- Honourable Elite
- |
- Exalted Legendary Member
- gamertag: [none]
- user homepage:
Your friendly and eccentric Sangheili forum-poster. :)
Posted by: Raylette
Posted by: Honourable Elite
Posted by: Horse Repairman
Posted by: Honourable Elite
Why would you have the same thing over and over again? Why would you want the exact same game just with a different location? Seems more like an expansion pack than a full game if nothing is changed. If you want the same so much, you can always stick to gee I dunno, the previous 3 games? Time for something revolutionary, immersive and unique. I don't know about you guys, but I am NOT paying £50 or $60 for a game that's going to be the exact same as it's previous, I blantantly refuse to pay for a game that has the exact same experience. I play new games for new experiences, new content, not old stuff.
We want a different game, not Halo 3.5. Or, considering that Halo 3 was 2.5, 3.
You're missing the point. He's not saying put new graphics into Halo 3 and call it Halo 4, he's saying don't reinvent the game. Like, we don't need pelican support after 7 kills, like so many people are suggesting.
And if you really think Halo 3 is just Halo 2.5, you clearly never played Halo 2 on Xbox Live during its prime years
Yes, and I'm not exactly a big fan of copying and pasting the exact same stuff from a different game either. I'm just saying a few good changes to the gameplay would be better than just having an upgraded Halo 3, which was an upgraded Halo 2. And yes, I did play Halo 2 back in the day. I had overall a much better experience than I ever did with Halo 3.
Heck I'll admit my first match on Halo 3 was really good, but that feeling I got then I had on just about every match on Halo 2. During the closing days of Halo 2, the engine was starting to show age, when you looked at other games being released around it. I know, they were Xbox 360 games, that was an Xbox game. But it was still starting to show age, a game that had better graphics, and gameplay, than most of the first Xbox 360 games. Now Halo 3 has pretty average graphics and gameplay compared to most Xbox 360 games out now, because it was pretty much the exact same thing as Halo 2, just a few minor tweaks here and there, which is something which is done to PC games through modding all the time.
As said before in some of my previous posts I know a lot of people play and enjoy Halo 3. But if you stopped playing it and read through the amount of things that were cut from both Halo 2 and 3, you'll see that Halo 3 has a lot more "could have been" than "it is".
Halo 3s graphics are to me way better than almost any game on the 360. They don't look like someone ate a character then threw up or look like chewed gum (like GoW and CoD. You know its true). Halo 3s graphics are beautifully rendered. Look at the enviromental textures compared to that of CoD and GoW. Halo really makes them look ugly.
The character models look better too. Sure, they are wearing helmets. But the helmets hold such mysterious personalities. They could be funny. They could be serious. In CoD the face is only one thing. Ugly.
The humans were the most off putting thing to look at while playing Halo 3. They have no detail on their faces whatsoever, it just looks like they're made of clay. While I'll appreciate it trying to stray away from the usual "dull and grey" appearance most games have these days, the graphics overall still aren't what I would call "good". Reason being is because of what it could have been, yet again. There seems to be a certain E3 2006 trailer that comes into mind when I say that.