Topic: One reason Halo 3 sucks

[Lepton]

I haven't played it of course.  No 360, but I have seen some extensive gameplay videos.  Keep in mind I have never played any Halo titles nor FPS games in general. So I am looking at all these detailed environments thinking this is pretty cool when I start to notice Master Chief going over and jumping up or down rough terrain, and I see absolutely no realistic body kinetics or physics.  It just looks like a perfectly stable target reticule dropping or rising in space.  This is a Next Gen game???  No real physics??!!!  It's my assumption that titles like Half Life 2 or all those Rainbow 6 things incorporate some sort of at least head bobbing or jump recovery.  If not, I think these games are pretty poor examples for anything close to a combat simulation.

[marstone]

  I agree that with a limited real  physics it takes it down a notch for some. 

But then, maybe the weapon uses advanced steady-cam tech.  thus the barrel "floats" within the stock and can take some of the bounce out of the run, so thus the sight moves less and you are more accurate.

[Vipre]

  I agree that with a limited real  physics it takes it down a notch for some. 

But then, maybe the weapon uses advanced steady-cam tech.  thus the barrel "floats" within the stock and can take some of the bounce out of the run, so thus the sight moves less and you are more accurate.

It is a powered armor suit so it's possible that the arms make automatic adjustments to keep the aim steady no matter what the rest of the body is doing, similar to some naval guns. Or it could just be that if you had a 100% real physics model the person sitting in front of the PC or TV wouldn't be able to hit crap with the reticule bouncing all over the place while running. "Run and gun" is a great real life way to hit absolutely nothing, but it makes for a fun game.

[Sirgod]

My daughter and son in law are Halo  crazy. But I tell you what game disappointed me Re: Physics, and  that was Dark Messiah of Might and Magic.

Stephen

[Tus-XC]

I haven't played it of course.  No 360, but I have seen some extensive gameplay videos.  Keep in mind I have never played any Halo titles nor FPS games in general. So I am looking at all these detailed environments thinking this is pretty cool when I start to notice Master Chief going over and jumping up or down rough terrain, and I see absolutely no realistic body kinetics or physics.  It just looks like a perfectly stable target reticule dropping or rising in space.  This is a Next Gen game???  No real physics??!!!  It's my assumption that titles like Half Life 2 or all those Rainbow 6 things incorporate some sort of at least head bobbing or jump recovery.  If not, I think these games are pretty poor examples for anything close to a combat simulation.

According to the official books the spartans are physically augmented humans through a variety of highly expiramental and deadly therapies.  A spartan with out his/her armor can run upto 30 kph (if i'm not mistaken, its been a while since I read fall of reach) and sprint even faster.  Further their muscle control and reflexes are far far above that of a normal human.  This is further augmented by their Mjoliner (sp?) armor, which enhances almost every physical aspect (and with cortona, mental aspects) of the spartans, making them literally mobile tanks (i think they weigh well over a ton or so).  These enhancements and their armor accounts for much of the "lack of boddy and physics" you see.  Weapons, which have recoil in most games, can be explained by the books as well, mainly if you think about a 1.5 ton (is that right... or is it higher?) man holding a tiny assault rifle is going to be affected by much recoil.  I believe also that their armor suppresses the recoil of the guns (which link directly to their huds, providing the reticule you see on the screen).  Further, games such as half-life 2 (which IMHO beats Halo 3 on graphics and physics, and in many respects is still the most advanced game to date) don't even employ all these forms of realism that.  In fact there are very few games that play around with body movements to the extent that you are talking about (the first to come to mind is dark messiah, which is based off of the steam engine).  In this regard it helps to have a little background info on the game and in this case the characters development...

I just wish they would come out with the halo 2 and now the halo 3 stories in paper back (preferably hard cover) format.  I truely enjoyed reading the series, it added so much depth to the game and explains alot of the backstory that you miss being in the FPS view (like why in halo 1 the marines eventually stop helping you...)

edit:  I would also advise you to play the series from beginning to end before you pass judgement on whether or not the game(s) suck.  It as much about the story as it is about the graphics and the gameplay.

[Hexx]

Halo 3 must suck because one of my friends prefers it to Half Life.

And he's really not that bright.

[Panzergranate]

Call Of Duty 3 beats Half Life on Graphics and effects any day.

I was disapointed by Halo 3, as it is easier to play than Halo 2, which was in, turn easier to play than Halo 1.

The Grunts have been toned down and as Killing Grunts, listening to their stupid babble and hearing "Why me??" and "Not again!!" whenever a plasma grenade sticks to one, never looses its appeal!!

I always thought it ammusingthat it took ne guy to programme the AI bots and 6 people to programme the AS (Artificial Stupidity) for the Grunts.

Without the comic relief of the Grunts blundering around or running away in a panic like the French when they see an enemy tank coming, Halo 3 has lost something vital.

The online play is boring, but I play Call Of Duty 3 a lot online and have come to expect other games to have the same high standard of online gameplay.

Nearly everyone asked misses the Grunt killing, which one can never tire of really.

The other thing is reducing the assult rilfe magazine from 60 round to 32!! Why??

And the Brute Shot now firing line of sight for those too thick to use a grenade launcher!! Firing over obstacles was the main advantage of that weapon and the new arrangement sucks sometimes in some combat situations.

The pistol now fires too slow as well!!

And what is the point fo the Covenat Shotgun?? It is useless!!

[TFO KILLSWITCH]

you all are missing the point.
it  dose not matter  to them if you  think the games sucks. what matters to them is
that   they are looking at this as  a new form of movies. were you can play  it out.
one movie  company all ready noticed it  made 3 times more money  on shipping day .
then  when spider man 3 came  out. i mean think of it . dvd 14 dollars  per unit . halo 3  $55 dollars  per unit

[KOTH-KieranXC, Ret.]

Covenant shotgun? Huh? I didn't know there was such an animal. Sure haven't seen it yet...

[TFO KILLSWITCH]

i found it   when the flood come

[Panzergranate]

They call the Covenamt Shotgun "The Mauler", which gives the impression that it is a kick ass weapon.... which it isn't!! Er.... it is kind of lame and has a slow reload rate just to make things worst. It seems to be an after thught kind of weapon that was designed during a coffee break.

Whoever came up with it should be taken out, put up against a wall and shot.... obviously not with a "Mauler" of course!!

I'm trying to think of a worst weapon in any first player shoot em up.... nope.... can't think of anything.

I thik that they had to remove a lot to add in more features such as multiplayer campaign, etc.
 
I find the online multiplayer is pretty boring on all Halo versions, when compared to other games such as Call of Duty, Medal Of Honour, Battlefield 2, etc. However, I was expecting something special, bearing in mind all the hype surounding Halo 3 before its launch. Instead it is the same running and jumping around, with a timer ticking tedium of Halo 1 and Halo 2.

Legacy was hyped up in a similar way and fell short of its rivals.