There's no accounting for quality (Halo 3 is now upon us)

[Petrarch]

Some will know I collect little bits and pieces - not a huge collector, just pieces that interest me from various films, games etc. Back when Halo was just appearing on the scene, a company called Joyride made the first collectible figures for it. I own the Master Chief one, and it looks like this:



As you can see, a bit on the cheap side.

Now, the characters armour design has visibly changed a little between the games, but compare this to the new figures that are being released in 2008, and this lot are made by McFarlane:



All I have to say at this point is why didn't they just get McFarlane to do it in the first place, and that I'm definitely scoring me one of those when they go on sale.

Edit to add: This thread is for the fact that Halo 3 is now upon us

[Doombot]

The best thing you'll see today: John P. Harvard goes Halo - Joystiq

[Brugdor]

Halo 3? Bwahahahahaha

 

[Night Owl]

Halo 3? Bwahahahahaha

 

Laugh if you must, but it's a sweet game.

[Pipboy 2000]

Mcfarlane could take the worst video game ever and make amazing toys for it though =P

[A.S.S.R.]

Mcfarlane could take the worst video game ever and make amazing toys for it though =P

Now that you mention it, some Daikatana figures would be pretty sweet, in an ironic hipster kind of sense...

[The SysMan]

Halo 3? Bwahahahahaha

 

Nobody can outsmart bullet!

[Petrarch]

I've seen in the news and on Bungies website that in the last 24 hours there's been close to 5 million games played on Xbox Live and that they've raked in £84 million in first day sales.

Not bad going at all there.

[Chucara]

I got it yesterday, and played it for a few hours before losing interest. Granted, I've never really liked the other games in the series, but I really don't understand the hype. It must have some pretty smashing multiplayer, because single player is nothing special.

I don't want to start an argument here (I know Petrarch likes the series), but I simply don't understand what is good about Halo in singleplayer.. I can't think of a single thing that hasn't been seen in some other game already.

[Brugdor]

I got it yesterday, and played it for a few hours before losing interest. Granted, I've never really liked the other games in the series, but I really don't understand the hype. It must have some pretty smashing multiplayer, because single player is nothing special.

I don't want to start an argument here (I know Petrarch likes the series), but I simply don't understand what is good about Halo in singleplayer.. I can't think of a single thing that hasn't been seen in some other game already.

I think the age of FPS with a great single player game and great multi-player are dead. It seems it has to be one or the other now. Bioshock had great single player and no multi-player. FEAR may as well have been the same because the MP was very lame IMO. TF2 has no single player game unless you count HL2. Even if you do, I've played a few hours of HL2 and it's far far behind FEAR which was only released about 6 months later.

[Solwyn]

I bought it, to my everlasting shame.

But to be honest it's really fun. The only reason I ever got Halo was to play with friends, because the co-op mode is really fun. I can't speak to the quality of the game, the graphics are definately 360 worthy. Nothing incredible but a definate step up from the previous incarnations.

I have to admit, I hated the first one. A game where you can snipe with a pistol just made me angry. Sci-fi be damned, pistols are close range sidearms. So they added dual wield in Halo 2, and I was hooked.

I'm terrible, I don't mind saying. But I have a lot of fun with it.

[Night Owl]

I got it yesterday, and played it for a few hours before losing interest. Granted, I've never really liked the other games in the series, but I really don't understand the hype. It must have some pretty smashing multiplayer, because single player is nothing special.

I don't want to start an argument here (I know Petrarch likes the series), but I simply don't understand what is good about Halo in singleplayer.. I can't think of a single thing that hasn't been seen in some other game already.

Halo did quite a few "firsts" (for a mainstream game, as some of these ideas may have existed in some form before)

* the regenerating armor (and later, regenerating health) - totally changed how FPS handle healing.

* Easy to use grenades - no more switching your weapon to 'grenade' to use one. You could (*gasp*) hold a gun with one hand and throw a grenade with the other. Made fights awesome.

* Incredibly varied, simple to drive vehicles (that were a blast to use)

* Excellent co-op. Fantastic Multiplayer.

* A biggie - every gun was useful, all game long.

* 2 guns at a time. That's it. I love this.

* Decent enough story. Ok, it's not the end-all, be-all, but there's WAY more story, and better developed characters, than 99% of shooters.

* Incredibly varied environments and battlefields. Yes, the whole "cut and paste" thing is a complete myth that  console haters love to grab. Show me any shooter, PC or console, that doesn't have similar looking  environments from time to time. ANY?? And in Halo, it made sense - you go in, you get out. It would make sense that the hallways of a huge building look similar. That said, there are some seriously good battlefields in Halo (fighting your way across the bridge? Driving the tanks on the snow and ice levels, etc etc)

I've played a ton of shooters. I've played shooters since the very beginning of shooters. All things equal, there isn't any shooter as much fun as the Halo games. They just have that certain "something". Some shooters I've enjoyed as much for a short time (SS1 & 2, HL1, Doom2 and 3, Duke Nukem, Call of Duty, Far Cry), but none of them are anywhere near the game that Halo is, for the reasons mentioned above.

[Ymir]

It will be the reason I finally get a 360.

My XBOX was given to me a few years ago by my wife for my birthday. I've been waiting the appropriate length of time before I replace it.

Cheers

[Jeff]

Halo did quite a few "firsts" (for a mainstream game, as some of these ideas may have existed in some form before)

* Incredibly varied environments and battlefields. Yes, the whole "cut and paste" thing is a complete myth that  console haters love to grab.

But the interior environments WERE incredibly repetitious. How is that a myth? It's not that they were similar, you'd literally walk down the same hallway, and walk into a room with the exact same layout.

Granted the exterior setpieces were great. The interiors largely sucked and their presence in the game (in a game of Halo's quality) is simply not defensible.

[Night Owl]

But the interior environments WERE incredibly repetitious. How is that a myth? It's not that they were similar, you'd literally walk down the same hallway, and walk into a room with the exact same layout.

Granted the exterior setpieces were great. The interiors largely sucked and their presence in the game (in a game of Halo's quality) is simply not defensible.

I'd like to know which shooter doesn't have reptitive interior environments.

Half Life? no. The Doom games? no. Far Cry?  no. SS2? Hell no. FEAR? No (look - more offices!). Any WW2 game? no. Bioshock? Ok, yes. Finally. A shooter that looked totally different almost everywhere you went.

See, that's my beef - not that Halo didn't have some areas that repeat, it's that every shooter does this to some degree. So to say that about just Halo is ridiculous. You have to then complain about that with  just about every shooter ever made to that point (and let's be fair - Halo 2 largely solved this issue as well)

and again, it toally made sense in Halo - you go into a big building, of course most of it will look the same. But nobody can say that every building looked the same inside - they didn't. Not by a longshot.

I do admit that the longest level to complete takes place in one building. That was their mistake. Had the library been as short as other levels, you'd never hear this beef.