-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo: Reach |OT3| This Thread is Not a Natural Formation
- Thread starter GhaleonEB
- Start date
bobs...onGaf
Member
urk said:
I admit its all incidental forum evidence that im referring to here, but it seems like we have gone from discussing (and moaning) and incremental alterations which were the typical moaning sessions about the older games... to over analysing every aspect of Reach. Its not quite the same ball park as the type of complaints in the past. Although at least no one has made HaloReachSucks.com.
In my opinion Reach is a good game, but its so far removed from the Halo formulae that it might aswell not be a Halo game. This might sound like a very odd complaint, but you have to understand im still waiting for the game to scratch my old school Halo itch, if people like Sage got the keys to the castle without having to work on older Halo then I have to question who put him in such a high spot, and why the veterans weren't doing that work.
TL;DR - Reach is a good game, but its VERY far removed from the traditional Halo formulae, which is still my problem with it.
A27 Tawpgun said:
I still play it, but the fact that most people DONT play it anymore kinda makes it hard for me to even still play it. With a diminished player base comes long matchmaking times, and if I aint got people to play with im better off just not playing it.
The gameplay is awesome, but the hassle of getting a match is ridiculous. It doesnt help that matchmaking has still been left in a crappy state, I cant be arsed waiting ages in matchmaking to play something like AR starts CTF in doubles lol.
The fact is that Reach is the newer game, and thats where the action is.
bobs...onGaf
Member
urk said:Not his is left, but who has. Contraction fail.
Oh wow silly me, I read that totally wrong. It would be a huge surprise is everyone who made Reach had left lol. Im still guessing that most of the veterans were working on the next big thing while Reach was being made though?
When are you going to reveal that anyway, you have been basically teasing it since ODST was announced.
Hurry up Bungie, we need a new game to play daily and then bitch about
Account Attempt #4
Member
:lol Looks like you'll have to wait until the next Halo game comes out before this happens, haha. For me, there's little more gratifying in gaming than pistoling someone to death as they charge in with the AR. Delicious.A27_StarWolf said:
urk said:
yup. i think a lot of people have rose tinted glasses when it comes to the other games. reach isnt perfect, but it has fixed a lot of the issues in past halo games, and introduced a new set of issues. that is what each halo has done --- fix the broken stuff from a previous game and introduce new stuff, some of which is destined to be seen as broken in the future.
Devin Olsen
Member
Hitmonchan107
Member
I'm playing Halo: Custom Edition if anyone would like to join me.
A27_StarWolf
Banned
alright no being positive then :/
A27_StarWolf said:
Forge is better... and yet, I had more fun in customs in Halo 3. Perhaps it was just the newest thing there or something... but I also still long for Foundation Zombies, Tower of Power (was the turret on Pinnacle issue ever fixed?) But the lack of physics based objects killed a LOT of the customs in Reach. Not to mention lack of Alpha Zombie, VIP, ect. We got some nice cool ones, but nothing like the fun I had in Halo 3 customs yet. But the game is still young.
Never played Nazi Zombies, and I will say, when there's no lag, Firefight is the best holdout mode I've played rivaled only by Bulletstorm with a good team. But its too hard to find one of those... (TUNAVI WE HAVE TO GET THE 50k ACHIEVEMENT) But since there is lag a lot of the times, I'll say right now that Horde is better. I had a lot of fun on Horde and it NEVER lagged. Same thing I complained about ODST. I would REALLY love Firefight if they did something about the netcode.
It was better than Halo 3's. Halo 2 still has best Halo campaign. I'll fight anyone that says otherwise (CE gets close 2nd)
Most of Halo 2's songs are still more memorable. Reach was pretty good I guess. Once again, better than Halo 3's.
Best weapons since Halo CE's sandbox. But the bloom really makes the precision ones annoying. Not to mention the sandbox killed BTB.
Was I the only one disappointed with the Armor in Reach? I felt they kind of dropped the ball here. Many of the chests are boring and look the same, same goes for a lot of the other pieces. Most of the shoulders are ugly as hell too.
There's my retort.
Hitmonchan107
Member
MrBig said:
DG Clan Blood Gulch CTF.
AlmostMilk
Member
Sorry, Randall Glass' vid is way better than that.Devin Olsen said:
A27_StarWolf
Banned
A27 Tawpgun said:
tl;dr You love halo2
Hydranockz
Member
What is that exactly?Kibbles said:
Deputy Moonman
Member
I severely miss the old Juices...xxjuicesxx said:
No, there was nothing broken with Halo:CE. And anyone who didn't like the pistol, they are the ones who should be playing a different game. There was a balance in Halo:CE that none of the subsequent Halo games have had.op_ivy said:
And Reach didn't fix a bunch of old issues. Instead, it magnified old issues to the extreme. I didn't like the BR spread or slow rate of fire in Halo3; and I never got over it. Reach just makes that issue even worse with bloom. I didn't like the way Halo3 gave people a chance to melee late and still get the melee hit in. Reach kept that mechanic and added the lousy shield issue where for some reason you can't kill someone unless their shield is completely removed, but of course power weapons can. If a power weapon can break someone's shield and kill them, I should be able to break someone's shield without a power weapon. It's the same as if X amount of damage from a power weapon can break a shield, if I do the same X amount of damage without a power weapon, the shield should still break. I didn't like how Halo2 shifted the game's strategy more towards having all the power weapons and I didn't like how it introduced a much more powerful plasma pistol combo. Guess what? Halo:Reach is just as bad if not worse on both counts. I didn't like the shift in Halo 3's focus toward having more dominating vehicles, which takes the focus off of shootouts in what i thought was an FPS game. Halo:Reach is worse in the regard.
All of these are core game play issues. I'm happy that Bungie could add new features like theater, forge, and achievements with armor accessories, but those only distract from the downward spiral that each new Halo game is taking. The one thing I have to give the makers of Call of Duty credit for is that they have managed to keep the weapon mechanics and the strengths of the different weapons fairly close through each new game. Halo has failed miserably on that front.
Urk brings up the dual-smg starts like that was just such a horrible problem. No, it wasn't. Because you could still pick up a good weapon and go to town. And that issue was easily fixable with an update to the playlists. Bloom is not fixable, at least from what I understand.
I just played 3 consecutive games where I had my ass handed to me because, yet again, it was people running around with the assault rifle and power weapons just ripping me a new one. There is no balance in that and I'm sick of it. Bloom means pacing shots when there is absolutely no time for it in Reach.
minasodaboy
Member
You and I should be friends. Where's Apollonia?Lake Minnetonka said:
Hydranockz
Member
Lol.Deputy Moonman said:
Seriously now, if that is the case I question your ability to use a DMR/Nerfle/Pistol. I recommend using the plasma pistol (seriously). It has no bloom (seriously) and a high rate of fire (seriously). Your dream weapon bro.
Bloom is by far a better mechanic than using recoil or no bloom at all. No bloom would break most weapons as seen in that mod video from a while back. So without bloom I can only hope there would be some kind of strict RoF like that of the BR minus the bullet spread. Is that really the game you guys want? Halo 3 will forever burn the sound of the BR into my brain. I like how adaptive te use of bloom can be on the situation. If a dude is close to you, you spam the first few shots to the body and settle for the headshot at the end. You take your time at distance. There, you are now able to combat AR spam (without grenades/melee/AAs getting involved
).Domino Theory
Crystal Dynamics
Very glad to see some nice discussion going on in here for 343's first Halo title. Ellis told me during the GDC event that they really care about these types of discussions and take them seriously even if no one from 343 responds to them (although it's obvious why). Continuing to give your thoughts in a mature manner will make things better, in my opinion.
And @Tashi: I consider Halo's core gameplay to be the fast and smooth transition between weapons, grenades and melee as well as the simple functions that each of these factors represent.
In Halo, when you pick up a weapon, you know exactly what to do and can transition between no weapon and no firefight to having a weapon and getting into a firefight because the game communicates that to you since you don't have to worry about iron sights, different fancy scopes, varying bullet damage because of a perk or attachment and whether or not your opponent has a flak jacket that allows them to take extra damage.
With melee, the game communicated common sense to the player in that if you did X amount of damage, you could kill your opponent with one melee, and rightfully so, because it makes sense. Halo 3 still harped on this but magnified it by allowing one melee to take out ALL of your shields. I believe that the Halo 3 Beta perfected Halo's melee system: one melee takes out half of your shields, two melees killed you.
With grenades, you always knew that as soon as a grenade bounced off of or on to something, it exploded and the game, once again, communicated common sense to you that the higher you aim your grenade, the farther it will go up to a certain point in which case it would start to land closer and closer to you when you reach the maximum height for aiming.
Then came Halo: Reach which stripped all of these and took a huge step backwards. Guns deal less damage (to think that Spartan IIIs are cheaper and weaker than Spartan IIs yet take more shots to kill just shows how absurd these changes were), melee can take out your entire shields or a fraction of your shields, grenades take 0.8 something seconds longer to blow up and deal more damage, bloom is introduced which slows down gunplay too much while you can get into simultaneous [insert every possible scenario imaginable here] kills.
Too many layers have been added on top of Halo's sandbox.
Not to mention that you're slower, can't jump as high as you used to and have gone back to using health packs. Really? It's 2011 and you want to have slow gunplay, slow movement, slow health/shield recharging and health packs? It works in this generation and previous generations for games like Battlefield and Left 4 Dead because that's how those games were BUILT FROM THE BEGINNING. It's part of what defines those franchises (yes I know health packs were in CE; which was 10 years ago).
That's my 2 cents. If you managed to read this far then know that I bought 2 more Defiant MP codes today. They go to GAFfers first and then what's left goes to my second home, HBO.
And @Tashi: I consider Halo's core gameplay to be the fast and smooth transition between weapons, grenades and melee as well as the simple functions that each of these factors represent.
In Halo, when you pick up a weapon, you know exactly what to do and can transition between no weapon and no firefight to having a weapon and getting into a firefight because the game communicates that to you since you don't have to worry about iron sights, different fancy scopes, varying bullet damage because of a perk or attachment and whether or not your opponent has a flak jacket that allows them to take extra damage.
With melee, the game communicated common sense to the player in that if you did X amount of damage, you could kill your opponent with one melee, and rightfully so, because it makes sense. Halo 3 still harped on this but magnified it by allowing one melee to take out ALL of your shields. I believe that the Halo 3 Beta perfected Halo's melee system: one melee takes out half of your shields, two melees killed you.
With grenades, you always knew that as soon as a grenade bounced off of or on to something, it exploded and the game, once again, communicated common sense to you that the higher you aim your grenade, the farther it will go up to a certain point in which case it would start to land closer and closer to you when you reach the maximum height for aiming.
Then came Halo: Reach which stripped all of these and took a huge step backwards. Guns deal less damage (to think that Spartan IIIs are cheaper and weaker than Spartan IIs yet take more shots to kill just shows how absurd these changes were), melee can take out your entire shields or a fraction of your shields, grenades take 0.8 something seconds longer to blow up and deal more damage, bloom is introduced which slows down gunplay too much while you can get into simultaneous [insert every possible scenario imaginable here] kills.
Too many layers have been added on top of Halo's sandbox.
Not to mention that you're slower, can't jump as high as you used to and have gone back to using health packs. Really? It's 2011 and you want to have slow gunplay, slow movement, slow health/shield recharging and health packs? It works in this generation and previous generations for games like Battlefield and Left 4 Dead because that's how those games were BUILT FROM THE BEGINNING. It's part of what defines those franchises (yes I know health packs were in CE; which was 10 years ago).
That's my 2 cents. If you managed to read this far then know that I bought 2 more Defiant MP codes today. They go to GAFfers first and then what's left goes to my second home, HBO.
Kibbles
Member
Probably common knowledge for everyone else but when I had difficulties because you have to restart the mission everytime you die someone here said you can just go to "Save & Quit" when you die and then Resume Campaign and you'll start at the last checkpoint. I did not think of that, and it totally made things easier.Hydranockz said:
I like bloom and the effect it has on Firefight and Campaign. But I don't like the effect it has on Multiplayer, and it's the only mechanic I've been split on like that. Usually I critique the impact of a decision on the game entire. I've gotten used to it, mind you. But I still find it frustrates more than anything.op_ivy said:
Another measure of how hard it is to balance the sandbox.
Domino Theory said:Very glad to see some nice discussion going on in here for 343's first Halo title. Ellis told me during the GDC event that they really care about these types of discussions and take them seriously even if no one from 343 responds to them (although it's obvious why). Continuing to give your thoughts in a mature manner will make things better, in my opinion.
And @Tashi: I consider Halo's core gameplay to be the fast and smooth transition between weapons, grenades and melee as well as the simple functions that each of these factors represent.
In Halo, when you pick up a weapon, you know exactly what to do and can transition between no weapon and no firefight to having a weapon and getting into a firefight because the game communicates that to you since you don't have to worry about iron sights, different fancy scopes, varying bullet damage because of a perk or attachment and whether or not your opponent has a flak jacket that allows them to take extra damage.
With melee, the game communicated common sense to the player in that if you did X amount of damage, you could kill your opponent with one melee, and rightfully so, because it makes sense. Halo 3 still harped on this but magnified it by allowing one melee to take out ALL of your shields. I believe that the Halo 3 Beta perfected Halo's melee system: one melee takes out half of your shields, two melees killed you.
With grenades, you always knew that as soon as a grenade bounced off of or on to something, it exploded and the game, once again, communicated common sense to you that the higher you aim your grenade, the farther it will go up to a certain point in which case it would start to land closer and closer to you when you reach the maximum height for aiming.
Then came Halo: Reach which stripped all of these and took a huge step backwards. Guns deal less damage (to think that Spartan IIIs are cheaper and weaker than Spartan IIs yet take more shots to kill just shows how absurd these changes were), melee can take out your entire shields or a fraction of your shields, grenades take 0.8 something seconds longer to blow up and deal more damage, bloom is introduced which slows down gunplay too much while you can get into simultaneous [insert every possible scenario imaginable here] kills.
Too many layers have been added on top of Halo's sandbox.
Not to mention that you're slower, can't jump as high as you used to and have gone back to using health packs. Really? It's 2011 and you want to have slow gunplay, slow movement, slow health/shield recharging and health packs? It works in this generation and previous generations for games like Battlefield and Left 4 Dead because that's how those games were BUILT FROM THE BEGINNING. It's part of what defines those franchises (yes I know health packs were in CE; which was 10 years ago).
That's my 2 cents. If you managed to read this far then know that I bought 2 more Defiant MP codes today. They go to GAFfers first and then what's left goes to my second home, HBO.
Amen brother.
Hydranockz
Member
I didn't quite understand that first paragraph I quoted. If you could elaborate, please do. I agree with the rest of your post too it should be noted.Domino Theory said:
Until that second paragraph. While the majority of it is well founded and true for the most part, I really don't undertand how bloom slows the game down. The way I see it is this, Halo 3's gunplay was like driving a car at 100mph. You could not go faster than that but you could go slower. I feel that Reach lets you push around 120mph except that after 90, shit starts getting too hot to handle. I guess if you take stable RoFs along with spamming the trigger in Reach you can imagine why I thought of those figures. I think that the added 'danger zone' as it wre that bloom adds is a good addition to the game.
Barrel Cannon
Member
Ironic. I kept on using and coming back to each base picking up fresh ones cause no one was using it. I was killing people like crazy. I mainly used it to disorient people and soften them up before going for the needle headshot. I went 32:2neoism said:
.The focus rifle is great because they can't scope on you and having that beam go all scross their screen and not be able to accurately fire at me annoys them and makes it harder to shoot back, especially at close range.
Also is it just me or does the needle rifle feel like it's less accurate at long range compared the DMR?
What's wrong with the no melee thing? It makes a ton of sense.
Not really going to bother arguing why since it's not going to happen but at the very least I would be happy if they removed the lunge. That's just complete crap. If I'm doing pretty good and shooting the crap out of you then you shouldn't be able to make a last desperation lunge to knock the life out of me. If you want to melee then get very close. Walk over. When I think of a good melee system I think of KZ2. It's melee system was so damn retarded that you would rarely use it. It had no lunge or automatic animations or any of that nonsense. You basically had to be kissing someone to kill them. That's the way it should be in the next Halo. Let the gun battles flow well without this melee nonsense disrupting the gameplay.
Not really going to bother arguing why since it's not going to happen but at the very least I would be happy if they removed the lunge. That's just complete crap. If I'm doing pretty good and shooting the crap out of you then you shouldn't be able to make a last desperation lunge to knock the life out of me. If you want to melee then get very close. Walk over. When I think of a good melee system I think of KZ2. It's melee system was so damn retarded that you would rarely use it. It had no lunge or automatic animations or any of that nonsense. You basically had to be kissing someone to kill them. That's the way it should be in the next Halo. Let the gun battles flow well without this melee nonsense disrupting the gameplay.
A27_StarWolf
Banned
Kuroyume said:
I remember Halo CE on the PC, it had no lunge. It was so awkward.
Hydranockz said:
It's the more competitive people that don't like it because although those choices exist, there is a gray area associated with them. All the other Halo's rewarded aiming and aiming only when it came to strictly guns. In Reach, you can have the better aim, but the guy with the better control of his bloom, and in a few, but enough cases, the guy with the luckier spread, will win.
It's really annoying to have the perfect aim, be pacing all your shots, but the guy your fighting spams all his shots and lands them all.
The problem this poses is how do we make the other weapons relevant? BR > everything but power weapons.
Solution: Make every weapon have a function. BR will still be the base weapon. AR + Zoomed pistol will be the AR starts gametype (face it, its going to exist) So what do we do about the others? Turn to Halo CE.
Make the shotgun an absolute beast. Make plasma stun. Bring back Halo CE AR. Implement that dual wielding idea where you pick up a set up duals, but lose your grenades.
While we're on the topic of talking about the next game, and what we hope 343i does with it, something occurred to me the other day when playing through a Campaign mission.
The two weapon carry limit in Halo is one of the simple features in the series that has a big impact on the gameplay. Or at least, used to. As the series has gone on, the two gun limit has had less and less impact on the mission design. Remember the decisions in the first Halo? Take the sniper rifle into the Truth and Reconciliation and you're rewarded with a string of ammo throughout the mission, at the cost of less versatile weaponry. In Assault on the Control room, there's a rocket launcher. But there's some ammo likewise sprinkled throughout the mission if you choose to lug it across the entire level. And so on - I remember constantly having to make decisions about what to carry and how it would impact the subsequent encounters.
I don't really find myself doing that any longer, for a few reasons. The first is because the enemy now uses a wider array of weapons and many of them are viable analogs to the UNSC weapons (Nerfle/DMR, etc.) That means I've always got viable sidearm at hand for nearly the entire game. (The first game withheld key weapons from entire missions just to shape the combat, as with the lack of pistol on T&R.) And when it comes to situation-specific weapons, they're generally handed to you as you need them.
ONI Sword Base provides a good example of this, starting with the sniper rifle placed on the walkway around the Courtyard; the Covenant fall back to that position during the battle, just the right distance for sniping. Then you get the Target Locator, just in time to use it on two Wraiths. Head over to comm station side, and there are rockets inside the building between you and the Revenant. Once you hit the switch, triggering the drop ship with the Skirmishers, you can snag the sniper rifle set up in that building to take the Skirmishers out (though the DMR or Nerfle work fine). You get the Gauss Hog just in time to tear through a pack of vehicles, and when the Hunters show up, the shotty is conveniently there right before the encounter.
Much of the game plays out this way. I keep a DMR or Nerfle on hand, never sweating the secondary weapon because I know the right one will be handed to me when I need it. If this were the first Halo, that first sniper rifle would have been the only one on the map, so you'd have to lug it around to use when it was ideal. Likewise, the rockets placed where you toast the Wraiths would have been the only ones - and you'd have to decide whether to use it on the Revenant, the vehicles near the end, or save it for the Hunters. That way I would be having to sacrifice one weapon, or the use of it, for later. You don't really have to do that much in Reach (or in Halo 3, for that matter).
My hope for the next Halo game from 343i is that they go back to leveraging the two-weapon carry limit to impact the game, and not supply us with the right weapons at the right times in every instance. I want to have to make agonizing decisions that alter how encounters play out again.
The two weapon carry limit in Halo is one of the simple features in the series that has a big impact on the gameplay. Or at least, used to. As the series has gone on, the two gun limit has had less and less impact on the mission design. Remember the decisions in the first Halo? Take the sniper rifle into the Truth and Reconciliation and you're rewarded with a string of ammo throughout the mission, at the cost of less versatile weaponry. In Assault on the Control room, there's a rocket launcher. But there's some ammo likewise sprinkled throughout the mission if you choose to lug it across the entire level. And so on - I remember constantly having to make decisions about what to carry and how it would impact the subsequent encounters.
I don't really find myself doing that any longer, for a few reasons. The first is because the enemy now uses a wider array of weapons and many of them are viable analogs to the UNSC weapons (Nerfle/DMR, etc.) That means I've always got viable sidearm at hand for nearly the entire game. (The first game withheld key weapons from entire missions just to shape the combat, as with the lack of pistol on T&R.) And when it comes to situation-specific weapons, they're generally handed to you as you need them.
ONI Sword Base provides a good example of this, starting with the sniper rifle placed on the walkway around the Courtyard; the Covenant fall back to that position during the battle, just the right distance for sniping. Then you get the Target Locator, just in time to use it on two Wraiths. Head over to comm station side, and there are rockets inside the building between you and the Revenant. Once you hit the switch, triggering the drop ship with the Skirmishers, you can snag the sniper rifle set up in that building to take the Skirmishers out (though the DMR or Nerfle work fine). You get the Gauss Hog just in time to tear through a pack of vehicles, and when the Hunters show up, the shotty is conveniently there right before the encounter.
Much of the game plays out this way. I keep a DMR or Nerfle on hand, never sweating the secondary weapon because I know the right one will be handed to me when I need it. If this were the first Halo, that first sniper rifle would have been the only one on the map, so you'd have to lug it around to use when it was ideal. Likewise, the rockets placed where you toast the Wraiths would have been the only ones - and you'd have to decide whether to use it on the Revenant, the vehicles near the end, or save it for the Hunters. That way I would be having to sacrifice one weapon, or the use of it, for later. You don't really have to do that much in Reach (or in Halo 3, for that matter).
My hope for the next Halo game from 343i is that they go back to leveraging the two-weapon carry limit to impact the game, and not supply us with the right weapons at the right times in every instance. I want to have to make agonizing decisions that alter how encounters play out again.
Kibbles
Member
Epic flag run - http://www.bungie.net/Stats/Reach/FileDetails.aspx?fid=15620013&player=xI Ace xI
Would've been better if the warthog actually had a gunner, since I'm sure we could've taken him out were he to make it to us, but it was still pretty crazy in the heat of the moment. I guess it was also more exciting because it was me and a friend playing on the same screen with two others watching us and we were freaking out at this part
Here's a bastardized picture version I made quickly.
We basically repeated the mongoose flag runs, this was the 2nd of 3. The first was just a good chunk into the game, I was sick of no flags being taken and decided to a take a run myself, was picked up by my buddy for a swift capture. Then the final one, which was delayed a bit because we ended up dying, we just took out some guys at the base and made another speedy flag delivery.
Would've been better if the warthog actually had a gunner, since I'm sure we could've taken him out were he to make it to us, but it was still pretty crazy in the heat of the moment. I guess it was also more exciting because it was me and a friend playing on the same screen with two others watching us and we were freaking out at this part
Here's a bastardized picture version I made quickly.
We basically repeated the mongoose flag runs, this was the 2nd of 3. The first was just a good chunk into the game, I was sick of no flags being taken and decided to a take a run myself, was picked up by my buddy for a swift capture. Then the final one, which was delayed a bit because we ended up dying, we just took out some guys at the base and made another speedy flag delivery.
Domino Theory
Crystal Dynamics
Hydranockz said:
To go along your analogy, I prefer to stay at a constant and stable 100mph than to have the risk of crashing drastically increase after I hit 90mph, but that's personal preference.
343 can have it so that there's no bloom, Halo: Reach Beta recoil and the addition of bullets disappearing after a certain amount of range for every weapon so that we have that freedom for the RoF. That's something I'd be happy with. I'm sure they're experimenting with it right now.
The Librarian
Banned
Excellent points from Domino.
Campaign wise, I hope 343 continues to follow the design philosophy of having a single level constructed around one objective.
You know, this is something I never noticed until you pointed it out. Without that mechanic, the two weapon system doesn't hold as much weight.GhaleonEB said:
Campaign wise, I hope 343 continues to follow the design philosophy of having a single level constructed around one objective.
I remember when I lurked Brian Jarrard posted here fairly frequently. What happened to him?Lazslo said:
That's because of Halo PC's terrible netcode. (which actually turned it into a skill, lol)A27_StarWolf said:
You had to actually lead your melee's so no one ever melee'd. Halo on LAN was actually a lot more fluid with the melee.
Hydranockz
Member
Fair point, but I always thought the risk/reward element was a good mechanic in Halo. Sure you can stick to a safe 90. Or you take the risk of going faster and you either spin out and have the dude going at 90 calmly drive by or else you nudge ahead and win the duel. I like that personally.Domino Theory said:
Edit: So I was doing the LASO run on my own, with that handy tip I learned of, and I was doing everything pretty well according to RC's run. Got up to the top of the spire and that's when I overlooked a little detail. Download to your 360 for some unfortunate hilarity. As a side note to that, holy fuck that elite was quick! Scared the shit out of me...
Well, really, Halo 3's melee system was pretty bad itself. Simultaneous melee, or whoever has more health, even if you hit first, wins. Halo 2 had the large lunch factor, but at least it dealt with power pending how you hit them, i.e. jumping, falling, standing still, moving, etc. I rather have that factor than anything else moving forward. Reach's current system is flawed as well due to the melee damage, which would be sufficed by being weaker, as they're trying to implement into the Classic playlist.Trasher said:
It's going be hard to please everyone, ranging from melee, to the infantry combat, map direction, campaign design, etc.
Hydranockz
Member
Simultaneous kills are one thing... but me and another dude simultaneously sniped each other. The amount of beatdowns traded is crazy. Or how many times have you gotten a bulltrue with a shotgun only to find that you still get killed with the sword? I understand why a small margin of error as it were might be in place but it seems like sometimes me or my opponent is given a hefty grace period in which to strike back for the kill.
Dax01 said:
PLEASE no more AA guns. I'm absolutely sick of them. But do experiment with more unique combat scenarios and encounters.
And I'll go ahead and say it. Boss battles. Fighting the heretic in Halo 2 was a lot of fun, and I was SEVERELY (probably my biggest disappointment with Halo 3 campaign) disappointed when I couldn't fight gravemind. Seriously, was that meant to be some troll or joke?
Regret is killed. Halo's are turned off, looks like our job here is do- GRAVEMIND TENTACLES COME OUT OF NOWHERE. WE SEE THEM KNOCK A PELICAN LIKE ITS A TOY. MASTER CHIEF AND ARBITER BACK TO BACK BATTLEBRO DUO. SHITS ABOUT TO GET REA-powerful tentacles retract and we fight silly combat forms.
WHAT.
Hell, that could have been a fight against his tentacles, he could have sent combat forms after you as well. Throughout the fight he keeps saying badass gravemind things, maybe spilling some more beans on forerunners, on what happened during that war, ect. Then you damage his tentacles enough and he retracts. Rest of the level plays out, you go to High Charity to get Cortana.
You get Cortana, Gravemind roars and you see his entire form come up. He tries defending High Charities reactor things while attacking you, you blow up high charity, haul as and win.
Hell, even Guilty spark could have been made more interesting. Have him have the laser still, but have him sent sentinels, maybe even put in some enforcers, perhaps the canceled Guardians.
*sigh*
Seriously, the lack of a gravemind battle when it was so heavily implied it was going to happen....
The Henery
Member
Hydranockz said:Bloom is by far a better mechanic than using recoil or no bloom at all. No bloom would break most weapons as seen in that mod video from a while back. So without bloom I can only hope there would be some kind of strict RoF like that of the BR minus the bullet spread. Is that really the game you guys want? Halo 3 will forever burn the sound of the BR into my brain. I like how adaptive te use of bloom can be on the situation. If a dude is close to you, you spam the first few shots to the body and settle for the headshot at the end. You take your time at distance. There, you are now able to combat AR spam (without grenades/melee/AAs getting involved
Yes...
Having a utility weapon like the BR/CE pistol did not 'break' the sandbox in previous iterations. It made for a fucking fantastic game. Shotgun won at close range, sniper won at long range, rockets are, well, rockets. The laser functioned as an anti-vehicle weapon well; people complained about its anti infantry capabilities in Halo 3. You know why? Out of a certain range you couldn't knock the wielder out of scope owing to the overbearing spread that deteriorated accuracy over range. With a more capable utility weapon (ala the H2 BR) as soon as you saw the laser tracking you, you could make it significantly harder for the laser to hit you (it being unscoped).
The way I see it, there are two types of Halo fan that approach the game from a fundamentally different philosophical perspective. The side that speaks of 'broken sandboxes' due to the overdominance of one gun believes that Halo should play something like rock, paper, scissors and be more about tactical awareness of which weapon to use in a certain situation. The other camp thinks Halo should be predominantly about skillful aiming, physical input to the controller such as strafing, 'Gandhi hopping' quick scoping etcetera. Neither is right or wrong. Both can be accomodated. If trueskill worked absolutely perfectly then the two camps would be seperated rather quickly.
tl:dr please put a hard to use yet effective utility weapon in the next Halo
Hydranockz
Member
What's the DMR in your mind so? It is an all around versatile weapon. Difficult to master yet effective enough at most ranges.thee henery said:
So I just had a really weird game of Invasion on Spire.
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/Reach/GameStats.aspx?gameid=536303252&player=Big Boss 0DIN
We're playing like normal, we lose round 1 (we started as Spartans).
Round 2, we decide we're gonna wait for their falcon to defend ourselves once they do the ol' drop the core off the side. At this point, someone from our team starts team killing in a banshee (not us), and gets booted. Followed by 4 people from the other team (they either quit or were also booted).
Here's where it gets weird. When the game comes back, it's still phase 3, but WE are now the Spartans.
We proceed to take the core, perform epic stand on Falcon and fly carefully to drop point, and then still lost (Blue 4 Red 3).
Still, that game pseudo restart was odd.
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/Reach/GameStats.aspx?gameid=536303252&player=Big Boss 0DIN
We're playing like normal, we lose round 1 (we started as Spartans).
Round 2, we decide we're gonna wait for their falcon to defend ourselves once they do the ol' drop the core off the side. At this point, someone from our team starts team killing in a banshee (not us), and gets booted. Followed by 4 people from the other team (they either quit or were also booted).
Here's where it gets weird. When the game comes back, it's still phase 3, but WE are now the Spartans.
We proceed to take the core, perform epic stand on Falcon and fly carefully to drop point, and then still lost (Blue 4 Red 3).
Still, that game pseudo restart was odd.