Jump to content
KurtiZ

Other than nostalgia, why do people like Halo 3?

Recommended Posts

More like 

H1 10/10

H2 10/10

H3 10/10

Reach 1/10

H4 1/10

excuse_me_bird.gif

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I know it's the cool thing to hate on Halo 3 on this forum, but the aiming skill and gun play in Halo 3 is so much more difficult than the Halo 2 counterparts that I think it more than makes up for the spread everyone hates. 

 

Someone else already stated that the term mid range is only relative to the game and sandbox it's in. For what Halo 3 was it was okay.  Would the game be better off with less/no randomized spread? Sure, no one's arguing that. But that alone alongside slightly worse movement acceleration and the lack of button glitches doesn't make Halo 3 a worse game. 

 

The bottom line is that in a shooter the most important and essential part of the game that needs to have a high skill gap is shooting.  Sprint blows, clamber blows. So does thruster and ground pound and charge and ADS.  But if the shooting has an insanely high skill gap it still brings a lot to the table.  H2A is fantastic on paper, in fact on paper it's just H2C with grenade indicators and no button combos. But the guns aiming themselves doesn't help the engine in the least.

 

Button combos and an accurate BR alone isn't enough to merit H2 infinitely superior to Halo3 in my eyes. Say what you want, I love the OG trilogy with all my heart but I've always though H3 took more individual skill than Halo 2.  Chalk it up to the shitty grid aiming if you need, but Halo 3 when it comes down to it has a much higher skill curve when it comes to BR/Snipe gunplay then Halo 2 has with button combos. Just my opinion.

 

This is one of the best posts in support of H3 in this thread so far. You're essentially saying that shooting was more skillful in H3 and since shooting is such a large part of the game that this outweighs other areas that may be lacking. I don't agree with you that a slight advantage in skilled shooting overrides all the other negative aspects, but I am glad someone finally made an argument that centers around gameplay and I can respect the opinion.

 

To respond to this point I would say that while aiming and shooting is certainly a large part of the game I've never found shooting in Halo to be extremely difficult. There's certainly a shooting skill gap in every Halo game, but as a series Halo has never been the pinnacle of shooting skill. It matters even less when you consider the difference in shooting skill between Halo 2 and Halo 3 and when you consider the randomness of the BR in Halo 3.

 

I would say that most of the skill in Halo is in the timing, teamwork, map movement, positioning, and awareness aspects of the game. This is especially true after a certain point of skill is reached. You'll notice a giant skill gap in shooting between a complete noob and a professional, but the difference gets more and more negligible once players get to a certain level. 

 

I can see where you're coming from but I don't think that a small advantage in shooting skill makes up for the drawbacks in melee, grenades, map design, spawn systems, powerups, etc.

 

 

 

Right i will try explain my reasons for preferring halo 3 

 

  1. There is a more broad range of competitive maps. halo 2 had  midship which accounted for the VAST AND I MEAN VAST majority of competitive game-types alongside warlord, lockout and shrine in comparison halo 3 which had midship, pit, narrows, gaurdian, construct (not counting forge maps). Call me crazy but i like a diverse range of maps otherwise the gameplay gets stale quick, its my main issue with the mcc at present.
  2. I think the ability to perfectly four someone over large distances is an absolute piss take, you shouldn't be able to do that, it encourages people to sit back and camp their little arses off, halo 3 spread requires people move up the map more, it also encourages more teamwork as one person cannot just camp p3 on midship and perfectly 4 someone every fucking time - it really is not that difficult in halo 2.
  3. halo 2's main skill gap is an accident, it wasn't meant to be in the game i.e button glitches and sadly these combos no longer even require skill to use with the introduction of scuffs which i am betting my house that some of the halo 2 purists in this forum have and use, which then allows the ability to double shot all day long WOW MAD SKILLS BRO.
  4. Halo 2 sword lunge was absolutely ridiculous also.
  5. Halo 3 had a more diverse range of weapons and maps which made the game fun to play competitively whilst also allowing people to play for fun, which halo 2 imo failed to do, with super jump kids (again another fucking glitch) ruining the fucking game.

 

1. This is debatable, but I personally think that the Halo 2 lineup of Midship, Warlock, Lockout, Beaver Creek, and Sanctuary was stronger than Construct, Guardian, Narrows, The Pit, Heretic, Onslaught, and Amplified. While Forge was probably necessary because of the lack of quality balanced maps in Halo 3 it did little to help the situation. Maps like Onslaught did the job but it had an awful and very simplistic spawn system and nothing in the way of terrain or depth. This is something we could discuss for hours so I'll just leave it at that.

 

2. I've seen this logic used many times. It was pretty heavily debated when people were trying to decide between the BR or the DMR as the default weapon. What you're essentially saying is that the ability to engage and effectively kill people from far away negates the reason to move around the map. This is the same logic used by Bungie back in the early H2 days when they were trying to defend SMG starts. I mean, if logic follows then why not spawn us all with SMGs? After all, since you can't shoot someone from range you have to move to close the gap. Also, like you mentioned, you have to have superior teamwork if everyone has SMGs because everyone needs to shoot the same person. While it's technically correct that having an SMG would force people to move and close the gap, we all know that it's an extremely inelegant solution. I would say that the utility weapon is not what should encourage someone to move. Movement should be encouraged by powerups, power weapons, and proper map design. 

 

3. It's astonishing the number of times I've seen people refer to glitches as the main skill gap in Halo 2. Honestly, this just shows that you aren't very good at Halo 2. The core of the competitive advantages in Halo 2 still came from teamwork. Things like button glitches allowed for occasional great individual plays but most pros used them very selectively (especially dbl shot because it was hard to consistently do). You would see pros double shot if they were down shots and going to lose or if an enemy player was about to get around a corner and they weren't going to be able to finish him off. By good players these glitches were used much more selectively than most people think.

 

4. The sword was very powerful, but it was used as a power weapon. Players made a conscious effort to go and get it which is what a power weapon is supposed to do. It helped add this element to smaller maps where things like the sniper and rockets didn't make as much sense.

 

5. Meh

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

2. I've seen this logic used many times. It was pretty heavily debated when people were trying to decide between the BR or the DMR as the default weapon. What you're essentially saying is that the ability to engage and effectively kill people from far away negates the reason to move around the map. This is the same logic used by Bungie back in the early H2 days when they were trying to defend SMG starts. I mean, if logic follows then why not spawn us all with SMGs? After all, since you can't shoot someone from range you have to move to close the gap. Also, like you mentioned, you have to have superior teamwork if everyone has SMGs because everyone needs to shoot the same person. While it's technically correct that having an SMG would force people to move and close the gap, we all know that it's an extremely inelegant solution. I would say that the utility weapon is not what should encourage someone to move. Movement should be encouraged by powerups, power weapons, and proper map design. 

 

3. It's astonishing the number of times I've seen people refer to glitches as the main skill gap in Halo 2. Honestly, this just shows that you aren't very good at Halo 2. The core of the competitive advantages in Halo 2 still came from teamwork. Things like button glitches allowed for occasional great individual plays but most pros used them very selectively (especially dbl shot because it was hard to consistently do). You would see pros double shot if they were down shots and going to lose or if an enemy player was about to get around a corner and they weren't going to be able to finish him off. By good players these glitches were used much more selectively than most people think.

 

 

(1) when did i say anything about smg starts what i was arguing is the unconstrained distance of the br made for boring gameplay imo as people just sat up p3 and  were able to four people all day long regardless of where they were -IT ISNT DIFFICULT IS IT? I could argue the same about the h1 pistol but that was harder to aim imo. I agree though that movement should be determined by power ups but on maps like middy there is only the sword and possibly a shotty (not 100%) so map movement becomes quite non existent once one team establishes p3 control. (obviously on maps such as lockout or gametypes such as koth this isnt an issue)

(2) Most pro's used them selectively????? ehhh no it was frequently used, and with the introduction of scuffs it has made the situation worse which is what my argument is, the skill depth required to do button glitches CONSISTENTLY like final boss were able to do is gone as the scuf makes it easier, addtionally the scuff is not only available to pro's and sales have been forever increasing as people realize how beneficial they are as your thumb doesn't have to really ever leave the thumbstick during a gun battle.  that is why my opinion has changed as imo the main skill gap has been eroded with this (i am not saying every tom dick and harry owns a scuff but i am saying the more you move up the ranks the more likely they are to own one) 

 

Sorry have to include this edit:

 

Finally i will end by disputing the following claim "the core competitive advantages came from teamwork" Teamwork has always been a staple of halo, it is across all the halo's games even 4 in fact it is a stable in any competitive multi-player game (i defy you to name one example where teamwork is not critical to success) so the fact you arguing that the main competitive advantage of halo 2 was teamwork is irrelevant as quite frankly i expected that to be taken for granted, but what separated good players from great players in halo 2 apart from the blatantly obvious attributes of teamwork, positioning, power weapon control and communication was the ability to consistently execute button glitches such as bxr and double shot, there really is no argument against it, in terms of winning one on one battles and going clutch this was the key component of all the greats and now that skill gap is eroding so it really isn't a skill gap anymore but rather an investment gap, therefore halo 2 imo and you may disagree with this required less teamwork than h3 as it allowed for greater opportunities of individual plays t be made

Share this post


Link to post

I've had more fun playing Halo 3 MP than i have the other two. That doesn't mean it's better, but if given a choice, it's the one I'd rather play. 

Share this post


Link to post

Forge creations kept me from getting bored of Halo, really. When I went a few years more 'casually involved' I screwed around in a gimmick map on Reach, or played custom invasions with highly interactive maps. Same goes with Halo 3, of course.

Share this post


Link to post

Additionally i would like to apologize to the op @@KurtiZ for criticizing his possible motives for creating this thread, i automatically assumed it was lets knock h3 day and prove h2 superiority (hence why i called it condescending) but if the intention was simply to see why people prefer halo 3 then i was perhaps overly assertive in my views, anyway i have given my views on why I PERSONALLY PREFERRED h3 - and no it was not because i started with it, i am in fact 24, so started with h1 and became obsessed like so many of us here - wasn't any good at it as at 11 i didn't understand any of the complexities but i started with it.

 

You may not agree with me and that's fine but those are my opinions

Share this post


Link to post

I like it because it was the last great Halo game. It can't hold a candle to halo 2, but it was the last time I thoroughly enjoyed playing and watching halo.  

Share this post


Link to post

I always felt H3 took way more team work because of the different hit detection team shooting became way more important. Also what made H3 to me was the maps. I felt bungie really hit their stride with H3 with the artistic direction and style of the game that in my mind still rivals todays halo graphics. 

 

Now although I have been mostly a 4v4 player I also really enjoy BTB with a team of 8 guys I have played with for years. And in H3 I felt BTB was the most balanced with the biggest skill gap for teams. The BR wasn't effective at super long range that way it was in every other game which was in fact a positive thing for BTB as it turned the map into 3-4 smaller "arenas" you had to fight over. And team shooting players who were outside of an individuals BR range became possible with 4 people all focussing on one player across the map.

 

I really wish there was a dedicated H3 BTB playlist for us.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I enjoy h3 because it was the first Halo game I owned. I never had an XBox and first graced the series on the 360, so I was an H3 kid. I played H2 on friends consoles back in the day and I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I can't actually kill as well as I can in H3. So I'm better at H3 than H2, so I enjoy it more.

 

However, I will always pick CE when given the opportunity. I feel there is less bullshit to deal with. If I die, I know it's probably because I was out-played. Not because someone had a power drain or regen in their back pocket. Also knowing that the better person will win makes me always push the envelope in CE whereas I'm hesitant in H3. That makes CE more fun for me and why I think I hated H5 so much during the beta.

Share this post


Link to post

(1) when did i say anything about smg starts what i was arguing is the unconstrained distance of the br made for boring gameplay imo as people just sat up p3 and  were able to four people all day long regardless of where they were -IT ISNT DIFFICULT IS IT? I could argue the same about the h1 pistol but that was harder to aim imo. I agree though that movement should be determined by power ups but on maps like middy there is only the sword and possibly a shotty (not 100%) so map movement becomes quite non existent once one team establishes p3 control. (obviously on maps such as lockout or gametypes such as koth this isnt an issue)

(2) Most pro's used them selectively????? ehhh no it was frequently used, and with the introduction of scuffs it has made the situation worse which is what my argument is, the skill depth required to do button glitches CONSISTENTLY like final boss were able to do is gone as the scuf makes it easier, addtionally the scuff is not only available to pro's and sales have been forever increasing as people realize how beneficial they are as your thumb doesn't have to really ever leave the thumbstick during a gun battle.  that is why my opinion has changed as imo the main skill gap has been eroded with this (i am not saying every tom dick and harry owns a scuff but i am saying the more you move up the ranks the more likely they are to own one) 

 

Sorry have to include this edit:

 

Finally i will end by disputing the following claim "the core competitive advantages came from teamwork" Teamwork has always been a staple of halo, it is across all the halo's games even 4 in fact it is a stable in any competitive multi-player game (i defy you to name one example where teamwork is not critical to success) so the fact you arguing that the main competitive advantage of halo 2 was teamwork is irrelevant as quite frankly i expected that to be taken for granted, but what separated good players from great players in halo 2 apart from the blatantly obvious attributes of teamwork, positioning, power weapon control and communication was the ability to consistently execute button glitches such as bxr and double shot, there really is no argument against it, in terms of winning one on one battles and going clutch this was the key component of all the greats and now that skill gap is eroding so it really isn't a skill gap anymore but rather an investment gap, therefore halo 2 imo and you may disagree with this required less teamwork than h3 as it allowed for greater opportunities of individual plays t be made

 

1. I know you didn't say anything about SMG starts. I was using that as an example to show the flaw in your logic. You are making an argument for promoting map movement by decreasing effective weapon range. If that logic follows then we can further increase the need to move by further decreasing the weapon range. That is to say, spawning with an SMG, a shotgun, a plasma rifle, or any other short range weapon. The reason I'm using this as an example is because it should become extremely clear why decreasing weapon range isn't a good solution for increasing map movement.

 

2. Below is the 2007 National Championship. This is basically the pinnacle of Halo 2 competition before Halo 3 started up. I have no idea how you can watch this and conclude that the majority of the skill in the game is derived from button glitches (imagine that, they are rarely used). You did say, "Halo 2s main skill gap is an accident, it wasn't meant to be in the game ie button glitches."

 

I won't argue that a scuf doesn't hurt the experience of the game, but that's kinda beside the point isn't it? That has nothing to do with Halo 2 itself. Nobody would be allowed to play with one at a tournament. You wouldn't argue that Street Fighter is less competitive because some controllers break the experience would you?

 

Share this post


Link to post

Halo 3 was a great halo game. In terms of longevity it lasted well into 3 years and had a vibrant competitive scene. The spartan and map designs were aesthecially pleasing, especially in comparison to 343's iterations. Minus the br spread, the game was a great transition from halo 2 and added many new features without changing the game's core dynamics.

Share this post


Link to post

Big team battle in Halo 3 was the tits. I only wish more of the maps had choppers; the warthog/chopper dynamic in H3 >>>>>> the warthog/ghost dynamic in every other game.

Share this post


Link to post

Au contraire! I am . . . or, at least, I will. I fail to see how the addition of randomness (both intentionally via spread and unintentionally via latency to the host affecting the amount of lead) makes the gun have a higher skill gap. Higher host gap, sure. Higher luck gap, yeppers. But skill gap?

 

If adding random factors to bullet travel such that with identically aimed guns you could have a 4-shot one time and a 6-shot next time adds a skill gap, then is not the AR the most skilled weapon of all? After all, it has even more randomness with respect to where bullets go. If making the BR accuracy shit-poor even at half the red reticule range is good, then making it fucking awful all the time must be awesome. So awesome that you give it a new name. AR. Awesome Rifle.

 

Random =/= skill.

 

Now when it comes to the aim assist reduction, yes. I will agree that the reduction in aim assist for H3 created a higher skill gap for players to put the reticle on target. That's a universal characteristic for all the weapons, not something specific to the BR.

 

So I would conclude:

 

Aiming skill gap: H3 > H2

BR mechanics skill gap: H2 > H3

 

What would have been awesome is the H3 aiming + H2 BR.

"Au contraire! *proceeds to state the same thing I did except in more words*"

 

Cool rebuttal bro? We agree with each other lol. Did you even read the rest of my post, or quote that sentence and knee-jerk react to it?

 

Where did I say randomness = skill gap? I'm saying the H3 br is harder to aim so a really good player will usually beat a decent player in a duel DESPITE randomness, vs halo 2 where individual aiming skill is nearly non existent and 99% of the time is about who saw the other person first or teamshot.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

therefore halo 2 imo and you may disagree with this required less teamwork than h3 as it allowed for greater opportunities of individual plays t be made

I agree entirely with that.  It's one of the reasons I prefer H2.

Share this post


Link to post

drastic inconsistency time and again

 

 

This is my whole argument.

 

It's no where near as bad as you want to say it is.

 

Go back to my first post and read it.

 

Your whole argument stems from your belief that this weapon can only kill an enemy if you are "lucky" enough to have the spread fall correctly.  At that all I can do is laugh.

 

If it seems like I'm responding to less and less, it's because this is the basis of your entire argument.  You hate this BR because you incorrectly believe that it's randomness is game breaking.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I always felt H3 took way more team work because of the different hit detection team shooting became way more important

 

So teamwork = teamshooting

 

that just hurt my brain a little

Share this post


Link to post

This is my whole argument.

 

It's no where near as bad as you want to say it is.

 

Go back to my first post and read it.

 

Your whole argument stems from your belief that this weapon can only kill an enemy if you are "lucky" enough to have the spread fall correctly. At that all I can do is laugh.

 

If it seems like I'm responding to less and less, it's because this is the basis of your entire argument. You hate this BR because you incorrectly believe that it's randomness is game breaking.

Again, I point to having done 10 tests at 33M and having a 60/40 split of 5 vs 6 shots.

 

It can't even stay consistent at under 35M. It varies more as distance increases.

 

The fact that you gloss over that time and again as minimal leaves me with one conclusion: you should get your head checked. I guess if everyone just lowered their standards to "yeah that's about right" like you do then H3 would be the most popular in the series.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

"Au contraire! *proceeds to state the same thing I did except in more words*"

 

Cool rebuttal bro? We agree with each other lol. Did you even read the rest of my post, or quote that sentence and knee-jerk react to it?

 

Where did I say randomness = skill gap? I'm saying the H3 br is harder to aim so a really good player will usually beat a decent player in a duel DESPITE randomness, vs halo 2 where individual aiming skill is nearly non existent and 99% of the time is about who saw the other person first or teamshot.

Do u even read bro?

 

Saying that the H3 BR has a higher skill gap means that the outcome is more influenced by skill.  The outcome of the H3 BR - using your own words above - is less influenced by skill.  Also, I've said before that my biggest issue with the H3 BR was the ballistic rounds.  Doesn't matter how good you are at aiming if your shots evaporate.

 

And if aiming difficulty were the only thing that needed to be considered, why don't you list CE as the title requiring the least skill?  CE's aim assist puts the rest of the titles to shame.  Aiming is easiest in CE.  What CE lacked was H3's level of bullet magnetism:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDnaVh5rTa4

 

Your assumption about H2 play is totally off-base and not at all what I said.  99% of H2 BR battles are not decided by first-come-first-shoot or teamshooting . . . teamshooting became a much larger part of the game in H3 because of the lesser effectiveness of the BR.  Strafing was a thing in H2, was it not?  Or is everyone except you having a mass hallucination about how effective H2 strafes were (especially when comparing to Reach/H4)?

 

If you haven't figured it out by now, just saying it was "harder" to aim in H3 than H2 is not the whole story, is it?  And that's without mentioning that aiming is not a BR characteristic . . . but spread and ballistic rounds areHere's the TL/DR:  The combination of aim assist, bullet magnetism, and BR characteristics in H2 generated a larger skill gap than the combination of those elements in H3.

 

Yeah.  I said exactly the same thing as you.

Share this post


Link to post

For me, I just can't have fun anymore unless shooting the gun itself is hard. It doesn't feel satisfying to four someone in 2. I want to be able to go down shots on purpose and outshoot people I know I'm better than. Once the shooting feels right, then I can have fun with he rest of the game.

 

Edit: I can't believe how many of you actually think the spread on the h3 br affects who wins matches. I'd get a right laugh watching any of you play h3 I reckon.

 

*gets out br'd* "oh my god the spread got me killed again!"

 

I'm sorry but if you honestly think that, you're probably just not very good with 3s br.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Again, I point to having done 10 tests at 33M and having a 60/40 split of 5 vs 6 shots.

 

It can't even stay consistent at under 35M. It varies more as distance increases.

 

The fact that you gloss over that time and again as minimal leaves me with one conclusion: you should get your head checked. I guess if everyone just lowered their standards to "yeah that's about right" like you do then H3 would be the most popular in the series.

 

 

Yes, let's let this debate turn into personal attacks, because you're so frustrated that I won't see it your way, even after telling you this.  

 

Thumbs up

Share this post


Link to post

H3 is a good game especially on LAN. the main issues i had with H3 were the terrible hit detection and the constant lag. I enjoyed the way the weapons worked (br had to lead shots, snipe was difficult, things were balanced for the most part.) the maps were actually pretty good, and overall i had a good time. Granted I prefer H1 H2 more, but Halo 3 is in no was a bad game.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Again, I point to having done 10 tests at 33M and having a 60/40 split of 5 vs 6 shots.

 

It can't even stay consistent at under 35M. It varies more as distance increases.

 

The fact that you gloss over that time and again as minimal leaves me with one conclusion: you should get your head checked. I guess if everyone just lowered their standards to "yeah that's about right" like you do then H3 would be the most popular in the series.

 

 

I never said it doesn't have a spread, all I said was the spread isn't as bad as you claim it is.

 

It doesn't cause any deaths.

Share this post


Link to post

If it seems like I'm responding to less and less, it's because this is the basis of your entire argument.  You hate this BR because you incorrectly believe that it's randomness is game breaking.

Not exactly.  He's just been saying that it's inferior to H2 because it does affect game outcomes, which is why he would prefer H2 over H3.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.