Why do people say halo 3 would not have a 9.5 if it came out this year.

[QUOTE="SparkyProtocol"][QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

Demons-Souls

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

and Halo would have destroyed Doom if they had come out at the same time, what is your point? :|

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

DarkGamer007

and Halo would have destroyed Doom if they had come out at the same time, what is your point? :|

No need to damage control, I already destroyed his point.

Well, has it come out yet?Demons-Souls

You should read your own sentence, you said it would beat halo without it being out yet... Also, the chances are slim to none.

[QUOTE="G-O-M-J"]How can standards be higher when there hasnt been a single fps that has scored 9.5 or higher since halo 3..Threebabycows

That is what I said..

[QUOTE="Demons-Souls"]Well, has it come out yet?Threebabycows

You should read your own sentence, you said it would beat halo without it being out yet... Also, the chances are slim to none.

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="G-O-M-J"]How can standards be higher when there hasnt been a single fps that has scored 9.5 or higher since halo 3..SilverChimera

That is what I said..

Just following SW rules.

[QUOTE="Abicus7"]

Its too bad that KZ2 doesnt have Co-op modes like Halo. Maybe it would have scored higher if it did..

imaps3fanboy

The online is much better, for a similar reason, it's much more feature full, and more refined formula-wise and more competitive which is a good thing. You can't judge the game on community or just the aim assist, that's silly.

Don't be a fanboy. I have both games and I used to play Killzone 2 semi-regularly. I still play Halo till this day, and that's for the gameplay. I don't play it as much now though.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="G-O-M-J"]How can standards be higher when there hasnt been a single fps that has scored 9.5 or higher since halo 3..Threebabycows

Therefore, the bar, that is halo is weighing it down.

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"] Because it still counts as a title on the platform, weighing down on all other respective titles.skrat_01

Therefore, the bar, that is halo is weighing it down.

The thing is is that comparing FPS, if an FPS would have atleast tied halo's score after it came out we would be getting somewhere, but it didn't.

This stuff cracks me up. If halo 3 came out now it wouldn't be the same game because it would have had 2 more years of dev time. If KZ had come out the same time as Halo 3 it would have felt unfinished because it would have been. Halo 3 scored higher than KZ2. Deal with it. They're both still great, exciting games, and you can still like one better than the other without having to argue that your opinion is right.cainetao11

Are you talking to me? If so read the first post, I'd say halo 3 would not even have to be different right now, to get the 9.5.

[QUOTE="Abicus7"]

Its too bad that KZ2 doesnt have Co-op modes like Halo. Maybe it would have scored higher if it did..

imaps3fanboy

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

Therefore, the bar, that is halo is weighing it down.

Threebabycows

The thing is is that comparing FPS, if an FPS would have atleast tied halo's score after it came out we would be getting somewhere, but it didn't.

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]And if Halo was released *AFTER* those titles, as the topic states. Then it would have been weighed down because of these titles.skrat_01

The thing is is that comparing FPS, if an FPS would have atleast tied halo's score after it came out we would be getting somewhere, but it didn't.

Yes, I know but it would have to get to atleast 9.5 to prove that it is as good as halo 3 was/is(if not better). Then that game will be the new bar to beat, get it?

Could someone please explain to me why exactly Halo 3 deserves a score above 6.5?

Graphics, story, gameplay, characters...they're all boring and mediocre at best. Half the guns don't have a down the sights option so you're forced to spray, the graphics are BAD, the story is average, characters are uninteresting(how does a game have a main character that says 10 words throughout 3 games?)...I'll never understand.

Could someone please explain to me why exactly Halo 3 deserves a score above 6.5?

Graphics, story, gameplay, characters...they're all boring and mediocre at best. Half the guns don't have a down the sights option so you're forced to spray, the graphics are BAD, the story is average, characters are uninteresting(how does a game have a main character that says 10 words throughout 3 games?)...I'll never understand.

urdead18

wrong,!!!!!WRONG!!!!,wrong!. If you played all three games you would see a very interesting story, the characters, like Johnson, cortana, etc are good. The gameplay just feels good, and better than most games, and you are not spraying, you suit gives the gun a crosshair.. The game is shallow and deep at the same time, it can be a noob fest, but it can be for pros at the same time- which is why it will have much more staying power over something like, COD another popular franchise. It has forge(BIG +), has an option to watch your gameplay(for a montage, to save funny moments, or for the hardcore, to study it.). The gameplay is very different from many modern shooters today, serously look around you, COD/Socom/KZ2/GEOW, halo plays very different so it is refreshing. The feeling of the game. is just perfect, you would have to play for yourself to understand.. Now can you tell me why R2 deserved an 9.0 vs. KZ2/GEOW2?

Could someone please explain to me why exactly Halo 3 deserves a score above 6.5?

Graphics, story, gameplay, characters...they're all boring and mediocre at best. Half the guns don't have a down the sights option so you're forced to spray, the graphics are BAD, the story is average, characters are uninteresting(how does a game have a main character that says 10 words throughout 3 games?)...I'll never understand.

urdead18

I think if halo 3 was just released, then it would get an 8.5-9.0, simply because standards are raised over time

I think if halo 3 was just released, then it would get an 8.5-9.0, simply because standards are raised over time

Sword-Demon

But for a standered to be raised, you would have to beat it right? No FPS has scored 9.5(well stalker/crysis) since halo 3 came out.

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

Threebabycows

But it only scored 9.0 at the time no console FPS has scored 9.5 or higher since Halo 3 therefore the reviewers didn't think it was a good as halo 3, it would have to score atleast 9.5.

[QUOTE="RedruM_I"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

It "only" scored 9.0 so it did not... no console FPS has scored 9.5 since halo so that means halo was the last game to raise the bar.

Threebabycows

I already addressed that, for the bar to be raised a game that is an FPS would have to tie/beat halo 3s score and no console game and only 2 PC games have does this.

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

Pariah-

But it only scored 9.0 at the time no console FPS has scored 9.5 or higher since Halo 3 therefore the reviewers didn't think it was a good as halo 3, it would have to score atleast 9.5.

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

If only it didn't take a decade to make KZ2...

[QUOTE="Pariah-"] Allegedly, standards for games go up year after year. Suppose reviewers didn't have to acknowledge Halo 3 as the ball and chain--or anchor if you wish-- that holds them to the consideration that most, if not all, FPS's stand on its shoulders. By the "elevating standards" logic, Killzone would have destroyed Halo 3 had it came out at the same time. Or, if it had come out before Halo 3, it probably would have got the 9.5 and both Gears and Halo would be subject to lower scores than what they got.cainetao11

Which ignores the point about a constantly elevated rating system completely.

I think halo3 deserved it's 9.5 at the time, but I feel in current times it would have got an 9.0

I think it has too many great features to drop any lower than that, forge, replay theatre, bungies web support.

Anyway I guess we'll see when odst comes out

Its too bad that KZ2 doesnt have Co-op modes like Halo. Maybe it would have scored higher if it did..

Abicus7

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

Could someone please explain to me why exactly Halo 3 deserves a score above 6.5?

Graphics, story, gameplay, characters...they're all boring and mediocre at best. Half the guns don't have a down the sights option so you're forced to spray, the graphics are BAD, the story is average, characters are uninteresting(how does a game have a main character that says 10 words throughout 3 games?)...I'll never understand.

urdead18

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

The thing is is that comparing FPS, if an FPS would have atleast tied halo's score after it came out we would be getting somewhere, but it didn't.

Threebabycows

Yes, I know but it would have to get to atleast 9.5 to prove that it is as good as halo 3 was/is(if not better). Then that game will be the new bar to beat, get it?

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

nah, people would still get bored of KZ2 quickly, and halo 3 would still have millions online playing for years.

I think it would probably get about 9.0 if it came out now. It would still get 9.5 from me though, the game hasn't aged AT ALL imho, the number of people still playing is testament to thatangelkimne

agreed, the amount of gameplay enjoyment time people have gotten out of the game is 100000000000000000000000000000 times more important than some score on some web site.

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

RedruM_I

I don't think so, because that means Killzone 2 would've had almost 2 years less development time. If Halo 3 came out now it would have had 2 more years in development time and would've been a better game.

Ok. what prompted this pointless thread? The simple fact Halo is still the most talked about, played and highest rated shooter on console should attest to its quality. You don't have to like it, but claiming it's overrated is rather silly.

It's earned everything it's got.

Well, as a Killzone 2 and Halo 3 player, I honestly find Halo 3 overall to be the better game. KZ2 is great though, don't get me wrong.

To me, Halo 3 just has a more varied, replayable experience.

That argument doesn't work, if Halo 3 came out now, Bungie would have had 2 extra years for more polish. If they knew it was coming out in 2009 form the start they would have probably even have made a new engine.

ujjval16

Worst argument ever.

When people make hypothetical statements like "if it came out in 2009...", it's obviously based on the assumption that everything else is equal. That is to say that Halo 3 started development by that amount of time later and hence released it exactly like it did, only with the release offset by 2 years. Only then, can we call it the Halo 3 we know of. There's no point in assuming bungie would take 2 years longer to develop and end up with a product no one here has any idea what will be.

And if came out in 2009, the engine will still be the same. Engines generally don't change unless the console hardware changes. When they started the development of Halo 3, it might have been during the end of the ps2 era, but the application of the engine was intented for the 360. if they did the same thing 2 years later, the intention and the hardware will still be the same, hence same engine. Because if what you say is true, then ODST should be vastly different. It isn't right?

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]Huh? This is specualtion. Fact of the matter is, the more high rating shooters there are on a system, the more it impacts on the score of games released after them. That is how standards work - a game released is compared to the respective titles on the system.skrat_01

Yes, I know but it would have to get to atleast 9.5 to prove that it is as good as halo 3 was/is(if not better). Then that game will be the new bar to beat, get it?

Kz2 wouldve destroyed it if it came out the same time as Halo 3.

imaps3fanboy

Lets be realistic here, if Halo 3 didnt release until now, the graphics would probably be a lot better (given that KZ2 would have been out for a half a year now), there would be more content (given that COD4 came out in 07). There would probably be a sprint feature, aim down sight, unlockables, etc (the features that are the new craze in FPS's). It it would still score well because since H3 hasnt come out yet, the theater feature would not have been implemented in console games yet, forge mode,and etc.

But only to please the fanboys and Halo haters, if Bungie would release Halo 3, the way it was back in 07, it would score an 8.5 tops

[QUOTE="urdead18"]

Could someone please explain to me why exactly Halo 3 deserves a score above 6.5?

Graphics, story, gameplay, characters...they're all boring and mediocre at best. Half the guns don't have a down the sights option so you're forced to spray, the graphics are BAD, the story is average, characters are uninteresting(how does a game have a main character that says 10 words throughout 3 games?)...I'll never understand.

iwasgood2u

COD4 came out 2 months after Halo 3 and scored 1 whole point lower...

If Bungie made a FPS that was only marginally better than Halo 3 it would not score a 9.5. (I dont think Bungie will make a game that is ONLY marginally better im just using an example.)

emorainbo

Halo 3: ODST.

[QUOTE="emorainbo"]

If Bungie made a FPS that was only marginally better than Halo 3 it would not score a 9.5. (I dont think Bungie will make a game that is ONLY marginally better im just using an example.)

-Karmum-

Halo 3: ODST.

Yep, but lets cut Bungie some slack. They put 5-10 guys on ODST while the other 200 employees worked on Reach and their new IP. If ODST scores a 9.0 just from 5-10 guys from Bungie, just imagine how great a game from Bungie using 200+ employees will be like :shock:

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

Yes, I know but it would have to get to atleast 9.5 to prove that it is as good as halo 3 was/is(if not better). Then that game will be the new bar to beat, get it?

-DrRobotnik-