that is sweet
water is very good considering the scope of the game (as are all of the graphics) and the gameplay is right on par.
The First Halo 3 Single Player Screens + Video! Rules=#369
- Thread starter Hardknock
- Start date
- Status
that is sweet
water is very good considering the scope of the game (as are all of the graphics) and the gameplay is right on par.
Are Master Chief twice the size of the teammates in this game? The perspective when driving the warthog also makes everything looks very small.
yea allegedly, he's huge in the suit as are the covenant.
Ok. It just looked so strange like he was running alongside midgets in the beginning of the demo.
Spartan 117 = ~7 ft
Elite = ~8' 6" (full height). In the game they are kinda hunched to be more like the Master Chief's height.
Grunts = ~5'
Jackals ~=5'8
Hunters ~= 12' (head/neck extends). In battle it's more like 8' crouched. Actually, the hunter seemed a lot bigger in Halo when you got up close... I'm not sure if they're keeping that scale (which I personally liked).
Elite = ~8' 6" (full height). In the game they are kinda hunched to be more like the Master Chief's height.
Grunts = ~5'
Jackals ~=5'8
Hunters ~= 12' (head/neck extends). In battle it's more like 8' crouched. Actually, the hunter seemed a lot bigger in Halo when you got up close... I'm not sure if they're keeping that scale (which I personally liked).
Blim has got the full presentation online and did some tinkering with image quality:
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_4884_en.html
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_4884_en.html
http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/14275
http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/14276
Some new gamevideos from pax making the internet rounds. Flamethrower is in there.
Pretty crazy to here the audience cheering like that for a video game.
http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/14276
Some new gamevideos from pax making the internet rounds. Flamethrower is in there.
Pretty crazy to here the audience cheering like that for a video game.
Do you remember the video of the E3 2003 presentation that hit the net? I think it was Gamespot. Hearing the crowd then was just so exciting.
Sick! How does that compare graphically to the Beta version?
Last edited by a moderator:
iceberg187
Regular
It's a testament to the game that Bungie has created. The badass version of this generation's Luke Skywalker, as far as gaming.
I'm pretty sure this footage was from the final round of the Omegathon. Neither of the players had ever played Halo before. Regardless, I doubt that the cheering was for the players overall, but rather just for the game itself.
That said, was there any point to making this comment in the first place, or was it just general trolling?
For some reason, in spite of the fact Halo 3 will likely be a fantastic game that sets a new bar for FPS's, I get the feeling that it's not going to review well. To me there is no doubt that it's going to be better than its predecessor in every way, but I would bet money it will end up with lower average review scores than Halo 2. I have just seen too many "it's more of the same" comments, so people might be getting tired of the series and right now graphics rule over gameplay.
So my question is this: "Should review scores from previous or competing games be considered for consumers to determine relative quality, or should scores be based solely on the reviewers feeling at the time of review?" IMO, scoring should be used to rank the title relative to other games. Unfortunately, I think that sometimes, future games, that may have only be seen in demo or preview form, can also influence scores. Example - I think the GT demo on the PS3 hurt Forza 2 because of the graphical comparisons, and I believe KZ2 will do the same to Halo 3. I hope it gets judged against it's previous versions and all games shipping on or before its release.
So my question is this: "Should review scores from previous or competing games be considered for consumers to determine relative quality, or should scores be based solely on the reviewers feeling at the time of review?" IMO, scoring should be used to rank the title relative to other games. Unfortunately, I think that sometimes, future games, that may have only be seen in demo or preview form, can also influence scores. Example - I think the GT demo on the PS3 hurt Forza 2 because of the graphical comparisons, and I believe KZ2 will do the same to Halo 3. I hope it gets judged against it's previous versions and all games shipping on or before its release.
That didn't happen for Halo 2 and it wasn't better than it's predecessor in every way
while i agree
this is halo we are talking about
the game could play worse then reed steel and still score 10's across the board
Love halo but man people need to stop riding Bungies wii wii
just look at halo 2, well below average game and not superior to the original in any way yet it scored higher then most games .
If its an average game ffs give the score it disserves
its sad really
TurnDragoZeroV2G
Regular
Have you even played Red Steel?
And Halo 2 was still a good game, well above average, though at least you're right regarding how it compares to Halo 1.
Credit where credit is due indeed. :smile:
I keep seeing comments how it seems to be universally accepted that Halo 2 was a poor game compared to the original. My memory may be failing me, but I totally enjoyed it and thought it was as good if not better than the original. Granted the ending had a major cliff hanger, but IMO it was still great nonetheless. It is that people's memory of the original is colored because it was something new and original? Or is it because they really hated the idea of playing as the Arbiter? Personally, I was floored by that and loved playing as the Arbiter. Yes, playing as Master Chief was great, but the twist came out of nowhere. Something you'd only see in movies. That's how it felt like playing to me. Especially with the perfect soundtrack. Oh well, different strokes for different folks I guess.
Tommy McClain
Tommy McClain
- Status
Similar threads
