HaloMods "Classic" Read-only Archive

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/article ... ion-Halo-3

I can't help but to feel insulted by this review, however humorous it may be. Although now that I think about it he is pretty much correct in everything he claimed.
But I do agree that multiplayer excuses the "poor" campaign, and that more people care about multiplayer than campaign.

What are your guys thoughts on it?

I thought it was hilarious. The whole reviewing style is much better than the "take me so seriously 'cos I use big words yet can't understand how to review a game properly" people.

Anyway, there are some bad reviews (or insulting as you put it) on halo 3 out there, but I don't give a "flying shit" about his or anyone else's opinions on the matter. I check reviews to possibly consider buying them...I'm passed that stage with Halo 3, and I know I enjoy it so I don't care about anyone else (unless my friends say they don't like it, which would mean no more LANs )

But since we are on the topic of talking about this review, sure some, almost all his points are valid (the marine vehicle AI is worse than halo 2's for example) but to me are not really that strong... "oooh noo, I don't understand the plot and I'm drawing similarities from Halflife because of headcrabs and stuff!"...meh so? Gonna go on a rampage on the next game that has aliens? "oh no! light reflecting off metal in sun light! Nooo!"

I loved the keye's reference though...

One last thing, I'm confused about this boss fight he's talking about with the wheelchair guy? Like what? He refering to guilty spark?

meh i dont like how he reviewed halo 3 but i like the video...ya it's better than does ppl that say big words and don't make sense.

I'm normally a fan of Zero Punctuation, but he sort of loses credibility when he complains about things after not having played Halo 1 or 2.

Also, Bioshock is <<<<<<<<<<<< Halo 3.

I suppose one day I'll finish playing Bioshock XD

ScottyGEE wrote:One last thing, I'm confused about this boss fight he's talking about with the wheelchair guy? Like what? He refering to guilty spark?

the only thing I can think of is the prophet...

Besides it being highly annoying how fast he spoke i have to agree with a lot of it, even being a fan of halo myself lol. This is the best review ive seen for halo 3 just from the comedy alone. Tho i too was confused about the wheelchair remark, he must of meant Guilty Spark cause thats 1) the only "boss" i can think of and 2) it is the equivalent of fighting a guy in a wheelchair like he said. Tho i gotta say imagine if he wasnt an uber noob, 6-8 hours of play.... He would have been even more pissed knowing that if u have any skill at all in the game it shouldnt take u more than 4-5 hours MAX...

Yamagushi wrote:Besides it being highly annoying how fast he spoke

You realize, that's like, the entire basis of his reviews, right?

Tural wrote:

Yamagushi wrote:Besides it being highly annoying how fast he spoke

You realize, that's like, the entire basis of his reviews, right?

nah never seen any by him before lol

So I watched the video, and I read these replies. I am amused/annoyed.

You all take the review so seriously, as though he's making a review with no bias. If anyone bothered to watch any of his others, you'd quickly notice he does primarily negative reviews, with very few positive aspects. It's meant to be like this, he is doing it specifically to be negative. Those taking it seriously and becoming defensive about it are the ones who really look incredible.

With that being said, it's slight hypocrisy time.
Zone 117, virtually none of his points are valid. I think you mixed up the words "all" and "a ridiculously small amount."
ScottyGEE, he's talking about 343 Guilty Spark.
GametagAeonFlux, indeed. He criticizes a story element when he knowingly is uneducated about it.
JacksonCougAr, spoilers: The ending sucks.
CptnNsan0, that wasn't a fight, it was a cutscene.

The only valid point he made was the Marine AI.
Let's debunk some off the top of my head:
Bloom: It has errors, they are not frequent, and it is not overpowering unless you take the time to sit there, zooming on on something sitting directly under a light, in which case, you're an idiot.
Difficulty: It's based on environment. He's criticizing the game for having a variety of environments in which you fight. Some are easier to fight in, others are much more difficult.
Single Player vs. Multiplayer: More play multiplayer than those who play only campaign. Statistics are significant here, and he presents none, because such statistics contradict his own point. He's playing on ignorance.
Microsoft: He treats the game as if Microsoft made it. We'll have to excuse the complete idiocy here, as it is apparent he spent no more time caring about the factual information than he did about checking his own logic.
Been done before: No. Few of the new features have been done before, and those which have have not been done significantly better. On top of that, he fails to provide any examples. "Hey, this sucks, but I can't tell you why."
BioShock: He criticized BioShock way more than he criticized Halo 3. How do I stated logical fallacies?

kbai.

Basically this person doesn't review things seriously, so why should we treat this as a serious review. The game obviously isnt that bad, considering the amount of people playing it.

Tural wrote:So I watched the video, and I read these replies. I am amused/annoyed.

You all take the review so seriously, as though he's making a review with no bias. If anyone bothered to watch any of his others, you'd quickly notice he does primarily negative reviews, with very few positive aspects. It's meant to be like this, he is doing it specifically to be negative. Those taking it seriously and becoming defensive about it are the ones who really look incredible.

With that being said, it's slight hypocrisy time.
Zone 117, virtually none of his points are valid. I think you mixed up the words "all" and "a ridiculously small amount."
ScottyGEE, he's talking about 343 Guilty Spark.
GametagAeonFlux, indeed. He criticizes a story element when he knowingly is uneducated about it.
JacksonCougAr, spoilers: The ending sucks.
CptnNsan0, that wasn't a fight, it was a cutscene.

The only valid point he made was the Marine AI.
Let's debunk some off the top of my head:
Bloom: It has errors, they are not frequent, and it is not overpowering unless you take the time to sit there, zooming on on something sitting directly under a light, in which case, you're an idiot.
Difficulty: It's based on environment. He's criticizing the game for having a variety of environments in which you fight. Some are easier to fight in, others are much more difficult.
Single Player vs. Multiplayer: More play multiplayer than those who play only campaign. Statistics are significant here, and he presents none, because such statistics contradict his own point. He's playing on ignorance.
Microsoft: He treats the game as if Microsoft made it. We'll have to excuse the complete idiocy here, as it is apparent he spent no more time caring about the factual information than he did about checking his own logic.
Been done before: No. Few of the new features have been done before, and those which have have not been done significantly better. On top of that, he fails to provide any examples. "Hey, this sucks, but I can't tell you why."
BioShock: He criticized BioShock way more than he criticized Halo 3. How do I stated logical fallacies?

kbai.

Haha. Ok, questions answered.

I didn't find it insulting, even though they make insulting video game reviews on all the new games. I actually found it funny.

three words wow just wow
actually the halo 3 campaign was good but short but the multiplayer is better than the campaign and some people cant have high speed internet for live (my friends)

I didn't take it seriously As I said anyway, I don't care about other people's opinions that much

I think people should lighten up... i mean its just this guys opinion, or mb its just something funny he decided to make either way the video is cool, but I still love halo 3 in ever way, except that I feel that the campaign was slightly short, and STILL left questions at the end... o well this isnt the place to rant on about small details about a great game.

I would just like to say that i simply found that review extermely entertaining. I don't agree with most of his points, but you have to admit he does it in rather a clever and amusing way.

bloodymess wrote:I would just like to say that i simply found that review extermely entertaining. I don't agree with most of his points, but you have to admit he does it in rather a clever and amusing way.

Yes and that's what he does with EVERY "review".

I can't believe that people are that stupid too believe that this "video review" is actually a real review. His videos are meant for entertainment nothing else.
He said it himself that people prefer that he has a negative attitude toward the games than actually a positive one. Obviously the negative attitude is more entertaining.

You can't call his movies a review because he barely scratches the surface of the game and does not do an in depth analysis of it. You can't possibly take this serious if he refers Cortana as a "12 year old girl".

His movies are just for entertainment and he is very good at it.

I liked the review, but didn't agree with most of it.


I did like his comment about the boss battle being like fighting a wheel-chair kid and you have the BFG9000 (me = old doom fan). In Halo2, people complained about the boss fights, but that was what it felt like Halo3 really needed, some sort of real end boss fight.