Nega-review: Halo 3

by Kyle Orland { Sep 26th 2007 at 8:00AM }

"Just like that girl you dated in college, Halo 3 has some issues." (5) "This game might not be everyone's cup of tea, despite the immense hype machine surrounding it." (4) "No one aspect of the game is life-changing on its own" (1) and "anyone would be hard pressed to call it mind-blowing." (1)

"It's genuinely disappointing to note the number of missteps in the single-player campaign. (7) "The campaign ... is Halo 3's weakest point. It doesn't capture the cavalier spirit of the original Halo." (5) "The gameplay doesn't stray too far from Halo 2." (6) "Rather than trying something new, it sticks to the run and gun formula of the first two." (9) "Everything is now pretty much a known quantity ... and a bit of going-through-the-motions gameplay numbs the excitement " (1) "To be honest, it begins to feel a little rote and by-the-numbers by the halfway point." (8) "Others might criticise the developers for a lack of new ideas." (3) "It doesn't hold any big surprises for fans of the last two titles." (1)

"The AI is ... not entirely convincing. ... most of the time being patient and not rushing in will do the trick." (3) "The artificial intelligence can't drive very well;" (6) in fact, "the AI drivers are less like marines and more like Mr. Magoo; support troops are just fodder for the Brutes; and the Arbiter makes me question why the Elites were ever feared in the original Halo. ... What is the point of sticking you with an AI compatriot if all he's good at is respawning?" (5)

"It doesn't help that some repetition and backtracking still taint this series." (1) "The first two games featured a lot of 'going out the way you came in', and 3 does too" (9) Yes, "you will still need to backtrack in a few areas." (5) What's more, "the mission environments aren't hugely varied," (3) and "many corridors are so similar in their appearance, navigation becomes equal parts confusing and frustrating. Unfortunately, these stages are often the ones players will need to storm into and, later, escape from. (7) "There is one level in particular that requires a grueling descent, only to have you do an about-face and battle your way right back the way you came... after a quick cry." (2)

"The studio promised a more straightforward narrative in Halo 3 ... but it certainly won't be drawing in any new fans to the series" (1) "The first half of the game suffers to some extent from the lack of Cortana, who provided the series with most of what humor it had and most of the exposition." (8) "The storyline can be a tad difficult to follow at times" (3) and "if you don't pay close attention to the cut scenes and in-game dialogue, you will quickly find yourself following the Arbiter around like a lost puppy, and have no real idea what your objectives have to do with anything." (2) "I had to watch the ending a couple of times to get my head around what happened too." (9) "What the hell is going on?" (2)

"The game's end sequence, to put it mildly, is an eight-car pileup." (7) "It doesn't feel entirely finished, with the incredible polish of the early levels fading to a more lackluster shine as you approach the end of the game." (4) "The penultimate chapter is so bad, just thinking about it puts a rotten taste in my mouth." (5) "The end result ... is fairly absurd, as the whole shebang reeks of game developers wracking their brains to come up with the cleverest, most exciting finish, and shattering the fourth wall in the process." (7)

"Halo 3 doesn't have the best graphics we've ever seen." (3) "For one, the water effects look merely average." (3) and "the human faces ... look flat and unnatural and are the most obvious relics of the last generation here." (4) "The graphics and sound, frankly, don't display any significant advances over Halo 2" (8) and, all in all, "Halo 3 is an underachiever in graphical terms." (4)

In the end, "Halo 3 still can't quite escape the category of flawed masterpiece" (4) "The big 'Oh wow!' gameplay moments just aren't there" (1) and "it's not going to revolutionize the genre." (9) "You won't recapture that feeling you got when you first met and fought the Flood, first drove a Scorpion tank, or first played as the Aribiter." (1) "Did we feel as completely blown away as we did by Halo: Combat Evolved? Probably not." (3)

What's going on here?

Welcome to the first ever Joystiq nega-review. Much like our meta-reviews, our nega-reviews collect together opinions on a hot game from across the game review community. Unlike meta-reviews, though, the nega-review focuses only on negative quotes from extremely positive reviews; massaging them together into an entirely unforgiving whole.

The numbers in parentheses after each quote refer to the reviews linked below, all of which scored the game at least nine out of ten, and many of which gave the game a perfect score. In some quotes, positive qualifiers have been taken out and replaced with ellipsis, but the context of the comments was not changed significantly -- every quote here was intended as a negative in the original review.

Why do this? Partly to erect an artificial island in Halo 3's wide sea of praise for haters to set up camp on. Partly as a warning against taking out-of-context quotes as representative of a much different whole. But mainly as a reminder that no game is perfect, and even the best, most hyped games have a few flaws.

Also See: The Only Negative Review of Halo 2 You're Ever Likely to Read

Sources:
(1) 1UP
(2) G4
(3) Pro-G
(4) EuroGamer
(5) IGN
(6) GameSpot
(7) Yahoo Videogames!
(8) WorthPlaying
(9) Computer and Video Games

Tags: bungie, halo, halo3, microsoft, negareview

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)

how_much_I_carrot @ Sep 26th 2007 8:15AM

"Just like that girl you dated in college, Halo 3 has some issues."

I KNEW this was IGN. I just knew it.

Steve Wells @ Sep 27th 2007 12:00AM

And there's a good bug in the game too. You run slightly faster on a slight diagonal.

horngreen @ Sep 26th 2007 8:18AM

Why fix what ain't broke? It seems to work well for Madden and EVERY other game EA makes.

MYPS3KilledMy360 @ Sep 26th 2007 2:24PM

since next gen came out madden has been getting low scores until this year.

Brad Lee @ Sep 27th 2007 11:05AM

I don't know about everyone else, but I really didn't want them to fix what ain't broke.

I loved Halo, I liked Halo 2. Halo 2 had some flaws, Halo 3 fixed those flaws and improved on the series in a number of ways. They added some cool new vehicles, a couple of new weapons (Gravity Hammer is badass), 4-player co-op, saving and watching replays that take up virtually zero virtual space, and so on.

I have yet to beat the game and I've only played a few matches online, but so far I'm more impressed than I was when I played the Beta months ago.

Anyone disappointed in Halo 3 is was just expecting too much or never really appreciated the series in the first place. And that's just it. Halo 3 is the end of a series, so how and/or why would it be substantially different than it's predecessors?

Despite all that I loved the Negareview. Hilarious. Joystiq should do this with more often.

eldee @ Sep 26th 2007 8:18AM

This is the first Halo 3 review I can completely agree with. Kudos.

thomasLogic @ Sep 26th 2007 8:28AM

Takes guts to speak the truth. Meh to halo3.

Irwin @ Sep 26th 2007 8:31AM

lol, "meh to halo 3"

im sorry, but this game still rocked and got extremely high review scores

i guess its just not ure type of game..
its still an awesome game though :)

JerJerBinks @ Sep 26th 2007 12:32PM

I wasnt impressed with Bioshock (aka System Shock 2 Redux - Easy Mode), and I most certainly am not impressed with Halo 3. I will see your Meh and raise you 2 Mehs.

Rubang B (NDF - Heart) @ Sep 26th 2007 2:04PM

Oh come on, don't go touting the review scores. Just have fun with it. We all know that 90% of reviewers are paid-off crackheads anyway.

Zachary Hinchliffe @ Sep 26th 2007 8:19AM

oh god joystiq that's some serious flamebait you got here

LiasonAngel08 @ Sep 26th 2007 10:19AM

Tell me about it...this is quite shocking...

The FIRST EVER "nega review" and you reserve it for the BIGGEST title on the xbox 360?

Yeah Joystiq...you sure are umm...whats that word again? Oh yeah "objective"

I'm sure the next "nega review" will be of a big Nintendo game...Perhaps Super Smash Brothers Brawl?

shivr @ Sep 26th 2007 10:59AM

they probably chose this game BECAUSE this is one of the biggest releases (for any -platform-) and has such a huge hype machine and insanely positive reviews. If this were last year, they probably would have picked twilight princess.

It's actually a pretty cool idea.. you guys should keep it up. If only to provide defence force fodder ;p

Kyle Orland @ Sep 26th 2007 11:05AM

Actually, LiasonAngel, it probably will be. There's no insidious motive to doing Halo 3 first... I just recalled the idea as something I had done for Halo 2 on my personal blog a few years ago and thought it might work again for another super-hyped game in the series.

Like I said in an earlier comment, I'd like to see this become a recurring feature for any massively hyped game that gets overwhelmingly good reviews. Smash Bros. Brawl will likely fall in that category.

Defenestrator2.0 @ Sep 26th 2007 5:27PM

LiasonAngel08
Sep 26th 2007
10:19AM

"Tell me about it...this is quite shocking...

The FIRST EVER "nega review" and you reserve it for the BIGGEST title on the xbox 360?

Yeah Joystiq...you sure are umm...whats that word again? Oh yeah "objective"

I'm sure the next "nega review" will be of a big Nintendo game...Perhaps Super Smash Brothers Brawl?"

The word is "subjective." Objective means that it's cold, hard fact, subjective means that it's open to discussion, and that it's really only opinion.

HineyWipe @ Sep 26th 2007 8:22AM

I tend not to take magazines, that are compensated by advertisers (game makers), seriously at all. I do not subscribe to, link to nor purchase any gamer mag. I may read a buddy's (hey, it's his $5) copy and gloat over the slick ads.
But seriously, I played last night, did 4 player co-op, played some matches (got ass kicked as I am unfamiliar with new maps and controls) and basically came away with, it's not the same as first Halo in play. It looks better, it plays faster, but I didn't wet my pants. Apathy has set in.

Ska Oreo @ Sep 26th 2007 8:24AM

meh, anyone who agrees with the run and gun statement is obviously playing on easy or normal (either that or your a gaming god).

J.Goodwin @ Sep 26th 2007 8:49AM

This is a good point. The negative reviews I've seen so far all mention that the reviewer was playing on "Normal."

Meanwhile, at Microsoft's review sleepovers, the players were all started out at the "Heroic" difficulty level.

Those who played on normal seem to think that the game is too easy. Those who played on heroic seem to think that the game is the proper length, and well balanced.

Aside from that, the sniping seems to be pretty well confined to "Halo 3 is Halo" or "Halo 3 is Halo 2," which is the same criticism that we've recently seen of RPGs on the 360. Funny, considering that Gears of War was pretty much an examplar of the "do a genre, do it well" trend, and didn't seem to garner as much criticism for doing the same thing over again.

It's definitely an interesting industry phenomenon. Basically, all of the top rated games for 360 on the aggregators are examples of iterating on a premise to near-perfection. You've got Halo 3, Bioshock, Gears of War, Oblivion, GRAW, and Guitar Hero 2 on Gamerankings, for example.

I wonder if that's due more to the desires of aging developers to perfect their craft, or if it's a result of publishers wanting sure things. We're definitely seeing more titles being given the time in the incubator to come out fully formed in this generation than in the last one though, which is good for everyone. I guess once you've put 10 million dollars into a title, another million to ensure that it scores well and sells well isn't that big a commitment anymore, particularly when you could be faced with a disastrous failure in the marketplace.

We're also seeing an increasing level, I feel, of the apathy reaction to games. We get extremely pumped (as do the reviewers, c.f. 1up previews, the 1upShow, and 1upYours) for upcoming games, then we rip them to shreds for minor flaws, all the while claiming that a perfect 10 by necessity isn't a flawless game. It's like opening your gifts before Christmas.

I haven't bought Halo 3 yet, but I do intend to do it in the next week or so. Meanwhile, I have a few games that I would like to finish up (Bioshock in particular). We need to slow down, stop looking forward to the next thing, and start finishing and reflecting on the games that we've got. Because the future is in the future, and the past is a big brick wall. I've got to make you understand now, I'M A MAN, NOT A DISCO BALL!

Er, sorry.

Games that haven't come out yet get a lot of the benefit of the doubt because they're not out, so there's always the possibility that whatever is wrong with them might get fixed. We forget that the things that are wrong with games that have already been released can be fixed too, and that developers are increasingly responsive to community comments for improvement.

We also forget that sometimes you just have to deal with little annoyances to get the experience of playing a great game. Go back and play Mario 64 or Ocarina of Time. They aren't the flawless gems that you remember. Conker's Bad Fur Day? Yeah, seemed great at the time, but when it came out improved on the Xbox, we saw it for what it was. All of them are still great games if you can play them with those fresh eyes that you did in times past.

That's another weird phenomenon that I'm seeing a lot lately. Hating on gems because you don't understand their gameplay.

A particular target for this treatment lately has been NiGHTS. I'm a huge NiGHTS fan. The game wasn't fantastic because of it's visuals, which were broken even at the time, it was fantastic because of it's gameplay and because of it's addictive score rush mentality. A lot of people never managed to get to the point where they were good enough to chain and start that score fever going. If you never passed a million points on a stage, then you frankly didn't play the same game that I did. You may not have liked it, but from my perspective, you aren't qualified to review it anymore than someone who watched the intro cinema for Halo is qualified to review that game.

You're seeing the same thing with Space Giraffe. People put three minutes into it, presume that it's the same as Tempest without even going through the tutorial, fail to get a decent score, and award it a 2 out of 10 without even considering how that happened.

I'm looking forward to Halo 3 because it has that same score rush attitude. Kudos for stylish kills. Hidden skulls beckoning to me like NiGHTOPIAN eggs, waiting to be busted open and cross bred with other mutant creatures. Online coop inviting me and my friends back again and again like that Shadow over Mystaria cab used to at the arcade.

If you don't get it, just say so. Because believe me, we can see it already, and you're only fooling yourself.

Shagittarius @ Sep 26th 2007 11:08AM

Halo 3 is the better shooter but Bioshock is the better game.

Mez Jr @ Sep 26th 2007 11:50AM

Niiiice Electric 6 reference.

baby sea tuna @ Sep 26th 2007 8:26AM

AKA: We love haters and shit-talkers here at Joystiq since they provide us with most of our hits. That's why we sneak flamebait in like 60% of our post titles.

If you guys really wanted to aggregate complaints about something, why not complain about the lack of full widescreen support in co-op? Or how you can't make clips from saved campaign films? Instead it's wah-wah-water-effects and boo-hoo-backtracking. Lame, guys. Just lame.

nowhere @ Sep 26th 2007 8:36AM

Are you serious?
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/09/25/halo-3-split-screen-wastes-16-9-hdtv-edges/
and
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/09/23/halo-3-pre-review/

First one is the split screen, second one mentions the inability to make clips.

baby sea tuna @ Sep 26th 2007 8:43AM

That doesn't make this any less of a cheap attempt to get hits.

Kevin @ Sep 26th 2007 11:55AM

Those weren't Joystiq's complaints, they took what they had in other reviews. If they other guys complained about something regularly (1UP, G4, Pro-G, IGN, Yahoo Videogames! and Computer and Video Games complained about back tracking) then maybe it's a bit easier to write the nega-review.

And besides, they were talking about GAMEPLAY (which is important) not widescreen displays and clips from campaign mode (which are extras and not as important).

If game is designed to play at 4:3, 16:10, or 16:9 then putting on two players and displaying it at 16:4.5 will require another view mode entirely.

Ska Oreo @ Sep 26th 2007 3:57PM

and honestly who cares? They don't take away from the game play so why should they bother us?

hermetics @ Sep 26th 2007 8:26AM

I purchased Halo 3 around 8:00 pm yesterday night in hopes of being pleasently surprised after some negative reviews from friends earlier in the day. It's sad to report that Halo 3 feels like a beefed up version of Marathon more than a third installment of Halo. I remember how Halo one impressed me when it first came out with its graphics and great games play but that was 2001 and times and games have changed so much since then. Bungie is out of there league when compared to games like Gears of War or even Resident Evil.............or just look at Bio Shock if you want to compare first person shooters. The best thing about Halo 3 is the calibration disk you can use to fine tune your video and audio system; I say that sincerely.

Geoffrey Sperl @ Sep 26th 2007 11:23AM

But, let's be honest: Halo is Marathon. I played all three Marathon titles way back when and, when I played Halo for the first time, I settled right back into Marathon-mode. Sure, there are bells and whistles that make the Halo series better than Marathon... but it's still the same basic concept.

Ed @ Sep 26th 2007 7:03PM

and as one who hasn't played either halo or marathon I'm looking forward to Halo 3. but to tell the truth it's mainly because the multiplayer armors look so awesome.

konajinx @ Sep 26th 2007 8:28AM

This game DOES suck! No, I jest, I jest! C'mon, that whole taking down the scarab mission was one of the coolest things I've ever seen or played in any video game ever, period. Having not been a huge Halo nut prior to 3, I can safely say that my 59 bucks was well spent and that I've been enjoying every minute of the single player campaign mode.

GaryM @ Sep 26th 2007 8:28AM

And yet one of the cited sites (Eurogamer) still gave it 10/10.

bm @ Sep 26th 2007 8:58AM

Eurogamer's scores are rarely based on actual game quality.

Irwin @ Sep 26th 2007 8:29AM

Wwow..
after reading that, I dont want to play halo 3 anymore..

BUT I MUST, ITS HALO

Namssorg @ Sep 26th 2007 8:30AM

Damn, IGN. Go figure. I haven't even played this game yet. Why do they always insist it has to do something NEW AND LIFE CHANGING? It's a game. I know it's on a more powerful platform now but I mean, the first two were extremely popular, don't you kinda think they should stick to that? Sounds like they've added in a lot of new features anyhow.

tmacairjordan87 @ Sep 26th 2007 2:52PM

when a game is hyped like halo 3 was, should it not be life changing? dont blame ign blame microsoft

zmog @ Sep 26th 2007 8:33AM

yet somehow these people gave it a perfect score, despite noticing flaws.

reviews today are really terrible.

Geist @ Sep 26th 2007 10:51AM

That's what I keep trying to tell people, but they all tell me to stfu about perfect scores.

James @ Sep 26th 2007 8:34AM

I am hearing a lot of "meh" about this, even from my 360 fanboy mates. I can't judge either as my mates 360 red ringed upon playing this!

derek @ Sep 26th 2007 8:36AM

compared to alot of pc games that already came out...halo 3 is a snore both graphics wise and definitely gameplay wise...poor poor meathead consolers

brian586 @ Sep 26th 2007 9:09AM

Been playing it since last night, the graphics are very nice in the campaign, same level as Gears IMO. Increasing the difficulty level is really the way to play this game, normal difficulty makes it EXTREMELY boring, as there is no challenge. No game this generation or last does multiplayer better (Gears multiplayer was broken, reminded me of trying to do multiplayer on a PC... oops, I forgot derek, PCs are TEH nbUR !!!111!!). Did you play the game at all, Derek? I guess you are not a meathead so you wouldn't.

sicsided @ Sep 26th 2007 9:21AM

I agree fully. Halo3 does seem to be a good from what I've seen but nothing compared to what PC has had for years.

cloud @ Sep 26th 2007 11:24AM

I too agree with Derek. Not really a PC gamer myself. But I was expecting a game that was practically flawless and jaw-dropping, following all the hype. But I find myself not too impresssed with the graphics and/or the gameplay. I had played Gears and that was WAY more compelling and addicting than Halo 3 has been. The cut scene animation (not talking CG) is very edgy and choppy. E=nviroment graphics haven't been awe inspiring. I'm just saying I have seen better in other games. In fact, I preferred to go and play SKATE for a few hours. I just think it's sad that a Skateboarding game can take me away from the "BIGGEST MULTIMEDIA RELEASE OF ALL TIME!!!"

I say... Meh.

kokuryukai @ Sep 26th 2007 8:37AM

Wow the first honest review, nice to see a reviewer not drunk with the hype and give a sober review, much appreciated

felixlighter @ Sep 26th 2007 8:50AM

So you just read the negative comments from this post and completely ignored the whole premise which was so specifically describe be Kyle Orland? These are the negative comments made about the game, taken out of context from otherwise glowing reviews, compiled to create one review, which ignores any and all of the games positive aspects. I don't think I have every read a single review from any game in which the reviewer says "Everything is prefect; any changes or additions would be for the worst."

I like the idea behind the article but these comments are going to be hard to read.

upz @ Sep 26th 2007 10:40AM

Either that, or you need to buy yourself a sarcasm detector.

Jason @ Sep 26th 2007 8:37AM

This whole "Nega-Review" thing is stupid... sure it will make something sound bad if you take ALL the negative stuff from 9 different reviews (most of which rated the game a 9 or higher)...

It is really mis-leading and stupid of Joystiq to run something like this... It is just like quoting someone out of context.

Is this really the kind of stuff people want to read at a site like this?

Look at all the people posting "wow this is the first good review i've read so far"... ITS NOT A REVIEW!!! Shame on you Joystiq... this is just LAME...

Why don't you run down a list of all the negative comments ever made about the PS3???

Farseer @ Sep 26th 2007 10:08AM

"Why don't you run down a list of all the negative comments ever made about the PS3???"

I don't think that Joystiq has sufficient bandwidth for that...

j/k :)

zmog @ Sep 26th 2007 11:01AM

this itself is not a review, correct. that wasnt the point, as explained in the last paragraph of the post.

paralipsis @ Sep 26th 2007 8:46AM

It just goes to show you that there is very little wiggle room at the top end of most review scales. If the median score is generally somewhere over 7, then what happens when a truly great masterpieces not filled with these kind of niggles comes along?

Frankly, a lot of the problems they mention were the kind of things I felt gave the original Halo game a kind of "meh" feeling, and the has served as the motivation for me to not play either of the sequels.