Zero Punctuation reviews Halo 3, hates it
Yahtzee's spitting-mad review might be in part a reaction to the high demand for it; he proudly admits to having had no intention of reviewing the megaton first-person shooter until an inordinate number of requests -- and his editor -- forced him to. Still, it's always refreshing to hear unabashedly critical reactions to a game that's largely been walking on water.
Catch the carnage after the break.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
ALH @ Oct 4th 2007 4:44AM
amazing
its nice to hear a review from someone who doesnt start out with the words 'this game is review proof' or ' everyone is going to buy it anyways'before going on to say exactly why the fans would like it
the FANS
DarkNessBear @ Oct 4th 2007 4:44AM
I am a Sony fanboy.
But I thought this review was a little harsh. Yes Halo is overhyped beyond compare, but it definetally isnt average, it oozes with production value and quality. And the multiplayer experience is flawless (although sometimes connecting to friends is a drag...)
And I have to disagree with the statement that many games have done what Halo has and better. I dont think he knows that Halo was really the first GOOD Console FPS and that every other console FPS has followed in its footsteps. Even bioshock.
I think he tried to hard to be controversial. Although I am really against the major hype halo gets. Its a really good game. It isnt the best game ever, or the greatest gameplay experience in the world! But it is a really good value. And thats what matters.
Kadotsu @ Oct 4th 2007 4:54AM
Have you ever played the first Unreal Tournament, Quake, Half Life, Deus Ex, TFC, CS.
I think Halo is THE game to play when you are into CONSOLE FPS but there have always been better franchises for the PC market.
Yet I've to give Halo the best (read "most active") community award, atleast for America.
Cigol @ Oct 4th 2007 5:12AM
Goldeneye on the N64 preceded Halo by a good margin and is the better title. One is an all time classic that will live on long after the XBOX finally croaks, whilst the other is a title backed up by hype and Microsoft funding. No one's saying it's shit. Average is fair.
But enjoy playing it by all means.
Jake @ Oct 4th 2007 8:17AM
Halo is above average. There is no conspiracy.
There are a small number of PC shooters that are arguably better. None of them feature local multiplayer, though. Local multiplayer is what made Halo popular in the first place, long before you could take the thing online.
Halo 3 also gives solid campaign, great co-op, neat Forge mode, new competitive co-op, the best local multiplayer, and a very robust, deep, and smooth online multiplayer experience.
Which shooter does all of those things better again?
BigJKO @ Oct 4th 2007 8:43AM
He's not reviewing Halo, so whether or not it did ground-breaking things is completely irrelevant. Furthermore he's reviewing Halo 3's single-player, which, according to every review out there, is decidedly avarage.
So no, he's being particularly harsh, IMO.
Phranctoast @ Oct 4th 2007 9:19AM
jake. Im sorry, but did you just start playing FPS's when Halo came out?
I dont remember PC FPS's games that dont have LAN MP as an option. If Im to believe what you say, LAN parties started with Halo!
Or
are you saying that Halo is just better than any of those games that revolutionalized FPS MP games.(CS,UT99-2004,Quake3,RTCW,ET)
Halo is a decent game. There, I said it. A decent game. I'll agree with your above average comment.
The UT series allowed users to create their own maps and mods. While Forge is more user friendly, its also more limited. You could also record in UT 2004. Again. not as user friendly but still there.
So to answer your last question.
The Unreal Series does it better.
sectionz @ Oct 4th 2007 9:52AM
you should see his other work. jesus christ.
Zach S @ Oct 4th 2007 12:55PM
Uhhhh pretty much without Goldeneye and Perfect Dark on the N64, there wouldn't be multiplayer as you see it today. Plus, the single player aspect of those titles brought about challenges to the mode, instead of just "shoot everyone." Oh, and they're still fun to play, even though they're obviously dated.
t_m @ Oct 5th 2007 6:48AM
halo 3 reviews =
Like singleplayer? = average.
Like mutiplayer? = rocks.
the review was pretty funny though. I sure had more fun with that review than the SP of Halo 1.
Sam @ Oct 4th 2007 4:52AM
I think most people that aren't halo fanatics would definitely agree with him, at least on some points.
He definitely highlights all the problems with the game, and none of them are made up or unjustifyable.
Oh and his style of journalism is needless to say, unforgiving and sarcastic. Its not like he just has some unbased hatred for halo so...
DOWN FANBOYS!
DOWN!
Good boys.
Runstad @ Oct 4th 2007 4:57AM
He thought the single-player campaign was average, he didn't hate the game.
Kinjak @ Oct 4th 2007 5:02AM
This guy is new to me, but is a monumental genius.
Don't agree with most of his sentiments, but damn he's funny.
MinorHavoc @ Oct 5th 2007 1:03AM
Yes indeed, he's very funny. As for his "review", you must take it with a very large grain of salt. As someone else said, it's meant as an entertainment piece, not a real review. In fact he states in his review done after Psychonauts (Bioshock?) that he received many complaints that his positive review was far inferior to (and less entertaining than) his negative reviews. Thus, he would only be doing negative reviews (partially by assuming an elistist attitude as someone else pointed out) no matter what he actually thought of a game.
Also, if you read the end credits to the Halo 3 review you'll notice his lament about having promised to do this review given enough interest and having been forced to keep his word.
Jon @ Oct 4th 2007 5:04AM
Hate is a strong word Joystiq. Did you even watch the review?
ZombieX @ Oct 4th 2007 5:15AM
Finally a Halo 3 review from someone who didn't receive the $800 bribe/swag bag.
Phranctoast @ Oct 4th 2007 5:23AM
damn you. you beat me to it!
mfed3 @ Oct 4th 2007 5:21AM
some people just have no respect for the amount of genius that goes into games. from a dev perspective the game is just insane. take the newest most complex engine and now allow someone to go back and watch it from any angle, pause rewind fast forward, and also allow this to happen online with 16 players. ho-ly crap. although all of these components are exceptional, halo is not about the story, or the music, or the graphics, or the voice acting, or the AI, or the animations, or the physics... you get the point. its about the attention to detail, fluidity, finish, and tightness. its got the tightest and most accurate controls of any console game. the controller just morphs into your hand and you forget youre even holding it. halo is just so good because it allows any gamer to play it without even thinking about the buttons. forget about all the great pc games out there for a minute, step back and just realize why its so popular. im an avid pc gamer, hl2, cs, ns, tfc, ut2004, bf2, all the lot. but not everyone wants to worry about the complexity of a full querty keyboard and mouse. fanboyism aside, why cant people enjoy pc and xbox games side by side? to conclude, halo is good cuz the gameplay is awesome and it DOES the "i wish i could do x" in other games. disrespectful review, makes me sick. my 2 cents.
Kazi @ Oct 4th 2007 5:54AM
I don't know about you but I'm still thinking about the buttons when I play Halo 3. If you hear someone on Live saying "Shit, that's not the reload button!" it's me, and I just threw down my X Item.
James @ Oct 4th 2007 5:59AM
Most complex engine? I LOL.
HDR engine that can't run smooth above it's non-HD resolution, enemy AI that isn't so smart, HAVOK (are they using that again? not as intertwined as Half Life's).
As for the pause everything and rewind. That is nothing from a dev perspective. Simply an array that records the position and direction of all objects.
Honest to mofo god. You like Halo 3 but it's not what you think it is. Battlefield, ET:QW, HL2 all have much better (even older) engines.
And the controls morphing to my hand? WTF. No, they really didn't. My hand was used to Halo 1 (since it was the last decent Halo game) and Bioshock. I turned to Halo 3 and got the controls wrong on many times and wished for a keyboard and mouse to actually get precision aiming working.
Sorry for that.
FPSfan @ Oct 4th 2007 6:10AM
That feeling you're having of the controller "morphing" into your hand er w/e. That's actually the autoaim taking control and playing the game for you.
chris @ Oct 4th 2007 7:40AM
From what I remember of the game (abandoned it quite quickly to go back to BF1942), BF2 let you save replays of a game (with 64 playerz zomg datz crazy) and then go back and watch it, moving the camera around, pausing etc. That was at least 2 years ago. Certainly didn't work as well as in Halo 3, but that's like saying the transmission in a 1970s car isn't as good as the transmission in a 2007 car.
Oh, and no FPS is even slightly close to having the tightest controls of any console game. That honour goes to Super Mario Sunshine (which being a Halo fanboy I'm sure you never have and never will play), with daylight second.
By all means like the game, be a fan of Halo, but ffs, don't act as if it's some sort of perfect masterpiece, even Bungie themselves wouldn't say that.
Phranctoast @ Oct 4th 2007 5:22AM
Sounds like MS forgot to send this guy the $800 bribe...uh i mean promotional pack of goodies!
I found it amusing that EGM gave Halo3 the best AI award and killzone 2 the worst. Makes me kind of scared for KZ2 if Halo 3's AI is that fuckin dumb.
mo @ Oct 4th 2007 5:57AM
its your allys A.I. thats retarded, the enemies A.I. was one of the best features about the game imo
lawrence @ Oct 4th 2007 7:42AM
list to what you talking about its egm right it means everyone goes microsoft on us so lets see someone taklking about the kz2 and then talk.but kz2 has the best ai and egm never tried the game yet at least
baby sea tuna @ Oct 4th 2007 8:56AM
Oh, lawrence...good to have you back, and glad to see you still have no fucking idea what you're talking about.
WMain00 @ Oct 4th 2007 5:31AM
I think Yahtzee should be taken with a pinch of salt. He's quite clever and hilarious and as he points out in his review, you shouldn't start widdling in his letter box just because he said bad stuff about Halo.
Brandon @ Oct 4th 2007 8:57AM
He is an awesomely hilarious reviewer. Even though he is unforgiving, his short reviews do point out valid issues with the games he plays, and they are never unfounded.
dave @ Oct 4th 2007 5:35AM
The halo series was great. I did love ever min of it. As for console FPS its up there with the best. But perfect drak N64 is still king for console FPS
WMain00 @ Oct 4th 2007 5:53AM
Nonsense! Goldeneye! GOLDENEYE!
FPSfan @ Oct 4th 2007 6:03AM
indeed golden eye... plus some of the turok games as well, they were always fun (not the best just fun.)
exit stencil @ Oct 4th 2007 1:38PM
You goldeneye/perfect dark fanatics need to LET IT GO. Those games are UNPLAYABLE by today's standards.
They were my favorites too, in their day. It is time to move on.
On topic, his gripes were fair. His style is to be comically harsh, and I thought this one was clever. I didn't get any incentives and paid for my game and I'd still give it a 9/10.
FPSfan @ Oct 4th 2007 5:41AM
The halo series has never really been any good. Halo 2 and 3 are insanely easy, the games auto aim pretty much does all the work for you. But I'd have to say that the reviewer didn't rip into halo enough.
jovin6 @ Oct 4th 2007 6:52AM
Definitely. Because when I play Halo online all I do is sit back and let the auto aim score Triple Kills for me.
Mischa @ Oct 4th 2007 7:58AM
Have you played Halo on the higher difficulties? It gets pretty tough, dude.
rdj75 @ Oct 4th 2007 8:19AM
Quite honestly halo 3 is very easy if you actually play it on the easy setting or normal setting, its so totally obvious that you haven't played the game on legendary. I am just tired of people saying that its so easy when all they do is play it on the easy or normal setting. The first time I played halo 3 I immediately played it on legendary and in fact beat the game in one day but believe me it wasn't easy.
D dogg @ Oct 4th 2007 1:57PM
Halo 2 on legendary is one of the hardest games I've EVER played... period. Harder than Halo 3 so much that I almost broke my controller 2 nights ago.
Dude, you speak as if you know what you're talking about and it's your ignorance and then run off with the mouth that really irk me.
James @ Oct 4th 2007 5:52AM
The guy's right.
I've been spoilt by Half Life 2 myself. Single played with HL2, Ep1 and soon Ep2 and Portal. Multiplayer with CS:S, Deathmatch and TF2 all for the same price as Halo 3 (and with better controls).
2 giant royal fingers I stick up at Bungie.
(though like Yahtzee it's not a bad game. But even the 360 has better FPS.)
Neebs @ Oct 4th 2007 6:13AM
I like his take on how the plot was off him because he had never played a Halo, and how he admitted that Halo 3 lowered his standards and made Bioshock better.
Danny @ Oct 4th 2007 6:28AM
Jesus Geoffrey Christ, Joystiq. You sound awg=fully butthurt that someone with a pen and paper finally said something negative about Halo 3. For one, he doesn't hate it. He says it's 'not bad'. And lest we forget he's a PC gamer at heart.
Danny @ Oct 4th 2007 6:29AM
*awfully
Easo @ Oct 4th 2007 6:31AM
"Have you ever played the first Unreal Tournament, Quake, Half Life, Deus Ex, TFC, CS."
and
"Goldeneye on the N64 preceded Halo by a good margin and is the better title."
Have you guys played those games recently? With the exception of Half Life, which still kicks ass, time hasnt treated those games very well. Especially Golden Eye. Now have you played Halo or Halo 2 recently? They are still just as good as they have always been, they just dont look as good as they use to. Thats because just like Half Life and Half Life 2, they were and are still are truly great games.
I still found the reivew funny, even though he has shit on every game he ever reviewed.
sinergy @ Oct 4th 2007 6:42AM
Sorry but Halo was never good to begin with.
SKI @ Oct 4th 2007 7:52AM
I still have a huge Goldeneye competitions with my friends at least once a month and yes, it's better then Halo 3.
Squeek @ Oct 4th 2007 1:17PM
He says Psychonauts is one of the greatest games ever in his review for it.
The review is more of "why the game is awesome" as opposed to "why the game sucks" for Psychonauts.
I pretty much agree with all his points on Halo 3. Ever since the 2nd one came out, it was obvious Bungie only cared to market to the multi-player nuts. Halo 3 is an impossibly sub-par single-player experience compared to almost any other FPS on the market. I'm glad Unreal 3 comes out this year or I wouldn't have played a solid FPS in the year 2007.
Bauer22 @ Oct 4th 2007 6:37AM
I have to say Im a big Halo Fanboy but I loved this review! It was hilarious!
NeuroMan42 @ Oct 4th 2007 6:38AM
I only wish all reviewers were this honest about games. The Halo series has NEVER been original or ground-breaking but the media makes it so.
Poisoned Al @ Oct 4th 2007 12:02PM
I love how people forget the fact that the shield system, holding only two weapons and usable and useful vehicles first appeared in the first Halo and was promptly stolen by everyone else and their dog.
I tell you what is unoriginal though; dribbling fuck-tards like you that shit out posts like this because it's "cool" to rag on something popular. Halo 2 & 3 brought nothing new to the table and Halo 1's level design was horrid, but to say it was unoriginal is fucking stupid.
SeriousKriss @ Oct 4th 2007 5:55PM
@ Poisoned AI : You have obviously never played Tribes or Rise of the Triad. Please go inform yourself.
Homer 918 @ Oct 4th 2007 7:19AM
"I know this is the "See!? I *knew* all that hype last week was overblown" thread, so I'll be dugg down before I finish typing, but let's get some things clear:
He admits right up front that he hasn't played either Halo. I'm pretty sure if this doesn't exclude someone from reviewing the game, it should at least be taken into consideration.
He calls out that several things in the game have been done before. He's right! See my above comment. Halo spawned numerous FPS features which are now considered commonplace, such as regenerating health, restrictions on weapons you can hold at one time, etc.
He doesn't play multiplayer. I don't have the figures, but some insane percentage of people who bought Halo last week took the game online, almost bringing the servers to a halt. Very few people who are fanatical about Halo are playing *just* for the campaign.
He says the game cycles in difficulty. Again, see my first comment. Pacing was one of the things that the first Halo brought mainstream, interchanging fierce gunfighting with vehicular sequences. It isn't supposed to be one steady treadmill upwards. And of course, that treadmill varies *greatly* depending on the difficulty you are playing. Normal can seem like a run-and-gun shooter at times, while Legendary or even Heroic can seem like a tactical strategy game. So, I don't think blanket statements on difficulty are really possible with the Halo series.
It's pretty clear from his reference to Bioshock that he probably isn't the target audience for this game. They are very different games even from a single player experience. Halo has always been contrasted against games like Bioshock, and other "thinking" shooters, and it never intends to be anything other than what it is. He's comparing apples to oranges with this reference, and even Half Life doesn't seem properly placed next to the Halo series in my opinion.
I normally love this guy's reviews, and he definitely points out flaws which have been stated before, even in people's glowing reviews he rags on so much.
However, apparently reviewing a Honda Civic as if it were a Porche 911 in a speedy, cockney accent is enough fuel to the fire of the Sony Defense Force to keep them from admitting that Halo 3 might actually be a really, really great game." -Roger H