Support NeoGAF

[Metroidvania]

Woot.

Can't wait for some o' dem reach demo-playin.

Also, lol@that youtube clip. I wish my every game were like that.

 

[Tashi]

My wishlist is all multiplayer related (I loved h3's campaign but was bored to death by the multiplayer):

More complex level designs
I think if you look at it there are two approaches to level design in shooters that have emerged this gen. There is the Halo (and Gears I guess) way where the maps have very distinct and cool setpieces but very simplistic and sometimes boring layouts. Then there is the way games like Battlefield BC have done it where the maps don't have as memorable setpieces but there are so many buildings/vegetation/hills/rivers/shit dropped all over the place that there are a million different ways to play the levels. I would like to see Bungie embrace the second way. I think throughout the halo trilogy they have gotten so involved with creating memorable little doodads and other bullshit in the levels that the complexity and variety of the level design itself has suffered and it really shows now that Halo is no longer the only big console fps in town.

Weapon kit selection
Weapons spawns are last gen, get with the times Bungie. I know that battling over the spawns can sometimes add some strategy to the game but it sucks when your team gets fucked because the 1 or 2 key weapons that your side gets were picked up by jackasses who charged off like rambo only to get crushed and now the other team has all the good shit and you spend the rest of the round getting spawn killed and trying to get it back.

Those two things, plus the revolutionary feature of letting us pick what map and mode we want to play (shocking I know) would make my day. If Reach is pretty much the same multiplayer experience we've had since halo 2 with some more community features and different maps then I'll be sticking with the more modern shooters and just pick Reach up later on the cheap for the campaign.

Oh god, I just threw up everywhere.

 

[Slightly Live]

I really hope Bungie gives the player a feeling of a true invasion. Halo 2 and Halo 3 had some small moments where it actually felt like a war, but it always ended out feeling like the Covenant went out for a picnic and four of them got into a fight with you. It never felt like the end of the world, or a fight that could not be won.

Hopefully the new engine can give the feeling of being utterly outnumbered and fucked. And not like now, where I never got a feeling of fighting against more then four enemies at time. And I really hope they go Modern Warfare 2, and remove co-op from the main campaign and focus on creating a good singleplayer experience, rather then trying to throw the kitchen sink into the campaign.

Spoiler

Haven't you heard? Reach fell to the Covenant. They invaded, kicked ass and glassed it and pretty much wiped out all but the last Spartan (Mister Chief).

 

[-tetsuo-]

Oh god, I just threw up everywhere.

I never understand stuff like that. Why buy Halo if you don't want to play Halo? Let the game continue to have its identity.

 

[Vinterbird]

Spoiler

Haven't you heard? Reach fell to the Covenant. They invaded, kicked ass and glassed it and pretty much wiped out all but the last Spartan (Mister Chief).

I know, the book is great, and I really hope that Bungie can actually pull it off this time. The book has some great set pieces that could make for some truely big battles, and I really hope Bungie can do the book and the story justice.

 

[Slightly Live]

So much potential for concepts, new weapons and plays on older weapons to think about. Even the Halo MMO concepts had one or two nifty ideas.

 

[GavinGT]

My wishlist is all multiplayer related (I loved h3's campaign but was bored to death by the multiplayer):

More complex level designs
I think if you look at it there are two approaches to level design in shooters that have emerged this gen. There is the Halo (and Gears I guess) way where the maps have very distinct and cool setpieces but very simplistic and sometimes boring layouts. Then there is the way games like Battlefield BC have done it where the maps don't have as memorable setpieces but there are so many buildings/vegetation/hills/rivers/shit dropped all over the place that there are a million different ways to play the levels. I would like to see Bungie embrace the second way. I think throughout the halo trilogy they have gotten so involved with creating memorable little doodads and other bullshit in the levels that the complexity and variety of the level design itself has suffered and it really shows now that Halo is no longer the only big console fps in town.

Weapon kit selection
Weapons spawns are last gen, get with the times Bungie. I know that battling over the spawns can sometimes add some strategy to the game but it sucks when your team gets fucked because the 1 or 2 key weapons that your side gets were picked up by jackasses who charged off like rambo only to get crushed and now the other team has all the good shit and you spend the rest of the round getting spawn killed and trying to get it back.

Those two things, plus the revolutionary feature of letting us pick what map and mode we want to play (shocking I know) would make my day. If Reach is pretty much the same multiplayer experience we've had since halo 2 with some more community features and different maps then I'll be sticking with the more modern shooters and just pick Reach up later on the cheap for the campaign.

Fuck that. I want to see a return to Halo's simplistic MP map design.

And fuck weapon kits.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

character progression for just one example of online replay quality

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck that. So hard. SO GODDAMN HARD.\

Character progression in multiplayer is the worst goddamn thing ever. Bungie better not fall victim to this stupid fucking fad.

 

[GodfatherX]

faster gameplay, bigger battles, blow shit up....

 

[Striker]

Three primary things I would like:

1) Map Editor similar to Fry Cry; if not as deep, give us something similar in line of this

2) Custom Game Searching; how the hell does this eliminate a reason to play MM? It gives users more variety among playing what they want, and trying out new map variants or meeting new friends

I personally would stick Multiplayer being Ranked, Custom Search, and the Firefight mode (co-op, search for others) - as well as Custom Gaming and Forge/Map Editing

3) Remakes being made; Halo 3 launch maps were brutal -- I hope for a ton of multiplayer maps, small, mid-size, and large. Give something for all gametypes.

 

[Slightly Live]

I want a remake or port of The Pit map for multiplayer day one. Best Halo 3 map needs to be included. It was the most successful Halo 3 map that encompassed close to mid-range play. It's still fun to play even today and I can safely assume it would be fun to play three years hence.

 

[EazyB]

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck that. So hard. SO GODDAMN HARD.\

Character progression in multiplayer is the worst goddamn thing ever. Bungie better not fall victim to this stupid fucking fad.

This really interests me. In some cases you have games that rely on character progression in place of actual fun and to a greater extreme sacrifice gameplay for the sake of character progression. CoD is like this, if players had all the guns and perks unlocked from the start, I'm willing to bet a lot less people would play it and for a much sorter lifetime. But if everything was unlocked from the beginning it would make it an absolute balanced playing field yet IW sacrifices this balance for the sake of luring people into an unlockfest. What amazes me about Halo is that, while all other online games these days have intricate unlocking system, those that have been playing Halo and continue to do so play it solely based on how great and fun the gameplay can be.

I don't want gameplay unlocks in Reach. Will they probably have them like all other MP shooters? Probably, but I have some faith that they'll make them as balanced as possible. In my ideal vision Reach has a shitload of unlocks but they're all visual and don't effect the gameplay. Armor permutations, color schemes, emblems, etc. could all be used to give the player a sense of progression. That gets rid of the second disadvantage of character progression (it hurting gameplay). A sense of progression is hugely important to players and while it gets away from the fact that video games should primarily be about just having fun and being competitive, in the age of CoD dicksucking, if you want the big player populations you have to appease to these people. And no one dislikes the feeling of accomplishment so as long as it doesn't effect the gameplay I don't see why anyone would care.

 

[permutated]

Not sure if want but keep in mind I'd buy the game day one if they would GIVE ME THE OPTION TO FUCKING SPRINT!

Character progression in multiplayer is the worst goddamn thing ever. Bungie better not fall victim to this stupid fucking fad.

Translation: Longevity and depth = BAD!

The fuck?

 

[NemesisPrime]

Oh god, I just threw up everywhere.

QFT.

 

[AdventureRacing]

This really interests me. In some cases you have games that rely on character progression in place of actual fun and to a greater extreme sacrifice gameplay for the sake of character progression. CoD is like this, if players had all the guns and perks unlocked from the start, I'm willing to bet a lot less people would play it and for a much sorter lifetime. But if everything was unlocked from the beginning it would make it an absolute balanced playing field yet IW sacrifices this balance for the sake of luring people into an unlockfest. What amazes me about Halo is that, while all other online games these days have intricate unlocking system, those that have been playing Halo and continue to do so play it solely based on how great and fun the gameplay can be.

I don't want gameplay unlocks in Reach. Will they probably have them like all other MP shooters? Probably, but I have some faith that they'll make them as balanced as possible. In my ideal vision Reach has a shitload of unlocks but they're all visual and don't effect the gameplay. Armor permutations, color schemes, emblems, etc. could all be used to give the player a sense of progression. That gets rid of the second disadvantage of character progression (it hurting gameplay). A sense of progression is hugely important to players and while it gets away from the fact that video games should primarily be about just having fun and being competitive, in the age of CoD dicksucking, if you want the big player populations you have to appease to these people. And no one dislikes the feeling of accomplishment so as long as it doesn't effect the gameplay I don't see why anyone would care.

I don't see why bungie would need to try and copy the CoD formula. It's not as if halo is selling poorly.

I'm pretty sure halo 3 is still in front of COD4 and i still think reach could outsell MW2.

Having said that i do like your suggestions and i wouldn't care if bungie did something like that.

 

[XenoRaven]

This really interests me. In some cases you have games that rely on character progression in place of actual fun and to a greater extreme sacrifice gameplay for the sake of character progression. CoD is like this, if players had all the guns and perks unlocked from the start, I'm willing to bet a lot less people would play it and for a much sorter lifetime. But if everything was unlocked from the beginning it would make it an absolute balanced playing field yet IW sacrifices this balance for the sake of luring people into an unlockfest. What amazes me about Halo is that, while all other online games these days have intricate unlocking system, those that have been playing Halo and continue to do so play it solely based on how great and fun the gameplay can be.

I don't want gameplay unlocks in Reach. Will they probably have them like all other MP shooters? Probably, but I have some faith that they'll make them as balanced as possible. In my ideal vision Reach has a shitload of unlocks but they're all visual and don't effect the gameplay. Armor permutations, color schemes, emblems, etc. could all be used to give the player a sense of progression. That gets rid of the second disadvantage of character progression (it hurting gameplay). A sense of progression is hugely important to players and while it gets away from the fact that video games should primarily be about just having fun and being competitive, in the age of CoD dicksucking, if you want the big player populations you have to appease to these people. And no one dislikes the feeling of accomplishment so as long as it doesn't effect the gameplay I don't see why anyone would care.

Well Bungie has said they could learn from Call of Duty in regards to how they do their online multiplayer. Most people took that to mean that they were interested in implementing perks and/or character progression. People are saying there are things that look like perks in the leaked Reach screens, but it's obviously not definite that that's what they were.

I agree with what you said though. I've continued to play Halo games through every major online multiplayer release. Played Halo 2 through Gears and Splinter Cell, played Halo 3 through Modern Warfare, Gears 2, SFIV, MW2, etc. The game doesn't need unlockables or customizable weapon loadouts or perks or killstreaks or any of that shit. The gameplay is so pure and fun on a fundamental level, it doesn't need gimmicks to make it good. That's why the comment about learning from CoD has me concerned. But at the same time, I trust Bungie more than any other developer to make a game that I will enjoy playing. Even if they do implement a system like that, I can't imagine them giving anyone the ability to run around with Marathon, Lightweight, and Commando with a Tactical Knife attachment lunging across the screen to stab everyone, or allowing 5-Star Generals to wield dual shotguns that shoot halfway across the map, or something similarly ridiculous.

EDIT: Almost forgot. Bungie's matchmaking is actually comprehensive in that it attempts to match you with players of similar skill. So technically, character progression isn't out of the question. It's not like someone will be able to nuke the map for a win after they sniped 25 people in a row through their thermal scope that you haven't unlocked yet in your very first multiplayer game.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

As I've said before, Reach is going to have to resemble a jump in quality that Bungie haven't really achieved in their dev history of Halo. They've fallen so far behind the curve on graphics, gameplay and online that as their last Halo game, this has to be "it". The shit, not just some .5 iteration up from Halo 3 with better IQ and some 'perks' in gameplay.

After my personal disappointment in their last 3 Halo games (2 - ODST) I do not feel they will deliver, and look forward to them finally ditching Halo and trying something new.

I was going to make a post claiming how wrong you are, but not including match making in ODST so I can EVER PLAY ONLINE was such a head scratcher that I have to conclude they didn't know what they were doing.

 

[XenoRaven]

I was going to make a post claiming how wrong you are, but not including match making in ODST so I can EVER PLAY ONLINE was such a head scratcher that I have to conclude they didn't know what they were doing.

I believe they were developing a game with a small team while the rest of the studio was developing another game and they had one year to make it. That might probably be why, since Firefight wasn't even in the original plans for the game.

 

[godhandiscen]

There HAS to be some kind of character progression IMO. At least make it cosmetic, but I do want some sort of in-game reward for playing tons of matches. As I said, it can be cosmetic, but nothing as simple as the badges in Halo 3. It would be cool if I could earn the pieces of by playing MP instead of earning them through SP.

Dammit, I want a Halo FPS MMO. PLEASE PLEASE!


Look at Huxley, take that concept and execute it well.

 

[EazyB]

I was going to make a post claiming how wrong you are, but not including match making in ODST so I can EVER PLAY ONLINE was such a head scratcher that I have to conclude they didn't know what they were doing.

Based on Halo 3 campaign tech. The reason there wasn't MM in firefight was the same reason there wasn't MM in Halo 3's campaign back in 07, the same reason ODST used the same engine, and the same reason there weren't elites in ODST. ODST was a sideproject, sold at $60 because MS could do so, made to get a game out as soon as possible. Adding in MM (as well as drop-in drop-out features) would have required a ton of work. Work that would be a waste because their real release, Reach, wouldn't use any of that old shit and comes out just a year after.

Well Bungie has said they could learn from Call of Duty in regards to how they do their online multiplayer. Most people took that to mean that they were interested in implementing perks and/or character progression. People are saying there are things that look like perks in the leaked Reach screens, but it's obviously not definite that that's what they were.

[Bunch of stuff I agree with.]

That's another CoD thing I'm wary about seeing adopted in Halo. I've talked about it before but the perk stuff makes the game really unpredictable. In CoD it's explainable (he had perk x which let him do something my current loadout won't let me do) but still unpredicatable. to be clear I'm not talking about unpredictable like he took a warthog off the mancannon a splattered some poor sap. I'm talkiing about that clean feeling of knowing just how many BR shots it takes to kill someone, how fast everyone can move, how long their lunge is, and everyone starts with the same weapon. While it can be argued perks add a ton of variety to the game, it's done so at the expense of predictability. Halo doesn't need to sacrifice this predictability to spice things up though because gametypes can be created that tweak a massive amount of variables.

So anyways, perks and classes in Halo make me uneasy. If they do venture into that territory I hope they clearly represent the attributes of the character (classes looking distinctly different) and perks (different look, some special effect, or sound) to counter to unpredictable nature of classes and perks. As for starting weapons, I'd still like there to be powerweapons to encourage map control and discourage camping, but I wouldn't mind being able to choose between the BR, AR, and SMG in vanilla gametypes for example.

 

[Ardorx]

Look at Huxley, take that concept and execute it well.

So you want a Halo MMO where all the battles and stuff are instanced? Personally, I'd rather have a Halo MMO in the style of Planetside.

 

[Slightly Live]

So you want a Halo MMO where all the battles and stuff are instanced? Personally, I'd rather have a Halo MMO in the style of Planetside.

The gods that be decided there will be no Halo MMO in the near future.

 

[godhandiscen]

So you want a Halo MMO where all the battles and stuff are instanced? Personally, I'd rather have a Halo MMO in the style of Planetside.

Yes I do. Actually, get rid of the fucking towns, hubs, I just want the whole stat management, weapon customization, leveling up, etc.

 

[adizzy615]

It would be really easy for Bungie to go the COD route with perks. There is bunch they can steal from Halo Wars (Carpet bomb, MAC Cannon blast, Hornet support). But I don't want another MW type game. I don't expect Bungie to be followers, so I am looking forward to what they do.

 

[Hazaro]

There HAS to be some kind of character progression IMO. At least make it cosmetic, but I do want some sort of in-game reward for playing tons of matches. As I said, it can be cosmetic, but nothing as simple as the badges in Halo 3. It would be cool if I could earn the pieces of by playing MP instead of earning them through SP.

Dammit, I want a Halo FPS MMO. PLEASE PLEASE!


Look at Huxley, take that concept and execute it well.

You know I wouldn't mind that.

Especially with seemless transitioning between hubworld, quests, online play, etc.

Instances work a lot better since they can be tailored much more effectively than open world.

 

[godhandiscen]

You know I wouldn't mind that.

Especially with seemless transitioning between hubworld, quests, online play, etc.

Instances work a lot better since they can be tailored much more effectively than open world.

Yeah, you catch my drift. Actually, I am hoping Borderlands 2 will move into this area, and offer some sort of competitive MP.

 

[Domino Theory]

Three primary things I would like:

1) Map Editor similar to Fry Cry; if not as deep, give us something similar in line of this.

Sorry for being upfront and/or rude, but people need to stop asking for this. Not because it's a bad feature (because it's not), but because it's not going happen.

If Bungie actually implemented a map editor like Far Cry or very similar to Far Cry then there'd be no point for Microsoft to plan map re-makes or maps in the form of DLC at all.

Microsoft knows there's a lot of money in re-making Midship, Lockout, and other fan-favorite Halo: CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3 maps for Halo: Reach.

Will we get a Forge+? Hell yeah. A Far Cry-esque map editor? No.

 

[The Librarian]

Halo Wars Images

Out of all of those, I want to see the Locust the most.

Not sure if want but keep in mind I'd buy the game day one if they would GIVE ME THE OPTION TO FUCKING SPRINT!

You "run" faster in Halo 3 than sprinting in most games.

Choose your own weapon loadouts? I can see it now, Snipers and BR's on every map and every game mode and everyone wanting to choose something else being donged on for not choosing them. Every death a fourshot, headshot or no-scope.

Urgh.

Ew.

 

[Hazaro]

Yeah, you catch my drift. Actually, I am hoping Borderlands 2 will move into this area, and offer some sort of competitive MP.

Highly doubt Borderlands 2 will be doing anything in that regard but that is just my opinion.

 

[EazyB]

Sorry for being upfront and/or rude, but people need to stop asking for this. Not because it's a bad feature (because it's not), but because it's not going happen.

If Bungie actually implemented a map editor like Far Cry or very similar to Far Cry then there'd be no point for Microsoft to plan map re-makes or maps in the form of DLC at all.

Microsoft knows there's a lot of money in re-making Midship, Lockout, and other fan-favorite Halo: CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3 maps for Halo: Reach.

Will we get a Forge+? Hell yeah. A Far Cry-esque map editor? No.

I know MS has forced Bungie to do some stupid shit but I don't think they could stop Bungie from making a comprehensive map editor. I mean, where would they draw the line? Apparently Halo 3's would be barebones enough to that it wouldn't cut into DLC sales but how much better than Sandbox would they suddenly draw the line.

No, with matchmaking MS can dictate what DLC requirements there are, if they want (like they did when the mythic maps first hit XBL) they can force Bungie to make the players buy the DLC to play the majority of the playlists. Beyond that, user created maps could never match a DLC map. I'm not talking about the quality of the map

Spoiler

Hey how you doin, Orbital.

but unless they allowed users to create assets and geometry (not going to happen), developer maps will always be on a whole different level.

That said, I want a full map editor more than anyone else but I doubt it'll happen because it would require a ton of effort and resources from Bungie. The Far Cry 2 guys made the map editor a huge priority, not only that but they had experience coming from Far Cry 1 (?) and Far Cry Instincts. I'm not sure if anyone at Bungie has that sort of experience or if they'd take the time to learn it all. Surprise me Bungle.

 

[Domino Theory]

Isn't that Far Cry's map editor, though? To be able to shape shift the geometry and all that other advanced shit?

Edit: If you can do this (because we know Forge cannot do this at all) in Halo: Reach, there's no way I'd EVER pay for a Valhalla re-make DLC pack for Halo: Reach when I could just download it from your File Share for free: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DADy_l3L_7I

 

[The Librarian]

Isn't that Far Cry's map editor, though? To be able to shape shift the geometry and all that other advanced shit?

Edit: If you can do this (because we know Forge cannot do this at all) in Halo: Reach, there's no way I'd EVER pay for a Valhalla re-make DLC pack for Halo: Reach when I could just download it from your File Share for free: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DADy_l3L_7I

Va... Val... Valhalla remake?

*faints*

 

[EazyB]

Isn't that Far Cry's map editor, though? To be able to shape shift the geometry and all that other advanced shit?

Edit: If you can do this (because we know Forge cannot do this at all) in Halo: Reach, there's no way I'd EVER pay for a Valhalla re-make DLC pack for Halo: Reach when I could just download it from your File Share for free: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DADy_l3L_7I

Haha, thanks. What Far Cry 2 has is a terrain editor, something that I think's absolutely necessary for creating outdoor maps. It's a terrain editor because it's limited to just making shaping the ground. When I said geometry editor I was referring to something like using the full unreal editor, importing textures, creating geometry your very own crates, and other things that will probably never see the light of day on consoles. Although LBP allowed custom stickers which acted like imported textures, and UT3 for the PS3 allowed for user created maps on the PC to be ported over. All said and done, that's the stuff I don't think MS will ever allow anything like that on the Xbox unless their competitors started to really push it. If, by some brilliant occurrence, ever managed to grace a Bungie game forgers could go batshit and really create/recreate maps that could rival Bungie's own in every regard.

Jesus Christ, got myself all hot and bothered typing that out.

Edit: In addition, I think Bungie would rather spend their time creating original maps then porting every over every remake fans want. Works out splendidly for everyone.

Va... Val... Valhalla remake?

*faints*

If you only knew who was responsible for that remake... :lol


Man, I know I do this everytime the subject of Far Cry 2 and Halo come up but just in case someone's missed these, check out some other Halo remakes (that I'm not responsible for) made in the Far Cry 2 editor:
Link: Turf, Burial Mounds, Sandtrap, Narrows, Last Resort,
Link: Headlong, Ascension, The Pit, Lockout

No one in their right mind woundn't be dying to see this for Reach. If Halo 2 to 3 gave us saved films, forge, and screenshots; I think Reach bringing a comparable editor would be an even bigger leap in featureset.

 

[VaLiancY]

And your point is? They could do that for Halo as well...

Halo never was a class based shooter there for the need for kits/class selection is moot. You're giving the right weapons to do the job if its an assault rifle or battle rifle depending on the size of the map.

 

[Zeouterlimits]

There HAS to be some kind of character progression IMO. At least make it cosmetic, but I do want some sort of in-game reward for playing tons of matches. As I said, it can be cosmetic, but nothing as simple as the badges in Halo 3. It would be cool if I could earn the pieces of by playing MP instead of earning them through SP.

There will have to be something, successful shooters have all turned in that direction, it's a definite "trend".

 

[broony]

Please for the love of god, at least have one humans vs covenant multiplayer mode. Preferably class-based, objective oriented gameplay. I'm pretty much done watching 16 Master Chiefs in different colors hopping around killing each other.

Yep. Will never happen but I would like then to ditch the current multiplayer model and start with something completely new. Another remake of the previous three multiplayer modes will just add to the 'fix the spread on the Br' and 'reduce the sword lunge' etc arguments that circle around and around and around. It just doesn't feel fresh anymore.

For me that multiplayer model is done to death now. Do something new. It would be impossible to balance but I would like a class based / CS money based system where as you get kills your earn points to upgrade you class. So start off as agrunt, then upgrade through the round into jackal, elite, hunter and so on. Same deal on the human side, marine, ODST, Spartan etc. Again, no way this would be able to be balanced.

I would also like to see map based objective gametypes, something like RTCW where you had a set mission to blow up this room or break a hole in this wall and so on. Single player is more important to me anyway though so I wouldn't be too upset about Halo MP 4.01 so long as co-op is in there.

 

[Thermite]

Man, I know I do this everytime the subject of Far Cry 2 and Halo come up but just in case someone's missed these, check out some other Halo remakes (that I'm not responsible for) made in the Far Cry 2 editor:
Link: Turf, Burial Mounds, Sandtrap, Narrows, Last Resort,
Link: Headlong, Ascension, The Pit, Lockout

No one in their right mind woundn't be dying to see this for Reach. If Halo 2 to 3 gave us saved films, forge, and screenshots; I think Reach bringing a comparable editor would be an even bigger leap in featureset.

Oh man, that Headlong remake...holy shit. :bow

 

[Slightly Live]

Oh man, that Headlong remake...holy shit. :bow

That's one hell of an impressive Pit.

 

[sullytao]

One thing I'm practically begging Bungie for is a custom game browser. Its the only thing that will ever get me into the multiplayer side again.

On a lighter note, it will be interesting to see what Natal features it will have (no way it wont have any, Microsoft wont miss the chance for there baby to pimp there new flashy accessory). I'm hoping its something useful like leaning and using voice commands for your squad.

 

[Plywood]

Dani you should put this in the OP, just cause: I love the HALO world

Bungle you should put that in the BWU.

 

[Slightly Live]

Dani you should put this in the OP, just cause: I love the HALO world

Bungle you should put that in the BWU.

:lol :lol

 

[The Librarian]

If you only knew who was responsible for that remake... :lol

Smallhalla? What are you getting at? I was thinking of an official remake of Valhalla from Bungie for Reach when I typed that.

 

[Slightly Live]

Smallhalla? What are you getting at? I was thinking of an official remake of Valhalla from Bungie for Reach when I typed that.

Easy made the kickass Valhalla FC2 map, if I am not mistaken.

 

[The Librarian]

Easy made the kickass Valhalla FC2 map, if I am not mistaken.

Yeah, I knew that.

 

[Talon]

I really hope Bungie gives the player a feeling of a true invasion. Halo 2 and Halo 3 had some small moments where it actually felt like a war, but it always ended out feeling like the Covenant went out for a picnic and four of them got into a fight with you. It never felt like the end of the world, or a fight that could not be won.

Hopefully the new engine can give the feeling of being utterly outnumbered and fucked. And not like now, where I never got a feeling of fighting against more then four enemies at time. And I really hope they go Modern Warfare 2, and remove co-op from the main campaign and focus on creating a good singleplayer experience, rather then trying to throw the kitchen sink into the campaign.

Yes. Halo 2 and Halo 3 really oversold the invasion element in the advertising. Tsavo Highway and The Storm were good levels, but the import of the situation wasn't really conveyed, IMO. I was thrilled when Reach was revealed as the setting of the game, but Bungie's managed to dance around the situation before. Hopefully you're in the middle of the shitstorm for most of the game.

I haven't been a huge fan of either Gears game, but Gears 2 does a great job of conveying the gravity of the situation with setpieces and the cavern battle scenes. If Reach pulls off the same effect for players, then Halo will blow Gears away.

Also, if you want to change everything that makes Halo Halo, go play MW2 or Battlefield: BC. I play MW2 alongside Halo 3 because of their differences. Nobody's making you stick to a series you don't enjoy. The only problem is when the criticisms you throw out there are factually incorrect.

 

[feel]

nm

 

[-PXG-]

If Reach plays like ODST, but with Spartans, I'll be happy. Oh and I welcome our Elite overlords, once again. Fuck the Brutes.

 

[kylej]

Microsoft knows there's a lot of money in re-making Midship, Lockout, and other fan-favorite Halo: CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3 maps for Halo: Reach.

Sell special environments and unique items ie. sell the Sanctuary waterfall and old tribal looking blocks and let me use them on my gigantic map editor for $1.99. It's really not that hard to monetize shit while keeping the fans happy it's just the old ignorant people that make decisions can't see them.

Yes. Halo 2 and Halo 3 really oversold the invasion element in the advertising. Tsavo Highway and The Storm were good levels, but the import of the situation wasn't really conveyed, IMO. I was thrilled when Reach was revealed as the setting of the game, but Bungie's managed to dance around the situation before. Hopefully you're in the middle of the shitstorm for most of the game.

It would be a miracle if the entirety of Reach had half the intense moments found in HL2's Route Kanal. Remember those interruptions by whoever when you're playing the Cortana level, where the screen starts shaking and goes dark? Yeah, that's Bungie tension.

 

[op_ivy]

:lol

My wishlist is all multiplayer related (I loved h3's campaign but was bored to death by the multiplayer):

More complex level designs
I think if you look at it there are two approaches to level design in shooters that have emerged this gen. There is the Halo (and Gears I guess) way where the maps have very distinct and cool setpieces but very simplistic and sometimes boring layouts. Then there is the way games like Battlefield BC have done it where the maps don't have as memorable setpieces but there are so many buildings/vegetation/hills/rivers/shit dropped all over the place that there are a million different ways to play the levels. I would like to see Bungie embrace the second way. I think throughout the halo trilogy they have gotten so involved with creating memorable little doodads and other bullshit in the levels that the complexity and variety of the level design itself has suffered and it really shows now that Halo is no longer the only big console fps in town.

Weapon kit selection
Weapons spawns are last gen, get with the times Bungie. I know that battling over the spawns can sometimes add some strategy to the game but it sucks when your team gets fucked because the 1 or 2 key weapons that your side gets were picked up by jackasses who charged off like rambo only to get crushed and now the other team has all the good shit and you spend the rest of the round getting spawn killed and trying to get it back.

Those two things, plus the revolutionary feature of letting us pick what map and mode we want to play (shocking I know) would make my day. If Reach is pretty much the same multiplayer experience we've had since halo 2 with some more community features and different maps then I'll be sticking with the more modern shooters and just pick Reach up later on the cheap for the campaign.

i agree for the most part. loadouts (user defined and customizable) would be cool but the power weapons should not be a part of that load out.

 

[BakedPigeon]

I really hope Reach is littered with easy and impossibly hard to find easter eggs. The skull thing in Halo 2 was actually neat and cool because some of the skulls were so hard to find and get. In Halo 3 they might as well just put a NAV point to them through your HUD. It just seems like they got away from having fun with the game and were forced to develop Halo 3 on strict professional levels. As much fun as I have had with multiplayer and single player, I have had equal fun hunting halo easter eggs and looking for secrets.