New video of Halo 3 Docu. about Brutes

[Sparta]

This is what makes Halo's combat stand out - the game requires you to actually get good at it, other fps don't.

Only on Legendary. Any other difficulty is a walk in the park. But if most games had that kind of difficulty for their hardest mode, than most games would be the same.

How many people played Sin Episode 1? That game was ****ing hard. Ridiculously hard. At least when it was first released, haven't played it since. But the later levels in that game require a lot of patience. More so than any other shooter i've played. Now, what you said about Halo could be applied to Sin Emergence, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good game does it?

Also: I loved the airboat section, but the buggy section was shit. No point to driving that buggy around. I will always have a place in my heart for that second level in Halo, when you're introduced to driving the Warthog. Love that level.

Anyway, lets stop comparing the two games (like that will ever happen) and get back to talking about Halo 3.

I hope the storyline in this one is better than the 2nd. And if they actually advertise it as being epic, it better ****ing be epic this time. ****ing Microsoft PR.

 

[Stigmata]

I hope the storyline in this one is better than the 2nd. And if they actually advertise it as being epic, it better ****ing be epic this time. ****ing Microsoft PR.

It was epic. It just wasn't good

 

[DEATHMASTER]

It's a great story, the game itself just kinda ruins it. It will be great as a book if any of the authers decide to write it.

 

[Sparta]

It was epic. It just wasn't good

What game were you playing? one part of one level of the whole game felt epic (Scarab battle).

 

[Warbie]

Now, what you said about Halo could be applied to Sin Emergence, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good game does it?

It's not just about a game being hard - it has to be that while being fun to play and not feeling unfair. All too often developers balls it up and the result is more frustrating than satisfying.

I've never played Sin episodes, but have read that it's a petty fun, if mindless, blaster. It doesn't sound like the kind of game that demands alot of practise or rewards skill in the way that Halo does, maybe i'm wrong.

There are quite of few fps that are difficult, but very few that are difficult for the right reasons.

 

[Sparta]

Sin: Emergence does demand alot of practice, but doesn't actually reward you with any satisfying moments.

Same thing that happened with me on Legendary, i just wasn't feeling rewarded playing it. And on Halo 2 i just got bored halfway through on Heroic.

 

[kupocake]

I loved the airboat section!

I think the sheer quality of Water Hazard is more in the scripted encounters, visuals and level design than it is in the airboat itself. Just goes to show that you can take Halo's approach and put all of your efforts into making the vehicle itself rewarding (which is surely more economical in development terms), or you can take HL2's approach and make a rudimentary vehicle and concentrate on placing that vehicle into an exciting space.

 

[Stigmata]

What game were you playing? one part of one level of the whole game felt epic (Scarab battle).

The story was epic. The game was not.

 

[knut]

Yeah, twas more fun when you could just snipe the bastard in the tank without damaging the tank. Sacrifice realism for fun! Your game is full of aliens anyway.

Well... yeah. A sniper round wouldn't do anything to a tank, so that's realistic right there. :|

 

[kupocake]

Well... yeah. A sniper round wouldn't do anything to a tank, so that's realistic right there. :|

The lack of realism is in the fact that the driver sits exposed in a hatch where you can shoot his clumsily bobbing head. Nothing can damage the tank.

 

[knut]

Yes and no, at that. Most tanks today have their drivers location open-hatched, except for when, obviously, in the closed-hatch state. This has been implicated because it stops tankers from whoring up the battlefield. But that's not the point anyway, the point is that it is realistic that the sniper round does nothing to a tank because it's the quivilent to throwing a rock at a building and hoping it will blow up.

 

[Stigmata]

I think the sheer quality of Water Hazard is more in the scripted encounters, visuals and level design than it is in the airboat itself. Just goes to show that you can take Halo's approach and put all of your efforts into making the vehicle itself rewarding (which is surely more economical in development terms), or you can take HL2's approach and make a rudimentary vehicle and concentrate on placing that vehicle into an exciting space.

I think the main problem with this approach is that every player's experience will be vert similar to every other player's experience - every scripted encounter and combat event is laid out in the same order, with relatively the same armament and same enemy forces, each and every time. The airboat levels in HL2, while fun, are so similar between players that individual experiences are less interesting, and the experience is fine-tuned to an extend that suppresses invididual experience.

In this respect, I feel that Halo's vehicle segments are inherently better than those of HL2, simply because they allow the player to utilize the vehicles in any way they see fit, rather than following a tightly linear path to end up with a combat timeline identical to that of every other player who has taken part in that sequence.

 

[Jintor]

I think the main problem with this approach is that every player's experience will be vert similar to every other player's experience - every scripted encounter and combat event is laid out in the same order, with relatively the same armament and same enemy forces, each and every time. The airboat levels in HL2, while fun, are so similar between players that individual experiences are less interesting, and the experience is fine-tuned to an extend that suppresses invididual experience.

In this respect, I feel that Halo's vehicle segments are inherently better than those of HL2, simply because they allow the player to utilize the vehicles in any way they see fit, rather than following a tightly linear path to end up with a combat timeline identical to that of every other player who has taken part in that sequence.

I must say, though, that nothing in Halo 2 (the Maw in Halo has) has approached, for me, the awesomeness of being chased by that ****ing Hunter-Chopper. Now, if only there weren't so many loading screens in the middle of that chase...

 

[Asknoone]

I think the main problem with this approach is that every player's experience will be vert similar to every other player's experience - every scripted encounter and combat event is laid out in the same order, with relatively the same armament and same enemy forces, each and every time. The airboat levels in HL2, while fun, are so similar between players that individual experiences are less interesting, and the experience is fine-tuned to an extend that suppresses invididual experience.

In this respect, I feel that Halo's vehicle segments are inherently better than those of HL2, simply because they allow the player to utilize the vehicles in any way they see fit, rather than following a tightly linear path to end up with a combat timeline identical to that of every other player who has taken part in that sequence.

I don't see how that's a bad thing. I enjoy strict control over gameplay elements from time to time.

 

[Warbie]

The whole water hazard sequence felt like a shit idea done well. I've yet to play a fps in which a compulsory vehicle section was fun and didn't feel like a chore.

 

[kupocake]

I think the main problem with this approach is that every player's experience will be vert similar to every other player's experience - every scripted encounter and combat event is laid out in the same order, with relatively the same armament and same enemy forces, each and every time. The airboat levels in HL2, while fun, are so similar between players that individual experiences are less interesting, and the experience is fine-tuned to an extend that suppresses invididual experience.

In this respect, I feel that Halo's vehicle segments are inherently better than those of HL2, simply because they allow the player to utilize the vehicles in any way they see fit, rather than following a tightly linear path to end up with a combat timeline identical to that of every other player who has taken part in that sequence.

I'm not convinced that Halo's driving sections are any less non-linear than Half-Life 2's. The difference still seems to me to be between driving down a twisting, intricately designed corridor in a vehicle that feels like an afterthought and driving down a twisting, less closely considered corridor in a vehicle which has been very well designed indeed. True, the first vehicle level in Halo contains multiple paths and a moment of non-linearity, but later levels fail to equal the promise of the first (I think that actually goes for many aspects of the game. I was tightly gripped by the the Pillar of Autumn and Halo levels, only to become less and less gripped by each following level. Halo just strikes me as an excellent game that ran out of development time and ended up merely good.)

I'm not sure whether to see tight scripting as a bad thing or not. Yes, it technically it isn't the peak of interactivity that gaming idealists would say that games should strive for, but at the same time, it is perfectly possible to craft a superior experience. Water Hazard stands out to me as one of the tensest experiences in gaming. I think Highway 17 provides an interesting contrast in that, less tightly scripted and detailed, it meanders more and doesn't quite reach the level of Halo's vehicle sections. Mind you, the 'stop offs' in Highway 17 are surely more interesting than any in Halo's vehicle sections. I suppose that just goes to highlight how driving around in the Buggy is itself a disappointment, though the chapter as a whole is full of great moments (but then that is all ruined by it continuing on for far too long into Sandtraps).

 

[Warbie]

I'm not convinced that Halo's driving sections are any less non-linear than Half-Life 2's. The difference still seems to me to be between driving down a twisting, intricately designed corridor in a vehicle that feels like an afterthought and driving down a twisting, less closely considered corridor in a vehicle which has been very well designed indeed

The difference in Halo being you can more often than not choose to use a vehicle or go it on foot. Use a tank, hover bike, warthog, go by foot - all are viable options, and each time the experience is different.

 

[knut]

I liked both HL2's vehicle segments and Halo/2's vehicle areas. Enjoyed them both muchly, namely Assault on the Control room from Halo as it had a mass gathering of marines and you could conduct two assaults; you manning the Scorpion whilst a few marines follow on the Warthog. I'm not sure which I liked better from HL2: I really liked the battles that took place throughout Highway 17, but the surroundings and environments in Water Hazard, including the factory/industrial districts, the Combine outpost on the gate, the old sewer tunnels - looked stupidly awesome. Loved it.

 

[Asknoone]

The difference in Halo being you can more often than not choose to use a vehicle or go it on foot. Use a tank, hover bike, warthog, go by foot - all are viable options, and each time the experience is different.

But not necessarily great. There's hardly any major substance to the different choices, and therefore they lack the quality control you can find in Water Hazard. Iy doesn't set it aside as a better game because there's a choice - not at all.

 

[Warbie]

It did for me, and added great replay value. Going through a level on foot rather than in a tank poses all sorts of new problems to overcome (it's also a massive credit to the developers for balancing the game on Legendary so well). At times you could switch between vehicles on the fly, jumping from warthog to hover bike, back to on foot, and then back into another vehicle. It's choices like that that put you into the game - you become master chief, cutting paths through the enemy as you see fit. You can't get more substance to your choices than that than that - your actions having a massive impact on the gameplay (something that simply doesn't happen in HL2, especially when it comes to combat)

Vehicles are very well integrated into Halo (i'd argue more than in any game before or since) and are as much a part of the experience, with as much impact on gameplay, as the weapons you choose to use in a given situation. This is the variety other fps lack and a million times better than, 'and now the obligatory vehicle section'.

 

[destrukt]

There is notable differences.

If you take a Ghost you have different tactics than that of a Tank, for example, with a Ghost you will zip through avoiding enemies and since it's more manoeuvrable than a tank you will go probably take a different path to and with the tank you will load up some allies on the side, take the main route and blast everything.

 

[Cerpin]

I had tons of fun with the vehicle sections in the first Halo - but not so much in its sequel. In terms of fun they were superior to the vehicle sections in Half-Life 2.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

There's a hoverbike in halo?

 

[Stigmata]

There's a hoverbike in halo?

Non-illiterates call it the Ghost

 

[Azner]

I only play halo when im real bored, i have a bunch of school friends who say master chief can kill gordon.

 

[Uriel]

I only play halo when im real bored, i have a bunch of school friends who say master chief can kill gordon.

Your school friends fail to the maximum!

Space Marine from DOOM > Garret from Thief > BJ from Wolfenstein > Duke Nukem > Gordon > etc etc etc......Master Chief.

 

[DarkStar]

Your school friends fail to the maximum!

Space Marine from DOOM > Garret from Thief > BJ from Wolfenstein > Duke Nukem > Gordon > etc etc etc......Master Chief.

Just wondering.

What so great about the DOOM Marine?

What's the character's history? Does he talk? Hell, does he even have a name?

 

[Uriel]

Not really, he does if you read the books, but they were pretty "meh".
He just simply looks so much better than the rest.

 

[Stigmata]

Not really, he does if you read the books, but they were pretty "meh".
He just simply looks so much better than the rest.

Sweet Science does he ever look lame.

 

[Uriel]

Sweet Science does he ever look lame.

Take that back before I accuse you of having a small winky.

 

[destrukt]

Not really, he does if you read the books, but they were pretty "meh".

The ones were he fights naked ? I remember reading one of the books and there were ~2 cases of him fighting monsters, while naked. :O

 

[Asknoone]

Not really, he does if you read the books, but they were pretty "meh".
He just simply looks so much better than the rest.

He looks retarded. I hope they eat him.

 

[AmishSlayer]

What lame box art.

"Duhhh, who's this guy taking our picture/painting us?"

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Are you kidding me? Thats the manliest box art ever. See? He left his friend behind all the way back there because hes all "**** that shit, I gotta kill things" , and that demon at the bottom is all "The **** are you looking at?"

 

[Stigmata]

Are you kidding me? Thats the manliest box art ever. See? He left his friend behind all the way back there because hes all "**** that shit, I gotta kill things" , and that demon at the bottom is all "The **** are you looking at?"

I'd call it the pussiest cover art ever.

The guy in the background is holding his weapon by the barrel, the demons are reaching out like they're going to fondle the Doom marine's manboobies, the demon in the foreground looks like a woman, and the marine is being grabbed by the wrist and refuses to do anything about it.

 

[Jangle]

I'd call it the pussiest cover art ever.

The guy in the background is holding his weapon by the barrel, the demons are reaching out like they're going to fondle the Doom marine's manboobies, the demon in the foreground looks like a woman, and the marine is being grabbed by the wrist and refuses to do anything about it.

Reminds me of this. That story makes me sad. In a bad way.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

I'd call it the pussiest cover art ever.

The guy in the background is holding his weapon by the barrel, the demons are reaching out like they're going to fondle the Doom marine's manboobies, the demon in the foreground looks like a woman, and the marine is being grabbed by the wrist and refuses to do anything about it.

Well DUUUH. Of course hes holding it by the barrel. He was supposed to be your lovable dumbass of a side kick pasculio, Also everyone knows The Doom marine lactates the Elixir of life :| I mean seriously what exactly did you think the story was about? The demon in the foreground is a woman. Read the story Jangle posted, that same demon is what the story is based on . Oh and that wrist that is being grabbed is actually a fake limb so he can't feel anything.


So uh..Them brutes are mean looking

 

[Sainku]

Reminds me of this. That story makes me sad. In a bad way.

Oh god not again, that dug up some painful memories

 

[DEATHMASTER]

What are we talking about anymore...

 

[Leviticus]

I hate how the Brute looks so stiff when firing. The melee animations looked excellent, of course, but that firing animation was abysmal. It also bothers me when things don't like they have any mass, and Brutes should definately have mass. From that video they seem like big, awkward pixies with pea-shooters.

I just recently bought a 360 after skipping every console since the original Playstation, and I can't help but feel a little disappointed with how Halo 3 looks so far. I'm hoping for a great multiplayer portion still, but wouldn't hold my breath for the singleplayer. It just seems outdated, both in gameplay and visuals.