@ MikeB

The game may have been hyped beyond belief but as it stands even scientific measurements of the response people have to the game put it in the same league as games like Half-Life, Call of Duty IV and Gears of War. You can measure how "good" a game is by measuring how people respond to it, and by that measure it far exceeds the response people have to lower tier shooters like RFOM 1 (No data on 2, no offense to R2 or insomniac! ). It also stands the one metric which noone can argue against, its still played even today by millions. People may be duped into spending their money unwisely, but its much harder to dupe them to spend their time unwisely.

Who the hell cares if its running at 640P? It simply works as a game. It doesn't try to be innovative, it just delivers an excellent experience. I can't comment personally on the R+C review scores as im personally unsuited to saying more than its an excellent game. So really is your problem with Halo or is your problem with Gamespot and other reviewers? One game was fairly treated, one game was unfairly treated and thats not a negative on Halo its more a negative on Gamespot themselves.

You may not like Halo,Halo may not be anything new,Halo may not have the best graphics(cause the game isnt about graphics),however Halo has the most fun gameplay,the only game to dethrone Halo in my book is L4D.

@ MikeB

don't mess up with Squilliam
he is a huge fanboy just like me.

360 rules

@ Garnett

Why don't you drop the Halo BS? Seriously you should...

This isn't politics, you can't complain about how other people choose to spend their money because their choices don't concern you.

You are fueling the very thing you were fighting against with this thread.

@ Squilliam

Halo 3 is a well marketed and anticipated game, combined with media hype it sold amazing well.

I am just saying Halo 3 for many (including many of those who bought it) is not the best FPS future games should be measured with.

I was just pointing out media bias.

Media are biased about halo ?? The third episode has almost reached 9 millions copies and this is the game the most played on the most populated console networking system ?

How can it be based ? It is pure fact.

Let me turn your argument the other way : It is not the media/marketing that make a game a success, it is the fact that the HALO series is a (commercial?) success from the beginning that allow s the editor to have a good ROI on marketing investment.

Whats the point? There are many examples of media hype and bias, there are also many far better examples you can use. I never implied its the best ever game, but by many metrics it lives up to the hype and anticipation so its not really a good example to use.

For a tech-head you've got to be impressed with the HDR lighting and physics they were able to pull off with the game, which many consider the best for a console game thus far.

For many it's a game that offers the best replayability because of it's great online community. It's a game that just ceases to stop being fun, it always makes for a good night playing with friends, which is pretty rare to find with a lot of games. I think it warrants the 'amazing' score it received based upon that fact alone and doesn't reflect biased media - is Ratchet & Clank a game that you play as often as Halo?

EDIT: I think the best measure of a game's success/greatness is by how long and how often it is played for and this game would then deserve an even higher score.

@ Fumanchu

Due a to strong brandname and good marketing Pacman sold on par with Halo 3 on the Atari 2600 (actually much better if you're considering penetration) and thus was heavily played. But that doesn't change the fact that the port is considered to be the most miserable version by far out there (for example compared to the less successful but much better c64 version).