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

]

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:

BodyElite

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

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

sub-raid

So, it came out at the same time and scored higher?

No wait, that's just your fanboy view on things.

Halo 3 was critized for having mediocre sp and not taking any chances. Any other game would have that reflected in the score. I believe it got cut some slack because it was friggin Halo!

Halo 3 was critized for having mediocre sp and not taking any chances. Any other game would have that reflected in the score. I believe it got cut some slack because it was friggin Halo!

Filthybastrd

Sometimes I think halo is automatically given a high score no matter what. Two had god awful level design and it still got a pass, no other game with such a bad SP would have been given such a high score. 3 is ok, the campaign is nice but I thought it was more a 8.5-9.0 game not more than that.

And if Perfect Dark on N64 came this year would it get 9.8? that how stupid ur question is TC.Syferonik

Not really, because games have scored 9.8-10 that are FPS since then..

And if Perfect Dark on N64 came this year would it get 9.8? that how stupid ur question is TC.Syferonik

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

imaps3fanboy

ROFL Which do you think is played more online? Halo 3. Why? Cuz its BETTER.

[QUOTE="BodyElite"]

]

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:

skrat_01

i guess if you dont read the Bungie weekly updates every week i guess you wouldnt know this. Bungie put a small team of "veterans" (original Halo 1 devs) to make an expansion for Halo 3 while the rest worked on their other 2 projects. Thats why Bungie said that ODST got a lot bigger than what they had planned, they kept adding and building upon the current expansion to make it what it is today. And yes, it was 10-15 "veterans". Thats why if ODST scores a 9.0 it will show how amazingly talented Bungie is, when 15 employees can sit in a corner and create a 9.0 game in a small time frame

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

imaps3fanboy

Halo3 is AAA every time i look at it. Not only because its mp but also for its amazing sp, coop campaign and great graphics imo. Well, it would probably not get 9.5 since there are better looking games (Killzone2, gears2, Resi5, etc) but it would still be AAA for sure.

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

Halo 3 was critized for having mediocre sp and not taking any chances. Any other game would have that reflected in the score. I believe it got cut some slack because it was friggin Halo!

angelkimne

Well, imo singleplayer campaign of Halo3 is the best part of the game...its brilliant imo. Ppl just hate it because they have to hate something about the game and considering mp is far more praised/popular, haters automatically find easier to bash the singleplayer.

Sometimes I think halo is automatically given a high score no matter what. Two had god awful level design and it still got a pass, no other game with such a bad SP would have been given such a high score. 3 is ok, the campaign is nice but I thought it was more a 8.5-9.0 game not more than that.

Espada12

When compared to the two GS 10's given out this gen., Halo 3 should have been scored a 12/10 then two years later you could say it would only be a 10/10 ! :P

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

imaps3fanboy

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

imaps3fanboy

[QUOTE="iwasgood2u"][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.

BodyElite

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

Halo3 had no competition at release, so compared to everything else it was an FPS GOD.

But if we stacked the game up against COD4 and 5, Gears 2 ect it would be crushed. It cant compete.

Also someone on this thread said that halo 3 was bad as you couldnt look down the sights, thats done on purpose to keep the gameplay run and gun rather than duck and cover.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="BodyElite"]

]

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:

BodyElite

i guess if you dont read the Bungie weekly updates every week i guess you wouldnt know this. Bungie put a small team of "veterans" (original Halo 1 devs) to make an expansion for Halo 3 while the rest worked on their other 2 projects. Thats why Bungie said that ODST got a lot bigger than what they had planned, they kept adding and building upon the current expansion to make it what it is today. And yes, it was 10-15 "veterans". Thats why if ODST scores a 9.0 it will show how amazingly talented Bungie is, when 15 employees can sit in a corner and create a 9.0 game in a small time frame

Halo3 had no competition at release, so compared to everything else it was an FPS GOD.

But if we stacked the game up against COD4 and 5, Gears 2 ect it would be crushed. It cant compete.

Also someone on this thread said that halo 3 was bad as you couldnt look down the sights, thats done on purpose to keep the gameplay run and gun rather than duck and cover.

NinjaMunkey01

um no h3 kills those games

Halo3 had no competition at release, so compared to everything else it was an FPS GOD.

But if we stacked the game up against COD4 and 5, Gears 2 ect it would be crushed. It cant compete.

Also someone on this thread said that halo 3 was bad as you couldnt look down the sights, thats done on purpose to keep the gameplay run and gun rather than duck and cover.

NinjaMunkey01

COD4, and 5 Gears 2 all came out after H3. Therfore not including review scores as validation, why arent more people playing those games on live then H3? I highly doubt it is only because of the name Halo. In fact before Halo:CE was released I thought the name sounded corny.

I'm sure there are some players that hopped on H3 due to hype. Those people most likely have moved on now and are bashing it here. However with a huge player base, on a console no less with many options as you stated, H3 must be doing something downright ****ing amazing for a hell of a lot of people if we are STILL playing/talking about it 2 full years later.

KZ2 is great. Gears 2 is great. COD4 is great (to many, not me). Halo1,2,3 are downright fantastic complete packages to me and many people, that have offered me far more hours of FPS *fun* through campaigns and multiplayer then any other.

I also prefer my PC and PS3 to the RROD/PC port 360. If it wasnt for Halo, i'd sell that damn thing.

I do love me some Crysis, and Half Life 2, and Left4Dead, and No One Lives for ever, and the Doom's, and TF2. But I always come back for more Halo.

[QUOTE="BodyElite"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]...what? Link or source please. Bungie has over 200 employees?.... ten people worked on OSDT?.. Please, do tell.skrat_01

i guess if you dont read the Bungie weekly updates every week i guess you wouldnt know this. Bungie put a small team of "veterans" (original Halo 1 devs) to make an expansion for Halo 3 while the rest worked on their other 2 projects. Thats why Bungie said that ODST got a lot bigger than what they had planned, they kept adding and building upon the current expansion to make it what it is today. And yes, it was 10-15 "veterans". Thats why if ODST scores a 9.0 it will show how amazingly talented Bungie is, when 15 employees can sit in a corner and create a 9.0 game in a small time frame

Try this if you're a non-believer

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="BodyElite"]

i guess if you dont read the Bungie weekly updates every week i guess you wouldnt know this. Bungie put a small team of "veterans" (original Halo 1 devs) to make an expansion for Halo 3 while the rest worked on their other 2 projects. Thats why Bungie said that ODST got a lot bigger than what they had planned, they kept adding and building upon the current expansion to make it what it is today. And yes, it was 10-15 "veterans". Thats why if ODST scores a 9.0 it will show how amazingly talented Bungie is, when 15 employees can sit in a corner and create a 9.0 game in a small time frame

Cyberfairy

Try this if you're a non-believer