Talk:Halo 3/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 → Archive 5

Release Date

I've edited the Release Date section of the page to make it better organized. It seems prudent to start with the most official release date, then get into the more outdated, but still worthwhile, information. I also cleaned up the end of the section dealing with Best Buy and Play, giving links to the product page. I don't know how necessary it is to have the last paragraph in there at all because every online store is going to make up it's own release date, probably because their inventory systems don't allow for TBA dates. Perhaps retail references should be removed.

If anyone disagrees with my changes, please say so. --Nick, 65.100.221.52 08:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop advertising your site here!

I just had to remove <link removed> that is a fansite which qualifies it for advertisment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lani12 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 26 July 2006

How clever to advertise your own site by saying you removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.0.62 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 19 October 2006

The Announced & Seen Returning Elements Section

Ok I made this section for stuff that has been announced and seen in both Halo 3 videos, and through Bungie.net. I dont want to see stuff that hasn't been confirmed or seen. Okay Tonster

What's your source for the M90 shotgun? It isn't in the trailer and isn't mentioned in the Weekly updates as far as I can see. Ace of Sevens 04:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm also wondering about the source for the phantoms and the unknown covenant weapon. As far as I can tell, Master Chief, Cortana, the Assault Rifle, Banshees and Capital Ships are in the trailer. Bungie later confirmed Gravemind, Beam Rifle and Warthog in weekly updates and that's it. Ace of Sevens 18:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

go watch the trailer again, you can see phantoms flying alongside the banshees. i dont know anything about the covenant weapon though. Sizzlebread23 16 aug 2006

The latest Bungie Weekly Update [1] mentions a new weapon (which I strongly suspect is the much-awaited flamethrower, but that is just an opinion), and more specifically, that one of the game testers was "running around the level destroying everything" with it. Probably doesn't count as actual proof that Halo 3 will feature destructible environments, but it might be something to watch out for.EDH 00:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The Shotgun is shown in the behind the scenes video released by Bungie. However, the list says Rocket Launcher, does anyone have a link saying this? Razer of Chaos 04:16, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't advertise your site here

I just removed two fansites from the External Links listing, don't re-add them. Darthbob100 01:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Pre-rendered proof?

Call me skeptical, but I disagree with the quote, "(and proving the video was not prerendered.)" since the Behind the Scenes video doesn't show that this was rendered on an Xbox360. They also imply pretty heavily that the final product won't be exactly what we've seen; at several points in the video they say something to the effect of 'we hope this is what the game will look like.' 64.247.206.176 19:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you know what prerendered means? It means they didn't use a supercomputer to render each frame one-by-one. In-engine means they did nothing more special than give instructions to the objects and their movement. For example, the reflection in MC's visor was real-time. JAF1970 23:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

There will undoubtedly bee differences between what we saw in the trailer and what will be in the box in early 2007. Case in point: compare and contrast Halo's E3 trailer with the actual game--very different. What was seen in the trailer, however, was being done in real-time, and not prerendered. This was proven where (from what I hear) the camera was moved around in order to demonstrate to observers that the trailer environment was generated in realtime using only a 360. Ourai 04:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Not to mention Bungie has previously shown off the trailer to various industry insiders post-e3 and actually flew the camera around in real-time to show off effects, including firing the assault rifle to prove that it also reflected in Chief's visor.Gspawn 14:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
And the claim that this is like the Halo 2 e3 showing is complately bogus, because that was a special case. After that e3, Bungie found out they'd spent too much time making the demo, and that harm had been done to the larger project, necessitating what was basically a rebuild of the entire game from the ground up (see Halo 2 special ed DVD). Work on Halo 3 seems to continue apace at the moment (Bungie.net Weekly Updates), and barring technical limitations, everything you saw in the e3 trailer is still in-game. There are a few things that will probably change (in my opinion)- for example, Chief's real-time visor reflections would be a major graphical waste in Campaign, necessitating the game always be prepared to render everything twice (or more, in Co-op). It's likely Bungie would limit that feature to cut-scenes or single-person Campaign in order- not because the 360 couldn't handle the reflections, but- to spend that power on other elements of the game. For example: Would you rather have a reflective visor, or perhaps 5 more characters onscreen at once with no slowdown? How about a larger full-detail draw distance, meaning even less potential popup when loading high-res textures? These are trades most anyone is willing to make in the larger scope of the game. Gspawn 14:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Assault Rifle / Shotgun

Under discussion of the new "making of" vid from Bungie, someone changed a reference to say Master Chief was seen holding the Shotgun. I can see the misunderstanding, as Chief is seen holding a Shotgun, but only in one part of the vid. In the more commonly seen portion, he is indeed holding an Assault Rifle. The point is that the Shotgun was essentially revealed in the video, and wording thus needs to be changed to wliminate confusion. Changing. Gspawn 15:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Playable Platforms

With the release of the X-Box 360, does that mean that people who don't have the 360, only the original X-Box, won't be able to enjoy the game in the comfort of their own home at 2:30 in the morning playing with someone in Australia? Or will they also make a version for X-Box? - User:Sasuke-kun27 17:43, 22 June 2006

Well, there hasn't been any word of Halo 3 for Xbox, and I remember someone saying that Halo 3 was going to take advantage of the 360's power, thus ruling out a Xbox title (Not powerful enough). It's highly unlikely that MS Game Studios will release a version of Halo 3 (Taken down a notch so the Xbox can handle it) for a console that they are halting production on for the 360, while releasing Halo 3 on Xbox 360 only would get a lot of people to buy 360s. Course, I could always be wrong.- Delta Spartan 04:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
No, Bungie will not release Halo 3 for the Xbox. Halo 3's very engine cannot run on the original. More importantly, Halo 3 is going to sell 360's. For many, it will be the reason to get one. --Orion Minor 09:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Or maybe everyone could calm down, realize that Halo 3 was an exclusive 360 title from the moment it was set in motion because Bungie wants to take advantage of the power of the new system, and leave it at that. There's no secret system-selling conspiracy here- why develop Halo 3 for Xbox when it could be developed for 360? Why go multiplatform with Xbox when you could just use that extra manpower to make Halo 3 better on the 360? It makes sense without reverting to screaming M$ IS EVIL OMG~ 172.134.16.25 16:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't know where you get this "screaming M$ IS EVIL OMG" stuff, because the other anwsers were in coherent, complete sentences taking a professional attitude in purporting their opinions.

Sword, Not Source

And leave it at that. Someone attempted to input a mess of psychological mumbo-jumbo basically trying to back up the "source" bit... seriously, people just heard it wrong. That's all. There is no secret conspiracy. Take off the tinfoil hat. Deleting any future addition of this nature if they happen again. 172.131.116.25 01:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Suspected Storyline of the Halo Series

Humans are actually the descendents of the Forerunners. Look at the symbolism in a Biblical content. In the bible there was a great flood for which Noah built an ark to avoid it. Everyone on Earth was destroyed except for those in the ark and life started over. The same happened in Halo: a parisite called the flood attacked the Forerunners and so they destroyed their world. Before this, however, they entered the ark and travelled to Earth where they began a new life. Also, according to the Halo 3 Announcement Trailer, the ark is in Africa, where life is suspected to have begun on Earth. Also, in one of the Halo games Guilty Spark asks Master Chief "If you have to, would you do it again?" meaning "if you had to activate the rings again, would you?". Why would Guilty Spark ask this unless he recognizes Master Chief's human form to be that of the Forerunners. --68.5.54.32 18:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC) C Rett

No.Guilty Spark means"would you go activate another ring"as in Halo combat evolved.--40k carnage 22:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)40k carnage

I knew that already. However, we can't include it until Halo 3 turns out that way, because it might turn out to be something else.--Zxcvbnm 19:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
And knowing Bungie, the obvious answer isn't the most likely....Peptuck 08:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Believing it doesn't make it true. Quick examples for the above: Couldn't the Covenant have also survived in this manner? Maybe they were re-seeded across the galaxy on purpose- to increase survivability of the recovering races. And who says the Covenant can't be Reclaimers? Master Chief is wearing a suit with shield technology reverse-engineered from Covenant sources (Jackals specifically- check the novels). Who's to say Guilty Spark isn't only checking technology and reading the Covenant signature? Or what if 343 is just insane (well, he is) and thinks that anyone nearby who looks like they could hold a weapon becomes The Reclaimer? There are a million ways to spin every tiny detail. In the novels, 343 referred to Sgt. Mabuto as a "Reclaimer" too, so the designation is obviously not unique. Gspawn 21:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

you do have to consider that only humans can fire halos, remember tartarus used miranda keyes to fire it in halo 2. Coviecarbine 16:23, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Anyone else getting the "vibe" that this guy is an alternate account to John-117?

what guy do you mean? i hope your not accusing me.Coviecarbine 04:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

O_o I was talking about the guy posting about the possible Halo storyline... John-117 did the same thing.

We know more then we know but not enough to understand. The truth will not survive but die not like regret. He showed no mercy to him. The kingdom will crumble his will destroyed . The rings will speak thou there number is f our. You have been deceived by many who know more then we know but they don’t understand. Who am I? I am you but I understand

Overspecification

Don't be overzealous with designations. For example, who says the Assault Rifle in the trailer is an "MA5B ACWS"? Isn't the ACWS a modern weapon system that people are comparing the MA5B to? Anyway- What if it's an "MA5b mkII" or an "MA16B" because of under-the-hood advancements? Until something has been absoutely proven, keep it out of the weapon/vehicle section. Also, someone listed the "M12 LRV" Warthog. The LRV designation is for Warthogs that carry the LAAG machinegun- if I remember, another version of the Hog was something like an LAAV (maybe the rocket hog from Halo PC?). Again, until you know for certain, leave out the details. Gspawn 21:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

what the hell are you talking about?--40k carnage 02:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)40k carnage

Ummm.... "Overspecification" is when someone states too much detail. Someone edited stating the weapon in the announcement trailer was an "MA5B ACWS Assault Rifle". We have no reason at all to think the weapon is an "MA5B" (it could shoot differently, and therefore be a new model like the Magnum versus the old Pistol), let alone an "ACWS" (a modern designation Bungie's never mentioned). Does that help? Gspawn 13:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

we have only ever seen one human push the button and that was commander keyes in halo 2 tartarus my have supplied the force but look closely and youll se it was her hand

halo3

When are you going to put halo3 on x box

Last time I checked, Wikipedia was not Bungie Studios. Perhaps you should ask them. Peptuck 08:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Bungie will not be releasing Halo 3 for Xbox consoles, to the best of my knowledge. The reasoning for this is simple; the Xbox simply is not powerful enough to run Halo 3, which--if you saw the Halo 3 high-def trailer--has graphics comprable to contemporary feature films. Ourai 02:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
"graphics comprable to contemporary feature films"? That's a bit far-fetched. Sure, the rendering and dynamic lighting effects look awesome but it is still an animation and has no resemblence to real photography.

Not before July 07

It is unlikely that Halo 3 will be released before July next year. --81.79.159.229 12:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

And your source is...? And your statement matters at all because...? Gspawn 15:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Knowing Them, They'll Try To Have It Out 07-07-07 Just To Be Cute.


And bungie has proven to have a major fetish with the number 7.

"I'm going to take back that cruiser"

This is the last line half-jaw had in halo 2, and I think that the Arbiter, Johnson, Miranda, Guilty spark, and the remaining covenant seperatists and sentinels will go to help half jaw take the cruiser, then use it to get back to earth( or the arc, but its speculated that its on earth). It's also possible that the sentinels and Spark will turn on the humans and covenant seperatists once they learn their intentions for the halos. What do yall think?

I think this isn't a message board for posting random theories. Try halo.bungie.org.
And you somehow think Guilty Spark doesn't know the humans' intent?

Flood as ally?

Well, if the gravemind is an ally, there's a possibility that he flood is as well. -The Gravemind was only using Chief and the Arbiter. There's no alliance. --Again, this is not just a message board. Try halo.bungie.org.

Not Likely because the gravemind is just a type of flood, he dosnt control the rest of the flood, he is mearly the only smart flood, and the flood are mindless zombies thats only goul in life/death (which ever one it is) is to kill every living thing. - Matt Husdon

The flood consume all in there path but there actions in the past have the ring of intelligence [waiting until the humans repaired the cruiser above halo before attacking in the book the flood

he waited four ages thou his mind slept 

his servants screaming awoke him

to his empire of eternal death his power complete his deception sure like the spider weaving its web he waited know no more.allthewisemen

Archival, edits

  • This page has been archived as of July 15, 2006. To see older discussions, see link at top. The page was getting too long, and I jsut wanted to ensure everyone knew I didn't just delete a bunch of talk.Gspawn 13:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone massively edited the "confirmed list" section, and I'll list some of the problems.

  • Overspecification: For example, we do not have any proof that the Assault Rifle in the trailer is the "MA5B". For all we know, it could be an MA16Z, because it could be a different model with a similar look. Until there's specific, linkable proof that something this specific is known, don't include it. See "overspecification", a few comments above.
  • Assumption: People call the Covenant "big ships" in the trailer Capital ships, or Cruisers, or whatever. Until someone can provide a link to where Bungie says what they are, you can also file this under "overspecification". They could have a new designation because of their task, or any number of things, and we're mostly guessing at designation anyway. We just don't know.
  • Empty Sections: Until a heading has information to list, don't include a heading. Someone put in an essentially blank "multiplayer gametypes" bit... when we know a gametype, add the section. But not before.

Yeah, it's all a bit anal, but it makes for a higher-quality article in the end.Gspawn 13:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

From the Assumption part. We already know that the ships above the Forerunner Artifact are Capitol Ships. Why? Because they are seen numerous times in Halo 2, and are announced to be Capitol Ships, not Excavation Ships. Thats what the Scarab does Tonster

I'm not saying they're "Excavation" ships (uppercase), I'm saying they're part of an excavation fleet (lowercase), as stated by Bungie in the FAQ at Bungie.net, if I'm not mistaken. So again, we have no reason to think these ships might not- Ah, *** it. Nobody cares anyway. The section has a "do not post here" warning (unencyclopedic) and lines like "unknown enemy larger than a Grunt" (non-specific, unnecessary...). I'm tired of trying to explain this. Gspawn 13:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Should we include the Banshee pilots, whatever they are? Or eliminate them and the "unknown species" as well? Peptuck 22:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I think about it like this- with the "unknown species", you're saying that you've obviously seen something that's been confirmed as new. With "banshee pilots", you're basically only saying that vehicles need drivers. What about "Covenant Cruiser pilot, crew, maintenance team, and soldiers on standby, as well as any Minor Prophets in command"? Gspawn 12:34, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha. I find myself agreeing; No banshee pilots, but the unknown species should stay.
Didn't Bungie specifically say that the enemy larger than a grunt may or may not be new? It was a way of saying something with no actual meaningful content. Ace of Sevens 12:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Halo 3 main screen?

Can someone confirm whether that is an accurate screenshot or not? Peptuck 21:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I beleive Bungie said it was fake.

Confirmed as a Photoshop in even this month's Game Informer. Gspawn 13:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Well then, that eliminated any possible regrets I may have had about deleting it from the article :P Peptuck 22:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Assault Rifle or Battle Rifle?

I raise the question whether MC is holding an assault rifle or a battle rifle. The assault rifle was replaced by the battle rifle in halo 2 so it would be strange if they brought it back in halo 3. It maybe a battle rifle or an unknown weapon. It is better to state this in the weapons section, ex.: "Assault rifle (speculation)" or "Battle Rifle or Assault Rifle". --Nytemunkey 04:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Bungie has referred to it as an assault rifle. For instance, in this week's weekly update. [2]

Just glancing at it shows that its an Assault Rifle, and not a Battle Rifle; not to mention that in the Halo plotline, the Battle Rifles were only introduced a month before Halo 2's events, so there's bound to be plenty of ARs left on Earth. Peptuck 06:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

They might even put both rifles in the game or combine them into one switch function rifle. -- User:Matthew Husdon

Under the human weapons section, don't change the name of the Assault Rifle to anything until direct confirmation from Bungie about the name; so, as for now, just leave it at MA5B. Darthbob100 02:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Since those scans its both! James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 06:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

deletions

Deleted a few bits. For clarity:
However, it could also be that Cortana means: This is the way the world ends, not with a whimper but a bang due to the bright flash during the "This is the way the world ends".

Actually, I just wanted to save this one somewhere. Gave me a chuckle, anyway.

Because of speculation as to the identity of the Spartan shown in the trailer, Bungie has confirmed that it is the Master Chief.

Already elsewhere in the article, not to mention I think this has mostly died off after the initial fan fervor from those who happened to read the novels.

One Xbox 360 magazine says that the ending will be somewhat biblical... [snip]

Unencyclopedic tone, unconfirmed speculation, etc. Gspawn 04:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
...and someone reverted these back into the article with absolutely no discussion. Ah-well. Gspawn 14:36, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Just for fun, I added the following to the "biblical" part. It's been a bit since I read that article, but it should be close. This magazine also admits in the same article they have no special connections to Bungie, that their take on the ending is not based on any inside information, and that their information should not be considered official. Gspawn 00:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

IFPV

I made the IFPV article, which received a Prod. Anyone object to it going in here? Tar7arus 14:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

That article as it stands will be deleted, as will be the reference. See the "crystal ball" section of WP:NOT for why. The site isn't worth having information about at all at the moment, and as it stands, basically no one is talking about it (I cruised half a dozen major gaming sites to check), so there's no sense even posting that it's not connected. I also checked the Unfiction forums- the premiere ARG site on the web- and "IFPV" isn't even mentioned there once. If/when it hits, they'll be all over it. And even if it WERE connected, there would still be nothing to post other than one sentence about its existance, perhaps with a second comparing it to ILB. The rest is fluff. Gspawn 15:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Not only do I whole-heartedly concur with Gspawn, but there is already precedent for deletion. Lyca had an article listing it as the new ilovebees for H3, but nothing to back it up. With a few preliminary checks, it was clear that there was nothing substantiating the claimed link, except for a single (very) misunderstood post of speculation on a Halo fansite. It shouldn't be merged; in fact, deletion is quite in order. Ourai 20:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Weapons

I have heard rumors of the assault rifle having a grenade launcher attachment and there also being a combat knife involved in the game plus a few more covenant weapons are rumored to be in Halo 3. - Matt Husdon


No, the MA5B Assault Rifle featured in Halo 3 has not been announced to be able to have modular functions. - User:Tonster

None of those are confirmed, whoever told you they were rumoured to be in the game probably read them off a wishlist, or similar. Personally I would like those but they are definitely not confirmed to be in the game and rumours are not put in articles, only confirmed facts.--James086 04:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

OK Thanks for that, but it would be cool if they did put a grenade launching assault rifle and combat knife in the game. - Matt Husdon

Grenade launcher, yes. Combat Knife, no. But there are definately going to be new Covenant weapons, at the very least simply remakes.Razer of Chaos 20:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Bungie's weekly update has details of a new logo, the final official logo. Consider updating current logo with a free-source version of the new one?- Delta Spartan 03:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Considering Bungie JUST released the first-ever shot of the logo, I don't think free ones exist yet.69.208.249.192 04:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Character specification

Should we include every variant of Marine or Grunt or Elite in this article as well as general characters? In the most recent podcast, Bungie identified a British Marine and hinted at a French one; should these be included or not? Peptuck 18:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it should. I mean in Halo or Halo 2 you sometimes said, I hate that Mexican or that Australian Marine. But most of the time you just said Marine. So no, just include the different jobs, infantryman, pilot, sniper, etc. Tonster 06:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

So we also need to include the crew on the Covenant ships in the e3 trailer. The gunners, the commanders, the Minor Prophet who's probably on board. The paratroopers (orbital drop), the Ultras, the Dignataries and Ministers, the various classes of Grunts and Jackals, the Heavy Artillery (hunters, fuel rod grunts), the engineers keeping the engines running smooth, the scientists who are undoubtedly on board to study the structure... (no, you don't list jobs either). gspawn 02:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


No, we really don't. Tonster 06:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Co-Op?

In the Modes of Play, it says that H3 will have Co-op. Has this been confirmed? I don't think Bungie has confirmed or denied it yet.

Hmmm... this is a tough one. As it is Halo, it's hard to imagine co-op would not be included. And when "campaign" is mentioned, fans usually equate that with both single and co-op, making the distinction non-useful unless you specifically want to mention something ABOUT playing one way. So this is one issue that might gain an exception from the confirmation rule. But if anyone wants to be strict about this, no I don't think it has been explicitly mentioned yet. gspawn 12:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Durandal References

It has come to my attention that unqualified individuals are being continually allowed to alter, edit and genuinely fuck up the Halo 3 Wikipedia entry. As an example, I would like to present the recent deletion attributed to a user calling himself Sasuke-kun27:

"It should also be noted that Cortana's dialogue is highly remiscent of and can be attributed to that of Durandal, an artificial intelligence originating from Bungie's previous FPS series of games, Marathon."

Source: http://halosm.bungie.org/story/staten083106.html

HBO: Additionally, the Letters themselves were strongly reminiscent of the messages from Durandal, the rampant AI from Marathon. What are your thoughts on "rampancy," AIs in the Halo universe, and Cortana specifically?

Joseph Staten (Bungie) The Halo story has as many loose threads as influences. And we do our best to sew the former into canon as we find them - are reminded of their potential. The Cortana Letters are an excellent example of this phenomenon. For all sorts of reasons, they lingered in canonical purgatory for years. But when we needed some compelling dialog to remind folks what's at stake in Halo3: Bam! Newfound utility! Alas, I'd have to say that, as of now, the only canonized parts of the letters are the fragments we pulled for use in the announcement trailer.


Here it is clearly stated by Joseph Staten himself that the content of the Cortana letters, its characters and references should be considered canon. It is a complilation of interweeving mythology that spans the entire works of Bungie, not simply the Halo series.

Therefore, it is highly valuable to include such footnotes in relation to Halo 3's mythology. Not only does this give new readers a more in-depth understanding of Halo's universe, it presents a rich backstory for understanding its origins.

Simply put, MISINFORMED AND UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WITH A LIMITED UNDERSTANDING OF BUNGIE'S CONTENT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO EDIT OR DELETE THE VALUABLE AND CONFIRMABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF OTHERS.

Please regulate the behavior of users editing Halo 3's entry.

Edited by longtime Halo contributer Zeal of EvilAvatar, TeamXbox and HBO.

Yes, I apoligize. I guess I was not aware of what I was reverting at the time and got careless. Nonetheless, it's no excuse to be reverting info like that and, again, I apoligize. Anyway, thank you for talking about it on the talk page and sorry for any inconvinience. But, if I may add, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, whether it be for the sake of the article or vandalism (which is not recommended and in fact prohibited as all you will get out of it is a sign on your talk page saying that you are blocked from editing Wikipedia, normally for a day or two). Sasuke-kun27 23:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Your response has been noted. Thank you for your cooperation.

Vandalism

Guys, I just deleted some vandalism on this page. It seems to have gone unnoticed. I think we should watch this page for a while. ShadowUltra 23:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

So full of hate were our eyes That none of us could see Our war would yield countless dead But never victory

Listen I hate to get out of sync here but this bullshit needs to end, we as Halo and Xbox fans need to take up arms. This is nothing more then cowardly acts from Sony and Nintendo fans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.33.118.81 (talk • contribs)

What the hell does that mean? If you vandal in return, you'll get blocked. All you do is create work for the people who clean up the mess behind you... Karafias Talk • Contributions 06:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not talking about vandaling their wiki articles.

I think it's time to ask semi protection. The article has been vandalized (again) repeatedly today...

--KaragouniS 20.49, 19 October 2006

This article does get vandalised a lot and most of the useful (not all but the sheer majority) come from existing Wikipedia users. Most IP edits are reverted because they aren't verifiable (adding speculation) or they're vandalism. Just a comment but I am neutral when it comes to semi-protection, I wouldn't mind either way. James086 Talk | Contribs 00:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


Vandalism

I found the words "f**k bed" at the end of allied weaponry section. However, I could not find those when I tried to remove them-they were still there, but they did not show up on the "Edit" page. As a consequence, I am unable to delete the vandalism. Please help. 75.16.50.219 00:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

It is possible that the edits were reverted, between the time you read the article and the time you edited it. This would mean they were removed before you saw the editing page. I looked through the history of the article but I couldn't find exactly this occurance. But, they're gone now so I suppose it's ok. This page gets lots of vandalism each day but it gets cleared up pretty fast. James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 12:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


What else do we have to do? I'm tired watching non registered users adding stupid words, irrelevant information and spam links in Halo 3 page. I asked administrators to semi protect this article but they said no. Every day we have to revert many of these changes. I believe Semi Protection is not just needed, it is essential... --KaragouniS 27 October 2006 11.25 GMT

This is probably one of the more visited pages (because lots of people like Halo) and a lot of IP's probably view it. The problem with semi-protecting it is that it would seem we don't want help from new people. While I understand completely why you want to semi-protect it, the issue isn't desperate. We can cope with this level of vandalism, it's not like there aren't enough people watching this article and vandalism doesn't last long. It does get vandalized a lot but it's not so much that vandalism is always present. Also the nature of vandalism is usually harmless; meaning there isn't tons of profanities all the time, often just something like "Enemies: sausages" which is really just silliness. Many reverts are also because of unverified additions, speculation that someone thinks is fact and they add it, this is not vandalism, but it needs to be removed. This sort of thing doesn't constitute a semi-protection. While I know it would make life a lot easier, I agree with the admin's position that it wouldn't really be neccessary. Something like George W. Bush is protected because of his politics and I'm sure dozens of people look him up each day with the intention of vandalizing his article. If that article were unprotected it would be rife with comments about him and it might even need it's own bot to revert all the vandalism. Halo 3 doesn't receive that level of vandalism which is why they turned the request down. James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 03:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

LEVEL Halo 3 Blowout

Swedish gaming magazine called LEVEL has a Halo 3 blowout, showing several new weapons, including a Brute Spiker, a Spartan Laser, and the Battle Rifle. These are confirmed please do not delete them. Peptuck 15:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

It may be confirmed via this magazine, but due to copywright law on Wikipedia.org, do not upload the scans to the Wikipedia servers.Darthbob100 16:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Yep Bungie confirmed them [3] as being legit but they also don't want copyright troubles. I must admit they look cool:) James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 16:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
The Mongoose ATV is also featured, and nicknamed "Mini-Warthog".

Where is this alternate name for the Spartan Laser coming from? I haven't seen it in any confirmed media released thus far. until I can get a cite, I'm removing it. Peptuck 03:59, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I've replaced links to scans, they were already there but remove if copyright infringement. Also, someone should make a section for multiplayer and a section for singleplayer.. Sir Teh 21:01, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Enemies

How is it that the Covenant are enemies again? @ the end of the second one many species were allied with the humans.Cameron Nedland 01:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

The only allies were the small group of elites on Delta Halo (and that was an uneasy truce to stop tartarus) and a small group of marines. The elites still attacked the Maser Chief on the last few levels when they were done fighting brutes. They are still attacking Earth. However please don't let this turn into a discussion of the Halo storyline, it is a talk page for discussing changes to the article. :) James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 03:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
No. You have one group of Elites with some Hunters who are not shooting at humans and a pair of humans who are not shooting at Elites and Hunters, and both groups shooting at a group of Brutes because said Brutes are committing genocide of Elites and attempting to spell the end of the galaxy, all on a remote corner of a remote ringworld many light-years away from where the vast, extended majority of the Covenant and humanity are still merrily blasting the hell out of each other. There is only a brief, tenuous alliance that has absolutely no indication of spreading outward to the vast majority of either sides' remaining forces. Peptuck 04:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
What he said! James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 04:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, my bad.Cameron Nedland 17:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
It also should be noted that in Halo: Ghosts of Onyx, the Elites are still quite intent on killing humans even after the revolution begins. So clearly the truce is either limited in scope or timeframe. Peptuck 09:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

1up 3 weeks

[4] JAF1970 04:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Spike Grenade?

How it that the image used as a reference shows a spike grenade? There is a frag going off in the far left. There appears to be spikes coming off the warthog turret but I think they are just sparks. Has the article been translated into English and I missed something? James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 06:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Look right up at the top in the centre of thee sky of that picture.

To me that looks like a spiked club or some new alien weapon (flying from someone's dead hands?), not a grenade. That looks big, like a sniper-rifle size, not grenade sized. James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 12:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that looks like that Spike Grenade, or maybe even a club like James was talking about. TonsterUser talk:Tonster 15:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC}

Mongoose ATV UNSC Designation

Does anyone have a official UNSC Designation for the Mongoose ATV that we could use in the Confirmed Elements section? Tonster 15:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Mini-Warthog. LMAO JAF1970 21:44, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Halo 3 preorders have begun

Added the pricing structure. JAF1970 18:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Image of the Legendary edition is here, but am unsure of the rights to the image. If someone gets the rights to post it, please do. JAF1970 20:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


Moreover, Microsoft nor Bungie has actually announced any sort of pricing detail.Darthbob100 01:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. I listed what EB Games and Gamestop are charging. It's subject to change, sure, but...JAF1970 02:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Eh, for now, just keep it like that. But when any sort of pricing detail happens...well, you know the drill. darthbob 06:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

1UP corrects Halo 3 rumors

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154831 I'm too tired to update -- someone else sort out the stuff in this big news item. :) JAF1970 04:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's called a Man Cannon. Just because it's a silly name doesn't mean it's not real, and Bungie states it's the name they're going with.JAF1970 16:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Stop removing it. It's a real name for a real feature in the game. Don't like it? Contact Bungie and complain. Whether it's a vehicle or a catapult weapon is questionable -- if you want to categorize it as a weapon, fine, but it's both a weapon and a transport.JAF1970 17:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I just want to say i feel very strong right now for not snickering everytime i read the words Man Cannon WookMuff 06:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

HALO 3 BLOW OUT INFO! YOU CAN THANK ME LATER!!!!!!!!!!!1111ONE 11!!1!ONE !!!111ONE!!!ONE!!111

Okay you guys got THREE days to add all this info in, or that's it, I will.

info 1 - http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/743/743189p1.html

info 2 - http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/742/742313p1.html

Zabrak 01:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, Zabrak, whatever would we do without you... ˉˉanetode╦╩ 01:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Nice finds. :) —Disavian (talk/contribs) 03:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Vehicles and Weapons

I'm re-adding the Wraith to the vehicle list, it was confirmed by Bungie yesterday.

"Posted: 11/2/2006 6:01 PM

Minus 12, huh? I guess that's what happens when one experiments with interactions between various things and the Man Cannon. I still need to see if I can get a wraith up there though. -Tom Achronos Bungie.net Overlord"[5] darthbob 19:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have confirmation of this "combat knife" allegedly on the back of a spartan's leg? Also "Gas Warthog" is that supposed to be Gauss, is it confirmed? Spectre and double barreled shotgun? They have been added at the same time as the multiplayer maps. James086 Talk | Contribs 08:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

The Assault Rifle, is now called the MA5C Assault Rifle; don't change it back.darthbob 20:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC) [6]

Drones

Whatever happened to the Drones? Have they been confirmed or not?

A Lone Gamer 10:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

They haven't been confirmed but that doesn't rule them out of the game, but it does mean we can't add them to this article. James086 Talk | Contribs 05:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

Seriously, people. The "confirmed facts" and such is WAY out of hand. There are actually several pages of info there now, in a section that really shouldn't be there at all technically. I'm going to pare it down to the essentials. gspawn 04:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Halo 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 12 external links on Halo 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:54, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Halo 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:13, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Halo 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:35, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Halo 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Halo_3/Archive_1&oldid=1222733553"