You can't run but you can hide. Halo 3 is broken.

I think your central point is correct. Whatever it is that you liked about Halo 1 was not something Bungie ever intended to put in.

You don't really want the best Halo possible, you want some other game-- something I wouldn't even recognize as Halo.

I think I agree with narc... what is this rule of three you speak of? Also, no need to complain about the defaults. Keep in mind that Bungie could easily go in and add a teleporter to whatever map on whatever playlist they want thanks to forge. Teleporters are by no means excluded from making appearances in any of the maps we know in the future.

You complain about the melee system. Im not sure how accurately I read, but it seems like most complaints about this stem from confusion about how the mechanics of halo 3 are different from those of halo 2. I couldn't go into details, but I am somewhat sure that there is some weirdness due to Bungie removing the host advantage. I don't think there is any for them to display it properly, but you have to just trust that the person that pressed the button first wins.

Your point is taken about the mauler, but keep in mind once again that everything apart from actual map geometry can be changed in the matchmaking playlists. If Bungie feels that the mauler is applied too liberally about some of the maps, Im sure they will not hesitate to cut back a bit.

There are two big problems with your argument. The first is that you are still stuck on halo 1. Thats great. Go play halo 1. The second is that no matter how much testing Bungie does, they will never be able to approach the "testing" that gets done by everybody on XBL even over a couple of days. What they can do is track stats and use them to improve playlists. I guarantee you those shiny new heatmaps will be used to see what weapons may need to be cut back on or moved. If you think about it, forge is the best thing they possibly could have spent their time on. The defaults for now were their best approximation of good maps. Would you rather they come up with a slightly better approximation? Or would you rather Bungie give themselves the chance to view the playing habits over billions of games and then have the ability to change everything at their own will? Forgive me, but duh.

By "rule of three" I think he means guns, grenades, and melee-- the relative balance between all three that make up characteristic Halo gameplay.

As for the melee system, I think there is the common complaint, which is that the Halo 3 wrinkle (most health wins on simultaneous melees) is unfair. This, I think, is largely a problem of people knowing too much about how the game works. They are assuming this "simultaneous melee" code is coming into play far more often than it actually does, and assuming that it is the reason for their deaths more often than it actually is.

As for host advantage... let's be clear here, Bungie cannot remove that except by switching to a dedicated server architecture, which I think is not feasible on Xbox Live for any number of reasons. As long as there is a host, there are advantages that player will have that simply cannot be removed. The more latency to the host a player has, the more of a disadvantage he or she is at. Bungie can attempt to minimize it, but that's all.

I think the bottom line is that VVV considers certain things broken that the majority of Halo players don't, and as a result, he'd have traded away the advanced features in order to have those things addressed. I think the issue is that those things have been left alone by design, not by accident or through incompetence, and that the accident is that a certain portion of the Halo 1 fan population liked the game for reasons that were very, very different from those of the majority.

Hrm, the thing I was thinking of when I said that was this...

So, either they came up with something to eliminate (at least to some extent) host advantage (perhaps timestamping?), or frankie is full of it... heh. Anyways I tend to agree that removing host advantage completly is probably impossible, but there are a lot of people at bungie that know a whole lot more about netcode for games than I do, so my guess is they made a pretty good go at it.

I was linked here by a friend.

I think that the hardcore Halo faithful are still standing around waiting for another "Halo 1" to come around.

Stop waiting. That bus is never coming.

The job of any gaming company is to make money. The original Halo sold basketloads - but Bungie needed to reach a broader audience. Halo 2 was wider open and now so is Halo 3.

Don't kid yourself. Bungie isn't making games to appease the several hundred hardcore Halo 1 fans out there that believe it was the best game ever made.

They're making games because it makes money - and puts food on the table of the people that work there.

I personally disagree with most of what was written above. I like Halo 3. I don't think the mele system is broken. I DO think the mauler needs a bit of a damage decrease, but I do NOT think that we should crank up the damage to a Battle Rifle or Carbine to "compensate" for anything.

Further, now you complain that there's no default teleporters on the maps? I really cannot understand this argument. There are many - MANY - more unique ways to get around the map - more SAFE ways than using a teleporter. I can camp outside a teleporter and kill you every time you come through it with my shotgun (which I feel is balanced perfectly). What I can't do is predict which lift you're going to come up on Construct.

Further - I think Shield doors are a blast. They add a whole new dynamic to the game. If you think someone's camping in the room, don't go in. I could hide around the corner of one of those doors whether the shield was there or not - and still get plenty of kills.

Like it or not the evolution of Halo will evolve. For the most part, Halo 3 is a breath of fresh air to 99% of the Halo Nation that's played Halo 2 to death.

So, my advice is to simply step back from your mindset that Halo 3 should have been "Halo v1.5" and realize that it's not - and never would have been/will be.

Every game in an iteration must evolve. If they had kept everything from Halo 1, odds are the same people that whine about Halo 3 would be whining that "there's nothing new in Halo 3".

Every game must evolve. Every gamer must evolve with it.

If you feel that Halo 1 is "superior", then feel free to go play that. The rest of us will be on Halo 3.

Having fun.

Remember - video games are supposed to be FUN. When's the last time you played for fun?

- LordGideon
PraetoriaGuard

What's wrong w/ adding another shotgun in another skin? Do you dislike it because it 'encourages' close quarters combat? Personally I believe it encourages combat at a distance... if you opponent has a mauler/shotty then stay back & aim = win, charge in = lose.

Also, I believe you mean dual wielding, not duel wielding. The former refers to holding two weapons, the latter would refer to holding a weapon in one-on-one combat.

-- DogCow (moof!)

If you could actually shoot enemies in the head with the new pistol, you'd realize it's not useless.

I really disagree with a lot of your points. Why is it that people feel that the only skillful way to kill somebody is with a BR or sniper and everything else is just random or lucky? If you chase me around a corner with your BR and I drop you with a mauler-melee it is because you were stupid enough to chase me around a corner, not because it wasn't skillful for me to lure you around the corner to give myself an advantage. Some supposed Halo "fans" just don't get what this game is supposed to be. It is not supposed to be a professional paintball simulator where every map is just one room with objects scattered for cover and nothing but BRs and snipers. There are paintball games out there that would be a better measure of "skill" as you and others define it but the problem with them is that they are boring. What makes Halo 3 fun for millions of gamers is the variance of gameplay. This is what you call "randomness". It is not fun for most people to just play the same 3 maps (Warlock, Sanctuary, and Midship) with nothing but BRs. Don't get me wrong, I like those maps and I love the BR. I'll pick up a BR over pretty much every other weapon in the game because it is pretty much guaranteed kills when in my hands but I also like close encounters and in those situations, I'd rather have the mauler than the BR and I'm glad for that variety.
As for trying to avoid camping. You can bitch about camping all you want but with the exception of an open level (with no structures or bases) it is impossible to avoid. Camping is simply good strategy and without any skill to back it up, you can try to camp all you want but decent players are going to be able to remove you from your camping spot anyways. The shield doors add a new level of strategy to the game. They allow new methods of laying traps. The only place where I see it as a problem is in team slayer games on Snowbound where a good 4 person team with an early lead can hold the inside of one of the bases indefinitely and never get removed. In free for all game types, this simply is not a problem.
The bottom line is that millions of people would not have any desire to play the game you describe and it would get about as many people playing as the paintball games do currently. The majority of people like having to choose 2 weapons that they are good with and having to adapt their strategy according to their positioning on varying map layouts. While Halo 3 is not perfect (and never could be perfect to everybody anyways - I really dislike the new melee system), it is a product designed to make money. Money is made by serving the majority, not the vocal minority and the majority of people like constantly changing gameplay or "randomness" as you call it.

Agreed.

I think VVV is right about the Maulers use in close quarters- but not for long.

Pretty soon people are going to realise to keep the f**k away from the guy with the shotgun/ Mauler, and the weapon will begin to be passed up, Like the SMG in Halo 2.

Personally, I frickin love Duel Maulers, and think their a great addition to Halo 3- but if Im against someone who knows what their doing, I won't last 5 seconds with them- If your clever a guy with a shotty is easy to kill. If your not, well thats your problem :>

The More Deluded

Hmm. I think there's some of what you say that rings true for me, but overall I feel we've come to different outcomes. Like Narcogen says, I think that Halo: Combat Evolved had some sort of 'secret sauce' that changed recipe in Halo 2 and (to an extent) remains unfound in Halo 3. I agree that combat has been made far more close-quarters in both Halo 2 and Halo 3, but where the dual-wielding felt imbalanced (to me) in Halo 2, it feels a lot more natural in Halo 3 and there are clear benefits to retaining a single weapon that could be dual wielded. I do miss the larger-scale battles that occurred in Halo on maps like Sidewinder and Blood Gulch, but if anything my criticisms towards Halo 3 would be at the shortage of maps that support those battles rather than that the mechanics of play are actually broken when on larger maps (much though I loved the pistol in Halo, I think making it a little bit more difficult to pop somebody off in three shots was a wise decision).

I don't know as I absolutely dislike it, but the melee in Halo 3 does strike me as overpowered, so I'd agree there. I have to wonder just how close-quarter encounters would change if a melee couldn't be used to top-up the damage you inflict with real weapons but was instead a 'last resort' when you run out of ammo (as it was in Halo); currently it's far more effective to use a melee before you run out of ammo, which does strike me as somewhat odd.

Your comments regarding the pistol do feel fair to me; I can't say I've ever found a useful purpose for the pistol. Bereft of both zoom and the damage it used to cause, even dual-wielded it is a pretty tame option (the same goes for the plasma pistol, unless you're on a map with vehicles). Consequently it did feel like it was put in there more for the Halo: CE fans to cheer at, and then ignore. A shame, although they've probably covered all the options with the other weapons.

Ultimately though, for me the most important question was whether or not Halo 3 was fun. I didn't enjoy Halo 2 multiplayer at all, so whatever it was they changed about Halo 3 that makes me keep coming back was obviously enough to negate the changes in style that has taken place since the original game.

i agree with the guy above about the pistol, if you shot someone in the head you'd be ok with it, if you learned that its a dual weapon and picked up two of them and learned the correct trigger pull timing (instead of pulling it as fast as you could i.e. battle rifle) AND learned that you should be shooting at the players head, THEN you'd be good with the pistol, sorry it takes some practice and you can't just scope in with an obviously overpowered weapon and get your kill, learn some new tactics.

as for shield doors, i think they are great also. there's nothing better than seeing the team that is winning camping on the other side and going suicide on them. one time i had my friend stick me with a plasma grenade and i ran in and threw all my grenades as fast as i could (only got off two frag grenades) to take down their sheilds and then the plasma went off killing 3 of the 4. my only regret is that i couldn't yell "praise allah" right before it went off. want to talk about some fun? take the lead that way, thats real fun.

oh and halo 1 was quite possibly in my opinion the worst game in the trilogy BECAUSE of the pistol. the only way to go back and fix it is to give it a new skin and call it some sort of rifle.... oh wait i think they basically did that. way to go bungie.

I could pile on a bunch more, or even go through a tedious point-by-point analysis, but after dozens of iterations of the same post over the past four years I've frankly grown bored with rebutting "there is no game but Halo 1 and I am it's prophet" posts.

Go play the game you prefer with your like-minded friends, as I shall with mine.

-- Steve'll get on with what needs to get done now.

As much as I enjoy the Halo series, my least favorite is Halo 3.

I don't play Matchmaking, it's basically pointless.

I still play 1 and have just as much fun playing 2.

The melee was an integral part of my Halo 1 experience. I found it very effective in Halo 1, I could do more damage in a short amount of time with it. I would use it to finish off people in close quarters. In fact I moved from the normal button layout to boxer and then finally to greenthumb to improve my melee (and keep grenade) accuracy & speed.

-- DogCow

I am having trouble formulating a response to this, since I don't want to sound like a fanboy, nor do I want to write a wall of text. I think it boils down to: Obviously you do not like this game, nor did you like the 2nd game, Bungie can't please everyone. For every person that thinks the game is a failure, there are thousands online at that moment enjoying what they feel is a great game. Enjoy playing other games than halo, maybe I will run into you in COD4... if not, good luck to you anyways!

I really don't know what you were expecting on 09/25/07, but Halo 1 was released many years ago. The people(s) that made the point that video games are first and foremost are a business are absolutely correct, period. Explanations and excuses can be made but when it comes right down to it, money fuels business not gameplay. As much as I enjoy playing Halo, I get my "professional gaming" fix from the PC. I play RTS games in a competitive manner, not Halo. I don't think it was ever Bungie's intention with the Halo series for it to be a tournament style game like counter-strike or starcraft, so my advice would be to stop treating it like it is.

-slikZ

I just have one small statement. I see a lot of "points", but not a lot of backing them up. "Shame"

Oh how fun it is to delve into the age old "If Halo 1 would only have my children debate". As much as it usually bothers me to see this kind of argument I found myself looking at it from a different perspective. What if by advocating how amazing Halo 1 is over the other iterations people were actually attempting to explain what elements of Halo 1 they wish were in the other games?

If I look at it from that respect I agree with some of your points. I will explain:

Mauler: The thing that bothers me about the mauler is that it has the ability to beat a shotgun and the hammer in close range fights. Now I am not saying that it happens EVERY time, but I know that I win close range shotty fights with the mauler probably 60% of the time or more. I would say that I win the mauler vs. hammer fight with the mauler almost 70% of the time. Now I know that the hammer is intended to be a power weapon so why is a dual-weildable weapon winning the fight even half the time?

Timing/Speed of the game: Halo 3 does feel much slower then the past games which is not too big of a deal except that it takes away some of the intensity for me. My biggest timing issue has to do with switching weapons. Now I understand the reasoning behind carrying two weapons; ideally, one carries a medium to long range weapon and another short range weapon to compliment their range. The problems occurs when you are in a medium range fight with someone and then the fight crosses over into the realm of short range and you have to switch weapons. It feels like it takes an eternity to switch to your other weapon and then actually fire it. The most glaring example of this I feel is with the sword. Now it maybe because of balance issues, but it gets irritating when you switch to the sword and you have to wait for it to crack and for your character to rotate it just slightly before you can lunge. By the time I complete that process at very close range I have usually been shot a few times and then meleed to death. Another thing that seems to screw me is equipment, specifically the bubble shield and the re generator. It seems like every time I am in a fight and I know that I need to use it I hit X and then it deploys .5 seconds after I die.

Weapons: My only complaint about the weapons is that I often feel like I am playing an elaborate version of "Paper, Scissor, Rock" but with about 30 elements instead of 3. Now I understand that is where strategy comes into play. I mean if I am standing out in the open and I get attacked by a BR or Carbine and I am dual-weilding maulers then I deserve my fate. However, in those instances when I come around a corner and I am engaged in a medium range fight and the other guy has a rocket launcher I am pretty much screwed. I guess the best way to describe what I am saying is that many of the fights victors seem predetermined based on the weapon in your hands rather then the actions of the person holding the weapon. (After thinking about this it is obvious that I am still not quite sure how to articulate this.) All I know is that something just kind of feels off to me.

At the end of the day I miss certain elements of the previous versions, but I still really enjoy this game too. If nothing else I think one of the biggest assets about Halo as a FPS is that it is very customizable. If you don't like something you have the ability to tailor the game to what you want it to be. I only wish that my own personal blend would be more the the majority view as apposed to my own.

-Compton

You can take the same map and 2 people will disagree on if it was a good map or not depending on their gameplay style. Those who like Resistance:FOM are more likely to like fast-paced games where you enter combat immediately and there are few camping spots. Those who like more extended gameplay probably prefer the Battlefield or Tribes games. It all depends on your preference.

Yeah, I mean honestly. A box canyon was the epiphany of originality. How could Halo 3 ever compare to that?

Perhaps I can put some perspective on this....I'm not like most players, I only discovered Halo 1 about two years ago, and never played Halo 2 up until a few months ago. I have, however, religiously played Halo 1. And you know? Halo 1 is boring. I mean, yes, it's an amazing game, but after awhile you realize the only good maps in the game are still getting old, because they are all so bland in design. Usually you can switch to one you haven't played in awhile and still have fun, but on maps like Death Island I find myself cringing everytime it comes up. And melee was broken in Halo 1. I have never used it; tried, and I think maybe once I managed to actually hit someone, but that was it. I think the fact that it's actually useful in Halo 3 is probably a good thing. Every time I play Halo 3 it feels like what Halo 1 should have been. True, the pistol doesn't have a scope, but if you can learn to aim it feels just like the old one. Honestly though, the Battle Rifle has much more of a "punch" to it anyway, and I've always enjoyed shooting it more. And I will never understand what the problem with the Mauler is. It's a short range weapon. Yes. Problem? You can't just have a match of snipers every game, it gets old. Perhaps you just don't get the "fun" portion of Halo, where you aren't supposed to take it so seriously. I mean, c'mon, a giant hammer? It's silly, but hey, it's fun to hit people with. Plain and simple.

It's just a game, have some freaking fun.

I completely agree with the author of that article. Halo 3 sucks compared to H1. Halo 3 is nothing more than H2 with a shiny new coat of paint.

Bungie said they were going to make H3 more like H1. What a crock of crap. Let's review:

1. H3 still has the sword.
2. H3 still has H2's crappy physics engine.
3. H3 still has no health bar.
4. H3 still has no fall damage.
5. H3 still has dual wielding.
6. H3 still does NOT have H1's pistol, which is by far the most balanced weapon in the Halo universe.

H3 is 90% H2 and 10% H1. H3 is better than H2, but that's not saying much.

Here is the universal Halo Equation:

H1 > H3 > H2

Your "universal Halo Equation" ain't universal. The sooner you and your ilk realise this, the sooner my homicidal rage will subside.

-- Steve'll remind folks that there are people who like eating grasshoppers; it may not match your taste, but a LOT of people disagree with the "H1 uber alles" theory.

It always brings a smile to my face, VVV, whenever you talk about Halo3's maps. Since all it took was the words "choke point" in the old Vidoc before the beta to make up your mind about the maps.

As for the rest, all I'm seeing is opinionated assertions. You're entitled to it. Anyone has every right to feel that Halo3 didn't deliver what he hoped it would (whatever that may be), but in the end opinionated rhetoric is all it is. And it should be more apparent than ever that what you may have hoped for in Halo1 was never intended from the very beginning.

End Bringer

While both H2 and H3 have noticeable flaws in basic game design, I believe that the only truly unforgivable flaw lies within the Halo 3 melee system, which rewards the players with slower reflexes.

Picture a typical scenario: two players (player 1 and player 2) with AR's see each other and start firing simultaneously, running towards each other.
As they near each other, let's suppose that they are both at a point where they have exactly no shield (no health damage) and are within melee range.
Let's say player 1 has faster reflexes and launches a melee attack, which should easily kill the unshielded player 2. However, as player 1 is in the act of the melee lunge, player 2 gets off a few more shots, dealing some health damage.
Player 2 then melee attacks, just as player 1 finishes his melee lunge and makes contact. So, although player 1 melee attacked first, the attacks will register at about the same time since player 2 did not have to lunge. The health melee system then calls the attacks simultaneous and grants player 2 the victory.

And trust me, this has nothing to do with host, or XBL, or anything else, my brother and I have tested it split screen multiple times, to make sure that this is as messed up as it sounds.
Phew.

Or maybe, you could look at it as the second player being smart enough to realize if he pumps in a few more bullets he is more likely to win a melee battle. It's just changing your strategy, that's all.

I hate to say it, but he's right. As much as I hate to admit it. As much as I denied it when playing the beta. Halo 3 is WAY too much like Halo 2. Neither present half of the fun of playing halo CE. Heck, I'd take playing Halo over XBConnect over Halo 2/3 on XBL if there were enough of a base of players there.

It's hard for me to admit. Because, I promised all of my friends who gave up on Halo after the second installment that Halo 3 would be the answer. I was sure that they had fixed the problems. I was sure it would be different. It's a shame that I can't honestly say that any more. Halo 3 will still have a strong rotation in my 360. But, it will never be the kind of game Halo CE was.

i have looked at some of the crap that you kids have posted. WHAT THE HELL? you kids need a life!!! go get a girl frind, hell go see a movie with someone. i mean F look at all this crap, its at least enough to make a book. by the way dont respond to me and say you have one, we all know thats a lie. I mean we all have some time on are hands, and most of you use your hand to bern that time, hell im not going to lie i do to, "again dont respon to me saying you dont, again we all know thats a lie". hell i have a life i have fun i hang out with my old frinds from high school. any ways im at school right now with time to bern and trying to block the sound of my teacher voice out, im in the computor lab, go figure right. ok i think this is the most i have ever written about asssssss like you and for this topic about halo. i have played the game and like it, whene ever im not swampt with home work or doing some chick. i make sure i make time for halo, or other games. i think halo #1 is the best game the guns are great and so are the maps. im not going to lie, there is halo 2,3 they may be better looking and have better grafics but there is so much more to a game than this, there is the story line and halo has a good one being fiction and all. this is a example im not going to list the hole dame thing there is just to dam much. back to halo #1 i think they should remake it just so you can play it on live, this may sound stuiped and most likely is. but i frankly dont give a f!!!!!! in care. it will not be the best seller like the old one but people will buy, what kind of people you say. the hard core halo fans kind. but if halo 3 is the last halo and i hope its not it would be a great good by present. hell who knows halo wars is coming may be thats where the halo sage contiuse. who knows right who cares any way, it may seem that i do but really im bord out of my F!! in mind. and with nothing eals to do i find my self talking with you cry baybes about your issues with halo and some crap about some BR problum. what ever the F that means, hear is my saying "Dont like it than move on" wicth i will be using right now, plus my teacher is looking at me, ow crap she comming tword me, may be errors no time fix by.......

Not necessarily. And while I have no way of ruling it out, somehow I suspect timestamps aren't being used, as these might represent too many avenues for manipulation, and give heavily lagged players an advantage, and offer more incentive for unnaturally altering one's network connection.

However, more important is the idea of revisionist history. It's bad enough now when, to lagged players, it seems that first one thing happens, and then something entirely different (sometimes opposite) happens. In heavy lag, you can throw a stickynade, see it bounce off, then see it stick and explode. The bounce I think is caused by your client needing to somehow display something even though it does not have an authoritative answer from the server about what happened to that grenade. When it finally gets the answer, the grenade warps from its apparent position to its real position in an unsettling way.

Right now, mostly it is the lagged player who experiences this-- it colors their interactions with all players and objects. To the rest of the players, it seems to affect only their interactions with the lagged player-- and even then, most of these events will be resolved in their favor.

Timestamping would project the effects of warping from the lagged player onto the host. To the host, it would appear at first as if they had won the melee battle. Then, a packet would arrive late from a lagged client, but tagged with a timestamp indicating that the lagged player actually meleed first, and it arrived late only because of the lag.

The server now has to reverse itself somehow. So either it can't display the results of actions to its player or other players in the game until it has a response from all relevant clients, or it has to display seemingly contradictory actions, or it does what it does now-- which is discard those packets and send an updated world state to the lagged client.

In short, the idea of timestamps would transform Halo's network architecture from client-server to peer to peer (with respect to events that are timestamped). The network performance of the entire game would become equal to the network performance of the slowest client.

Somehow I don't think Bungie has done that or will do that.

It's not a question of what anybody knows, or working hard. It's sort of like saying that since NASA has lots of really smart people who know more about physics than I do, I won't rule out the possibility that they'll find a way to negate the effects of gravity.

All any game designer can do in a network action game is decide how their architecture will apportion the effects of lag. In client-server, the clients all bear the entirety of the burden of their own lag. In peer to peer, the entire network bears the burden of the cumulative lag in the system. That's the only way to "eliminate" host advantage. In a peer to peer system, there is no host, so there is no advantage, but every player in the game experiences it with the cumulative lag the system accrues, since updates are passed around in a ring from the first client to the last before coming back.

I believe that the remarks about Halo 3's being more similar to Halo 1 than Halo 2 was in the context of a discussion about environmental design-- not physics or damage model, which are the only aspects of the game you've pointed out.

Halo 2 was neither the first nor last game to use the Havok physics code. A rather large number of games do. While it certainly had unique and fun aspects, Bungie decided Halo was about weapon choices, wide open spaces, vehicles and story-- and not about simulating surfaces made out of springs.

It's a tradeoff I'll take, and gladly.

All you're basically saying is that Halo 3 fails to reward you with a melee kill when you melee from too far away. Which is what you're doing. If you're trading off the chance to get in a few more bullets to do no damage while you lunge, you are meleeing too early.

You're not losing to a player with slower reflexes. You're losing to a player with better timing.

Trust me. I have poor reflexes. I don't win encounters like the one you describe above. Of course, I also have lag, so that might be part of it as well. On top of that, my 360 is dead. Which doesn't have anything to do with anything, really, I just thought I'd mention it.

Interesting story. What community college are you attending?

You sir lie. I cannot believe that you are attending a post secondary educational facility.

(Same person here)
Sooo... you are saying I should wait until I see the other person lunging towards me, then hit B in that 10 milisecond time window? Wish me luck...

I dunno. I guess I just don't understand why it was changed. There never seems to be any host issues for me in terms of melee attacks in H2. Why did they fix something that wasn't broken?

The mauler isn't a bad weapon when balanced with the map and its other weapons. On most maps it is great, but one has a big problem, Guardian, I have played numerous games were the opposite side has spawned at the base with the invisibility, shotgun, 2-3 mauler ( can't remember), the shotgun and the hammer is closer. IF they then are one the bottom level you, can't snipe them, and the only way you can attack them is if you are above them or next to them.

The melee system is fine, as now it has removed a little more host advantage, were in Halo 2 who hit first one. Also the mauler thing is no different to the BXR from Halo 2 as it still requires practice to perfect.

Also the pistol is fine, it is a Far-king PISTOL after all, not some super weapon. It is a great weapon as a last resort. Try playing SWAT with it and you will see how effective it actually is.

- A slightly biased gamer

You just dislike Halo3 is because your lack of strategy, perhaps even overall skill. Halo1 had many multiplayer flaws, the pistol wasn't even a proper pistol. You say Halo3's maps are boring? Look at those from Halo1 for example: Chiron=Irritating, boring no-one ever plays it. Boarding Action= sniper level=boring. Of course it had very good maps as well, also being reused in Halo2, but to avoid being repetitive, they were used as an inspirational source for Halo3.

Um, actually yeah it is. The sooner you and YOUR ilk realize this, the sooner your head will emerge from your ass. H1 is a better game than H3. Live it, learn it, internalize it, for it is the truth.

Well, sorry to tell you, but you're WRONG. They said they were making it more like Halo 1, and they sure as hell weren't just talking about "environmental design". Quit splitting hairs and making stuff up just so suit your phallacious argument.

Also, look at my list again: I pointed out far more aspects than "physics or damage model". You must've overlooked items 1, 5 and 6 from my list, which, funny enough, is fully HALF of the list. Get some reading comprehension skills and try again.

Grow up, child. It's not universal as, demonstrated by the replies to this rant, a great many players disagree with your "universal" opinion.

You have your opinion, and I respect that. I don't respect your assumption that your opinion should apply as some sort of law of nature... it is, indeed, your head that is rectally impacted.

-- Steve's mightily tired of the infantile mentality demonstrated by all too many posters in the Internet. Get weaned, people, and stop whining for Momma's milk.

cant say using school computer, what i can say is what classes i am taking, first criminal procedure, astronomy and math. but you still most likely dont believe me and if you dont than i dont give a F!!!!!!!!!!!!!

no lie. i am 100% truthful i do go to college. by the way how long did you take to look up all those fancy words? asssse hole

Please cite a source such as a link. I believe the only time this ever came up was in an interview with Frankie that specifically regarded level design-- wide open areas, nonlinear encounters. If you've got any reference to Halo 1 outside that context please feel free to share it.

My reading comprehension skills are just fine. You mentioned the sword, the pistol, and dual wielding. All of those relate to weapons and anything relating to weapons that isn't cosmetic is essentially the damage model: how much damage over time each weapon does.

I don't think anybody could have interpreted anything Bungie ever said about Halo 3 to indicate that the sword was going to be removed, the Halo 1 pistol was going to return, or that dual wielding would be removed. Dual wielding has been deemphasized a bit in the current weapon lineup, but that's about it.

If they can do it to you, then you can do it to them. It may not even be necessary to be so precise. Just delaying a little bit might help.

Just because something wasn't broken from your perspective does not mean it did not need changing.

I hate people. Not really, but it's people like that idiotic Halo 1 fanboy that make me feel that way. Your personal taste is not law, just like mine isn't. In fact, I'm amazed at how relatively civil Narc has been in response to you. And as to the "college" kid, you don't give an F*** for our opinions? Good for you. We don't give one for your's either.

Ok, timestamping was just the first thing that came to mind. My main point was that Frankie seems to be implying that they somehow found a way around giving the host advantage, at least in situations where the lag is somewhat low. My guess is that many of the calculations change depending on client ping. What do you think he meant?

You are so right I dont care I stumbled on to this fun field land and love arguing with people like you, so hear goes round one. I am still coming here because like I said I love to argue. If you notice I have defended my self against other assssse hole like you. But you only give so much ammunition against yourself. All i can say is if you dont give an F!!! about my opinions? than why bother telling me when i all ready said i dont give a F about what you think about my opinions. what i am doing right here is wasting time telling you, U just wasted your own time, funny right, not really. what i am now doing right hear is picking a fight not defending my opinions. i want to clear that with you, and with everyone else, some of you cant read that well or under stand text. this is true but i will not name names. like this ace hole, i believe opinions are ment to be criticize aginst and im all for it, but whene one says he dose not care like me dont bother me, but if it is to ask me something or tell me a fact that is the truth than go for it.i know you will write back saying "you are an idiot" or "stupid" hell may be that "i am right" ha ha ha. you will be the only ice hole i will be responding to about this you are the last, O great queen of ice holes. the funny thing about this is it could have been all avoided if you had just said "I"(dont give one for yours either). if you wish to fix your little mistake than do it.

If anyone's coming to this thread late and looking for a quick summary of the whole thing, Anonymous just nailed it. Kudos!

-Matt

OMG THE INSANITY!

VVV...chill, man. Or become a game designer.

Steve...rock on!

"Universal Equation" Guy...have you ever played Risk???

Narc...your logic is undeniable.

"College" Kid...May-B if u yoozd proprr gramr without run on centansiz peepal wood thinc u wer in colej.

asssse i don't care no time dip shitttttteeeeyyyy

Your being way to critical of things that are not necessarily broken, you just don't like them. To say camping is encouraged is ridiculous, campers are not a threat, they are an inconveniance. Campers don't win games, they can get some kills but whether you like to hear it or not you can still toss some grenades or a power drainer around the corner and kill them rather easily in their stationary position. As for the pistol i'm glad you don't have much to say about that, because a small arms weapon with long range rifle capabilities with a kick more than the highest caliber bullets have is ridiculous no matter what you say, Battle Rifles/Carbines make everything fine for the pistol complainers they just won't admit it. As for anything you say about melees in Halo CE being better than the ones in Halo 2/3, thats pure shit. You had a melee range of over 3 yards in Halo CE, nothing cool there, i sure can't reach 10 feet away and knock someone out. As for saying Halo CE map design was more creative, thats crap too. The only way it was creative was because it was the first of the series, the designs were plagued with unfinished terrain and linear canyon like design to keep you going where they wanted, and teleporters...... well if you dont like camping I don't see how you can like teleporters at all. Your stuck in the past buddy, on a game that was only half a game then microsoft said "We like what you have here, but we need twice as much in about a month for our systems release. Do it or your through!"
What you seem to want is indeed not something more like Halo CE, but the perfect game tailored to just your needs and whoever agrees with you (Fuck the majority of the world right what does what they think mean anyways pshhhft!).
You sure like to complain about things and have very little to back them up.

Not sure. Frankie's not a programmer, so perhaps all he knew was that 1) there was a problem with melees w/r/t host advantage (first to melee wins, host always melees first) and that 2) the current system was put in place to address that problem.

Addressing a melee problem does not and cannot negate host advantage. However, since it resolves simultaneous melees by another tiebreaker (total health) at least it means that all other things being equal, the host does not necessarily win.

It may be that under identical conditions, in Halo 2 this was the case. I'm not sure. All other things being equal, it may be true.

this is a great article on most parts, something i would love to send straight to bungie.
but there are still key things you have to think about too, ok when bungie came up with halo 1 they were working out of a basement untill their idea got out there. They were creating a game they thought they would like, and it spread because of those ideas. now that they are a big company, they have to appeal to everybody which means make it simpler and so easy a kid with downsyndrom can be easily entertained!

I agree for the most part but i dont mind the pistol. at least its better than halo 2s. teleporters were fun and the mauler is ridiculous.and i liked the old BR better too.

Wow, a lot of replys. Many of them deserve an answer and many have great counter points and arguments which need acknowledgement. I have been insanely busy since posting this and therefore haven't checked for responses until now.

However I haven't the time at present to get to a long response so bear with me and by tomorrow I will do just that. Thanks everyone for taking the time to read.

And here's my biggest problem with Halo 3:

It's always about what Bungie wants. What about what the players want? We have all these customization options and Forge, but no way to use them effectively due to the lack of Custom Game Broadcasting. Hell, we can't even play on XBC anymore now that they introduced this 30 ms latency limit. We are literally forced to play Matchmaking, and in turn we're forced to play the game the way Bungie wants us to, rather than the way we want to. I don't know about you, but I've gotten real tired of vetoing maps and gametypes on a daily basis and usually being forced to play it anyway. What if I don't want to play FFA oddball, ever? What if I don't want to play on Snowbound? Doesn't matter; Bungie doesn't care what I want.

It's for this reason alone that I've stopped playing Halo 3. I can't play it the way I want to, so I have trouble getting any enjoyment out of the game.

Let's not play word games. All of the above options were cited to show that the game is flexible enough to change with the needs of the community, even if these changes must be initiated from Bungie's side.

Yup. And that, of course, is the spearhead of Bungie's conspiracy to make you play game variations you don't want-- not a sign of anything really silly, of course... like the idea that it was tried and didn't work well.

Custom game broadcasting is, essentially, giving users a chance to build their own matchmmaking hoppers. The effectiveness of any hopper in quickly getting people into a game is directly proportional to the number of players in that hopper. Which is to say, the time it takes to find a match is inversely proportional to the players in the hopper.

Halo 3 only has a handful of hoppers right now, and they choose not to duplicate some (like having BTB both ranked and unranked) because that makes both playlists too small to match people quickly enough. The idea of people proliferating hundreds of very specific custom games into their own hoppers would probably prevent a lot of people from successfully getting matches in those hoppers. If Bungie simply created one hopper for all custom games, you'd just get endless streams of vetoes (and a lot of lousy game types).

Halo 3 already has an effective "custom games broadcasting" system that works well and does not interfere with regular matchmmaking. It's called your friends list.

What? What are you talking about? My connection has ten times that amount of latency without using XBC and I can still get in games. What 30ms limit are you talking about?

It's not Bungie that doesn't care what you want. It's the rest of the playing population. You are completely free to make whatever custom games you want and invite your friends into those games. You aren't ever forced to use matchmaking, ever, if you don't want.

If you don't have a friends list or can't be bothered to build one, then you're dependent on Bungie's matchmaking system to find you a match. Once you've done that, yes, you're subject to the system that Bungie has set up in order to serve the most players, most of the time-- not to cater to the whims of the fringe or to shatter the playerbase into a million tiny fragments all with their own specific favorite gametypes and maps they play to the exclusion of all others.

I'm sure we'll miss you. You sound like a really fun guy.

Hell if I'm reading the entirity of this crap.

The MELEE system is retardedly overpowered. VVV isn't saying that the only skillful way to kill someone is with range weapons. He's saying that the game is far too prone and prodded toward close combat. For two reasons.

First because of the whole melee being OVERFUCKINGPOWERED thing. And because there is WAAAY too many shotguns on maps. Guardian is a lamefest for corner camping. It's hard to actually get into an AIM oriented face off in this game. Anyone that thinks the AR beat-down isn't insane at 6 shots + melee, I pity you, and what it says about your methods.

Look through the records sometime hip-cats. There ARE far too many contests decided by beat-downs. It's a matter of what's effective, hence what's encouraged. That's tantamount to IDIOT-FRIENDLY. Which this game is.

-HZQI

HZQI, thanks for bringing some sense to this H3-fanboy-ridden thread. H1 is, and will always be, a superior game. H2 is a P.O.S. and H3 is really nothing more than that same P.O.S. with a bit more polish. Is H3 a better game than H2? Sure it is. Is H3 a better game than H1? Not on your life.