Halo 3 Beta Impressions

Yesterday in New York City Microsoft held an invite-only preview of the Halo 3 Beta, and passed out early Beta keys to a group of game journalists. The result is a barrage of coverage about this most-anticipated title. Notable features beyond basic previews include Dan Hsu's take on the game, Dean Takahashi's 'I got my butt kicked' perspective, the San Jose Merc's interview with Bungie Community Lead Brian Jarrad, CVG's hosting of the official Beta Movie, and Joystiq's interview with Frank O'Connor, Bungie's writing lead. From the 1up preview: "It's unmistakably Halo gameplay, despite the rearranged controls (which feel natural after 10 minutes), and all of the additions fit perfectly into the multiplayer universe we've come to love. The interface has been overhauled and is even easier to use, and you now have such niceties as being able to change your control layout at any point on any screen. While the visuals are rich and beautiful, it's the audio that's really impressed us so far. The rumbling throttle of unleashing dual SMGs makes them feel incredibly powerful, and the Spartan Laser tearing past your head is as scary as you'd imagine. Audio cues are more important than ever, and the better your sound system the more next-gen this will feel." More coverage below.

O RLY?

I hope the story is damn great, because the visuals don't look all that interesting, and under a barrage of some truly great titles coming to the PC it'll be tough.

Re:O RLY?

The Halo 3 beta will be running with mostly Halo 2 assets, at least at first. Saves download bandwidth.
I sure hope they release some larger textures to at least test the engine with later, though.

Re:O RLY?

Here are two screenshots, one from Halo 2, one from Halo 3:
http://media.teamxbox.com/games/ss/1353/1178912776 .jpg [teamxbox.com]
http://media.teamxbox.com/games/ss/472/1085785669. jpg [teamxbox.com]

It certainly looks like they've improved the graphics since H2.
More environmental detail, less blocky characters, more vibrant colours.

So I guess the complainers must have seen an overcompressed YouTube
variant only.

Chair Weapons available in Halo3

Halo3 three will include a variety of "Chair Weapons":
* A Wooden Chair in which you can break and stab and lacerate people
* A Ikea Chair in which the recipient simply throws the left over peices at any attacker
* An Executive Leather Chair in which the attacker simply places their opponent in the chair and spins it, until the opponent passes out.
* And the classic "Operator Chair" which is simply picked up and thrown.

Yes, audio will be important;

"Audio cues are more important than ever, and the better your sound system the more next-gen this will feel."

Now, instead of hearing 12 year olds scream in joy when they frag me, I will here their shrill wails in 5.1
Oh joyous day.

Re:Yes, audio will be important;

I'm not sure how many people actually hook things up properly, as even the original xbox had 5.1 for most of its games. Player voices in Halo2 come from the appropriate speaker positions, and it does give you a bit of an advantage over someone only playing through their TV speakers. I'm assuming their adding better 'footfall' sounds, and other environmentals to help out a bit.

Never played Halo..

But I have played Gears of War. Quite a bit, it's almost my favorite game now. How does Halo compare to Gears?

WMV......lame.....

any one have a ogg mpg or avi for us?

Yea yea I know you've heard it before

Audio cues are more important than ever, and the better your sound system the more next-gen this will feel.

That's kinda why I'm particular to PC gaming. A good pair of headphones is all you need to hear those 'audio cues' and lacking that, anything above 2 speakers is gravy since most games ship with decent sound engines for realistic 3d sound.

Joypad VS Mouse+keyboard: braindead battle

Man I cannot understand the long time FPS players. Most people who complain about joypad have been using mouse and keyboard for ages... they do not even notice they are used to play with those. Of course it's easier with your mouse and keyboard, you've been playing with this duo for ages. I mean, I've been playing Rocket Arena for years, of course I handle my mouse and keyboard better than this Xbox 360 joypad I've had for 3 months. I was playing like shit when I began playing FPS on PC. Now I am far better. A friend of mine was used to play FPS on PS2 for months and told me he could not think of using a mouse and a keyboard to play these... The point is that the joypad is not better or worse than your pc set, you just become accustomed to one or the other. I am not used to the 360 pads but these are damn great and precise. I've played Doom 3, Lost Planet and I come to like this setup. So come on, let's end this pointless battle. The only advantage that may have the mouse is that it can be used more often than a gamepad, for other uses, so that you can perhaps have lenghtier training.

Hey Bungie People

Do you ever wish you'd been bought by Apple instead?

Serious question.

I don't get it...

...a beta preview? What's next? This just in, Bungie had an idea, preview it next week...

As far as the actual content goes, I didn't notice anything huge. New levels, a new gun or two, and a few new vehicles(it really bugs me that the little 4-wheeler thing looks so much like a shrunk warthog too) but the graphics didn't really look all that much better.

Console vs PC

They each have their benefits. Saying either side is the best is just a pointless debate. Having played EXTENSIVELY on both setups I feel I'm qualified to enlighten you on 4 pros and cons of each. Since I'm reading mostly PC gamer hate I'll start with PCs so that they can see why people play console games it isn't arcane at all.

PC Gaming:

Pros
1. A Mouse makes a very intuitive and sensitive device to aim with, there are a variety of them to use so you can pick the one that works the best for you. You use it while your using the computer so you become very accustom to it.
2. A Keyboard offers a virtually limitless medium for configuration. Keyboards come in different shapes and sizes and even can be purchased specifically designed for the game your using.
3. The graphics are unparralleled. The latest greatest hardware always shows up in PCs first and the graphics truely show that.
4. PCs are used for far more then just games so it is easier to convince your spouse, parent, or self to buy.

Cons
1. All PCs are not created equal. In competitive and even advanced gaming it is clear that there is always an edge to the gamer with the best hardware. Even to build your own really good PC, not the best, your talking a $2000 a price of entry FAR higher then console gaming. While this is not necessarily a consideration for casual gamers it is frustrating to know that your computer may be what is holding you back.
2. The keyboard's single greatest strengh, configurability, is also its greatest weakness. Learning to play on a standard keyboard is not pretty for a new gamer. The buttons you press have little to no corelation between the action the game takes and learning which buttons do what can be very frustrating. The buttons are often not oriented in an easy to press intuitive manner and require some skill to master and time to learn. Buying a keyboard specifically designed for gaming can make learning easier and button placement more intuitive, but setup on those controllers, depending on game, can sometimes take hours.
3. Graphics are designed to be bleading edge in most games; in order to stay up with the graphics, you need to upgrade hardware at least every 2 years, depending on how much you spend on it. PC games made the graphics card market what it is and the games are usually designed around the latest greatest with the ability to play pretty well on moderate hardware. PC gaming can be VERY expensive. Low frame rates in a game can kill the experience completely.
4. PCs are used for other things and this con sometimes lead to annoyances for gaming. Other people in the house might need to use the computer, you might get viruses or other things that slow it down, sometimes applications that are running in the background can have a dramatic effect on performance, and because the platform is open PC games are a much more attractive market for cheaters.

Console Gaming

Pros
1. Entry cost is relatively low when compared to PCs and you don't have to upgrade for usually 5 years.
2. Everyone plays on the same hardware. Every console is pretty much the same, making for a far more level playing field. The software was designed for the hardware. Because every console is the same and every controller is the same, games are designed ground up to maximize that piece of hardware and gameplay is designed to be intuitive for the controller.
3. Multiple people can play on the same piece of hardware, making it a far more social gaming device. It is much better to see the expression on your friends face when he gets taken out then to hear about it over voice communication.
4. The community the hardware the online experience is all closed. Typically leading to a much more secure gaming environment.

Cons
1. The hardware isn't as good as PCs can be. You are limited to the hardware the console company can afford to put in there rather then what you can afford to buy. You don't get the cutting edge graphics that you do on PCs and until recently the

Gamespot review: 5/10

While the multiplayer in this multiplayer beta test exhibits typical Halo levels of excellence, the single player was significantly lacking. The single player consists of no AI, no objectives, and is played on the same maps as the multiplayer levels. While some fun can be had running around in circles, we find it hard to justify the purchase price compared to games that offer hours of interaction and direction.

Halo 3 Multiplayer Beta Test:
Graphics: 9
Halo isn't Gears of War; Get over it. It still looks great.

Sound: 10
Heartstopping.

Multiplayer: 10
It's Halo.

Singleplayer: 2
Strangely neglected.

Overall 5/10
Excellent online play, but most gamers will have a hard time finding value in the single player experience.

"the rumbling throttle..."?

... I think that word does not mean what you think it means....

"Gets intense when there's on left..."

One thing that worries me about the comments on the Halo 3 beta are that the game modes "Land Grab" and "Territories" "Gets intense when time's running out, and only one or two markers are left to defend/capture." or "Very fun when it's tied 2-2 and everyone's going after the last one!"

What about the rest of those matches? Why can't it be "very fun" and "intense" the whole match? I'm thinking of games like Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory where all of the action is always focused, so it's almost always "very fun" and "intense".

I guess I'm just biased towards focused objective-play vs. splitting everyone one up around the map until the very end. Especially when there are only 4 players per team, you really need them all focused in one place.

I mean, it almost makes sense on a 64-player Battlefield server to split the players up among 8 control points, but you still have 4v4 action at each point. If you have multiple control points but only 8 players, things will of course be sparse until the end.

On XXXX-Killers...

Why is it that game developers feel the need to call their games a killer of some kind? Ironically, I've only heard this expression used in conjunction with the FPS genre. As far as I can tell, no better game has ever truly killed the great game that came in line before it...and more often than not those games that are truly great are fondly remembered years down the line--for me, nothing will ever replace the experience of playing Team Fortress for the original quake, in its pixelated and later GLQuake glory :P

Better than Gears of War?

In my opinion Gears of War is going to prove a tough game to crack, with Gears of War 2 being made it's going to mean Halo 3 has to be pretty much perfect to better it. Still, it does mean one thing the Xbox 360 has some of the best games around exclusive to its gamers :-)

east coast models [eastcoastmodels.co.uk]

Re:Still missing one thing.

You know, I'm really sick of this particular criticism of console FPS games. The game was designed around a controller. It plays perfectly fine with it. Everyone else playing is using the same input device, there is no need for a keyboard / mouse. Remember the first time you ever used a keyboard / mouse to play an FPS? I'll bet it didn't seem intuitive at all, but with practice you got used to it, and then, proficient with it. Console FPS' are the same way now. Once you've sat down and played a while you don't even think about it. Lately I've been playing a lot of FPS titles on my 360 (Battlefield 2: MC, Call of Duty 2 / 3, Halo 2) and I don't even notice the controller.

PC gamers really, really need to stop this particular line of eliteism. A gamer is a gamer whether or not he is playing HL2 on a PC or Bioshock on his Xbox 360.

Re:Still missing one thing.

You know I agree with some of what you're saying. I was originally going to post something similar but figured the GP would get modded flamebait (which he should have been modded). But since you opened the discussion...

I'm a gamer that does both PC and console. I really hate this stupid debate. PC gamers should just stfu and play with their mouse and keyboard and console players should do the same and play with their thumb sticks. Halo was designed for the console* and so were the controls. However, to say both control schemes are equal is wrong. I know I'm much better with a mouse and keyboard and I know why. Since you can't exactly pick up the thumb stick and put it back in the middle when it goes over the edge its input is considerably different than a mouse. When you move a thumb stick to the far right your character spins around until you let go and the stick auto-centers itself. If you put your mouse on the right edge of your mouse pad then you look to the right a bit and that's that. You know how PC games usually have a key binding to turn left and right (yaw)? Well imagine if they added two more to look up and down (pitch). This is the control scheme that a console controller achieves**. Now notice how few PC gamers use these key bindings.

What I seem to notice on console*** is that people put their crosshair in a particular place and then use their left thumb stick to align the shot with the enemy player and only make minor adjustments with their right thumb stick. On PC I most certainly wouldn't do this. When it comes to close quarter combat it gets a lot more difficult to control as the accuracy just isn't there. As I said earlier I doubt any PC gamer would use four separate keys to control pitch and yaw. I also notice that most PC gamers tend to be at least casual console players while the reverse usually isn't true. I'd go deeper into the subject but I think you get the point.

You're free to disagree of course but that's how I see it. Both control schemes have pros and cons. For instance I hate picking my mouse up or what usually happens is it runs into my keyboard or computer case since my desk is small. That means I miss a kill or die or both. I also don't like playing ROMs on the PC that much, the controller was always better for those games. The playing field is not even and both PC and console gamers just need to accept that.

* Technically it was designed for the PC and Mac but I guess that's a bit too technical.
** Almost achieves anyway. Console controllers have to have active resistance on the thumb sticks so they auto-center which takes more getting used to.
*** I don't know any Halo gods so my observation may be wrong in the higher tiers of Halo gameplay.

Do we have to listen to this again?

No, we really, really do NOT need to stop explaining why it's impossible to play an FPS with a console controller.

Well that's just flat out wrong. This story is about people playing Halo. They were doing it with console controllers. Halo is an FPS. There for, playing an FPS on a controller is clearly possible. You might think a keyboard and mouse is better, that hardly means that using a controller is impossible.

Now lots of people play FPSs on consoles, and they seem to be enjoying themselves, so I don't think theres anything wrong with using a controller. I do think using a keyboard and mouse is better, if by better we mean provides faster response times. In any multiplayer game, where half the players were using K/M and half controllers, the K/M guys would win every time, all other things being equal.

On the other hand, I think controllers have some advantages over K/M. My consoles are all in my living room, and I play games sitting on my couch. I don't have a desk in front of my TV, so there's nowhere to put a K/M. Try balancing a keyboard on your lap and running you mouse on the cushion next to you. Comfortable? Thought not. I also prefer a thumbstick to WASD.

But really, why does it matter? As the OP said, why do we have to keep having this stupid argument? You like the K/M, dislike the controller. OP likes controllers. I'm happy with either. Why does each side feel the need to not only say "I like x" but to also insist "because y is inferior"? I feel like I'm back in the playground arguing about C64s and Spectrums.

Which you obviously do not know, because *you* *are* *not* *a* *gamer*. Deal with it.

AH, so you are the final arbiter of who is and isn't a gamer? Wow. Am I a gamer? I've been playing video games for twenty years, but I like some console FPSs, so I might fail your test. Perhaps you mean he isn't a PC gamer? Are PC gamers the one true gamer clan, to whom all others are inferior? Are those who are unwilling or unable to drop stupid amounts of cash on new graphics cards and processors supposed to keep quiet and never offer an opinion? Should they just kneel in supplication and reverence before their PC gaming overlords?

if you dislike us so much, as you say, then why the hell do you strive to be just like us?

I'm not even sure what this means? Where exactly did he say he was trying to be like you?

Oh, just FYI, the first time I played Doom, I used a joypad (yes PAD! not even a joystick), because I hated the keyboard and mouse so much. It was a lot easier back then, since there was no looking up or down. I didn't start using the K/M till quake came out.

Depends

It is a beta after all. If you criticize things to try to make it better you will never be banned. If you bash and criticize to troll the other players then I would hope pretty quick.

If you play Halo and the only thing you can say the whole time is "this game sucks" then why play? There are so many other great games why waste your time?

Swi

Re:Low Quality Graphics

The textures are low quality right now to save on download bandwidth for the beta stage.
I guess emphasis of this beta is eliminate game play bugs and any irritants not stressing the graphics subsystem.
The final game is supposed to be of much higher quality.

Re:What's the big deal?

It's just the new Goldeneye. As with the old one, it sold a lot on consoles and PC users didn't understand. A lot of people just don't play PC games and aren't exposed to FPSes, so when one comes along on consoles it's interesting. Look at PCs, circa 1993-95 they were coming out the wazoo and everything was exciting. People actually cared about games like Ken's Labyrinth. Same thing here except in the context of consoles. Still, hopefully the consoles will still have some original games and it won't be all 99% FPS/RTS/CRPG like on PC... which, incidentally, is why consoles are seeing a surge in popularity and PC gaming is declining nowadays.

Re:Microsoft Fails To Create A Resistance Killer

Even with the facts behind you, you do not account for the "Frat Boy" market. Halo 3 will be a smash hit on name recognition alone.

Re:What's the big deal?

Oh.

Looks like somebody's got the red ring.

Why would MS need to create a Resistance killer...

...When Epic already did it for them?

Re:Low Quality Graphics

The betas are to test the gameplay (particularly wrt to multiplayer, new weapons). I would be extremely surprised if the released game doesn't look significantly different than the betas. It makes sense to keep the 'wow' factor as secret as possible until the release. Otherwise game reviewers will won't have much new to praise before release.

Re:What's the big deal?

It's not really a big deal, it's just been marketed as such in North America when in reality it's just another generic FPS on a system that is flooded with shooters and not much else.

Re:Low Quality Graphics

TFC had a grenade button years before halo and I doubt that was even the first

TFC? Ha! The original TeamFortress (the Quake mod, not the Half-Life mod) had two buttons for grenades, as each class had two grenade types. Kids these days, thinking TFC was the origin of TeamFortress. The 'C' stands for "Classic" for a reason, you know.

Call of Duty and Iron Grip are two games I can think of just off the top of my head that use the quick melee attack like halo and I am sure there were many before those

Call of Duty (2003) was two years after Halo 1 (2001). I have no idea what Iron Grip [gamefaqs.com] is. As best I can tell, it's a mod for Half-Life 2 which automatically puts it after the launch of Halo 1. Other games had melee (Quake, Doom, Half-Life), but you had to switch weapons rather than just hit a button to attack.

I am not sure the many check points and lack of a user save can be counted as a positive but many console and computer games have used the checkpoint style system since the start of time..

True, but most older games tended towards checkpoints too far apart, and requiring user intervention to actually save (if you aren't paying attention, tough crap. It's another two hours to the next save point). Halo made it automatic.

I'm surprised the original poster didn't point out probably the biggest innovation in Halo 1 that has been copied over and over since -- regenerating shields. Without your shields, 1-2 shots will kill you, so you shields are essentially the same thing as health in Doom, Quake, Half-Life, etc. The difference is that rather than having to hunt around for pickups to regenerate, you just have to hide. Totally changes the dynamic for multiplayer games, because it forces you into tactical situations. Previously, you'd think, "I'm low on health and there's no way I'll find enough to keep me alive for a few more kills. Therefore, I'll just rush the next guy I see in order to do some damage before I'm taken out." Halo changed that to, "Do I hide and regen my armor, or do I attack and prevent my enemy from regenerating his armor?"

Re:What's the big deal?

The deal with Halo is that playing Halo with 4 friends is pretty easy (all you need are 4 controllers), and it's a lot easier to have a 16-person Halo party than to have a 16-person LAN party. While $PC_FPS_OF_CHOICE has better graphics and possibly better controls (people can fight K/M vs. controller all day if they want), it's so much more fun to blast the guy sitting next to you than a guy over the network.

The thing that a lot of hardcore gamers don't realize is that casual gamers like "party games". I can play Halo with my friend/apartmentmate/whoever, but I can't play Doom or Counterstrike with them right next to me.

Re:The halo games are some of the best FPSs ever m

I'm one of the haters who actually sat down and wanted Halo to be great and was let down. LIke you, I'm a PC Gamer. I was excited about Halo when I saw the E3 2000 video when it was suppose to be a 3rd person shooter for the PC that was like Tribes on crack. I camped out for my Xbox and got my copy of Halo. My friend and I played through the co op and after wards we gave game our own special title:

Halo: Repetition Evolved

The game just let me down on soooooo many levels. Absolutely nothing about it lived up to what I wanted. What I played before that: Goldeneye, Time Splitters, Tribes 2, Quake 2 DM/CTF, Quake 3 Rocket Arena, UT2004 DM/CTF, Rainbow 6 series (Raven Shield being the favorite). I felt like it tried to take the best of other games(mainly Tribes) and just failed at it as far as multiplayer was concerned. Single player well yea, that just sucked for me. :( Best console fps for me still is Goleneye.

Re:Microsoft Fails To Create A Resistance Killer

yeah it's a shame Bungie couldn't come up with a Resistance killer. Oh wait, if Halo 3 flops (half the sales of original Halo) it will still have sold twice as many copies as Resistance.

Oh sorry, Anonymous Sony Fanboy Coward, I didn't meant to ruin your dreams of Sony world domination. I'm sure Bungie is going to run back to the drawing board after you told them how Halo is going to fail as a Resistance killer. Oh wait, wasn't Resistance supposed to be a Halo killer? Or is that for Killzone?

Re:Microsoft Fails To Create A Resistance Killer

You know, the 'ZOMG 40 peoiple no lag KEKEKE" arguement just doesn't matter to me. I much prefer 4 vs 4 (or 3 vs 3 vs 3 vs 3) fights instead of Big Team Battles in Halo. Why? I have 2-3 friends in the room with me.

You could have the best squad in the world, and it won't matter if the other 16 guys on your side are idiots.

Re:What's the big deal?

Halo did to FPS what WoW did to MMO's. It took what everyone else did, polished it, simplified it, and brought it to the masses.

Re:What's expected?

I have a feeling the game replays on multiplayer matches will be the 'killer app' of Halo 3. Now those "Did you see that?" moments will be followed up with "Watch this!"