Halo 3 vs ....

[jonks]

http://www.extremetech.com/art.../0,1697,2279408,00.asp

Gears of War (better) - Meh, thought it was ok
Fronlines Fuel of War (better) - ? haven't played it but critical reception says otherwise
Crysis (worse) - reviewer shares complaints of many here
UT3 (better) - I don't know how he arrived at this conclusion

He goes on to compare other games from other platforms. I think the author is trying to create some controversy and increase page hits because he rates just about every game (but Crysis) better than H3.

 

[angry hampster]

I've never been that impressed by the Halo series as a whole.

 

[brikis98]

My opinion:

Gears of War: better than Halo 3
Frontlines Fuel of War: only played the demo, can't accurately judge
Crysis: much better than Halo 3
UT3: haven't played it
Call of Duty 4: so much better than Halo 3, you can't even compare them.
Half Life 2, Episode 2: better than Halo 3
Portals: MUCH better than Halo 3

Halo 3 isn't a *bad* game, but compared to many other FPS games, especially on the PC, it's nothing special at all.

 

[Anubis]

my take

Gears of War: single player was better but not by a large ammnt, H3 mulity player is better, so TIE

Frontlines Fuel of War: only played the demo, can't accurately judge

Crysis: i did not like farcry 2.0 so Halo 3 wins

UT3: worse then H3

Call of Duty 4: such a different game cant compair
Half Life 2, ehh im the resident hL hater

Portals: too different to compair

 

[Thraxen]

I know its the cool thing to do to bash Halo, especially around these parts, but what I like about the series is co-op. H3 has 4-player co-op for the campaign. I played through it 3 or 4 times on co-op with various friends. The lack of co-op is major flaw in ANY campaign FPS without it, IMO.

But I agree with Anubis... most of the games mentioned thus far are vastly different (with HL2 being the most similar in feel and gameplay). I enjoyed all of them except Frontlines (which I have not played) for their own reasons.

 

[PingSpike]

I agree about the co-op thing. Take any vanilla FPS and blow shit up with your pals and its a pretty good time. Sadly, for some reason developers have forgotten all about how to make co-op on the PC...didn't the original doom have it? Its fucking annoying.

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

"Crysis: On the other hand, I do understand the backlash against this tech demo in search of a decent game. Basically a retread of Far Cry with a graphics engine designed for hardware that doesn't exist yet, Crysis is a laggy, boring, rote snorefest. And what's up with the supersuit? Enemy soldiers take almost as much damage as you do before they die, and they're not wearing suits that say stuff like MAXIMUM ARMOR! And the bad guys never miss. I wish I could get my hands on a weapon as accurate as theirs seem to be. Verdict: Worse than Halo 3."

1. Try shooting a rocket at a enemy,and try shooting one right below you when you're using Armor,you'll be proven wrong.

2. You suck at aiming,the AI is more competent than you.

 

[GundamSonicZeroX]

Halo is a boring series. MP Halo 1 is fun. that's about it.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: IL2SturmovikPilot
"Crysis: On the other hand, I do understand the backlash against this tech demo in search of a decent game. Basically a retread of Far Cry with a graphics engine designed for hardware that doesn't exist yet, Crysis is a laggy, boring, rote snorefest. And what's up with the supersuit? Enemy soldiers take almost as much damage as you do before they die, and they're not wearing suits that say stuff like MAXIMUM ARMOR! And the bad guys never miss. I wish I could get my hands on a weapon as accurate as theirs seem to be. Verdict: Worse than Halo 3."

1. Try shooting a rocket at a enemy,and try shooting one right below you when you're using Armor,you'll be proven wrong.

2. You suck at aiming,the AI is more competent than you.

He said almost as much, which is true.

Sorry to offend your sensibilities but Crysis sucks the big one.

 

[shlemielo]

"This week, in a long-overdue game update, I not only sound off my opinions of some of the games I've been playing, but I conclude, in Rotten Tomatoes-style binary fashion, whether they're better than or worse than the game that millions of Xbox 360 geeks laughably consider to be the greatest game of 2007: Halo 3."

I don't know of a single Xbox 360 owner that considers Halo 3 to be the greatest game of 2007. This writer just comes off as an elitist PC gamer.

(The following is a rant defending Halo:CE)
Now, I used to swear against console shooters, especially when Goldeneye and Halo first came out. I, too, was a mouse and keyboard guy. Played Q3 competitively and such, but I didn't have the skills to be considered elite.

Then I got to college, and everyone around me was playing Halo:CE. I gave it a shot and was surprised at how much fun it was. It was such a great blend of skill and strategy, yet amazingly easy to pick up and play. You can't say the same about CS or Quake or Unreal, as those games require much more raw physical ability in terms of aiming and movement, and very few are able to even compete with players like Fatal1ty.

Halo:CE, on the other hand, required only that you master the pistol. Once you did that, you had a legitimate chance of beating anyone. I love that simplicity, yet the game had so much more than that. You could learn the spawns, grenade jumps, nading weapons and powerups, quick camo, backpack reloading, double melees, the list goes on. And you know what Bungie did? They took every single thing I just listed out of Halo 2 and 3.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: IL2SturmovikPilot
1. Try shooting a rocket at a enemy,and try shooting one right below you when you're using Armor,you'll be proven wrong.

2. You suck at aiming,the AI is more competent than you.

I know what he's talking about though. You may be right about the rockets, but those enemy soldiers can take a crap load of bullets if you hit them in the body. Their body armor is nearly as good as your own as far as bullets go.

Originally posted by: ayabe
Sorry to offend your sensibilities but Crysis sucks the big one.

Even with some flaws, I thought Crysis was very good. It certainly doesn't "suck the big one" by any reasonable measure. That no-gravity level and the linear levels afterward were not as good as I would have hoped, but the first 2/3 of the game were great IMO. And even that last 1/3 were as good as most games around, it just wasn't as good at the first portion of the game.

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: IL2SturmovikPilot
"Crysis: On the other hand, I do understand the backlash against this tech demo in search of a decent game. Basically a retread of Far Cry with a graphics engine designed for hardware that doesn't exist yet, Crysis is a laggy, boring, rote snorefest. And what's up with the supersuit? Enemy soldiers take almost as much damage as you do before they die, and they're not wearing suits that say stuff like MAXIMUM ARMOR! And the bad guys never miss. I wish I could get my hands on a weapon as accurate as theirs seem to be. Verdict: Worse than Halo 3."

1. Try shooting a rocket at a enemy,and try shooting one right below you when you're using Armor,you'll be proven wrong.

2. You suck at aiming,the AI is more competent than you.

He said almost as much, which is true.

Sorry to offend your sensibilities but Crysis sucks the big one.

And i said fire a rocket at a KPA soldier and then fire a rocket where your at while doing maximum armor,heck,i'll even take a few screens if you want me to.

 

[VashHT]

Originally posted by: shlemielo

I don't know of a single Xbox 360 owner that considers Halo 3 to be the greatest game of 2007. This writer just comes off as an elitist PC gamer.

I didn't consider it the best game of 2007 and I have a 360 and enjoyed the game. It was good but like all of them I felt it was overrated.

Anyway about Crysis, one of the biggest complaints I heard from previewers was the game was too easy because of your suit. Now people are complaining that the enemies are too hard, guess it can go either way but I had no problem killing people in it.

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: shlemielo

I don't know of a single Xbox 360 owner that considers Halo 3 to be the greatest game of 2007. This writer just comes off as an elitist PC gamer.

Halo 3 is by far the most popular games on the 360. So most 360 owners probably think it is.

 

[LumbergTech]

halo 1 was ok..although it had a lot of problems but they basically just did hardcore rehashes after that

 

[Maleficus]

Every single one of those games suck, hard.

Halo 3: mediocre compilation of all that came before, brings nothing to the table
GoW: laughable story, no hit points!?/instant recovery for the completely pussification of the FPS genre. (what kind of final boss doesn't even attack? rofl.)
FoW: rofl. slow boring gameplay with big gay tanks and huge maps.
Crysis: I didn't play through much of this game, got pretty bored with running in camo, waiting for recharge running in camo, waiting for recharge...
UT3: The shame of the UT franchise, it managed to remove everything good and unique about this awesome series of games, and turn it into I don't even know what, just pure crap.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
Halo 3 is by far the most popular games on the 360. So most 360 owners probably think it is.

Actually, no. It's popular for for MP, yes, but that's different than saying it's the best FPS of 2007. For example, games like BioShock and Portal don't have any MP, so it's easily conceivable that people would vote for either of those even if H3 racks up all the online gaming hours. I'd imagine many would vote for other games. And CoD4 is currently just as popular for online MP play.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Maleficus
Every single one of those games suck, hard.

Halo 3: mediocre compilation of all that came before, brings nothing to the table
GoW: laughable story, no hit points!?/instant recovery for the completely pussification of the FPS genre. (what kind of final boss doesn't even attack? rofl.)
FoW: rofl. slow boring gameplay with big gay tanks and huge maps.
Crysis: I didn't play through much of this game, got pretty bored with running in camo, waiting for recharge running in camo, waiting for recharge...
UT3: The shame of the UT franchise, it managed to remove everything good and unique about this awesome series of games, and turn it into I don't even know what, just pure crap.

And what exactly do you consider a quality game?

 

[Fenixgoon]

crysis gets "worse than halo3" yet UT3 gets "better"?

you should be ashamed of yourself, extremetech :|


edit: and on a note, the guy shouldn't be complaining about difficulty in crysis. clearly he hasn't seen the ridiculous amount of fire enemies in halo take on legendary (crysis on delta isn't bad if you get head/chest shots).

 

[Maleficus]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Maleficus
[...]
And what exactly do you consider a quality game?

Half-Life 1 (ONE) as in NOT TWO.
Unreal Tournament 2004
Diablo 1 (ONE)
Max Payne 1 & 2
Grim Fandango.
Warcraft III/TFT. I'm conflicted here because I really like the game, but the balance is just a little off and has always pissed me off.

etc etc

 

[Ika]

I loved Halo 1's storyline. Halo 2 and 3 were fun, but kinda mindless. Halo 1 had actual story depth, and before the other two Halos came out, it was more fun to imagine wehat the Halo universe was like.

 

[Donts00tmesanta]

it takes like 3-4 shots to down an enemy in crysis

 

[NoSoup4You]

I loved Halo 1's storyline. Halo 2 and 3 were fun, but kinda mindless. Halo 1 had actual story depth, and before the other two Halos came out, it was more fun to imagine wehat the Halo universe was like.

You hit the nail on the head. The Halo Universe was much cooler to imagine than how it actually turned out. Halo 1's storyline was simple and yet immensely mysterious with regards to the Forerunners and the Halo structure itself...etc.

With that said, Halo 3's multiplayer component is fantastic, thanks in large part to XBox Live's functionality.

 

[RESmonkey]

Halo 3 is actually pretty good. Especially single player + single player on CO-OP is just awesome.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Thraxen
I know its the cool thing to do to bash Halo, especially around these parts, but what I like about the series is co-op. H3 has 4-player co-op for the campaign. I played through it 3 or 4 times on co-op with various friends. The lack of co-op is major flaw in ANY campaign FPS without it, IMO.

But I agree with Anubis... most of the games mentioned thus far are vastly different (with HL2 being the most similar in feel and gameplay). I enjoyed all of them except Frontlines (which I have not played) for their own reasons.

I have to agree with you on one point; the Halo series is great for a coop experience. It is sad that so few modern games have a coop mode. I remember when Doom 3 came out that somehow had screwed around with the game and enabled a coop mode that was never finished. That would have improved the game A LOT.

Coop is what makes the Serious Sam series fun. It is such a redeeming factor that these games go from "pretty crappy" in singleplayer to "awesome" in coop.

However, that is the end of where the Halo series gets props. If other games (HL2, Crysis, etc.) had a coop mode for the singleplayer campaign, I am certain that there could be no contest. The Halo singleplayer campaign is kind of shitty if you have to play it by yourself.

And of course you'll always have the people who love Halo's multiplayer for some reason that I can't figure out (you also stand a good chance of running into these people at a high school or a kegger - go ahead and flame me, the truth hurts).