Halo 3 multiplayer beta Comments by Robert Purchese

Hello Halo 1/2.

Is it just me..... or is this only slightly nicer looking that Halo 2? And I do mean only ever so slightly.

That's because the MP maps are just using a buffed up Halo 2 engine, the SP game is where the meat of the graphical improvements are.

Or so I've read at least...

MEH.

All on ignore.. good catch.

Heh heh, Deathkiller2. So he's the killer of Death(tm), but unfortunately he's the second one, er... :)

All on ignore.. good catch.

O_o

fucking hell, that looks so fun.

can't wait!

If you're saying it looks marginally better than halo 2 I think you're an troll to be honest. Just because all the levels aren't packed with loads of stuff, it looks great. It's clean, and crisp, a good level of detail and with no clutter.

"If you're saying it looks marginally better than halo 2 I think you're an troll to be honest. "

I love it how people protect big games like this...

If medal of honor looked like this everyone would be saying 'meh' and 'wheres the graphical improvment' etc...

@ DUFFKING

Are you honestly tellin me that your impressed with those visuals? Maybe Bungie should employ some new GD artists but there is next to no graphical advancment evident in Halo 3. Don't get all defensive because it's Halo clear your concience and speak the truth. No one is trollin and in this particular case it would be hard to tell because the game really doesn't look impressive. Specially for a system that brought forth Gears of War.

Just call a spade a spade my friend.

It really doesn't look impressive, but it doesn't look bad either. I bet these aren't what the final game will look like mind.

Mehholland drive......I'm suprised bungie are letting MP shots out, how embarrassing.

If you're saying it looks marginally better than halo 2 I think you're an troll to be honest.

Bigging these shots up could be considered trolling as well, to be honest.

They look better than H2 but I have to say it isn't a great leap forward, and this before I am attacked is from a Halo fan

Yeah i just don't get what these screens where supposed to do. Insite excitment over the visuals? Again am sure the gameplay will be intact but come on now bungie you need to put alot more effort into the visuals.

I'm not 'bigging' the shots up, I'm saying they aren't half as bad as everyone's making them out to be. It's no gears of war but it looks nice and clean.

"but come on now bungie you need to put alot more effort into the visuals"

Why? Do you prefer graphics over gameplay? ;)

I think it looks great, but then I wasn't expecting to be blown away graphically (although there are times when the multiplayer REALLY impresses graphically imo).

The fact is, when the art/graphic style remains the same, it's more difficult to appreciate the improvements made. It's like Ninja Gaiden Sigma on the PS3. It looks great, but not a huge improvement over the already great looking XBox NGS games from last gen.

However, play the Halo 3 beta or NGS for an hour or so and then go back to playing the older games on the XBox and THEN you will really notice the difference.

I have my Nintendo Wii for Gamplay and my 360 and PS3 for graphics.

I'm not 'bigging' the shots up, I'm saying they aren't half as bad as everyone's making them out to be. It's no gears of war but it looks nice and clean.

Yeah, just getting a bit annoyed about the general vibe here that everybody who thinks these shots look a bit mediocre must be a troll. I'd like to think I am fairly neutral about Halo - never had any Xbox, but loved the first one on the PC - and want to be able to say that these screenshots look very unimpressive without someone jumping at me.

I've just been playing UT2k4 with some friends, and most of these screens just look bland compared to it. I'm sorry, but it's pure and simple truth.

And the gameplay? What's there that we haven't already seen a million times (and better, too) in other similar games?

>Why? Do you prefer graphics over gameplay? ;)

If he didnt, he would own a wii surely :-)

But a big fat meh from me, unless this does something other than generic shooty stuff then colour me uninterested.. seen it all before.

(maybe im just getting old?)

Well it looks better than Halo2Vista.

If any reference books wish to use that as an example of "damning with faint praise", I'll waive any copyright on it...

@ Yaz

Don't try to make this into something it's not. I clearly stated that am sure the gamplay will be intact. Where did i say i rather graphics over gameplay or what have i even said to justify that question? These visuals don't look like much of a improvement over Halo 2 and i feel like with games like gears on the Xbox360 and this being Microsofts flag ship title they (Bungie/Microsoft) should've put alot more effort into the visuals. Specially concidering the graphical warfare thats goin on now between the PS3 and Xbox360. If these screens impress you then more power to you but you need to raise your standards. Again i made no reference to gameplay as this department Halo has always excelled at, more so than it has visually in my opinion. So with that said it's full time Bungie put some more effort into the visuals.

It's not all about gameplay for me and anyone who says it is they are simply lying to themselves. We all wanna see these "Next gen" games look next gen.

@ smelly

What console(s) do i own?

"And the gameplay? What's there that we haven't already seen a million times (and better, too) in other similar games?"

And you could say EXACTLY the same thing about the UT games you obviously enjoy. I'm sure there will be many out there who will say exactly the same thing about UT2K7 upon release, but guess what, those who enjoy UT will not care because it will be another great addition to the series as far as they're concerned, with enough additions and enhancements to keep the fans happy.

Sometimes it seems as if EVERY game must re-invent the wheel before certain gamers are happy. ;)

I've never seen anything like it.

I dunno.

A part of me WANTS to get excited by this.. But I just cant.

I get the feeling i've seen it all before and played it all before.

Shooters which dont do anything different are becomming tired to me. Maybe when it comes out, i'll play it and think it's ace.

But at the moment, im trying to get excited (after all it's being touted as the 360's biggest game) but cant.

"Don't try to make this into something it's not."

I didn't, but I fail to see where Bungie has failed you in terms of graphics, especially as most of the bells and whistles are reserved for the single player game (including the realtime cut-scenes). The multiplayer game has to work within the constraints of offering smooth online gameplay with X no. of players, X no. of vehicles, all within a large level/map. Gameplay and weapon balance is the priority here, not graphics (which is just the icing on the cake).

The Halo series is succesful in this regard because, unlike numerous other devs, Bungie focus more on getting the gameplay right.

"I clearly stated that am sure the gamplay will be intact. Where did i say i rather graphics over gameplay or what have i even said to justify that question?"

Well I did put a smiley at the end to suggest my comment wasn't to be taken too seriously, but it does seem to me that if those multiplayer graphics are not good enough for you, then you are placing more importance on graphics then you should.

"These visuals don't look like much of a improvement over Halo 2 and i feel like with games like gears on the Xbox360 and this being Microsofts flag ship title they (Bungie/Microsoft) should've put alot more effort into the visuals."

Neither does many over next-gen games over their last gen predecessors. And why should it look like Gears of War? There's a big difference between the size of the levels and the number of players and objects between the two games, so if you're expecting GEoW graphics within Halo's large scale environments, then you ARE expecting too much.

"Specially concidering the graphical warfare thats goin on now between the PS3 and Xbox360."

I would think that Bungie is more concerned about getting the gamplay right than satisfying gamers argueing over PS3 and 360 graphics.

"If these screens impress you then more power to you but you need to raise your standards."

I need to do nothing of the sort. I've been gaming since the late 70s, I've seen all the systems come and go, and seen graphics develop from the days of Pong. So for me, it IS gameplay FIRST. That is what matters above anything else, including silly graphics wars being fought between fanboys (and no, I'm not saying you're a fanboy). That doesn't mean I don't appreciate great graphics, of course I do, but like I said, great graphics is the icing on the cake, and imo, that's the way it should always be.

"Again i made no reference to gameplay as this department Halo has always excelled at, more so than it has visually in my opinion. So with that said it's full time Bungie put some more effort into the visuals."

And that's where we differ. I think the graphics look great and clearly show the efforts they've made, especially given the scale of the environments and the interactivity taking place. You say I should raise my standards, but I think it is you who should lower his standards to a more realistic level. :)

Halo 2.2 !

@ Yaz

"The Halo series is succesful in this regard because, unlike numerous other devs, Bungie focus more on getting the gameplay right. "

This is something that they have been good at and we've all played an appreciated their work over time. However like say the GT series if we continue to settle for the same game over an over then what will happen to the series? This is why i think Forza actually betterin GT is such a good thing for the series because they where gettin comfortable kindda like how Bungie seem to be gettin In my ever so humble opinion.

"Well I did put a smiley at the end to suggest my comment wasn't to be taken too seriously, but it does seem to me that if those multiplayer graphics are not good enough for you, then you are placing more importance on graphics then you should."

I like how you keep puttin such emphasis on "Multiplayer graphics" Forgive me but am not as forgivin or quick to introduce technicalities and variable in order to make excuses for a developer. You say realtime cutscene's like thats something new to the series or something that the series has done impressively.

"And why should it look like Gears of War?"

Don't try to put words in my mouth, am not lookin for Gears of War but am lookin for something impressive from Microsofts flagship title.

"I would think that Bungie is more concerned about getting the gamplay right than satisfying gamers argueing over PS3 and 360 graphics."

In order to grow the series must make strides both in gameplay and visuals, stop makin them out to be any different from other developers in this regard. When someone pays US$400 or US$480 on a Xbox360 a great part of the draw is Halo, excuse but if am a fence sitter what do you think am gonna be lookin at first to convince me. Stop makin it seem like the single player will be leaps and bound above what the multiplayer looks like because you know it will not. Probly alil more lightin effects and blurr.

" need to do nothing of the sort. I've been gaming since the late 70s, I've seen all the systems come and go, and seen graphics develop from the days of Pong. So for me, it IS gameplay FIRST. That is what matters above anything else, including silly graphics wars being fought between fanboys (and no, I'm not saying you're a fanboy). That doesn't mean I don't appreciate great graphics, of course I do, but like I said, great graphics is the icing on the cake, and imo, that's the way it should always be. "

I've been gamin from the 80's from the days of Pitfall, so whats your point in statin that, what you have seniority? Gameplay is always first my friend and again with bungie am confident that it will play great, however i also want something that looks like it's worth my US$500 dollars from Microsofts flagship title. Forgive me for not bein as easy on bungie as you are just because they are bungie.

"You say I should raise my standards, but I think it is you who should lower his standards to a more realistic level. :)"

No mediocrity is not something i do very well. Specially when am payin for a product. My standards aren't unrealisitic they are just higher than yours. Which is fine if you wanna take these visuals an be impressed by them then i can't fault you it's a matter of opinion and prefference. ;-)

Well first I'm going to avoid a post as long as my post above. (Edit: Failed :))

My problem with your 'opinion' is that you make all kinds of claims about what Bungie has and hasn't done to Halo 3 when no-one has played the final game yet and, very likely, neither of us has even played the beta. If you want to say the graphics don't impress you then fine, but don't act as if that reflects on the game as a WHOLE and conclude that because (you think) the graphics hasn't improved much therefore the game itself hasn't moved on much from the previous game in the series!

"Forgive me but am not as forgivin or quick to introduce technicalities and variable in order to make excuses for a developer"

It's not about excuses, it's about cutting the developers some slack until we've actually SEEN the single player game, and in particular, when we have reports from those who have played it, and finally when we get to play it ourselves. I'd rather do that than to make sweeping generalisations based upon the multiplayer game alone.

"I've been gamin from the 80's from the days of Pitfall, so whats your point in statin that, what you have seniority?"

And now look who's putting words into other people's mouths? I stated that in response to you saying I should raise my standards in terms of graphics, which imo, was very patronising. My point is, I've been gaming long enough to know what to expect and not expect graphically, so I don't need advice on what MY standards should be as if I've only been gaming for a few years.

"In order to grow the series must make strides both in gameplay and visuals, stop makin them out to be any different from other developers in this regard."

For any game series to grow, it is MORE IMPORTANT for it to make strides in gameplay, far more so than graphics. Graphics soon wear off, no matter how good they are, and then all you're left with is the gameplay. Sorry, but that's where we differ, because like I said, I feel you place too much emphasist on graphics.

"Gameplay is always first my friend and again with bungie am confident that it will play great, however i also want something that looks like it's worth my US$500 dollars from Microsofts flagship title."

And I would say wait until you actually SEE the single player game first before making that judgement. If you still feel the same, then fine, but at least it would be based upon the main game itself. And no, I'm not saying realtime cut-scenes are something new, I'm saying let's wait and SEE their quality first, together with the quality of the sp game, before deciding Halo 3 hasn't progressed enough to justify it's cost.

You say gameplay is first, and that's great, and yet it seems to me that if the graphics in the screenshots blew you away, then that would have been enough for you and gamers like you. Well, to me, that is a very superficial way of looking at games.

So I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. :)

(Edited for spelling and grammar)

"Why? Do you prefer graphics over gameplay?"

getting tired of hearing these kinds of comments to be honest, good visuals help a great deal to immerse you into whatever game you are playing. If theres anything to get excited about here its the match-making system which was also in Halo2 (and for some reason 99% of all other multiplayer games fail to copy, and they really should copy it) that and the single player portion.

I was actually pretty impressed with these shots. It doesn't look "OMG", granted, but it looks clean and uncluttered. I also think there's more of a difference between this and Halo 2 than some of you are giving credit for.

It's a Halo game, and it looks very like the previous halo games?

CRUCIFY IT FOR ITS STYLISTIC CONSISTENCY!

Battlefield on the 360 looks better.

i like them - i think some of them look very atmospheric. Can't wait to see what the single player stuff looks like :)

Impressive aliasing.

The backgrounds/sky look nice though. Graphically nothing overly impressive, compared to new(ish) PC games at least.

"getting tired of hearing these kinds of comments to be honest, good visuals help a great deal to immerse you into whatever game you are playing"

I don't disagree with you, but what I'm saying is that graphics is just the icing on the cake for games and shouldn't be the main reason to judge a game. If the gameplay isn't there to begin with, then no amount of flashy graphics is going to make up for it. But if the gameplay is solid and enjoyable, then yes, better graphics can enhance the experience.

It's like special effects in films. A crap film with incredible special effects is still a crap film. If another movie had a great plot, great acting but only so-so special effects, then I would perfer that movie any day. Of course, I may say afterwards that it's a shame the special effects were not better, but that wouldn't spoil my enjoyment of the film. Yes, if the special effects were great than would make the film better overall, but again, the enthasist shouldn't be on the special effects first, just as they shouldn't be on graphics for games.

Sorry, but that's the way I feel. :)

halo being the console seller and all, i expected a LOT more... this is just rubbish. and then i do mean just the way it looks.
first impressions count! bigg time, just go to the bar and look at a pretty girl, you'll get what i mean. haly should look absolutely dropdead gorgious,.... it doesn't and that's a real shame.
i do hope ms and bungy just happen to have a spare pack of textures and stuff lying around for final release version

It looks alrite! Looks just like halo 2. Best be better at release date otherwise, no purchase from me

It looks like crap. Is this all that Halo is, a mediocre looking console FPS? Very dissapointing.

"It looks like crap. Is this all that Halo is, a mediocre looking console FPS? Very dissapointing."

This looks crap to you?

http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/11438

Yes some will argue that it looks like a high res Halo 2 (nothing wrong with that imo), but as Mentalist(air) points out, it has the same graphical style, so the improvements are not going to be as obvious (although I can see them). Only if they changed the graphics style completely would it stand out as being different from the previous games, but that's not necessarily a good thing.

Contrary to what some may think here, the Halo series isn't the success it is today because of the graphics. It's not the graphics which had millions of gamers rush out to buy Halo and then Halo 2, and it's not the graphics which has millions still playing it today. In fact, it never had the best graphics upon release on the XBox (although argueably the best for a console fps perhaps).

Anyway, it looks great imo, and I can't wait to play it. :)

EDIT: Link fix

"not in the same league as high end upcoming PC shooters like Crysis. "

well duh...

You can tell that the the "gameplay" of Halo 3 is not in the same league as the "gameplay" in Crysis from static multiplayer screenshots can you?

And you could say EXACTLY the same thing about the UT games you obviously enjoy. I'm sure there will be many out there who will say exactly the same thing about UT2K7 upon release, but guess what, those who enjoy UT will not care because it will be another great addition to the series as far as they're concerned, with enough additions and enhancements to keep the fans happy.

First of all, I'm not a UT fanatic or anything, I just play the game because it's what's being played the most at lanparties over here at the moment. I'm not defending UT in particular.

With that out of the way, I'm just wondering what some people see in halo that makes it "the most anticipated game of all time" when it doesn't even compare very favourably to a three year old game, at least from what we've seen so far (and, frankly, from what we know about existing halo games).

"If you honestly don't think Halo's visuals had a whole lot to do with its success on the Xbox you are in serious denial!"

I said argueably the best graphics for a console fps, just not the best graphics on the console overall. DOA3 was also an XBox launch game and it had better graphics, yes it's a different genre I know, but that's not the point, just as Gears of War is more of a third person shooter than a FPS (although it probably sits somewhere in between).

When Halo 2 was launched, there were already XBox games with better graphics, but again, it was probably the best looking console FPS of it's TYPE at the time (despite the texture issues). Other XBox FPSs with only a few characters on screen at a time and short draw distances, such as Chronicles of Riddick (released a few months before Halo 2) and Doom3 (released a few months after), looked better than Halo 2 for the same reasons GEoW looks better than Halo 3. So it's not denial. Halo 3 should be compared to FPS games like Resistance and UT2K7, not GeoW.

"Halo3 unfortunately judging by these shots looks less impressive than GoW and truthfully, not in the same league as high end upcoming PC shooters like Crysis."

Firstly, why should it look equally as impressive as GoW (assuming that's Gears of War). Like I said, GEoW is nowhere near on the same scale as Halo or UT in terms of environmental size and number of players/characters. GEoW is also not really a FPS, and is more similar to Doom 3 in terms of style and scale. And as for PC games, so Halo 3 doesn't match up to a future DX10 based PC FPS running on a high end PC with a graphics card that probably costs more than the 360 itself? well that's a shock! *rolleyes* ;).

"I could be wrong, but truthfully, while I see H3 selling strongly, I don't see it making the same seismic impact that Halo did."

I think you're wrong and seriously underestimate the strength of the franchise, especially if these reports are true;

http://uk.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_en...

Whilst I'm sceptical of that figure alone for NA (seems way too high), many believe Halo 3 will break sales records, and I happen to agree. It's going to be down to the gameplay more than the graphics, and this will be reflected in the review scores. If Halo 3 scores as highly as Halo 2, then expect success at least equal to that of Halo 2, but if the review scores are only average (unlikely imo), then things may be different.

(Edit: Spelling, grammar, content)

"not in the same league as high end upcoming PC shooters like Crysis. "

well duh...

You can tell that the the "gameplay" of Halo 3 is not in the same league as the "gameplay" in Crysis from static multiplayer screenshots can you?


He was obviously talking about the graphics.

@unclelou

I know. But to compare H3 to a super high end PC shooter isn't a fair comparison. The only comparison that matters and that it boils down to is game play.

Crysis might look great, but might play like utter tosh, whereas we all know that H3 will offer a solid gaming experience :)

I still think it looks good anyway...

@ Yaz

"My problem with your 'opinion' is that you make all kinds of claims about what Bungie has and hasn't done to Halo 3 when no-one has played the final game yet and, very likely, neither of us has even played the beta. If you want to say the graphics don't impress you then fine, but don't act as if that reflects on the game as a WHOLE and conclude that because (you think) the graphics hasn't improved much therefore the game itself hasn't moved on much from the previous game in the series!"

Again you try to twist my words. I've been debating on one topic for the whole discussion "Visuals" now you say am makin it seem like the game itself hasn't moved on much. This is not the an avenue that am able to walk as yet as i have not played the game. So thus i comment on the visuals that Bungie has made available. Don't make it seem like me sayin the visuals aren't impressive then that must mean that the gameplay is the same.

"It's not about excuses, it's about cutting the developers some slack until we've actually SEEN the single player game, and in particular, when we have reports from those who have played it, and finally when we get to play it ourselves. I'd rather do that than to make sweeping generalisations based upon the multiplayer game alone."

This in itself is you makin an excuse for your prior excuse. It just seems like your doing so because this is Bungie. Thats just my opinion on your behaviour towards my opinion of their work. Don't baby them or else they will get comfortable and start havin the "If we build it they will come" Attitude. Am more for growth than makin excuses for a developer.

"And now look who's putting words into other people's mouths? I stated that in response to you saying I should raise my standards in terms of graphics, which imo, was very patronising. My point is, I've been gaming long enough to know what to expect and not expect graphically, so I don't need advice on what MY standards should be as if I've only been gaming for a few years."

You know what to expect, that right there is what i think is the problem. Your settling for mediocrity just because that is what you have been given in the past. If thats a result of you gamin from the 70's then am worried about me in 10 years.

"For any game series to grow, it is MORE IMPORTANT for it to make strides in gameplay, far more so than graphics. Graphics soon wear off, no matter how good they are, and then all you're left with is the gameplay. Sorry, but that's where we differ, because like I said, I feel you place too much emphasist on graphics. "

Now your addin emphasis on more when i clearly stated that they need to grow both. Yes i put alot of emphasis on graphic's however not as much as gameplay however again in this area am sure bungie will deliever thus am not worried. You clearly place too little emphasis on graphic and yes that is where we differ. :-)

"And I would say wait until you actually SEE the single player game first before making that judgement. If you still feel the same, then fine, but at least it would be based upon the main game itself. And no, I'm not saying realtime cut-scenes are something new, I'm saying let's wait and SEE their quality first, together with the quality of the sp game, before deciding Halo 3 hasn't progressed enough to justify it's cost."

Stop with this wait until i see the single player stuff. Again the single player will not look much better than the MP. I expect a lil more in terms of lighting and blurr, you make it sound like they are gonna use a seperate engine for the SP. Stop it please.

"You say gameplay is first, and that's great, and yet it seems to me that if the graphics in the screenshots blew you away, then that would have been enough for you and gamers like you. Well, to me, that is a very superficial way of looking at games."

Gamer's like me? Now your just bein rude for no reason. What catagory of gamer am i Yaz? Please don't generalize when we're clearly havin a discussion on personal prefference. Don't feel you have to catagorize me in order to understand my point. Yes if the graphic's blew me away then because as i've stated before am confident that bungie will do a good job on the gameplay front then yes i would be more excited about Halo 3. I thought i was clear on that, so whats your point?

"So I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. :) "

Your a worthy opponient Yaz, thumbs up ;-)

"Again you try to twist my words. I've been debating on one topic for the whole discussion "Visuals" now you say am makin it seem like the game itself hasn't moved on much."

You did say and I quote "In order to grow the series must make strides both in gameplay and visuals". So correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you just say BOTH gameplay AND visuals MUST make strides for the series to grow? Now your whole arguement here is that the graphics haven't made any real strides (if any), therefore that means the series itself hasn't grown according to you (or not enough to justify it's cost). Well, I disagree, because as they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and all we've done so far is watch someone else having a little nibble. ;)

"It just seems like your doing so because this is Bungie."

Far from it. I loved Halo, but I didn't enjoy Halo 2 as much and I still haven't finished the sp game yet (I stopped soon after taking the role as the Arbiter, but I heard it gets much better later). From what I'm seeing, Halo 3 looks excellent, so I really don't have the issues you have with the visuals.

Anyway, I'll skip some paragraphs because I'll just be repeating myself, and so I'll go to...

"Gamer's like me? Now your just bein rude for no reason."

No reason? And you think saying my standards are low and that I settle for mediocrity isn't being rude? I found that to be very insulting (especially as I'm an artist who's career is in computing). So if you find the term "gamer's like you" a bit rude, then I think we're about equal on the rudeness scale (about 3/10 each I would say)! :P

"Your a worthy opponient Yaz, thumbs up ;-)"

And you too Jamaicangmr. But I think we've gone as far as we can in this discussion for now.

If you're around when the single player screenshots surface, together with previews and movies, perhaps we'll continue the discussion then. Who knows, you may even change you mind (but then again, maybe I'll be the one instead).

Well see. ;)

(EDIT: Soooo many edits. I just can't spell today)

@ Yaz

Am looking forward to havin a complete discussion once we get a chance to actually play Halo 3. Am willing to change my views and i hope Bungie does impress me with Halo 3.

See you around, buddy... ;-)