Halo 3 Brute video
With the Covenant Elite saying goodbye as the major enemy in the Halo series, Bungie had to replace them with someone. To replace them, Bungie gives us the Brutes. Their documentary talks about the evolution of the Brutes from the stupid, mindless killing machines of Halo 2 to the more sophisticated enemy worthy of replacing the Elites. The video shows some nice, new in-game footage (which I'm sure is what most people care about the most) that should leave Halo fans wanting more. For those with an Xbox 360, you can get the 720p version from the Xbox Live Marketplace. Enjoy!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
AKIHABARA BLUES MAGAZINE @ Dec 20th 2006 9:40AM
Is it on the youtube or something?
Jamie Skella @ Dec 20th 2006 9:51AM
I had little faith in Halo 3 before this, and now that hope is entirely demolished. I didn't like the first two, and this seems like more of the same crap.
Bring back the Halo they were developing for the Mac and PC all those years ago, before Microsoft bought Bungie. Now that sh*t was cool!
jimbo @ Dec 20th 2006 9:51AM
on xbox live marketplace
jimbo @ Dec 20th 2006 9:56AM
you are stupid halo will be awsome
jay @ Dec 20th 2006 9:56AM
looks good,can't wait to play
RogueJedi86 @ Dec 20th 2006 9:57AM
The Brute workings sounds interesting, though I am still disappointed that they won't at least be a player race in multiplayer.
And was it just me, or the did Graphics looks a bit more like a Halo 2.5? It certainly didn't look "Gears" good.
DanMacMan @ Dec 20th 2006 9:59AM
God I hope we have seen the last of the Flood. I absolutely hate that part of the Halo series.
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 10:03AM
Ummm Bungie has already come out and say they are not aiming for Gears Graphics because halo was never about the immense detail and if they did it wouldn't feel like halo as much anymore...
Anonymous @ Dec 20th 2006 10:08AM
it's at xboxyde:
http://www.xboxyde.com/news_3900_en.html
RogueJedi86 @ Dec 20th 2006 10:11AM
Oh yeah and @#1, click the Read at the bottom of the article to read it. I guess some people didn't see it because there's no Joystiq thumbnail and link-in-the-paragraph like always.
The Intangible Fact @ Dec 20th 2006 10:12AM
"not aiming for Gears Graphics because halo was never about the immense detail and if they did it wouldn't feel like halo as much anymore..."
This is stupid shit! If your not gonna create GOW type graphics then put halo 3 back on reg xbox assholes.
LMAO @ Dec 20th 2006 10:20AM
I'm sure it will still sell 2+ million copies.
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 10:22AM
They didn't say it wouldn't be pretty but it wouldn't be as detailed as Gears... Its about the experience anyway... It'll still look much better than the old halo and it will still be amazing it just won't be like gears.
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 10:29AM
Keep in mind they arn't even in "Beta" yet so it isn't going to be refined graphics at the present moment.
biohazard13 @ Dec 20th 2006 10:31AM
in re. to all comments about 'poor' graphics
quoted from:
http://www.bungie.net/News/TopStory.aspx?cid=9340
"· There are no finished graphics in the documentary, and everything you see is a work in progress. "
and
"You’ll see what amounts in a way to the first glimpse at Campaign content, but don’t get too excited. Everything you see here is a work in progress, and I’m afraid you won’t be seeing anything like finished graphics..."
please dial back the rhetoric (looking at The Intangible Fact).
The Devil @ Dec 20th 2006 10:34AM
#11
That's just being spoiled rotten.
RogueJedi86 @ Dec 20th 2006 10:39AM
Yes I saw the thing on bungie.net, maybe there's still hope on getting graphics of a "Gears of Halo" quality. Fingers crossed!
And as for the documentary, I'm still not entirely sure if the Elite-Grunt-Hunter Alliance is maintained. I couldn't tell if the Grunts were with the Brutes, or fighting them. In one scene a Grunt is standing by a Brute, not fighting. But in another shot, you see a Grunt apparently trying to fight one.
Brian @ Dec 20th 2006 10:40AM
I'd rather play a marginally better-looking Halo 3 with awesome features than a hi-def polished turd Halo 3 with a basic feature set.
Pedro @ Dec 20th 2006 10:41AM
People, it is pre alpha. They are still using Halo 2 assets. The game will look like the e3 trailer, which was done in engine. So while it won't have uberdetail on every atom of every rock like gears, it is stil going to look awesome.
Take a fucking valium.
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 10:48AM
Thank you Biohazard13
Jason @ Dec 20th 2006 10:48AM
"Bring back the Halo they were developing for the Mac and PC" - WTF?
"God I hope we have seen the last of the Flood." - Well, if the Covenant succeed at the ark, you won't have Flood (or any other living thing) to worry about!
The video looked, well, it looked bad. I'm quite certain they could have whipped up another 30 second trailer that would have drawn more positive response.
The Elite with two swords was kind of cool.
The game is not ready to show yet (which is somewhat disturbing given the quality of the first trailer) and I'm not getting the feeling yet that they have something absolutely awesome in the works. My excitement has definitely cooled since E3.
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 10:53AM
In my opinion the Grunts themselves are divided depending on who they were with because they really can't stand up to either side.
LumberjackOff @ Dec 20th 2006 10:58AM
I own both halo and halo2 which I enjoyed.. but after playing Gow I dont know if Im going to enjoy playing another shooting game without a cover system like Gow or rainbow6.. the whole idea of just running out and exchanging shots seems kinda boring to me..I always thought it was sort of unrealistic but I wasnt sure why until I played games that let you use cover etc..I know its just a video game but that is not the way a real firefight would take place...one that uses startegy anyway. anyone else have a opinion on this topic?
Pete C @ Dec 20th 2006 11:06AM
This video is going to cause a shit storm on the internet. Halo 3 should be the end-all, be-all killer app for the 360, but it is not yet at the point that Gears of War was one year prior to its release. So I think the concerns are at least somewhat valid on the graphics front. This video shows off the character models, which DO look quite good. The backgrounds are probably just placeholders, but showing off this video is not going to do them any good as far as generating hype. -1 for Microsoft on releasing this video.
bfos7215 @ Dec 20th 2006 11:22AM
Yah, I'm pissed it's not going to be GoW level graphics and GoW crappy gameplay.
Pedro @ Dec 20th 2006 11:26AM
You gotta love how MS shows realtime footage of games....and gets complained at. Sony shows FMV, CALLS it real time, and the entire internet spooges in unison.
Chrono404 @ Dec 20th 2006 11:40AM
@ 21 ""Bring back the Halo they were developing for the Mac and PC" - WTF?"
Originally before Microsoft bought Bungie, Bungie was making Halo for Playstation2. Although i think he is commenting about the Halo RTS Mod that Microsoft shut down becouse of them Working on Halo Wars, a 360 Exclusive RTS.
I have never really like the halo games, Just could never really get into them. I Love Gears of War, Maybe I will like Halo3, But I have my doubts.
Andrew Fong @ Dec 20th 2006 11:40AM
It's looking fine. I like how Bungie keeps giving us these little updates, not so much to keep the hype going, but to give us a little glimpse at how designing a game works. It sounds like it'd be fun to be the motion capture guy at Bungie.
"What'd you do at work today?"
"I tried dying in seventeen different ways. Then I beat a marine over the head with a golf club."
jork @ Dec 20th 2006 11:42AM
does no one remember gears from 1 year ago??
it looked like a friggin cartoon
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 11:48AM
Gears and Rainbox are more based on strategy shooting, Halo has always been more of the Run and Gun... I like the change personally. The ability to grab a shotgun and frag a few unfortainate souls because I'm faster as opposed to because I have to rely on my usually useless team members... I don't think its necessary to compare the two different game types. Its like comparing soccer to football. Some prefer one some prefer the other but neither is truly "better" than the other... Although I do personally prefer soccer myself...
uh_oh @ Dec 20th 2006 11:48AM
Looks to me like they fixed the view back to halo 1 where i have actual left and right peripheral vision instead of depending on the radar. Brutes look awesome, so I would assume the elites will fight along side the chief and marines????
uh_oh @ Dec 20th 2006 11:48AM
You see the animation where the brute ripped the arms out of the marines sockets???? Now that's BRUTAL :).
EclipseCDN @ Dec 20th 2006 11:51AM
"Originally before Microsoft bought Bungie, Bungie was making Halo for Playstation2."
Halo was NEVER at ANY point in development for the PS2. It was originally a Mac/PC title. It started as a RTS but then turned into an FPS...it originally looked like it was going to be a MMOFPS taking place on a ringworld.
Furthermore, it was Bungie that approached microsoft, not the other way around. In any event, if you hated halo, don't be hating on it. Check out gamerankings.com. These games are legends in their own right.
lupos @ Dec 20th 2006 11:53AM
@Chrono404
Are you mental? Halo was a multiplayer team based 3rd person comabt game for the Mac before MS bought them.
@Jork
Why are peopel makign stuff up? Epic showed test shots of the unreal engine 3 with gears of war characters 3 years ago and they looked astounding then, before anyone even knew what GoW was. The only reason Gears looked phenomi9nal from the get go is because it was a game made to show of an engine. HAlos engine is beign made along with th egame, liek most games, and there for wont look its best till much closer to show time. Not to mention the areas in halo are usualy loadfree and huge where as gears as much tighter zones. I'd rather have a massivle battle in halo with 100 characters on screen that look pretty good because its a war game and thats what it should be like. Gears looks awsome like it does cause they are only rendering liek 20 characters tops at any given time.
Corosato @ Dec 20th 2006 11:57AM
uh...most of that game footage WAS halo 2, until the end...
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 11:58AM
Ummm everything I heard was that Bungie was making an RTS for Macs then Msoft bought them and they eventually changed it to an FPS for them... Never heard anything Sony related...
tyler @ Dec 20th 2006 12:05PM
For me, playing Gears of Wat has brought a new level of expectation. I know you can't compare apples to oranges, but for example, I'm playing Rainbow 6 Vegas now, and every time I reload, I look to my HUD for active reload. I realize its not there, and I think "boooooring!"
GoW, while flawed, brings a new level of intense, visceral gameplay that I expect with my shooters from now on; tactical or not.
rrenna @ Dec 20th 2006 12:09PM
The game changed like 3 different times, it was definatly a classic Real-Time Strategy at one point, their footage of it from the making of Halo 1, there's also video of it being a 3rd-person squad based game...
JPRacer @ Dec 20th 2006 12:14PM
I think I'm the only one that like the graphics? It's easy to see the polycounts/use of normal maps on the models when they run the engine with no textures. Also the animations are much more elaborated than before. When they switch to full visuals we can see good use of coloroed lighting, all projectiles create their own lightsource. The shadows are much realistic, there's good use of HDR lighting and texturing looks good (though to see with the low-res video). Only bad thing is the interior design. Seem a little bland but that's been the case since Halo 1. Square room, corridor, another square room, etc. The exterior levels look really good though, just like the previous Halo.
Anyway, I'm not a big fan of Halo and think it's way overhyped but I like what I saw in this vid.
The Dude @ Dec 20th 2006 12:27PM
"27. @ 21 ""Bring back the Halo they were developing for the Mac and PC" - WTF?"
Originally before Microsoft bought Bungie, Bungie was making Halo for Playstation2. Although i think he is commenting about the Halo RTS Mod that Microsoft shut down becouse of them Working on Halo Wars, a 360 Exclusive RTS."
Wrong on both counts. Actually Halo was in development for the Mac and PC for almost 3 years before Microsoft bought Bungie to make Halo an Xbox exclusive. I know this because I watched development with much anticipation and then horror as I realized it was being consolized by M$. It was suppose to be a totally open world back then and on a MUCH larger scale than the console versions have been. First started reading about it in '97 or '98.
tyler @ Dec 20th 2006 12:28PM
@lupos
I too would love to see a battlefield in Halo 3 with 100 guys throwing down, but I don't know if they can pull it off. I had huge (maybe too high) expectations for Halo 2. It didn't totally disappoint, but it didn't whet my desire like Halo 1 did either.
Stumper @ Dec 20th 2006 12:29PM
OMFG!!!! Did anyone else catch the dual-wielded Energy Swords???!!!! (or is this old news)
Intentless @ Dec 20th 2006 12:34PM
Dual weilding looks cool with the swords but with the instant kill will it make any difference..... If it does I can't wait because it will just be unstoppable if it is instant kill with one then the other... So yeah if they want some balance its just for looks...
Krazy Koala @ Dec 20th 2006 12:41PM
At least the multiplayer or the single player is going to kick ass for this game, hopefully both. Either way it'll be worth the money so stop complaining. PS: MAYBE it won't look as good as Gears of War, but you WILL notice better AI, orders of magnitude greater than in Gears. Halo 1 had better A.I than Gears. Not to mention Gears was also relatively short and has few multiplayer maps. Halo 3 will have many (heck new Halo 2 maps are coming) and they are large. So yes Gears may look better, but there are less textures to fill in because there are less backgrounds in a smaller world...Plus Halo has a MUCH better vehicle system than Gears (that turret jeep was lame), and there are way more guns. Gears has less than 10 weapons, so less effects to create=more time for character models. And notice how's there's only ONE animation for the chainsaw? Look, I loved Gears, but remember that even if Halo 3 doesn't look as good as Gears from one snapshot, there will be a lot more effects going on in real time, more, smarter, diverse A.I. Better multiplayer. Stop saying Gears spoiled Halo for you, you know that's a lie, pop Halo 2 back in the drive and play some online.
justin @ Dec 20th 2006 12:50PM
I don't think you'll see graphics at Gears' level due, in part, to the difference in play. Gears can only have something like 6 people on screen, if what I read was true. Halo typically throws more at you at once.
0ldb0y @ Dec 20th 2006 12:56PM
What happened to the Elites?
chimp o death @ Dec 20th 2006 1:00PM
RE: Halo 3's current graphical state.
If you watched the Halo 2 documentary in the collector's version of Halo 2, you would have seen how the team toiled for months to get the E3 2003 demo ready. Then they found out most of that work was wasted and not suitable for a game level, which was the initial plan.
The E3 2006 teaser was indicative of Bungie's new direction. Reportedly featuring a bevy og game assets and running on the game engine, it was giving a taste of where the developers are trying to push the game by the end of 2007. And this was done without trying to waste a lot of time on winning people over with unfinished gameplay a year before release.
This strategy is continuing with the first TV commericial. Instead of Bungie tying up development time with it, it was farmed out to Digital Domain with impressive results. I'm sure Bungie did a lot of work on it, but they didn't have to waste time rendering the thing thmeselves.
Hollywood movies (like The Hulk or King Kong) have been forced to use unfinished or "first-pass" effects work as placeholders in their trailers, leaving the moviegoing public saying "meh, not impressed". The overwhelming critical and financial success of the Halo games has left Bungie in the position to not HAVE to do that. If they choose, they can concentrate on the actual game development. The stuff that trickles out at this poin tis really meant for the fans, to get them excited about the very possibilities of Halo 3, not yet to compete with the current state of the art (Gears of War).
Just like Gears of War, everyone involved in this game knows that it's one of the cornerstones of the 360's success, and the final product should be a reflection of that, and I for one am fairly confident that the game will be worth the wait.
P.S. I know a lot of people are engaging in the renders/gameplay debate. For my two cents I've always thought that if you're seeing a trailer for an FPS that isn't in a FP perspective, you should know you're not seeing actual gameplay.
Chase @ Dec 20th 2006 1:10PM
anyone who doesn't think that Bungie has insane graphics at the top of their list is just out of their minds.
Did we all seem to forget that at the time of both Halos, they were both the best looking games for their respective time and system. They basically pioneered bump mapping on the Xbox.
I strongly contend that Halo 3 will look BETTER than Gears of War, and possibly alot better.
Just as with the previous two games, it will be the best looking / most fun / most popular / most well thought out game available for a consumer to play... period.
Daniel @ Dec 20th 2006 1:11PM
Give me a call when there's news on Gears of War 2. That game is ten times what Halo or Halo 2 ever was.
SammyDKat @ Dec 20th 2006 1:23PM
In my mind, Halo is such a different game from GOW that I don't really compare the two any more than I would compare either to Splinter Cell. They all require different strategies & gameplay. It's a matter of execution & preference. The one criticism of Halo compared to GOW that I'd offer is that GOW is much more balanced overall. In Halo2, some weapons and maps were so ridiculously advantageous, that it was pointless one you spawned. I'd like to see them create more variability that not all weapons work well against all enemies & that "weaker" weapons have some other distinct advantage (e.g., chainsaw gun). Also, balance the maps. A little extra carnage would be nice too.