Halo 3: ODST Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why are people so against a more campaign focused halo?
  • Subject: Why are people so against a more campaign focused halo?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Why are people so against a more campaign focused halo?

Posted by: zappshmeow94
Because people get bored of the campaign after you beat it once, they want a game with replay value. I like campaign, but multiplayers what keeps me going.

Halo is extremely replayable.

Especially a non-linear game like halo.

  • 07.24.2009 3:39 PM PDT

I'm all for campaign cuz what got me into halo in the first place was the story(campaign) so in all halo games i'm really looking for the campaign to be good and the multiplayer is a bonus, as said above. Same with reach, i cant wait for it because of the story even though i've read the books it will be awesome.

  • 07.24.2009 3:40 PM PDT

Posted by: Dallas Green
I make a legitimate thread on the most logical choice for the next Bond actor, and you take that away from me by creating a parody thread indirectly connecting my thread to yours.

I hope your kids have bad influences and develop bad personalities. I wish this with all my heart.

We're all into a good campaign, but where do you think all the replay value is?

  • 07.24.2009 3:46 PM PDT

i can only enjoy a game fully, if the game has a awesome campaign, and thats exactly what all the Halo games have so far offered, i never to bothered about multiplayer in many games, just as long as the story line is fun, makes sence (unlike Sacred 2) and draws you in. I have all the halo books, because i enjoy the story of halo, and when i offered to lend them to my cousin, he wouldnt take them because he cares only for multiplayer and achievments. I admit i do enjoy halos multiplayer system, but theres some games i hate to play online, because as soon as you win a match, everyone has to be really competative about it. At least with Campaign you can play at your pace, how you like, and pause when you like, i have played through the 3 halo games numourous times and i never get bored of playing them, i find something new and interesting everytime i play through it again. So in my opinion, i think its right on Bungie to concentrate more on a campaign side of a game rather than multiplayer, because thats what made us all play halo in the first place, am i right?

  • 07.24.2009 3:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

CAMPAIGN > Multiplayer

Don't retort with the usual, "Oh you must suck online then." I am mediocre, yes, but I would rather play a story based game.

  • 07.24.2009 3:53 PM PDT

SiLENTSHiRTS

i think campaign and multiplayer are great! Campaign is good for playing when your by yourself, and multiplayer is good for playing with friends.

  • 07.24.2009 4:11 PM PDT

people are butt holes

  • 07.24.2009 4:47 PM PDT

Posted by; A random forum poster
Posted by; ghostvirus
This apple is brown, and rotten. This orange on the other hand, is in relatively average shape. So the orange is definitely the preferable option.
----------You can't compare apples and oranges. You're so dumb.

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: lyddycakez
I think people are more pissed at the fact that we are paying the same price for something that isn't equal to Halo 3. Even though it has an equal price tag

I think that if it were a lower price tag, not extremely low of course, but lower. I am pretty sure the animosity would lower and things would smooth themselves out

Fair.
But the thing is, Halo 3 has way more content than just about every other game. You can't say that just because it doesn't have as much means it's not worht full price.

The majority of popular games have less content than ODST really. Assassin's Creed, Left 4 Dead, etc.


I'll give you left 4 Dead. But not Assassins Creed. But most people I know, have nothing but criticism for the amount of content, and variety in L4D. And likewise Assassins Creed was also critisised for a lack of variety.

At the end of the day, Halo 3 ODST is an expansion. Just because Microsoft, a publisher who has pressure to meet quotas, comes in and tells Bungie, " ODST is more than expansion". That doesn't make it so.

At the end of the day, It reuses models (enemies,vehicles, many weapons) from Halo 3 . It reuses all of Halo 3s engines. The reality is, most of the meat of the game, and most of the backbone on the technical side are not much more than copy paste. The reality is, the multiplayer mode is litterally copy paste Halo 3, plus three maps. Finally, even the title says it all, "Halo 3: ODST.

At the end of the day, we have a game with a production cycle of about a year and a half. Smaller than most games. With a team a fraction of the size of Halo 3s, and other fullfledged games. And we have a game, that leverages recycled engines, assets, and in some cases actual content to justify the full price . The reality is, if you strip the parts of ODST that are from Halo 3, you have a Bungie game more than a year from release, under a halo 3 sized production team.

The reality is, the campaign modes for Halo modes have always been fun. But they've always been extremely short, relative to other singleplayer games. Assumingly because resources were allocated to the multiplayer mode, but regardless the replay value of the multiplayer made up for it. Traditionally, the Halo games have had strength in the community intergration. Both in terms of moving units, and critic response. Now, there is no traditional multiplayer experience unique to ODST. There is however a co-op mode, that lacks any sort of matchmaking lobby. Which means I will have a two week window to play it, and after that there will be a rare opportunity.It has no community integration



The reality is, much of the 60$ pays for maps for Halo 3. Many of which we have ALL already bought, and some of which most of us have bought. And on top of all that, they have Johnson as a bonus in the game to people willing to fork over (waste), 10 dollars by preordering the game, when there is no need to.

It sucks. Bungie usually pushes the boundaries for value is a game. But I see the opposite to be true in this circumstance. Maybe Bungie is holding some pivotal cards to their chest. Maybe the game is longer, than the originally intended 4-5 hours. Maybe it will be longer than the usually short Halo games. But more than likely, im going to drop 60$, for an expansion pack.

But (sigh), I really enjoy Halo, and am, a Bungie fan. I am really looking forward to ODST.So even though I don't agree with a 60$ price tag, im going to bite my tounge. And just hope my leap of faith is rewarded.

  • 07.24.2009 6:10 PM PDT

Member of team Master Theory.

17th Mythic Conqueror of Halo 3.
5th Mythic Conqueror of ODST.
If you would like to know more about Mythic difficulty please go to this thread. Thank you.

Please do not send me "recruitment messages" as I'm not interested in joining any groups currently.

I don't really know. Personally I buy games for the story/Campaign, not for the multiplayer. Firefight will be great fun, but at the end of the day the real pull for me is that I get another Halo Campaign with some minor gameplay changes and a new perspective on things.
A game could have the best multiplayer int he world, but if it has a crap story I wouldn't buy it plain and simple.

[Edited on 07.24.2009 6:26 PM PDT]

  • 07.24.2009 6:25 PM PDT

Posted by: Maxillos
I'm interested in both the campaign and the multiplayer. It's a new way to play and a new story.

  • 07.24.2009 6:28 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2