Halo 3: ODST at The Oak Leaf – The Student Newspaper of Santa Rosa Junior College

THE STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF SANTA ROSA JUNIOR COLLEGE

SEARCH

IN THE KNOW

The Oak Leaf's guide to what's happening in Santa Rosa, Sonoma County and the entire Bay Area

Upcoming Events:

- No events.

PRINT EDITION

LATEST ISSUE

Halo 3: ODST

Published: October 8, 2009

Our rating system: Wretched Try Harder Tenderfoot Hell Yeah Steal This

“Halo 3: ODST”
Bungie/Microsoft

Mix together a bad story, sub-par graphics and regurgitated game play and what do you get? “Halo 3: ODST.” Six days after the release of Halo 3, developer Bungie announced it would become a limited liability company (LLC) and would be contractually obligated to make two more games for Microsoft. Many analysts speculated that this split was not amicable, and if this was true Microsoft wanted to make sure it would be compensated for the remaining two games. Microsoft made sure that Bungie would honor their contract. That meant there would be at least two more Halo games from Bungie, one being a Halo 3 prequel, ODST, and the other being Halo: Reach. Unfortunately, at the end of the game, it felt like Bungie did not want to make any more Halo games.

The most disappointing aspect about the game is the story. The writers failed to execute an engrossing storyline; it is not interesting because you already know the ending to the trilogy. In the end, I was left wondering why the game was even made, aside from the monetary incentive, of course. I admit that the film noir mystery setting was enticing at first, but through the course of the game it felt like the writers did not know where to take the story and the game suffers for it.

It felt as if the developers were relying more on gameplay and graphics than story, this would have been fine if they weren’t as bad as the storyline. The biggest problem with the graphics is that the engine used to power the game is the same one that powered “Halo 3.”

Keep in mind that the graphics engine is over two-years-old and originally designed for the Xbox and not the Xbox 360. Needless to say, the graphics looked OK in “Halo 3,” but in “ODST’ the visuals looked below industry standards.

The saving grace could have been the game play, which again, is as bad as the story and visuals. “Halo: Combat Evolved” completely revolutionized first person shooters on consoles.

However without any real upgrade to both the enemy and partner A.I.’s, it is the exact same game you have played over the last eight years. It is a bit ridiculous to go into a firefight and take out 20-something enemies who just stand there, only to see your allies trying to run through a wall. For those who are yelling, “but Halo is built in great multiplayer!” you can stop right there. Bungie simply reused the multiplayer from “Halo 3.”

If there are any differences, I couldn’t see them. Another feature the game touts is the “firefight” mode, which is similar to Nazi Zombies from “Call of Duty: World at War” and the horde mode from “Gears of War 2.” This mode would be better if you could play online with random people instead of having to play with people on your friends list and only those people. To me there is no real reason to not allow random matchmaking in this mode.

Overall, with a lackluster story, unimpressive graphics, and gameplay that hasn’t changed in three games, it is tough to recommend this game to anyone who isn’t a hardcore fan. This game would have been better if it had come out two years ago.

- Buckley Collins