Talk:Halo 3/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 13

People, do not git rid of the "[citation needed]s".

SpigotMap will agree that any info on here that is not sourced needs to have a citation needed tag, if you get rid of it then provide a source that does back up this claime. Duff man2007 04:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Please give WP:POINT a good reading. What you are doing here is trying to make a point by disrupting wikipedia. Please refrain from doing this in the future. SpigotMap 05:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

LOCK THIS PAGE NOW!

With the release of the game within two weeks, it's without a doubt this page will be more frequently visited as well as revised by people who'll most likely add false information as with any other popular wiki entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.72.96.113 (talk) 10:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It is already protected against editing by people who aren't logged in and by people who have just created an account. The only time we fully protect a page (so that only administrators can edit it) is when there is an edit war or some other complicated circumstances which don't apply here. See the protection policy for more information. James086^{Talk | Email} 13:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

well that and there has been confirmed reports that the game has been leaked also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ripster40 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Just because the release is coming up does not mean that the article should be uner protection. Protection should only be done when problems occur. -Anon

The page wasn't s-protected because the release was coming up...it was s-protected because there were abundant problems. AKRadecki^Speaketh 16:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

"saved films"

I created this entry yesterday, it was deleted by Duffman, its inappropriate to censor a talk page. fyi. The below point is imo essential to maintaining Wikipedias neutrality. within the article it reads like marketing and includes a quote from the developer that also sounds like marketing advertising. below is what i posted to the talk page yesterday night. Duffman, if you have an issue with this comment please raise it in talk, don't simply edit this page please.

This 'feature' is really overdiscussed in this article, especially as it makes it sound new to gaming or halo. Everywhere else in gaming this is simply called a "demo". Every fps since doom has allowed for their creation, even strategy games offer this. If anything, the only notable thing about this is that console gaming is beginning to adopt more and more features that've been standard in pc gaming for a long time, due to increased focus on multiplayer. Recommend either rewording this or deleting altogether. this is my first ever contrib to wikipedia and i have no other involvement in the article so will hold off on doing it myself for now.- skelebones —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.48.65 (talk) 23:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

First off, Duffman has been violating many rules lately so don't take his edits personally. As for the saved films section, I would argue that it is a feature of note. First off the way it handles it by recording game data and re-rendering it using the in-game engine is a pretty rare thing. Even for PC games the ability to disconnect the camera and move around the action during the playback is nearly unheard of. I don't know for sure if it even has been done, but I remember hearing it had (anyone got a source?). The vast majority of game recorders just record a video file that takes up far more space. Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it has ever been done on consoles before which makes this info of note and something that sets this piece of software apart from its competitors. It could use some minor changes to make it sounds less like a PR rep typed it, but I don't think it should be removed entirely.157.174.221.169 19:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

About rewording he article to focus on the aspect of being new to consoles, i agree entirely. However that is the lone aspect that makes this noteworthy. All fps' record the game using in game data, and render it with the ingame engine. Also, since Quake3 most engines have been able to manipulate angle/style of camera while watching the playback. These features are not notable or innovative. The fact that this feature is finally being released on a console game IS notable, but the current article does not reflect this or even mention it. I propose that the section be considerably shortened and only deal with notable aspects of the feature. - Skelebones 142.106.63.213 20:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I've added a clarification that it is not new. But, since Replay (computer games) has not yet been created at the time of my writing, the extra explaination is useful, i feel, in explaining exactly what it is. As soon as Replay (computer games) is created however, large parts of the section could be deleted in favour of explaination in that page. Feel free to create the page. I'm supposed to be writing an Essay atm anyway >.< RC Master 19:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Sources for prices

Does anyone have a source for the price data? The Euro prices seem especially off. I really can't imagine the Legendary edition being that much more expensive, than the UK one.157.174.221.169 19:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, we typically don't include pricing information in encyclopedia articles. Unless someone comes up with a good reason - in terms of our guidelines - to keep it, I will be deleting this. AKRadecki^Speaketh 19:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It has now been removed, and for anyone who's offended by this, please read WP:NOT paragraph 2.6 item 4. We aren't a price guide, and we don't generally put prices of products in articles. There's plenty of fan forums where this is more appropriate. AKRadecki^Speaketh 02:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

1up's last update

http://www.1up.com/do/minisite?cId=3161338 The last box is open (9/12/07) They now have 33 exclusive new screenshots if you didn't already know. 12 DAYS LEFT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.113.218 (talk) 22:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

*sigh* Please read WP:NOT#FORUM... Stryik 00:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

"Demise of Master Chief"

"Recent promotional items have had a strong memorial feeling to them, hinting at the demise of Master Chief, though strictly through speculative circumstantial evidence.[29]"

The last time I checked, an encyclopaedia was a place for facts, not rumours on gamestooge.com. This quote cites a source, but that source is nevertheless just speculation.

Shouldn't this be taken out? SplinterCell37 00:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

WP is not a place for speculation - I'll be deleting it. Stryik 00:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Additionally this should be probably be under the Marketing for Halo 3 article.157.174.221.168 21:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Halo 3 runs in 720p so having a 1080p television actually makes the game look worse because it has to be scaled up. http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topnews&cid=12392 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.252.201.143 (talk) 08:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

^^^^^^^He knows exactly what he's talking about. (however, a TV that is 1080p compatible is going to be 720p or 1080I compatible as well). 68.143.88.2 17:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

According to the memorial for the Human-Covenant War on Halo3.com, the Master Chief is captured in the Battle for New Mombasa. That probably means he's dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.111.135 (talk) 00:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

If you watch the ending cutscene on youtube, he doesn't die. I say take it off ASAP. --69.152.249.245 04:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

four million preorders?

According to this article from may... http://xboxevolved.e-mpire.com/article/Halo_3/3837.html

There were already 4 million preorders at gamestop alone. -Anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.42.176.201 (talk) 16:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Another article: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/DN-gamestop_15bus.ART0.State.Edition1.35a99d8.html

"Mr. DeMatteo said his company will receive 160 trailer loads of Halo 3 discs for the launch, and GameStop has taken more preorders for the game than any other in its history." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.128.209 (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

People losing their job s

Rumors have been roaming around that people at Gamestop and ebgames have been caught playing halo 3 early, and getting fired for doing so. iTry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.59.2 (talk) 19:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Not really a point for a wikipedia article, but you're right. The reps from gamestop said a while back that any employee even caught opening the boxes early would be immediately fired.157.174.221.168 20:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Show off the graphics...

I really think we should get some pictures showing off the graphics, since there's so much criticism of them. Here is a perfect example of how perfect the graphics are - [1], can we add that to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.120.2 (talk) 00:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

As long as it passes all copyright restrictions (fair use policy and all that), and it helps the article explain a point or something, which a good pic would, then yes add it in. A good representative picture helps explain not only the graphics engine, but also the basic artistic direction and whatnot. Beta shots are technically misleading so try and replace one of those if you get a good one.157.174.221.168 18:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Aaaah... unfortunately I don't know how to put pictures in.--58.167.120.2 08:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

See the Wikipedia Article for Images for futher reading. Neobros 08:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Gyrferret 03:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)The Page REALLY DOESN'T Need a "miscellaneous" section about the achievements and the "fauna". The people that do put those up are simply finding an excuse to put up every trivial little detail about the game up. Please... take it down and leave it down....

Vehicles

I suggest we make a seperate article about the vehicles in the Halo triogy. There's no mention of the vehicles in either Halo or Halo 2, and only a brief section on the new vehicles here. Stormfin 00:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

See WP:NOT#GUIDE ♦^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 01:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

What's that supposed to mean? All I'm saying is that we should mention the new vehicles, what's new about the old vehicles, and a storyline reference to it. Or at least seperate article detailing it.Stormfin 02:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Archiving

I just archived this talk page up to the end of August but seeing as it still has 37 sections, most of which are forgotten now, I suggest another archive before September 25. Would anyone have any objections to archiving it again on the 24th or about then because I expect a lot of traffic, especially since anons can't edit the actual article they will probably turn their attention to the talk. James086^{Talk | Email} 09:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely agree. I probably won't be around to do this myself (trying to avoid spoilers) but it needs to be done for a fresh article discusion in a post-halo 3-release situation. RC Master 19:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Aye. Fold all it up right before it comes out, and we'll have a clean slate. At the same time I'll be archiving the article and revamping the front. David Fuchs ^(talk) 20:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Advert tag on page

I think the reason that this page seems sort of like an advertisement is because it uses a lot of quotations from Bungie employees who are of course biased. Unfortunately since the game is not released yet, they are the only real source of verifiable info. If anyone can think of a way to rewrite the quoted parts to sound less like they're written by a PR rep, please do. Just try not to sacrifice encyclopedic knowledge to do so.157.174.221.168 18:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

If you rewrite a direct quote, it isn't really a quote anymore, is it? Besides, look at other good articles. They all have those quote boxes--$UIT 02:53, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I mean a lot of the stuff that is written in the article itself (not the separate quotations) is actually directly quoted, but not marked as such. Having quotes is good, copy/pasting info straight from a Bungie employee to make up the body of the article is not. I'm not saying the article is terrible or even incorrect, but if we want Featured article status, this is the kind of change that will need to be made.157.174.221.169 18:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't sound like an advertisement to me so much as it is just listing the product's features. Since when the page loads much of the top of the article is taken up by banners, I will remove the advertisement tag until it is voted on.TyGuy92 21:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Somebody badly messed it up and I am going to try to fix it. Dont get mad at me if I make a mistake and revert someones edit, just tell me, Excuse me, problem solved by someone else anyway.

You can see if any edits were missing by comparing page history [here]. If you compare pages the last known genuine edits, which happen to be a bot called "ClueBot", to the last revert of vandalism, happens to be mine, you can see if anything was lost, [you can see that nothing was lost]. The next and last non vandal edit was by a user called "Floaterfluss", he reverted the vandalism but also changed some text, [you can see that one small edit of his was lost]. I don't think that "renditions" over "games" is a good edit anyway as it does not suit dictionary definitions of "rendition" very well, so I will leave it as it is. JayKeaton 23:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually i was reading that backwards, Floater actually changed it to "games" from "renditions". I agree with that choice so I will add it in manually. JayKeaton 23:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Isolation Revealed!

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/820/820585p1.html Looks like a pretty fun map —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.113.218 (talk) 23:07, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks like that is an official interview with Bunjies level designer, so there is probably some useful information there and maybe some quote that would be good for the Halo 3 page JayKeaton 23:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Critical reception

First review is in for Halo 3. It's time to start formatting that section so it looks good. It's rudimentary for now, but that's definitely going to change soon. Fortunately, there's an embargo til 12mid pacific on day of release. JAF1970 16:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

argos

I looks like argos (argos.co.uk) has already sold some copies of halo 3 to a lucky few.. http://www.mcvuk.com/news/28316/Argos-We-didnt-deliberately-break-Halo-3-street-date just trivia might be suitable for a launch section if you have one..87.102.116.240 17:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

A separate section (maybe a separate page if it gets too cumbersome) about the launch might be useful as there should be a lot of news about the record breaking, long lines, people getting stabbed, etc.157.174.221.169 15:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

There should also be in that pre-release section about the massive file sharing, thousands of people are playing Halo 3 right now and that definitely deserves a mention, especially as the gaming press are reporting it which gives it default notability JayKeaton 20:47, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

NEW ViDOC!

Bungie released a new ViDOC about saved films and forge, http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topnews&link=h3savedfilms —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.113.218 (talk) 21:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Good find. Lets get some people on extrapolating useful stuff we can add to the article from that. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 22:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

September 25

Some idiots keep taking Halo 3 off calender of 25 September. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.111.39 (talk) 23:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Try reading the rules before posting things in the calender. Games are not considered good enough for event moments. Even Halo 3 gets no recognition. 24.226.195.58 12:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The main reason it is repeatedly removed from the date article is because it has not yet occurred. Please contribute to the discussion at Talk:September 25 to discuss this issue and remember to remain civil. James086^{Talk | Email} 12:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

ummmm...just an FYI. James086 is correct, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Additionally, 24.226.195.58 is wrong, if an event is notable (and I think the largest revenue grossing media event in history is notable), then it DOES belong in the calender. 68.143.88.2 14:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The release of the game is not the notable action, the record being broken is. As long as you focus the calender post around that, you should be fine. Oh and it can't be done until after the action has actually occured.157.174.221.169 16:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The calendar is for notable events, not fancruft. Even the record being broken isn't notable enough to be on the calendar...unless there is some notable event attached to it (i.e. "Riots break out in cities throughout the U.S. as disgruntled fans are upset at the lack of supply of Halo 3). -- 12.116.162.162 17:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

^^^^^luckily, people like this guy doesn't make up the policy. 68.143.88.2 18:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore...ummmm....largest revenue grossing media event in history...ummm....yeah... NOTABLE! Duh 68.143.88.2 18:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Suggest for new article

I personally think an article needs to be created about the anxiety gamers experience in waiting and what seems infinite anticipation for the release of this game. Every time I think about Halo 3, and they fact that I can't play it until Tuesday, my heart skips a beat and I'm afraid something might happen before now and then. (I'm going to lock myself in a padded room with a doctor on call 24/7 to help ensure my survival until Tuesday). :) 68.143.88.2 14:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

"a very positive review considering Japan's overall dislike of First-Person Shooters". Does that statement seem a little biased to anyone? I'll be honest, I have heard Japan is'nt to keen on FPS myself but perhaps it should have a second look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.177.84.99 (talk) 18:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

"very" is definately POV, but the rest isn't so much. Just needs to be worded better JayKeaton 21:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Also "overall" should probably be changed to something like "general" or "typical" or something that doesn't imply that it is a universal opinion of all Japanese gamers.157.174.221.169 16:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Perminant Lock?

I think this needs to be locked until it's release. Too many "leaks" have been leaked out.205.213.111.54 19:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Wikipedia does not bend to Microsofts release plan. This article should have clear sections detailing the prerelease, the online leaks, videos of the final version of the game being put on YouTube and things like bungie.net doing flat out bans for anyone that mentions that they have played a prerelease/downloaded copy of the game. Since when does wikipedia roll over and die because a company is scared about leaks over their big title of the year ruining their thunder? If it was flat out blocked now then days worth of information would be missed out on, who knows what will happen, MS could order non disclosure orders on gaming websites, there could be mass bannings of Xbox Live accounts for people that bought the game early... it would be insane to lock the page down now. It has already been locked to new users and that is just what should happen, anything else would be a knee jerk reaction JayKeaton 21:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The page is currently semi-protected meaning people who aren't logged in and very new users can't edit it. Full protection would prevent many good users editing and that's not worth the convenience of not needing to revert a bit of unhelpful info. James086^{Talk | Email} 04:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

VH1 and MTV are showing old-reruns once Halo 3 comes out. A coincidence or was it planned?

If this was planned we should definitely add this in, obviously. Question is, how can we find out??

Btw, if it was planned it's obvious why they did this. Shutup999 21:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. But even still, I would like to think that VH1 and MTV would use that time slot to appeal to a non gaming audience if they seriously thought enough viewers were not watching their channels. I think it is not even a coincidence, the American new tv season thing doesn't start until a few days after Halo 3 comes out. But most of all, no television station can afford to rearrange their whole programming around the chance that no one would watch it, too much lost revenue JayKeaton 04:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. So do you think we should add this in? On how those major networks did this for Halo 3? It is notable info. Shutup999 05:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

That would be a negative. I doubt the release of this, or any, videogame would even be a blip on a networks radar. If you can find a genuine article mentioning it it would be worth a mention, but I think that would be very hard to find, if it all. It would be fascinating if you could prove it, but alas it is unprovable JayKeaton 06:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Without a source, this is all original research, and cannot be added. -- Viewdrix 07:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

First of all, Halo 3 is supposed to be beat out Halo 2 in pre-order sales. And we all know what happened with Halo 2 and it's record breaking impact right? Exactly. So I doubt it would be that absurd for them to do this. And yes they are doing this. If you have DISH or something just keep on skipping forward on their schedule and you'll notice this. VH1 is doin gan all day re-run of I LOVE THE 90s: PART DUEX or something. and MTV is doing an all day re-run of AMERICA'S NEXT TOP MODEL or something like that. Like I said, it would be amazing if one of us could contact MTV or VH1 and ask the questions. Shutup999 09:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

MTV have actually been doing their own Halo 3 themed events and may even do something on the launch day. And looking back 7 days before the launch, the tv lineup is just as uninspiring. Anything posted on Wikipedia has to be able to be verified by someone else, like someone that's published a medical journal, or the opinions of a famous tv critic, which is impossible for this. JayKeaton 10:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails

I've periodically kept track of this article to make sure that the "Head Like A Whole" tl:for link, which fails to meet guidelines for notability and WP:SPAM, stays off. I was happy to see that the edits were kept off for the most part, but it seems a user added it again. I deleted it and will continue to do so, a RfC has already occurred, it does not seem the discussion was archived and this talk page has been wiped several times since then. Consensus decision on this was to keep the for link OFF the page and it stayed off for nearly half a year, so let's not start up an old argument again just because the game is about to be released. "Halo 3" is specifically and unambiguously the name of a notable video game and nothing else of note, therefore no tl:for or other disambiguation is required. Drop it. ZG 21:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The RfC is found here at: Talk:Halo 3/Archive 5#Request for Comment. Incidentally, the for links are still on Halo: Combat Evolved and Halo 2. David Fuchs ^(talk) 22:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't see that the RfC is conclusively; it's hardly unilateral. Chris Cunningham 10:48, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I took the ones off of Halo and Halo2, and added a comment saying stop effing adding the Nine Inch Nails thing. Doubt it will work. The Walkin Dude 00:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

No, it didn't, and less of the incivility, thanks.

It's crazy that someone went to the effort of RFCing this. It's one line for the sake of consistency, and it means that articles written about Nine Inch Nails which happen to lazily link to Halo 2 without considering that there might be a video game there (as opposed to most other Halo articles) don't leave readers lost when they visit the links. Spam my eye. Chris Cunningham 10:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Calling those who work on these articles 'kids' is rather patronizing too, bud. David Fuchs ^(talk) 15:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thing is, everyone who knows enough about Reznor's idiosyncratic naming scheme is also aware that albums have real names. The few people in the world who actually refer to NIN works exclusively by "Halo" designation should be careful to not push their pretensions too far, lest they continue wasting time and attention of the vast majority of visitors who have to read a disambig notice and wonder just who the hell would confuse a videogame with an obscure alternate title for an album. Problem with redirects? Fix 'em. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 11:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps those NIN articles which "lazily" link to halo whatever should be cleaned up to avoid double redirects. But more importantly, it's just not notable outside of the NIN fan base. No-one is reasonably going to arrive at Halo 3 looking for a nine inch nails song.--Yeti Hunter 13:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

There's also the fact that on all the NIN albums with this alternative name, it's always "HALO_01", "HALO_02", etc., so the chances of Mr. Everyman looking for 'Halo 2' is even less likely. David Fuchs ^(talk) 14:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Bullshit. I'm holding my PHM vinyl right now, and it says "halo two". Does that mean we can have Halo two, since you're not using it? 99.175.79.59 (talk) 19:26, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

leak and prerelease

I just added the following. It is all fact, all sourced and all confirmed by reputable sources, please do not delete it, but feel free to improve it:

Pre-release and piracy
A week before Halo 3 was due for release, major UK catalogue retailer Argos accidently released some of their final retail copies of Halo 3. Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices division were quoted as being "disappointed that it happened" but that "it was just an honest mistake" and that Microsoft had no intention of punishing Argos for the error.[32]

Halo 3 was also leaked online over a week before it's official release. The 6.14 gigabyte file of the game was hacked and downloaded by "thousands" of people within 24 hours of the leak. Also at this time, spoilers from the leaked copy of Halo 3 were captured and posted on popular file sharing sites like YouTube.[33]

JayKeaton 04:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Only a few more days...

I created a rough skeleton of what I assume the complete, post release article will take and put it here. My suggestion is that the day before the official release, we copy all the content on the article page over to /prerelease, paste in the article skeleton and add in relevant chunks from there. We should also archive all comments here and upon release be vigilant about forum discussions and to just remove them. David Fuchs ^(talk) 14:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Comments are already archived as they need to be and you can look at the article as it was at any time by going into the history. You can even link to certain forms, like [this one is from one day ago]. And don't forget, a lot of people already have the retail copy of the game and they have finished it, as well as the many that have downloaded Halo 3 and finished it. You know how people are, a store accidently sells them this years biggest game a week early and what will they do? They will come to Wikipedia to update what they have learned. Just keep that in mind as they haven't broken any rules, they have legitimate copies, they have read the entirety of the instruction booklet (in fact there are several scans of the booklet online) so you may have to assume good faith with some edits, put citation tags on things that could very well be fact and blam anything that is bullshit. All of the "game" related edits should be cornered into one section, like gameplay or summat, so there is room for updates that come straight from Bungie, the general press and the gaming press (which, obviously, is instantly verifiable) JayKeaton 14:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

You're missing the point. A) It is much easier to copy and paste info from another page then it is from an old version, and 3/4ths of the crap on the page right now should not be in the article. Secondly, we are not a forum, and so people posting 'OMG LOLZ WHAT AN ENDING' will have their comments removed. This is about improvement of the article, not discussion of the game. And what do you mean by 'game-related edits should be cornered in one section'- is not the game the point of the article? David Fuchs ^(talk) 15:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Dude, this is Wikipedia and I have been using it for more than a few weeks, you do not need to tell me "it is not a forum", so I do not know why are you are even saying that. As for the third, take a look at Halo 2, some of the page discusses the actual game, some of it discusses the games sales and impact. I must be missing the point, with only 46 hours until this mammoth title comes out, I do not see the point in copying the article somewhere else into a /sandbox when efforts should be made on the article itself JayKeaton 16:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

It's not a sandbox. Read the archives, and you'll see the editors agreed this would be a good idea. David Fuchs ^(talk) 17:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Basically the subpage (/prerelease) will be an stored version of the article (yes like a revision in the article history) but it allows us to easily and quickly get information from the old version without sorting through the history. The plan is not to edit the stored version, rather it's an easy way of refering to the old revision of the article. On Sept. 25 the article is going to undergo a big change and this helps keep it under control. When David is said that we should remove "discussion of the game" he meant talk page comments not related to the article (like "wow this game is so good" or "how cool is the the level Tzavo Highway?"), we should remove them, not archive them. When he mentioned archiving he was refering to this section where there was no opposition to archiving this talk page on September 24 because of the huge amount traffic expected the next few days. Oh and this is what I think David meant, correct me if I'm wrong. James086^{Talk | Email} 02:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Comparing history points would be easier then, as it actually highlights any changes made JayKeaton 05:57, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Well we find it easier to have a separate page that is always on that revision instead of adding a page in the history to favourites or something. If you find it easier to use the history as a reference point then by all means do so. James086^{Talk | Email} 07:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I would, but a method of editing that is crafted around an obsolete version seems pointless and it'd get in the way of anyone that is editing the article in the normal way JayKeaton 18:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Then you update the page your way, and leave us to our "pointless" methods. David Fuchs ^(talk) 19:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Order of release

For the countries that have a release date of Sept 25th, the order of release is "Australia, Singapore, India, Canada, Brazil and United States", as in it is the 25th of Sept in Australia 14 hours before the United States, and so on. It makes absolute sense that the countries are listed in order of release instead of just listed randomy JayKeaton 16:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Halo 3 already started

If you go to www.bungie.net and click on the big '3' on the homepage, people are already playing halo 3 multiplayer. How are they doing that if the game doesn't come out until Tuesday? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.113.218 (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

it cud b that they'r eithr bungie employees/friends/family members of bungie employees, or that they just won special contests and got to play the game early —Preceding unsigned comment added by Discopete117 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The game was leaked by some UK manufacturer, Argos. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 19:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

There have also been retailers who accidentally released the game early, and the game has also been sighted on ebay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.42.176.201 (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I asked on the forums yesterday and was told that MOST of the people currently playing are Bungie employees, or reviewers who are given copies early so they can have reviews ready. Very few people actually got legal leaked copies, and the pirated versions won't play on xbox live.157.174.221.169 16:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Custom soundtracks

I added the citation requested to article. Here's link: Bungie Podcast: So Long mentioned at about 36:36 into podcast. I'm not completely sure if I did everything right. Cheers. --Robert Harrison^{talk contrib} 17:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks good! SpigotMap 17:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

...Not sure why this is significant. ALL xbox 360 games support custom soundtracks. it is a feature of the 360, and all 360 games are required to support it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.42.176.201 (talk) 19:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

That is not actually correct. Nice try though. I've readded it. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 21:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

No, the standard is that every game should have custom soundtracks. In any case, feel free to mention it in the article, but it isn't even near notable enough for its own section. -- Viewdrix 22:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Maps

Why isn't there a category for maps. There a important aspect of Halo 3 and deserve more than a line or two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.113.218 (talk) 18:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

See WP:NOT#GUIDE ♦^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 18:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying make a list or guide, i'm saying make a 'maps' category and go in a little bit more detail than one line because maps are kind of important. Or maybe there not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.113.218 (talk) 20:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

To clarify: Literally ANYBODY can join your game if you allow them, right??

I read in an EGM article or something that they got smart, and jumped on the bandwagon with literally every other FPS out there and got rid of the worthless "only friends, and friend's friends can join" restriction. Which is good. That means that I don't have to wait forever for to get a full game going, AND don't have to remove my friends who will not play Halo 3 all that much.

I'm pretty sure what they said is this: You go to the start menu and click on some option that "sends your gametype out there for people can join" or something like that.

Anyway, why the hell is this not featured in the article? Don't say "we did not add it in due to a lack of source". 1/2 this things on this article is not even sourced. Just take a look at the "technology" section for one, out of the many examples. Shutup999 21:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

"a very positive review considering Japan's overall dislike of the first-person shooters genre"

This is very true. Do NOT remove this. Articles accross the internet have talked about this. They also mentioned how they are biased towards japanese games, and have provided facts to prove this. Anyway, just telling you guys NOT to remove this. Shutup999 21:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I was just asking for a second look earlier, if what you say is true, then its all fine by me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.177.84.99 (talk) 22:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The same magazine gave Nintendogs a perfect score. QED.--Yeti Hunter 23:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes 142.177.84.99, is is very true. Hell, go to wikipedia's own article and check their top reviewed games. or just search "halo 3 famitsu" on google news, or google by itself for that matter. And check all the articles talking about how much they are surprised.

It would be nice if somebody can just atke one, out of the hundreds of links and put it on the halo 3 article. I't to lazy to do it myself Shutup999 23:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Matchmaking Info

http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topnews&cid=12802 Bungie just updated and its chockfull of the matchmaking variants for Halo 3. Could find some good adds for the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandon boudreaux (talk • contribs) 23:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

So...Why the hell is nobdy adding any of this info in? Shutup999 03:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Why the hell don't you add it yourself? JayKeaton 10:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Everytime i try and add something, it gets deleted. So I don't even try anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandon boudreaux (talk • contribs) 14:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Just be vigilant. After it was deleted, look at the reason why it was deleted in the article history, and just re add it but improve on it this time, maybe put it in a better section or put better sources on it. Sometimes peoples edits can be deleted by accident, a person will revert back to older edits without actually looking at what they reverted, so it can pay to add it back in if you think it really does belong in the article JayKeaton 16:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

characters

Should there be anything about the enemy characters in halo 3? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.105.206.35 (talk) 03:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

This info is already provided in the Halo universe article. No need to repeat it.157.174.221.169 17:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Halo 3 manual online

Halo 3 manual. It contains a LOT of information that should be on the page. For example, the campaign scoring ONLY occurs in co-op. Points are given for killing enemies, getting vehicles, etc. You lose points for griefing, etc. I don't have the time to post the relevent stuff into the article, but I'm sure some of you can. ;) JAF1970 15:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

What the heck is Silverlight? I can't do anything with it, I've only got Mac OS X Panther... When it comes to sourcing upon release I'll just use the physical manual :\ David Fuchs ^(talk) 17:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Silverlight is like flash except it's designed by Microsoft. The website does have some interesting info, but the pc I'm currently on, uh, doesn't have silverlight to say the least. Anyway, tomorrow I'm getting Legendary yay! and I'm sure there's loads of info in the Beastiarum and the DVDs to also be added. Does anyone know how to cite an instruction manual/the beastiarum, I doubt they have an ISBN so is it a book or magazine? Or do I just add what info I can? James086^{Talk | Email} 23:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

That's strange, I was quite sure scoring, or the 'metagame', was an option (can be turned on or off) for both solo and co-op play. This was also said in many of the recent reviews. Hayden120 00:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Check Halo 2's citations on the manual, James. David Fuchs ^(talk) 11:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Article Layout

Ok, over at /prereleaseI came up with a rough skeleton of what the finished article would look like at some point in the future. The only problem I'm finding is what to do with the 'Features' that are currently on the page- we don't want to go into an overly precise-bordering on crufty approach to the new features, but we want them to be recognizable and flow with the rest of the article. Putting them before the gameplay makes no sense, but putting it after is a bit rough as well- and putting it smack in the relevant sections, while the most streamlined approach, means that navigating specifically to this section would be a problem. Thoughts? David Fuchs ^(talk) 18:20, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

You, uh, decided to remove the info about Halo 3 being optimized for 1080p in the infobox? Articles should shape themselves, if you need a sandbox to help work out how an article should look then you probably should avoid editing that article to begin with. JayKeaton 18:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

1080p definitely deserves to be mentioned in the infobox, Hilary Goldstein in IGNs official review of Halo 3 makes a clear point that "it's die for in 1080p" JayKeaton 19:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I copied that infobox from whatever version of the article was there at the time; evidently it didn't have 1080p mentioned that version. Calm down, it's not a deliberate attempt to remove the information. David Fuchs ^(talk) 19:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Not specifically about your sandbox was I pointing out the 1080p issue, but it was talked about before. Some people are really heavy on the 1080p/Halo 3 issue, but it was claimed by Microsoft to run in 1080p and it has been confirmed by at least one reviewer to look very good while in the 1080p mode. JayKeaton 20:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

24(ish) hours to release, full protection?

Ok guys, we're getting close to 24 hours away from release time. As those of you who have witnessed a major game release approach on Wikipedia, you know that we get swarmed with vandals, edits that have NOTHING to do with the game, unencyclopedic edits, game guides, etc. The standard stuff. What I'm proposing is that sometime in the next few hours, the article be fully protected, with the expiration date to be approx. ~4 hours after release. This does NOT mean that edits will not be made to the article: You can use the {{editprotected}} tag to request changes, and a sysop will make them. I will be monitoring the page myself, as well. This would not affect the talk page. Thoughts? ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 18:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

My thoughts are a strong no to any more protection than the page already has. And the game comes out in less than 20 hours btw. JayKeaton 18:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I will protect the page if we get large amounts of vandalism from recent accounts as well, but page protection, as per policy, should not be used as a preventative measure, rather in response to vandalism. Unless it's really bad, we should just be vigilant, both here on the talk page and in terms of actual content. Hopefully, the vandalism will be like the ones I used to have to weed out over at Halo 2 - "Haloz are 1337" and crap like that which is easily identifiable. David Fuchs ^(talk) 19:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be unwise to have no protection at all, even if it does appear to go against policy. This article will be at its highest traffic point between now and about a week from now, so making it open to any unregistered editor would be foolish and locking it completely to make it even harder for registered editors from improving it while it is at its peak traffic point would be just as foolish JayKeaton 20:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I also oppose full protection. The opportunity cost is too high (too many good editors lost for the gain of not cleaning up). It's also against policy, but even if we use common sense, this is still not a good idea. James086^{Talk | Email} 23:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The current semi-protected state will probably weed out a good 90% of the vandals. Lets try and just handle the others at first and see how it goes. If it gets REALLY bad, more protection may be in order, but I don't think we'll need it.157.174.221.169 17:14, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, while I agree, I'm also concerned about the reception section which will hinder any possible neutral status. Stabby Joe 00:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Eh, its gonna get good reviews, if some fanboys keep hiding any issues (which for right now seem only to be that it's short in terms of story and evolutionary rather than revolutionary) we can probably just block them if they're being disruptive, rather than locking the entire thing. David Fuchs ^(talk) 01:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Don't just put in IGN's review and leave it at that. Include a a quote praising it and their major complaint

Don't just put in IGN's revie and leave it at that. Include a a quote praising it and their major complaint.

Seriously. say IGN gave Halo 3 a "____", praising it's "____" and citing "___" as their major complaint. Or something like that. Shutup999 18:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The entire section will need revising once all the reviews come out. For one, in the side table you only put notable publication scores, that way you don't have to say 'IGN gave it... XX out of XX." It may also be more prudent to simply have a good-bad paragraph form, depending on the reviews. David Fuchs ^(talk) 19:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

universally every crticic's major gripe is that Halo 3's single player campaign is disappointing.

universally every crticic's major gripe is that Halo 3's single player campaign is disappointing. please add this in. Shutup999 20:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

"so far" would be more accurate than "universally", as universally might imply that all future reviews will have that same gripe. Although they probably will, some might not. Always strive to be as descriptive and accurate as possible I always say JayKeaton 20:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The only complaint about the campaign has been it's length - not one has complained about the campaign itself - they've raved about it. JAF1970 04:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. There's definitely going to be something about criticisms of the single player campaign going into the criticism. But we need to be specific: they're not complaining about the quality, they're complaining about the length. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 05:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Somebody is playing with the article

Read Gameplay. INTUNEevolution 22:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Give specifics, don't just tell us to read the article. SpigotMap 22:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

somebody just destroyed the entry on the article, talking abolut only nerds care and its a bad game. please ban whoever this is and fix the page!!! its locked to me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darthblaze99 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Chile launch date

Could someone add Chile right next to Japan? We are also having an official launch by Microsoft Chile on September 27th. Thanks. leoprieto 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the infobox only contains the 'main' dates, which there are three. Most countries fit into one of them. For example, Australia, my country, fits into the North American timeframe; the 25th of September. Chile fits into the Japanese time frame; the 27th of September. (By the way, you can sign your comments by typing four tildes (~~~~) rather than typing all the code manually) Hayden120 00:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

According to xbox.com, Chiles "fecha de aparición" (date of appearance) for Halo 3 is "TBD" (To Be Determined). It could just be that xbox.com hasn't updated the Chile version of the website and that it is coming out soon, it is meant to be more or less a worldwide release JayKeaton 08:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

IGN calles Halo 3's soundtrack the best of all time. worth adding? I think so.

IGN calles Halo 3's soundtrack the best of all time. worth adding? I think so. But WHERE do we add this in? Shutup999 05:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Somewhere down in Halo 3#Critical reception. Someguy1221 05:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Wait until the reviews are all in. And by that, I mean OXM and EGM's magazine reviews. JAF1970 05:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Or, create a new section for Audio/Soundtrack. David Fuchs ^(talk) 11:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

halo 3 came out in australia at midnight monday. It's been out for 2 hours! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.186.72.68 (talk) 16:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

People, it's still not included. This is ridiculous, I mean it is notable for IGN to say that this soundtrack is the best they have ever heard. We HAVE to include this one way or another. Shutup999 17:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Be careful though, I can see the neutral stance being killed by die hard fans who will want to advertise this game as the best ever through this article... and I don't think I need to explain why we can't have that. Stabby Joe 00:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Halo 3 Ranking System

Rank: Recruit - Grade 1, RP Points: 1

Rank: Apprentice - Grade 1, RP Points: 2

Rank: Apprentice - Grade 2, RP Points: 3

Rank: Private - Grade 1, RP Points: 5

Rank: Private - Grade 2, RP Points: 7

Rank: Corporal - Grade 1, RP Points: 10

Rank: Corporal - Grade 2, RP Points: 15

Rank: Sergeant - Grade 1, RP Points: 20

Rank: Sergeant - Grade 2, RP Points: 30

Rank: Sergeant - Grade 3, RP Points: 40

Rank: Gunnery Sergeant - Grade 1, RP Points: 50

Rank: Gunnery Sergeant - Grade 2, RP Points: 60

Rank: Gunnery Sergeant - Grade 3, RP Points: 150

Rank: Gunnery Sergeant - Grade 4, RP Points: 300

Rank: Lieutenant - Grade 1, RP Points: 70

Rank: Lieutenant - Grade 2, RP Points: 85

Rank: Lieutenant - Grade 3, RP Points: 200

Rank: Lieutenant - Grade 4, RP Points: 400

Rank: Captain - Grade 1, RP Points: 100

Rank: Captain - Grade 2, RP Points: 150

Rank: Captain - Grade 3, RP Points: 300

Rank: Captain - Grade 4, RP Points: 600

Rank: Major - Grade 1, RP Points: 200

Rank: Major - Grade 2, RP Points: 300

Rank: Major - Grade 3, RP Points: 600

Rank: Major - Grade 4, RP Points: 1200

Rank: Commander - Grade 1, RP Points: 300

Rank: Commander - Grade 2, RP Points: 450

Rank: Commander - Grade 3, RP Points: 900

Rank: Commander - Grade 4, RP Points: 1800

Rank: Colonel - Grade 1, RP Points: 400

Rank: Colonel - Grade 2, RP Points: 600

Rank: Colonel - Grade 3, RP Points: 1200

Rank: Colonel - Grade 4, RP Points: 2400

Rank: Brigadier - Grade 1, RP Points: 500

Rank: Brigadier - Grade 2, RP Points: 1000

Rank: Brigadier - Grade 3, RP Points: 2000

Rank: Brigadier - Grade 4, RP Points: 4000

Rank: General - Grade 1, RP Points: 600

Rank: General - Grade 2, RP Points: 1200

Rank: General - Grade 3, RP Points: 2500

Rank: General - Grade 4, RP Points: 5000

Continued...

Skill Level: 10, Lieutenant

Skill Level: 20, Captain

Skill Level: 30, Major

Skill Level: 35, Commander

Skill Level: 40, Colonel

Skill Level: 45, Brigadier

Skill Level: 50, General

X68zeppelin80x 14:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Disc scratching problems with Limited Edition

Why is there there no mention of this? The flawed packaging is a pretty well documented problem on the web, and my game disc came out scratched. Richiekim 17:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

To keep up the illusion of awesomeness, obviously. (Actually, I don't know.) Vegetaman 17:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

      My disk did not come scratched and i got the legendary edition -Kit T. Kat

UK:RESISTANCE review

Remove the reference to it, it's clearly sarcastic. The Frederick 13:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

mistake

i found a small thing that could be changed.... were it says players are limited to only two weapons at any one time in Halo it should also include or three if the player is dual weilding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.206.130.125 (talk) 16:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Or 11 if player is dual weilding and is carrying 8 grenades, as grenades are undeniably weapons JayKeaton 08:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually 12 weapons can be held at one time, even without dual wielding. 8 grenades, one firearm, another fire arm and on of the turrets that has been torn off and carried around. You need to be accurate with these things guys ^_^