyperbole but blatantly disregarding one of Halo's most fundamental and unique gameplay features is just . . . damnable. I'm talking about seamless transition from First Person Shooting to Third Person Driving, no other game I can think of does that. It's also somewhat interesting to note that he used vehicles from Halo 2 in his animations. Lazines or a subtle trick to imply poorer graphical quality?
Getting close to the end, which reminds me that this particular Zero Punctuation is rather short. Yahtzee says that the campaign is (criminally) short, about 8-10 hours. A fairly standard length for a shooter, forgiveable considering the polish levels and numerous features that add replayability, not to mention the proliferation of games that are as short or shorter. Before I go on I will point out that Yahtzee never chastizes missions, just the campaign as a whole and never points out poor level design or retarded AI (aside from Grunts and Marines, the former being cannon fodder and the latter foolishly expected to perform as well as a human). So he must hold a fairly high opinion of those aspects, since his track record shows he has nit-picking down to a science. Also left conspicuously unsaid (to anyone who's played Halo 3 at least) are Online four player Co-op, the meta-game, skulls, and saved films.
Yahtzee then claims that he "doesn't give a flying shit about multiplayer," but he clearly played Team Fortress 2 more than a little bit for his Orange Box review. I believe in this case he didn't even try multiplayer because no reviewer worth his salt would ever belittle one of the greatest (least infuriating anyway) multiplayer experiences ever created so much. He then makes the mistaken assumption that in the overall experience of Halo 3 the multiplayer is half and the campaign is half. The Halo series has always been multiplayer-centric, be it co-operative or competitive with the single-player campaign being an intergral yet short-lasting part. Yahtzee seems to take this as meaning the multiplayer excuses the campaign for it's shortness, the campaign needs no excuses since anyone who thinks it's any good will play it longer than any other shooter's campaign. Hmm, I'm starting to rant, I'll finish and move on. Good multiplayer doesn't excuse short campaign, they're different experiences and should be regarded seperately first then packaged together to regard the overall game.
Yahtzee then rants a little about how great people think Halo is great and implying that they're wrong and worse as people for it. Then he says Halo 3 is average. I'm fine with that, I can even see sane people thinking that. But then he qualifies his statement, saying everything in Halo has been done before and better. This I cannot abide for it is factually false. I challenge Yahtzee to name a shooter besides and predating Halo that: has quick and easy transistion from foot-pounding to driving, a similar or larger number of weapons with as varied effects, a similar or larger number of driveable vehicles that are as varied, equipment with similarily great impact on battle, an object layout editor, saved films, something functionally similar to Halo 3's skulls, recharging health, sticky grenades, campaign scoring, boarding vehicles, a highly restricted inventory of weapons, or significant and useful online support for many of the aformentioned features. Digging deep into the vaults of gaming history he might find a few of these popping-up here and there in inferior forms.
One final point: It's not totally unforgiveable that Yahtzee chooses to review the game based on single-player only, but it is shameful to do so while ignoring a significant component of the single-player experience. Especially considering his overt and enormous fondness for a good story in a video game.
So, that's what I have to say. Sorry for ranting in some spots, I just feel very strongly that Yahtzee is very biased against Halo.
EDIT: I don't mean this as a direct attack on Yahtzee. When I see people praising Zero Punctuation as though Yahtzee is the Apostle of God Almighty I just want them to realize that what we have here is no infalable divinity descendent from the Higher Planes to enlighten us pathetic mortals. Yahtzee is only human, flawed as is any human. What I have described above shows bias and flaws, but despite these I respect Yahtzee for admitting the game is not as bad as he would have his viewers believe. Now if he would admit and overcome his biases you herded sheep might be somewhat justified in your deifying.
really funny review and you said what about every one thought about halo 3 keep making reviews!But I mean really how in any universe you ever just label carl weathers as "that black guy from predator"? He is a living legend
I only revived it because a mod said I couldn't post that anywhere else. (Not sure why)shatnershaman said:
alright this hole thing is starting to piss me off. ever since this review I cant get away from Halo 3 hate so I will take the liberty on pointing out exactly why halo is such a popular and critically exclaimed series.
1. I always here the argument that Halo has never done anything original and that its just another bland FPS, this is completely false. Halo 1 broke away from extremely linear and constricting level design by having vast open landscapes with a more sandbox approach to battles. anybody who has ever played the silent cartographer or assault on the control room level knows that. bungi continued this level design throughout H2 and H3. almost no FPS can compete with the scale, epic feel, and fun of Halo's battles
2. story. yes I said it story. Halo may not have as compelling a story as Half-life or thought provoking as Bioshock but that can be ok. halo's story is meant to be entertaining and thats what it does. Its a relatively simple but interring story with some really cool twists and turns. The story can satisfy the casual gamer as well as the hard core.
3. game play. the game play of Halo is solid. it is smooth fluent and flows nicely. every battle is exiting well designed and above all fun. lots of weapons vehicles and smart challenging enemies keep the pace steady. and its a game that actually does good driving sequences.
some complain about the friendly AI isn't up to par but I followed the development of the Halo 3 and the friendly AI was actually intentionally tuned. this is because the developers noticed that battles became too easy when all your allies were doing all the work and that this took away from the intensity of battles and the feeling that you are facing overwhelming odds.
4. Art. The environments in halo have always been some of my favorite in game history. they are a cool and original blend of ancient architecture and futuristic technology. also in a market so crowded by gritty realistic games whose only colors are black white brown and sometimes red halo stands out with a more colorful comic book like style that gives it a cool exaggerated over the top almost fantasy like appearance that really fits everything els in the game. this leeds me to my next point.
5. graphics. I always hear how bad Halo 3's graphics are but I argue that there as good as any other 360 game just in its own ways. I find it funny how yhatzee criticizes games for their colorless approach to graphics but then does the same to Halo 3 for having to much color. Halo isn't so pose to have photo realistic graphics. the art style allows Halo 3 to have extremely crisp and detailed environments. take a close look at the textures in Cod 4, bioshock, or gears. then do the same for Halo 3. the detail in those games don't come close to H3. also the game looks crisper than most other games with no areas that aren't detailed. You also have to remember that Halo 3 has much bigger environments than all the games it is compared to so for it to have the graphical level that is does with NO slowdown is technologically amazing (lag aside because every game has that)
6. multiplayer. It is nothing short of amazing. as balanced as you can get, lots and lots of cool weapons and vehicles, well designed maps, and awesome extra features. saved films are soooo fun cool and convenient (if you didn't wish every game had it you'd be lying) Forge is fun creative and the fun you'll have playing your very own map with friends is unmatched. some complain about annoying people and I agree with them but that is why bungie created the mute option. yhatzee didn't play Halo 3's multiplayer which is sad because he was missing half the game.
I could go on but those are just a few reasons Halo is so popular and a great game. but because halo is so popular it attracts blind scrutiny by people who think its cool to hate whatever is popular. not saying that that is all people who dislike halo, if you have a legitimate reason than I respect that, but if you spread blind hate than your loss. your missing out on enjoying some amazing games.
1. I always here the argument that Halo has never done anything original and that its just another bland FPS, this is completely false. Halo 1 broke away from extremely linear and constricting level design by having vast open landscapes with a more sandbox approach to battles. anybody who has ever played the silent cartographer or assault on the control room level knows that. bungi continued this level design throughout H2 and H3. almost no FPS can compete with the scale, epic feel, and fun of Halo's battles
2. story. yes I said it story. Halo may not have as compelling a story as Half-life or thought provoking as Bioshock but that can be ok. halo's story is meant to be entertaining and thats what it does. Its a relatively simple but interring story with some really cool twists and turns. The story can satisfy the casual gamer as well as the hard core.
3. game play. the game play of Halo is solid. it is smooth fluent and flows nicely. every battle is exiting well designed and above all fun. lots of weapons vehicles and smart challenging enemies keep the pace steady. and its a game that actually does good driving sequences.
some complain about the friendly AI isn't up to par but I followed the development of the Halo 3 and the friendly AI was actually intentionally tuned. this is because the developers noticed that battles became too easy when all your allies were doing all the work and that this took away from the intensity of battles and the feeling that you are facing overwhelming odds.
4. Art. The environments in halo have always been some of my favorite in game history. they are a cool and original blend of ancient architecture and futuristic technology. also in a market so crowded by gritty realistic games whose only colors are black white brown and sometimes red halo stands out with a more colorful comic book like style that gives it a cool exaggerated over the top almost fantasy like appearance that really fits everything els in the game. this leeds me to my next point.
5. graphics. I always hear how bad Halo 3's graphics are but I argue that there as good as any other 360 game just in its own ways. I find it funny how yhatzee criticizes games for their colorless approach to graphics but then does the same to Halo 3 for having to much color. Halo isn't so pose to have photo realistic graphics. the art style allows Halo 3 to have extremely crisp and detailed environments. take a close look at the textures in Cod 4, bioshock, or gears. then do the same for Halo 3. the detail in those games don't come close to H3. also the game looks crisper than most other games with no areas that aren't detailed. You also have to remember that Halo 3 has much bigger environments than all the games it is compared to so for it to have the graphical level that is does with NO slowdown is technologically amazing (lag aside because every game has that)
6. multiplayer. It is nothing short of amazing. as balanced as you can get, lots and lots of cool weapons and vehicles, well designed maps, and awesome extra features. saved films are soooo fun cool and convenient (if you didn't wish every game had it you'd be lying) Forge is fun creative and the fun you'll have playing your very own map with friends is unmatched. some complain about annoying people and I agree with them but that is why bungie created the mute option. yhatzee didn't play Halo 3's multiplayer which is sad because he was missing half the game.
I could go on but those are just a few reasons Halo is so popular and a great game. but because halo is so popular it attracts blind scrutiny by people who think its cool to hate whatever is popular. not saying that that is all people who dislike halo, if you have a legitimate reason than I respect that, but if you spread blind hate than your loss. your missing out on enjoying some amazing games.
You're right, well said (if not grammatically perfect).lukemdizzle said:
I'd like to point out that Halo takes a rather unique approach to sci-fi story-telling. What I mean is everything is not explained to you, you have to think (a foreign concept to many, I know).
SPOILERS An example: the message Cortana sends on the Flood infested battlecruiser. There really was no solution to stop the Flood without firing Halo. Cortana knew the Gravemind would know her message and she knew it would go through the portal to stop them. And she knew that a rebuilt Halo on the Ark could eliminate all the Flood once the Gravemind was there. SPOILERS
The surface story of Halo is simple, but there's a depth to the universe almost unmatched by any but the greatest of sci-fi franchises. Literally hundreds of allusions and a comprehensive history for everything make the Haloverse one of the most interesting settings ever.
Those cortana messages were complete shit that was a dumb move by BungieEldritch Warlord said:
Bad move, yes. Complete shit, no. This is more of the "makes you think" aspect that I find appealing to Halo's story. The Chief and Cortana had been together so long that a corrupt bit of her is left in him (SPOILERS or maybe it's from when Cortana copied herself in First Strike so that she could stay with the ship and help him at the same time SPOILERS) and will briefly interfer with his electronics from time to time without the true presence of Cortana to blot it out. And this corrupt bit seems to sync with the real Cortana when they're within range of each other.shatnershaman said:
But there should be some way to skip them, that would make the game slightly better. And it would be for the best if Halo 4 (if it ever comes) does not have those at all, or limits it to just talking and maybe some effect on the visuals.
Also, wrong message. I was refering to the actually plot item that convinces Master Chief and Miranda to go with the Elites through the Portal. (you know, the thing they watch in that conference on Shadow of Intent)
Oh come on now. A bit left over that can communicate across mass distances (the copies went insane) thats ridiculous even for a sci fi game like Halo.Eldritch Warlord said:
I didn't say "mass distances," I said "within range." I implied a certain proximity, no greater than planetary-scale distances. I also used bit throughout my statement and added the paranthesed Spoiler to suggest that the bit may be from the copies (not a complete copy).shatnershaman said:
I'll go into some technicals, when something is "removed" from a hard drive it remains on the hard drive until it is written over by new data or purged. Cortana was removed from the Chief's data storage device but nothing wrote over her data, so it is reasonable to assume that she's still there in some unpurged fragments denied total functionality because there was no interfacing with Master Chief's nervous system (at least not in the way she's meant to).
This arguing is pointless, we should be allies in this forum of Halo-haters.
Amen Mister Yahtzee. Halo sucked since day one. (Plus Master Chief is just a jacked up version of the Doom Marine. XD) I have noticed a lot of the FPS' have the same setting and designs. I will say this: all of those Halo junkies should get a real life and play Warhammer 40K. xD
Mad kudos.
Mad kudos.
bodiddly83 said:
And so what if he played on easy? The man has to play a game, note down criticisms of it, elaborate his criticisms, write them all into a hilarious script, record it with no mistakes (at that speed it's hard) and also do the 4 minute animation and syncronise it to his voice... all in one week
It's good that the comments section on the ZP video becomes intelligent conversations, sucks people like bodiddly83 come in though. And only 7 days, a tad bit soft don't you think?
Man, I'm late onto the boat on this one (wish I'd known about Zero Punctuation and it's hilarious butchery back when this was a new development). First off, yes, one would need to have played the other two titles in the series in order to gain some notion of what the heck is going on. That said, it wouldn't make much difference because, tragically, the singleplayer of Halo 3 is, well, dull. At times It was so hard that it kicked my ass until my nose bled, and then promptly reversed so that I could get up and do something else without pausing it. This is coming from someone who awaited this game's arrival with something dangerously and shamefully close to fanboy-ism. The first game, despite the many valid criticisms that could be levied at it, had a good story (in my opinion). somewhere, I guess they switched emphasis from single- to multiplayer (which, admittedly is awesome sans the frothy-mouthed thirteen year old dicks that inhabit it).
Err...This is really late for me to do this, but I'm doing it anyway, because I just made an account. That reveiw, was great for what you reveiwed... But you only reveiwed half of the game, people go to you looking on your oppinion on a game, to catch it's flawes, but you poined out, the "shitty" part of Halo, the bad half. You pointed out that this girl is average at masterbating, but you never experienced a orgy, the better part. Bungie spent half of their time making the multi-player portion, and your not even going to reveiw it? But then again, I'm to late.