Video Game Analysis: Halo 3

Hate is an overstatement, the game was decent I think. I just thought that the multiplayer got boring and I don't want a game that I can only play Singleplayer with. If I played it through once, I don't think I would often pick up the controller to play it again.

All in all it wasn't bad, but it sure wasn't.... really good.

mcz wrote:Hey, i also like halo 3 more than halo ce, but its just MY opinion. I just plain like it more, more boom! more enemies and more blood. The only thing i dont like about halo 3 is that you dont find the elites, they were fun opontents and that the brutes were super easy, even on legendary, considering the fact how strong they were in the First strike.

Are you stupid or just had a lapse of memory?

[quote="Angatar"]

mcz wrote:Hey, i also like halo 3 more than halo ce, but its just MY opinion. I just plain like it more, more boom! more enemies and more blood. The only thing i dont like about halo 3 is that you dont find the elites, they were fun opontents and that the brutes were super easy, even on legendary, considering the fact how strong they were in the First strike.

So I guess a captivating story is... unimportant to you? I guess you also liked Transformers 2...

Zaki90 wrote:Halo 2 was better than Halo 3 because it had the Arbiter and Master Chief apart. Telling 2 stories from 2 different factions against each other. It felt good to play with the Covenant for once. To fight among side the elites and grunts, it was good.

Halo 3 killed that feeling, made the Covenant feel like the bad guys ( which in reality Truth is a good guy.)

The repeated Scarab parts were boring. I liked the Halo 2, invincible Scarab.

The levels repeated themselves. Cortana was easy on Legendary. The Brutes, were not brute, and I didn't want to fight with the Elites.

Frankly, none of these issues really did anything to make me dislike the game. Just because it's different doesn't mean it's bad.

Besides, any way you look at it, Halo 3 still has Forge, theater mode, and four player co-op.

Gauz wrote:So I guess a captivating story is... unimportant to you? I guess you also liked Transformers 2...

And what was uncreative about the story?

CivBase wrote:

Gauz wrote:So I guess a captivating story is... unimportant to you? I guess you also liked Transformers 2...

And what was uncreative about the story?

Halo: CE- Stop the Covenant, kill the flood, stop the ring from firing.

Halo 2-Stop the Covenant, kill the flood, stop the ring from firing.

Halo 3- Stop the covenant, kill the flood, destroy the ark (AKA stop the ring from firing)

Gauz wrote:

CivBase wrote:

Gauz wrote:So I guess a captivating story is... unimportant to you? I guess you also liked Transformers 2...

And what was uncreative about the story?

Halo: CE- Stop the Covenant, kill the flood, stop the ring from firing.

Halo 2-Stop the Covenant, kill the flood, stop the ring from firing.

Halo 3- Stop the covenant, kill the flood, destroy the ark, fire the ring

Fixed. From what I can see, that's more creative than the previous two (the two that you can't stop praising.).

I don't praise Halo 2...

And the order is mixed up, you have to fire the ring prematurely to destroy the ark. In reality though, you are just destroying the ark so no more rings can be fired. Coincidence?

Would it kill any of the games to not have the flood in them?
Like maybe in Halo 2, there shouldn't of been flood, and the flood make a big reintroduction in Halo 3, that would be awesome.

But obviously, a monotonous game is the best game.

Gauz wrote:I don't praise Halo 2...

And the order is mixed up, you have to fire the ring prematurely to destroy the ark. In reality though, you are just destroying the ark so no more rings can be fired. Coincidence?

No, you're firing the ring to kill the flood. The ark still works when the ring is fired, all the rings do is kill sentient life.

Gauz wrote:Would it kill any of the games to not have the flood in them?

Considering the fact that the rings were built to destroy flood... yes.

Gauz wrote:Like maybe in Halo 2, there shouldn't of been flood, and the flood make a big reintroduction in Halo 3, that would be awesome.

But then how would the flood have made it to Halo 3?

Gauz wrote:But obviously, a monotonous game is the best game.

Hardly. Halo 3 had the biggest twist in the series, and you obviously love the series if you were on HWF (and eventually here).

CivBase wrote:

Gauz wrote:I don't praise Halo 2...

And the order is mixed up, you have to fire the ring prematurely to destroy the ark. In reality though, you are just destroying the ark so no more rings can be fired. Coincidence?

No, you're firing the ring to kill the flood. The ark still works when the ring is fired, all the rings do is kill sentient life.
And what does firing Installation 04 v2 do? There's nothing living on the Ark.

Gauz wrote:Would it kill any of the games to not have the flood in them?

Considering the fact that the rings were built to destroy flood... yes.
They were built to kill sentient life, which indirectly kills the Flood.

Gauz wrote:Like maybe in Halo 2, there shouldn't of been flood, and the flood make a big reintroduction in Halo 3, that would be awesome.

But then how would the flood have made it to Halo 3?
Different, better plotline.

Gauz wrote:But obviously, a monotonous game is the best game.

Hardly. Halo 3 had the biggest twist in the series, and you obviously love the series if you were on HWF (and eventually here).
No it didn't. What about the introduction of the Flood, finding out Halo kills all life, the Prophets betraying the Elites?

It's funny, all the people who think Halo 3 is better than Halo CE don't know a thing about story.

CivBase wrote:
No, you're firing the ring to kill the flood. The ark still works when the ring is fired, all the rings do is kill sentient life.

You're right, you fire the ring to destroy the flood. Although the ark was obviously damaged after the unfinished ring is destroyed. That is why Cortana and the Chief are in some unknown space.

CivBase wrote:
Considering the fact that the rings were built to destroy flood... yes.

Perhaps they could have innovated the plot to not involve the same basic idea of their previous game? I'm talking about Halo 2.

CivBase wrote:
But then how would the flood have made it to Halo 3?

They would've changed the plot to Halo 3, should the flood not have been in Halo 2.

CivBase wrote:
Hardly. Halo 3 had the biggest twist in the series

Halo CE was the first one, so that was epic already, because of its story. Halo 2 was kind of a copy of Halo 2, and Halo did have a plot twist, although it wasn't really a major plot twist...

CivBase wrote: and you obviously love the series if you were on HWF (and eventually here).

I do love the series, I like the stories, although it could be better.

Angatar wrote:And what does firing Installation 04 v2 do? There's nothing living on the Ark.

Kills all the Covenant on the ark so that the flood will die.

Gauz wrote:You're right, you fire the ring to destroy the flood. Although the ark was obviously damaged after the unfinished ring is destroyed. That is why Cortana and the Chief are in some unknown space.

An added bonus.

Angatar wrote:They were built to kill sentient life, which indirectly kills the Flood.

Yes, but they were built to kill sentient life so that the flood would starve. Their purpose was still to kill flood, even if they fulfilled that purpose indirectly.

Gauz wrote:Perhaps they could have innovated the plot to not involve the same basic idea of their previous game? I'm talking about Halo 2.

Weren't you just complaining that the story wasn't original enough?

Angatar wrote:Different, better plotline.

It seems like you're just searching for problems now.

Angatar wrote:No it didn't. What about the introduction of the Flood, finding out Halo kills all life, the Prophets betraying the Elites?

Halo: CE was an introduction to everything. Halo 2 had the Great Schism. Halo 3 had the story on the Ark, and the deaths of Truth and Gravemind.

Okay, Halo 3 may not have the biggest twist, but it's certainly not a copy.

Gauz wrote:I do love the series, I like the stories, although it could be better.

Fine, you come up with a story.

Angatar wrote:It's funny, all the people who think Halo 3 is better than Halo CE don't know a thing about story.

Excuse me?

The fact still remains that Halo 3 was a closer. They couldn't add that much because the storyline was already created. All they could do was finish it off. Frankly, I think they did a wonderful job of doing it.

Coming up with a better story is the hard part...

Halo 2 is the only one that needed revision to make Halo 3 good actually. If Halo 2 was different from Halo CE, then it would've made Halo 3 a more epic ending.

How? I don't know, instead of going to the ring, stay on earth and fight more important battles? I don't make canon, so I really can't make a story. Something that didn't involve the flood or the rings would've been better.

I'm not searching for problems, I have said many times Halo 3's story is extremely weak.

For gameplay reasons, Halo 3 kicks CE in the ass. Although, there were some things about gameplay I didn't like. H3's story was pretty good, not as good as Halo CE's twist, definitely not as good as Halo 2's twist.

I liked Halo CE gameplay better...