Support NeoGAF

[FyreWulff]

Explain.

They can never actually explain, it's just bitching that Halo: Reach wasn't Fall of Reach: The Game.

 

[Blue Ninja]

They can never actually explain, it's just bitching that Halo: Reach wasn't Fall of Reach: The Game.

Well, it pretty much took the first Halo novel, peed on it and then set it on fire. Then when 343 had to step up they added the "it's all a conspiracy"-twist to reconcile the two again. It is canon, but it's also a complete clusterf***.

Stuff like (endgame spoilers):

Spoiler

- The Covenant suddenly attacking a month earlier
- Halsey meeting Spartan-III's when she clearly had no idea they existed in fiction set afterwards
- Halsey even being where she is in the game isn't exactly feasible
- The Cortana fragments
- The Pillar of Autumn being on the surface of Reach, while it should be halfway to Halo at the time
- The Pillar of Autumn even being on the surface of Reach at all

It's minor stuff, and doesn't matter for people who don't care about the canon, but some people are/were pissed at Bungie for it. Reach is a good game, with a good campaign, but I tend to look at it seperate from the other games.

?

 

[Overdoziz]

?

It's Fyrewulff.

 

[FyreWulff]

Apparently slightly changing the timing of events in a way that still works counts as setting something on fire and pissing on it. Games overwrite books, especially when that game has the original book's author involved and especially when that first book was written before the first game came out and the author wasn't allowed to see the game at all. Seriously, the bitching is about slight timing misalignment and setups for fiction written after Reach. They didn't do anything like have Chief show up and bench press a Cruiser.

The people that wrote all the dialogue for Halo 1 weren't allowed to see the game they were writing dialogue for. Hence the "Cave is a natural formation" line. The books can't even keep their own dates straight and had everyone leaving a location before they got there. lol.

Some people just need to go join Cody Miller at his site.

to OP: when you finish the game, don't skip the credits.

 

[Stripper13]

OP, just enjoy Reach. It was a high point in the Halo series campaigns.

If you really like the level/enemy design, grab Halo:Anniversary at some point too. It looks and sounds great, and while some of the gameplay design has aged a little - it's still an amazing campaign and probably the best in the series.

I would say, unless you fall in love with the Halo series via Reach, I'd probably avoid 2/3/ODST for the time being. I loved them all (massive Halo fan), but I'll be honest... None of them have aged all that well. In particular 3/ODST are very average graphically, and while the music is brilliant, the sound effects and gunplay are subpar compared to any shooter in the last few years. The campaigns are still very well designed, but challenging, quick Elites are replaced by relatively boring to fight Brutes - so I think the combat tends to rely heavily on numbers and/or scale/vehicles. Again... I loved the games, but I wouldn't recommend them to someone at this point in the generation, as I don't think it would be doing the series justice.

In summary - If you enjoy Reach, try Anniversary. It looks/sounds great, and retains the fun Elite fights and strong campaign.

If you love BOTH Anniversary/Reach THEN go and try Halo 3 - and then ODST. They certainly don't have the graphical/audio sheen that you would expect at this point - but I imagine if you love both Reach/Anniversary the Halo gameplay design will be more than enough to keep you entertained.

Also... I really hope you enjoy Reach, Halo 4 and whatever other Halo games you manage to play. I don't feel that the vast majority of GAFers give the Halo series the credit it deserves, so it's refreshing to see someone saying "I'm actually enjoying it" as opposed to many of the apathetic and shitty posts that tend to fill Halo threads.

 

[Tha Robbertster]

My ranking for all the Halo campaigns would be:

Halo 3>Reach>CE>ODST>Halo 2

Halo 3 really only has one level that really sucks, all th other levels are decent with some of them really standing out (the Ark and the Covenant). Reach is also really good and doesn't have any really bad level but there also aren't any levels that are as good as the best levels in Halo 3. Also, I don't like Bungie's approach to the story. If they would've changed some of the level orders, dates and some dialogue/cutscenes, Reach could've easily fit into the established canon.

 

[Pollux]

Tip from me: master vehicles. Never let anyone else drive, ever.

Truer words have never been spoken

 

[Oemenia]

I thought Halo 3 and ODST were masterpieces and yet was bored to tears by Reach. I honestly cant think of another reason than Bungie simply didnt care as they were leaving MS for good. Heck even the music was completely forgettable.

 

[Blue Ninja]

Apparently slightly changing the timing of events in a way that still works counts as setting something on fire and pissing on it. Games overwrite books, especially when that game has the original book's author involved and especially when that first book was written before the first game came out and the author wasn't allowed to see the game at all. Seriously, the bitching is about slight timing misalignment and setups for fiction written after Reach. They didn't do anything like have Chief show up and bench press a Cruiser.

The people that wrote all the dialogue for Halo 1 weren't allowed to see the game they were writing dialogue for. Hence the "Cave is a natural formation" line. The books can't even keep their own dates straight and had everyone leaving a location before they got there. lol.

Some people just need to go join Cody Miller at his site.

to OP: when you finish the game, don't skip the credits.

I wouldn't call a month 'slight'. Plus, established canon should stay established canon, imo. There's millions of ways to write a story and not have it contradict anything, and then they choose to do so anyway.

But this is a debate we had two years ago, so I'm dropping it.

 

[The Librarian]

Here's the best part about all of it though. There's only two situations in Halo 3 where you are forced in a vehicle, and they aren't any of them that I mentioned above. It's the flying section on The Covenant and the last mission of the game. See The Pedestrian. It's definitely a good watch.

I wished Voc had continued with those videos.

The minutiae of the games is not what I refer to, but the overall arc. The infighting is fine on its own, but the fact that the Covenant's intent never wavered, nor was it revealed to be anything more complex, sinister, or nuanced, it was really just "the great journey" the entire time, was just so completely inane. I mean, seriously? This whole thing is about some dumb religious cult that may or may not even know they're going to end galactic civilization? There's no direct or indirect ulterior motive at all? Blech.

Again, it is my hope that 4 can somehow give 1-3 more relevance, because on their own, they really don't go anywhere. Which is sad, because CE deserves better.

Trying not to be a bit rude after your "CE is best your opinion is wrong otherwise" post, but the part in bold is wrong.

The Oracle tried to launch the Dreadnought from High Charity to find and bring the humans to The Ark, but before it could succeed, the Lekgolo worms that were tasked with exploring the Dreadnought's inner regions short-circuited the connection, and the two co-conspirators, along with the Philologist (leader of the ascetic priests and later the Prophet of Mercy), disconnected the Oracle from the ship. When Fortitude realized the implications of what the Oracle had told them, he and the other two Hierarchs-to-be agreed not to tell the masses of their discovery and decided that the humans must be eradicated once and for all before any of the Covenant could learn the truth.

The three Prophets successfully implemented their plan and became the new rulers of the Covenant which heralded the beginning of the Ninth Age of Reclamation. Fortitude chose the name "Truth" as a reminder to himself of the truths he must never tell and the lies he would have to spin in order to prevent the Covenant from fragmenting.

 

[Red]

It's always good when someone makes it easy on you in choosing which opinions to tune out in the future. <3

Huh, so that's how it works. People who disagree should be ignored? Suddenly the world makes a lot more sense.

My problems with 2 are the usual problems with 2: focus on corridor shooting, overwrought writing, demystifying of the Covenant, sudden ending, baffling music choices, terrible boss fights, etc. I didn't like it. Beginning to end it seemed rough and incomplete, with obvious pop-in, strange, unfinished cut scenes. Many of the battles were sparse and uninteresting. The sniper alley moments were step back for the series, which previously relied on quick thinking over the memorization of enemy placement. Halo 3 was refreshing after 2's grey/orange/brown/purple color palette. It even looks like the most muted game in the series.

I thought it was a frustrating, disappointing game. I am not saying you aren't allowed to like it, or your opinion is invalid. But thanks for the reply anyway.

 

[Stallion Free]

I was really into the Halo novels/universe, but one of the novels pushed me off the deep end and after that I stopped trying to keep track of of the canon.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

Stop playing that filth.

Grab Anniversary.

Just don't play it co-op online.

 

[Stallion Free]

I wish Anniversary had dropped the whole "old engine running underneath" thing because I felt like that was the root of all the performance hiccups I had while playing the game. If I want to play old Halo graphics I can just play it on PC at a much higher resolution and better framerate or locked at 30 fps because of their stupid animations fps lock.

 

[InvincibleAgent]

Play it on Normal. If you like it, play it on Heroic. If you like it, play it on Legendary.

If you like it, play it on Legendary, solo, with all skulls on.



You can take Blind off after the first mission.

I'm one of those weirdos who actually beat all of those challenges when they were available. Pillar of Autumn was exhilarating.

 

[Tha Robbertster]

Play it on Normal. If you like it, play it on Heroic. If you like it, play it on Legendary.

If you like it, play it on Legendary, solo, with all skulls on.



You can take Blind off after the first mission.

I'm one of those weirdos who actually beat all of those challenges when they were available. Pillar of Autumn was exhilarating.

Oh god, the PoA one was so difficult. I think I nearly spent 3 hours on that one. I didn't wanted to give up since I got so far :lol

Never again.

 

[FyreWulff]

Play it on Normal. If you like it, play it on Heroic. If you like it, play it on Legendary.

If you like it, play it on Legendary, solo, with all skulls on.



You can take Blind off after the first mission.

I'm one of those weirdos who actually beat all of those challenges when they were available.

I did 77 weeklies in a row since launch because I was silly

The final level LASO is like an experience in itself, and I believe that came up two or three times during that run. It probably helps that you really can't cheese that level much at all. All you can really do to help yourself is skip a Hunter spawn.

 

[Plywood]

Spoiler

Also, hi Ply. I remember you from my Maxim Hot 100 2012 thread

Ah, so that was you.

My favorite Halo to day, period. I enjoyed this game soooooo much. Even got this, which was pretty fucked up. My proudest cheevo ever:

Day of release, baybee:

 

[pakkit]

I love Reach's multiplayer. It's a much more tactical game than mainline Halo's, thanks in part to the super detailed radar. You can see enemies and tell whether they're above or below you on the map, which means, if you know the map well enough, you can figure out their exact position.

People fallaciously claim that Halo games haven't ever looked as good as Halo 4, but Halo 4 is built off of Reach's tech. Reach looked very good to me, Halo 4 seems to have made it more stylized and embraced Retro's Metroid Prime design.

 

[j0hnny_385]

Day of release, baybee:

 

[Overdoziz]

I love Reach's multiplayer. It's a much more tactical game than mainline Halo's, thanks in part to the super detailed radar. You can see enemies and tell whether they're above or below you on the map, which means, if you know the map well enough, you can figure out their exact position.

 

[Plywood]

http://i.imgur.com/0HqcK.gif

 

[Squire]

OP, just enjoy Reach. It was a high point in the Halo series campaigns.

If you really like the level/enemy design, grab Halo:Anniversary at some point too. It looks and sounds great, and while some of the gameplay design has aged a little - it's still an amazing campaign and probably the best in the series.

I would say, unless you fall in love with the Halo series via Reach, I'd probably avoid 2/3/ODST for the time being. I loved them all (massive Halo fan), but I'll be honest... None of them have aged all that well. In particular 3/ODST are very average graphically, and while the music is brilliant, the sound effects and gunplay are subpar compared to any shooter in the last few years. The campaigns are still very well designed, but challenging, quick Elites are replaced by relatively boring to fight Brutes - so I think the combat tends to rely heavily on numbers and/or scale/vehicles. Again... I loved the games, but I wouldn't recommend them to someone at this point in the generation, as I don't think it would be doing the series justice.

In summary - If you enjoy Reach, try Anniversary. It looks/sounds great, and retains the fun Elite fights and strong campaign.

If you love BOTH Anniversary/Reach THEN go and try Halo 3 - and then ODST. They certainly don't have the graphical/audio sheen that you would expect at this point - but I imagine if you love both Reach/Anniversary the Halo gameplay design will be more than enough to keep you entertained.

Also... I really hope you enjoy Reach, Halo 4 and whatever other Halo games you manage to play. I don't feel that the vast majority of GAFers give the Halo series the credit it deserves, so it's refreshing to see someone saying "I'm actually enjoying it" as opposed to many of the apathetic and shitty posts that tend to fill Halo threads.

No problem. Thanks for your post

 

[Snacks the sober sea lion]

I will argue this to the death!

But really, Halo 3 has the most dynamic vehicle sections.

We could start with Tsavo Highway where the only vehicles are the Chopper, the Warthog, and the Wraith. It's a good combination to get the player introduced to vehicular combat and for the more advanced player to experiment with the sandbox. When using the Chopper you have the choice of cannoning the Covenant from afar or going for the much riskier splatter. You can also boost at the correct time on rocks to send you soaring. There you can either bail out or stay in the vehicle for another pass around. The Warthog in these encounters is obviously much more fun with co-op partners, but it works with the AI as well. A beginner can learn paths and AI line of sight, and advanced players can go for the splatters or get in the passenger with a power weapon. Wraiths are only available at the end of the mission, but they provide for an interesting mortar section at the end.

Except I already know how to use the vehicles (including the Chopper because I played ODST first). Trying to run down Covenant with the Chopper is ineffective because 1. most of the guys on foot are not very high-priority. The cannons pick them off easily, there is no reason to go for a splatter, 2. You've just put yourself in a prime position to be picked off easily and/ or rammed by everything in sight. The Wraith probably won't even be available to newer players, because they'll so busy killing a dozen Choppers that they either won't realize the best way to hijack it, or will go for it first and get killed over and over again because Wraith pilots and gunners are psychic and always know where you are. This is actually a running problem with the series, that Wraith pilots will always know where you are and will always arc shots flawlessly.

The Ark is where the vehicles really start to shine. When you get your first vehicles in the level it will either be a Mongoose or a Prowler if you managed to kill just the occupants of the vehicle. Then the next immediate encounter, you have the chance to hijack either a Ghost or a Chopper. And right after that there is an abandoned Warthog. You now have almost the entire light ground vehicle armament at your disposal. My personal favorite is to get Sniper/Rockets on the back of a Mongoose and let the AI drive me around. The best part is that if I die, 9/10 I'm not angry about the death being cheap. There is an entire optional encounter that is ridiculously fun to take as a Mongoose passenger.

Prowler in single player is boring. It's a clunkier Warthog whose turret isn't even hitscan. Ghosts barely offer any protection, so on Heroic and up enemies on foot will effortlessly pick you off. So it doesn't matter that you have variety because not only is the Chopper the best option, the other options are straight-up boring. I already had my fill of strafing in a Ghost while holding down the trigger in Halo 2.

Right after that you get some Scorpions dropped off for you. The AI even tells you that "tank beats everything" and it is a hell of a lot of fun to blast through with the tank. After you clear the building and exit the other side you enter one of the most dynamic sections in any Halo campaign. You have the choice of every ground vehicle, including the newly introduced Gauss Warthog. At the end of the push, you have to fight a Scarab. And guess what, you still have the choice of every vehicle.

Of course the tank beats everything, that's why you would use it. That's why getting the tank is the best vehicle section in the game, which isn't saying much. Because you finally have a vehicle that isn't just a dumbed-down substitute for Halo's real strength, the variety of the on-foot combat, something that ACTUALLY MAKES YOU NOTICEABLY STRONGER instead of forcing you to board a tin-can that puts you on the same level offensively as GRUNTS. That's the problem. The vehicles make you weaker, because you are essentially downgrading yourself to the enemy's level. You have the same health and offensive capabilities as them, and just have to rely on their general stupidity to win. But soon enough that tank gets blown up by any of five Wraiths, maybe you'll get another one from your allies, but still, we get another of those dumbass Scarab fights which are only here for the cool factor. Yeah, they're dumb. The first Scarab fight is supposed to be a big moment. You can use the missile pod, or the Mongoose with a rocket Marine you already had, right? That doesn't matter because one method beats them all: Go up the elevator, stand on the edge of the crane-thing, and the Scarab will politely walk right under you, letting you board it and wreck the crew. Happens every time. Halo 3 thinks it can replace good design with "big open area and EPIC MOMENTS," and it completely fails at it. It relies so heavily on vehicles that the campaign just falls apart at every dramatic moment, because as soon as the music starts, you get hit by a Wraith 500 feet away or immediately shot up by 4 Choppers.

Variety is meant to offer multiple, roughly equally effective options, not one superior option and a couple others you can do for fun that intentionally screw you over. It doesn't matter that you have a choice of vehicle, because how much fun is destroying 5 Wraiths with a Chopper, while the gunners are all shooting at you? Not very. Just get a tank, hope the psychic Wraiths don't blow you up over and over again, get down the hill and shoot the Scarab's legs. Master Chief is an ultra-badass because of his training, his armor, his SKILL WITH WEAPONS AND ABILITY TO PUNCH SPACE-APES TO DEATH. Halo 3 just makes you feel like some guy who is very good at improvising solutions with vehicles, but might as well be wearing tissue paper. It feels ridiculous that this hyper-advanced supersoldier is reduced to bunny hopping around desperately trying not to be hit by psychic mortar tanks until he can get into a Chopper. Now if you could hijack vehicles from ANOTHER vehicle, that would be pretty damn good. But as it was, Master Chief is reducing to driving around trying not to get hit by dozens of highly-accurate purple lasers before clumsily jumping out of his own vehicle, then slowly lumbering onto another one.

You seem to expect vehicles to be a god machine. That's not the case by any means, and if you are looking at them like that, then you are quite simply doing it wrong.

It doesn't have to be a god-machine. It's supposed to give you an ADVANTAGE. But Halo 3 doesn't use vehicles as variety, it uses them to replace the on-foot sections with repetitive strafe-a-thons against waves and waves of vehicles. And I only had this problem in Halo 3. I don't mind the vehicle sections in any other Halo game, except for those stupid overpowered Revenants in Reach and parts of The Package. This is how I see it: When you get a tank in Halo 1, 2, or Reach, I thought something along the lines of "that's cool," and got in. When I first got a tank in Halo 3, all I could think was "About fucking time."

 

[Piano]

I absolutely loved Reach. I also recommend you check out ODST - both are interesting spins on the mainline Halo games.

If you haven't played them they're great too. First game is awesome. Play the first half of the Halo 2 campaign and then move on to Halo 3.

It didn't click with me at first, but I think ODST was my favorite.

 

[Tokubetsu]

Didn't buy the DLC maps because fuck armor lock and I didn't want to fuck up my 1000/1000 with mp achievements I was probably never gonna be able to get. Love the game though and spent more time than I should have in MP. Will be there for Halo 4 Solo Legendary because I hate myself

 

[The Librarian]

No problem. Thanks for your post

None of the Halo games are perfect. They all have elements in them that make them feel dated. But here's the thing: the sandbox and combat in Halo is so much that makes it easier to look past the dated elements than it otherwise would be.

Halo 1: Repetitive corridors and horrible use of the Flood (monster closets) in the last two levels.
Halo 2: Tends to be linear in its overall design with an unpolished quality about it.
Halo 3: Underwhelming graphics and gun noises. Also has the honor of containing the worst level in the series.
ODST: Short with a hubworld that doesn't quite live up to the creator's ambitions, but it was a solid first try. The hubworld is pretty lifeless, and it has a number of Firefight encounters that slow the game down.
Reach: Doesn't rise above itself with the exception of New Alexandria. Doesn't portray well the "end of the world" angle it goes for. Like ODST, a number of its encounters are "hold the ground" Firefight encounters that hurt the game's replayability.

Speaking of Halo 3 and ODST, the games do have comparably weak gunplay when looking at recent FPS titles, but the thing is, the sandbox and combat encounters are so well designed &#8211; especially in Halo 3, which has the best encounters of the series &#8211; I think it makes it pretty easy to look past some of those things because you're having so much fun.

It's more fun to shoot aliens in Reach than it is any other Halo game. But is it more fun to fight them? In my opinion...no. And that's more important to me.

 

[Shrennin]

speaking on Halo2. i really liked playing as Arbiter. It was pretty much the exact same gameplay, but I liked the story through the covenant. I felt like I was playing as a Protoss Zealot.

Eh, I didn't like this part so much. I felt that they should have kept the Covenant a mystery (as far as their motivations).

Spoiler

If anything, it would have been more interesting to have the Arbiter help the Chief when both couldn't really understand the other (so there would always be this trust issue between the two - or at least between the Arbiter and the player because it was kinda like that already but it sucked knowing the motivations of the Arbiter as the player when the Chief wasn't really sure of it).

I spoiler tagged the rest of that post because the OP is just starting Halo and I didn't want to give out spoilers, even really old, vague spoilers for Halo 2.

Anyway, enjoy the game! The campaign is really good and I definitely suggest playing all of the games for their campaigns. My least favorite campaign in the series is either Halo 2 or Halo 3 (story wise) but they are still really good compared to most FPS games. ODST probably has the best campaign, honestly. On the other hand, the original Halo: CE and Reach have really good story campaigns too. Hmmm....

 

[Karl2177]

Before I begin, I should say that when I do mission runthroughs, I play Heroic with Tough Luck, Catch, Thunderstorm, Mythic, Grunt Birthday, and IWHBYD skulls on. If I bump it up to Legendary I take Mythic off.

Except I already know how to use the vehicles (including the Chopper because I played ODST first). Trying to run down Covenant with the Chopper is ineffective because 1. most of the guys on foot are not very high-priority. The cannons pick them off easily, there is no reason to go for a splatter, 2. You've just put yourself in a prime position to be picked off easily and/ or rammed by everything in sight. The Wraith probably won't even be available to newer players, because they'll so busy killing a dozen Choppers that they either won't realize the best way to hijack it, or will go for it first and get killed over and over again because Wraith pilots and gunners are psychic and always know where you are. This is actually a running problem with the series, that Wraith pilots will always know where you are and will always arc shots flawlessly.

Wraiths can miss. I've hardly ever had situations where the Wraith was cheating in Halo 3. Reach on the other hand has issues with the Wraiths on Legendary. But I won't go there. I can understand all of the Wraith shots in 1, 2, 3, and ODST; and 3 and ODST I can actually analyze them thanks to Theatre. As for the Choppers, it's about not overextending yourself. There are certain enemies like Chieftains that it are inefficient to take out using conventional on-foot methods. A splatter is the quickest method to do so without taking return fire from him. And you can't approach those situations as "Master Chief is an ultra-badass because of his training, his armor, his SKILL WITH WEAPONS AND ABILITY TO PUNCH SPACE-APES TO DEATH."; you have to approach them in a moderately stealthy way.

Prowler in single player is boring. It's a clunkier Warthog whose turret isn't even hitscan. Ghosts barely offer any protection, so on Heroic and up enemies on foot will effortlessly pick you off. So it doesn't matter that you have variety because not only is the Chopper the best option, the other options are straight-up boring. I already had my fill of strafing in a Ghost while holding down the trigger in Halo 2.

The Prowler uses the Plasma tech. You'll notice that those projectiles naturally move slower. Putting hitscan on those weapon would be silly, and to an extent rather unfun. And again, it sounds like you ae overextending yourself when you play.

[1]Of course the tank beats everything, that's why you would use it. That's why getting the tank is the best vehicle section in the game, which isn't saying much. Because you finally have a vehicle that isn't just a dumbed-down substitute for Halo's real strength, the variety of the on-foot combat, something that ACTUALLY MAKES YOU NOTICEABLY STRONGER instead of forcing you to board a tin-can that puts you on the same level offensively as GRUNTS. That's the problem. The vehicles make you weaker, because you are essentially downgrading yourself to the enemy's level. You have the same health and offensive capabilities as them, and just have to rely on their general stupidity to win. [2]But soon enough that tank gets blown up by any of five Wraiths, maybe you'll get another one from your allies, but still, [3]we get another of those dumbass Scarab fights which are only here for the cool factor. Yeah, they're dumb. The first Scarab fight is supposed to be a big moment. You can use the missile pod, or the Mongoose with a rocket Marine you already had, right? That doesn't matter because one method beats them all: Go up the elevator, stand on the edge of the crane-thing, and the Scarab will politely walk right under you, letting you board it and wreck the crew. Happens every time. [4] Halo 3 thinks it can replace good design with "big open area and EPIC MOMENTS," and it completely fails at it. It relies so heavily on vehicles that the campaign just falls apart at every dramatic moment, because as soon as the music starts, you get hit by a Wraith 500 feet away or immediately shot up by 4 Choppers.

I divided this into 4 parts, with the breakpoints noted in the quote. [1] It really does seem like you want the vehicles to be god-level. They are an advantage. How many turret shots can you take while in a Warthog versus on foot? How long does it take to kill the turret in a vehicle versus on foot? A tank gives you an advantage in both regards. A Warthog gives you an instant advantage in one spot, and possibly a second if you aren't carrying a power weapon. This applies to all of the vehicles. The AI is far from superhuman perfection like you claim it is. And using the tactics that the enemy uses isn't going to make your enjoyment any better.

[2]See above section on Wraith shots. You've just put yourself in a position that isn't the best, and in turn blaming it on the game.

[3]This is the one that stood out the most to me. If you say the Scarab fights are awful, I'm almost sure you hate non-conventional boss fights. They are a boss fight. And they are one of the more unique ones in any FPS. It isn't you versus some big bad guy in a room where he has magnificent powers and you are stuck with what you brought in. These fights give you a slew of alternatives that are all viable options. You are looking for a one-way god mode to go through the games, which is why this statement stuck out to me: "That doesn't matter because one method beats them all".

[4]That's just... Wrong. Those moments are quite possibly the best gameplay sections in any Halo game, and many of the HaloGAF vets will tell you so. If you're getting hit by Wraiths from 500 yards away, you're not playing smart enough quite simply.

Variety is meant to offer multiple, roughly equally effective options, not one superior option and a couple others you can do for fun that intentionally screw you over. It doesn't matter that you have a choice of vehicle, because how much fun is destroying 5 Wraiths with a Chopper, while the gunners are all shooting at you? Not very. Just get a tank, hope the psychic Wraiths don't blow you up over and over again, get down the hill and shoot the Scarab's legs. Master Chief is an ultra-badass because of his training, his armor, his SKILL WITH WEAPONS AND ABILITY TO PUNCH SPACE-APES TO DEATH. Halo 3 just makes you feel like some guy who is very good at improvising solutions with vehicles, but might as well be wearing tissue paper. It feels ridiculous that this hyper-advanced supersoldier is reduced to bunny hopping around desperately trying not to be hit by psychic mortar tanks until he can get into a Chopper. Now if you could hijack vehicles from ANOTHER vehicle, that would be pretty damn good. But as it was, Master Chief is reducing to driving around trying not to get hit by dozens of highly-accurate purple lasers before clumsily jumping out of his own vehicle, then slowly lumbering onto another one.

One thing that I would do in ODST and 3 is to Chopper boost up to an enemy Wraith. Then I would hop on and destroy it. As I said in the opening part of my post, this is on Heroic or Legendary with skulls on.

Again, it seems like you are expecting everything to fall at your feet, giving you roses and candy bars. Earn it.

It doesn't have to be a god-machine. It's supposed to give you an ADVANTAGE. But Halo 3 doesn't use vehicles as variety, it uses them to replace the on-foot sections with repetitive strafe-a-thons against waves and waves of vehicles. And I only had this problem in Halo 3. I don't mind the vehicle sections in any other Halo game, except for those stupid overpowered Revenants in Reach and parts of The Package. This is how I see it: When you get a tank in Halo 1, 2, or Reach, I thought something along the lines of "that's cool," and got in. When I first got a tank in Halo 3, all I could think was "About fucking time."

Halo 1, you get the tank in the 5th mission after 2 primarily vehicle missions. Halo 2 you get it in the 3rd mission after 1 vehicle mission. Halo 3 you get it in the 5th mission after 1 vehicle mission. ODST is variable when you get it. It could be the 3rd to the 7th mission. Reach you get it in the next to last mission for 10 minutes after 2 vehicle missions. If anything, I'm surprised you aren't complaining about Reach more than Halo 3. I think you need to reevaluate and replay Halo 3 for the gameplay.

 

[SpinningBirdKick]

I still have Reach in my backlog.

I really must get around to firing it up one of these days...

 

[Squire]

Mission six is done!

Spoiler

RIP Jorge/Noble Five :'(

 

[Tha Robbertster]

Mission six is done!

Spoiler

RIP Jorge/Noble Five :'(

I really liked Jorge's death. He thinks he saves the entire planet, but a few minutes later, an even bigger fleet shows up and Reach is in even bigger troubles.

 

[Blue Ninja]

That's one thing Reach does really well. It's not the typical videogame story where a hero saves the day, it's just one gut-punch after another. Too bad most of the characters were so cardboard, or they could've made it really moving.

From the beginning, you know the end.

Spoiler

That quote also sums up pretty much every Halo thread on here.

 

[Popeck]

That's one thing Reach does really well. It's not the typical videogame story where a hero saves the day, it's just one gut-punch after another. Too bad most of the characters were so cardboard, or they could've made it really moving.

From the beginning, you know the end.

Spoiler

That quote also sums up pretty much every Halo thread on here.

About the gut-punches:

Spoiler

The death scenes could also have been handled better, especially the death of Kat. That was just stupid. However, I agree about Jorge. He and that part specifically was one of the highlights of the campaign storywise. Okay, it was pretty absurd to see Noble Six survive that drop...

 

[Veelk]

About the gut-punches:

Spoiler

The death scenes could also have been handled better, especially the death of Kat. That was just stupid. However, I agree about Jorge. He and that part specifically was one of the highlights of the campaign storywise. Okay, it was pretty absurd to see Noble Six survive that drop...

Master Chief does it in the opening of Halo 3, and Noble 6 had that orbital re-entry pack.

 

[bobs...onGaf]

I love Reach's multiplayer. It's a much more tactical game than mainline Halo's, thanks in part to the super detailed radar. You can see enemies and tell whether they're above or below you on the map, which means, if you know the map well enough, you can figure out their exact position.

People fallaciously claim that Halo games haven't ever looked as good as Halo 4, but Halo 4 is built off of Reach's tech. Reach looked very good to me, Halo 4 seems to have made it more stylized and embraced Retro's Metroid Prime design.

Thats not tactics, thats the opposite of tactics, thats getting information handed to you on a plate which allows people to camp

You know what, I totally agree.

 

[Snacks the sober sea lion]

Wraiths can miss. I've hardly ever had situations where the Wraith was cheating in Halo 3. Reach on the other hand has issues with the Wraiths on Legendary. But I won't go there. I can understand all of the Wraith shots in 1, 2, 3, and ODST; and 3 and ODST I can actually analyze them thanks to Theatre. As for the Choppers, it's about not overextending yourself. There are certain enemies like Chieftains that it are inefficient to take out using conventional on-foot methods. A splatter is the quickest method to do so without taking return fire from him. And you can't approach those situations as "Master Chief is an ultra-badass because of his training, his armor, his SKILL WITH WEAPONS AND ABILITY TO PUNCH SPACE-APES TO DEATH."; you have to approach them in a moderately stealthy way.

First off, I'm going to make any assumptions about skill. I'm not a dedicated Halo player, so if someone tells me something works on Legendary, sure, why not. You're probably (definitely) better than me at Halo. But, when I'm playing Halo 3, the vehicle sections are repetitive and not particularly fun. So anyway:

You say it's about not overextending yourself when I just pointed that out. You said the same thing I did and phrase it like it was a refutation of my point.

Next, you took my statement completely out of context. I didn't say I want Master Chief to not need vehicles, I'm saying Halo 3 treats the biggest part of the series, the standard on-foot combat, as a mere interlude to extensive vehicle sections. You then say something about needing to play "stealthy" immediately after suggesting ramming into Brute Chieftans to kill them. Make up your mind. Are you picking enemies off with the Chopper cannons, or charging into a Chieftan? If you see a Chieftan who for some reason is on foot in a vehicle section, why are you heading straight for him? Chopper cannons have the advantage over his plasma cannon, and if for some reason he has a hammer, he's worthless against you. But I don't even know of a single vehicle section where a Brute Chieftan of all things would be your highest priority.

The Prowler uses the Plasma tech. You'll notice that those projectiles naturally move slower. Putting hitscan on those weapon would be silly, and to an extent rather unfun. And again, it sounds like you ae overextending yourself when you play.

I know what plasma weapons do. If I know what hitscan is, logically it can be inferred that I what a weapon that is NOT hitscan is, i.e. the majority of Covenant weapons. So don't try to explain to me why a Prowler isn't hitscan because that's pretty damn obvious. It doesn't matter knowing why a weapon isn't hitscan because the fact still stands that it is not hitscan, which I see as a disadvantage, that this huge, clunky transport's only weaponry is a slow-firing turret.

I didn't say anything to imply "overextend" myself because I already made a comment about how effective the Brute Chopper's cannons are at range.

I divided this into 4 parts, with the breakpoints noted in the quote. [1] It really does seem like you want the vehicles to be god-level. They are an advantage. How many turret shots can you take while in a Warthog versus on foot? How long does it take to kill the turret in a vehicle versus on foot? A tank gives you an advantage in both regards. A Warthog gives you an instant advantage in one spot, and possibly a second if you aren't carrying a power weapon. This applies to all of the vehicles. The AI is far from superhuman perfection like you claim it is. And using the tactics that the enemy uses isn't going to make your enjoyment any better.

That's not even what I said. I said nothing about using the same tactics as the computer. I said getting a Ghost puts you on the same level offensively (dual plasma turrets and ramming are your only attacks) and defensively (if the Ghost is destroyed, you die too). That's statistics, not tactics.

I'm not saying Master Chief is better on-foot vs. vehicles than in vehicular combat. I'm saying comparing the on-foot combat, purely Master Chief vs. infantry, Master Chief has some advantage over nearly every enemy. He throws grenades faster and more accurately than Brutes and Grunts, he has a huge advantage over the Grunts and Jackals in health, accuracy, and melee power, he can stagger Brutes with melee and headshots, he has all manner of weapons to use. Vehicle sections throw that out. There is no melee advantage, there are no headshots, there are no grenades. When Master Chief gets into a vehicle, and fights other vehicles, he is on even ground. He has identical capabilities, and only has an advantage because the enemies will drive themselves into walls, between rocks, and otherwise straight into the player's line of fire.

Basically, any vehicular battle will have significantly fewer factors at work. There are Ghosts, there are Choppers, there are Wraiths, there are Banshees, usually only 2 types of these at work at a single time. The player can only commit to one vehicle at a time, and all vehicles limit the player to only two methods of attack. Every variable that makes an FPS interesting, that makes Halo interesting, is gone. Lasers or ramming, no headshots no grenades no melee no jumping. The vehicle sections are just nowhere near as compelling as the on-foot combat.

[3]This is the one that stood out the most to me. If you say the Scarab fights are awful, I'm almost sure you hate non-conventional boss fights. They are a boss fight. And they are one of the more unique ones in any FPS. It isn't you versus some big bad guy in a room where he has magnificent powers and you are stuck with what you brought in. These fights give you a slew of alternatives that are all viable options. You are looking for a one-way god mode to go through the games, which is why this statement stuck out to me: "That doesn't matter because one method beats them all".

I just don't like the Scarab fights. I think strafing around a big weapons platform shooting its legs until they blow up and shooting its secret weak point is kind of ridiculous. Even the double Scarabs on The Covenant, which I think is an okay section really, I can't help but see the absurdity of these huge war machines being so easily taken down by what is essentially a helicopter flying in circles shooting its legs. I think boss fights in general are pretty shitty in first person shooters though, so maybe I shouldn't be so hard on Halo 3 for not subverting that.

[4]That's just... Wrong. Those moments are quite possibly the best gameplay sections in any Halo game, and many of the HaloGAF vets will tell you so. If you're getting hit by Wraiths from 500 yards away, you're not playing smart enough quite simply.

My opinion is wrong, I'm sorry. How dare I not like Halo 3's mediocre vehicle sections, people who play Halo more than me say they're good!

One thing that I would do in ODST and 3 is to Chopper boost up to an enemy Wraith. Then I would hop on and destroy it. As I said in the opening part of my post, this is on Heroic or Legendary with skulls on.

What did you do about the gunner? What happened to the vehicles supporting the Wraith? Were they just not shooting at you? That can't be all there is to it.

Halo 1, you get the tank in the 5th mission after 2 primarily vehicle missions. Halo 2 you get it in the 3rd mission after 1 vehicle mission. Halo 3 you get it in the 5th mission after 1 vehicle mission. ODST is variable when you get it. It could be the 3rd to the 7th mission. Reach you get it in the next to last mission for 10 minutes after 2 vehicle missions. If anything, I'm surprised you aren't complaining about Reach more than Halo 3. I think you need to reevaluate and replay Halo 3 for the gameplay.

I've played Halo 1 probably the most, so I have things to say for that one:

Halo is not a vehicle mission in the same way Tsavo Highway is. You use the vehicles for transport. There are no enemy vehicles to fight in Halo, aside from the Banshees at the start who will eventually leave you alone, or can be shot down with the assault rifle. Same applies to The Silent Cartographer. You won't fight even one (non-Banshee) vehicle in Combat Evolved until you reach the ground in Assault on the Control Room.
As for Halo 3, I consider Tsavo Highway and The Storm vehicles levels, because vehicles are actually fought. Same with half of The Ark. That makes 3 versus Combat Evolved's 0.

The last time I did play Halo 3 was actually specifically to replay Halo 3. I was playing through the series again, maybe thinking I would change my mind about Halo 3. And well, I didn't.

This is actually way too long. I already get what you're saying.

 

[Squire]

Mission seven down I like the way the start screen is chsnging as I go through the campaign and I really enjoyed Nathan Fillion's voice acting in this mission.

 

[Snacks the sober sea lion]

You mean Gunnery Sergeant Buck? He's a major character in ODST, his role in Reach is really just a cameo.

 

[Squire]

You mean Gunnery Sergeant Buck? He's a major character in ODST, his role in Reach is really just a cameo.

He was really good!

 

[Demoncarnotaur]

If you liked Buck for sure pick up ODST...a lot more where that came from.

 

[EatinOlives]

I never played Halo before playing Reach, and the only reason I have Reach is because MS gave it away in one of those update betas where they wanted to test some new disc DRM or something. I popped it in to play it because hey, free game.

I couldn't bring myself to enjoy it. The gameplay is about as pedestrian as it could get. It's probably because every other FPS is copying Halo by now, but absolutely nothing about the campaign was standout. I only remember the mission with you flying from one top of a building to the next and the space shooting sequence. Everything else I found extremely forgettable, from the shooting to the story. I didn't even finish the campaign.

I dunno, as someone who had never played the series before, I wasn't impressed despite everyone saying it was the best campaign. Maybe it's the type of series you have to have been playing for a long time to appreciate it? Or maybe it's that I hate controlling FPSs with a thumbstick and made the game to me feel more clumsy than with a mouse. The extremely muddy visuals and jaggies galore also didn't help. I dunno, it wasn't a bad experience certainly but the whole package felt completely flat to me.

 

[pakkit]

Thats not tactics, thats the opposite of tactics, thats getting information handed to you on a plate which allows people to camp

You know what, I totally agree.

I don't really encounter camping in Reach on the same level that I do in other online multiplayer games. Again, if you use the radar properly, you can locate the enemies and get the drop on them, thus nullifying the benefit of camping. Of course, if you keep going on the lift in Sword Base, I will guarantee you that you're going to die at the hands of the opportunistic asshole at the top with the shotty or sword.

Source: I've put 300 hours into Reach, and at least 100 in Halo 3.

EatinOlives: It's a good co-op campaign, but I didn't really like it in comparison to the mainline series. The story was bare-bones, and there was almost no diversity within the campaign (besides the overblown/undercooked aerial combat).

 

[Red]

I never played Halo before playing Reach, and the only reason I have Reach is because MS gave it away in one of those update betas where they wanted to test some new disc DRM or something. I popped it in to play it because hey, free game.

I couldn't bring myself to enjoy it. The gameplay is about as pedestrian as it could get. It's probably because every other FPS is copying Halo by now, but absolutely nothing about the campaign was standout. I only remember the mission with you flying from one top of a building to the next and the space shooting sequence. Everything else I found extremely forgettable, from the shooting to the story. I didn't even finish the campaign.

I dunno, as someone who had never played the series before, I wasn't impressed despite everyone saying it was the best campaign. Maybe it's the type of series you have to have been playing for a long time to appreciate it? Or maybe it's that I hate controlling FPSs with a thumbstick and made the game to me feel more clumsy than with a mouse. The extremely muddy visuals and jaggies galore also didn't help. I dunno, it wasn't a bad experience certainly but the whole package felt completely flat to me.

The AI makes the series for me. There is no other FPS console or otherwise with enemies that are as consistently fun to fight.

And of all console shooters, it's Halo above all that has controls I love falling back into, as a primarily PC gamer. I understand how it can be jarring and weird after getting used to m&k, and maybe it's because I've been with the series from the start, but Halo controls just feel right to me.

It's not as good in some areas as other heavy hitters, but I find almost every entry very fun.

 

[NullPointer]

If you liked Buck for sure pick up ODST...a lot more where that came from.

He's also one of the best voices you can use in Reach Firefight. Whenever I go ODST armor I use Buck.

 

[lazybones18]

Halfway to Reclaimer. Don't think I'll reach Inheritor before Halo 4's release

 

[Squire]

"Welcome to the Bullfrogs!" Haha, yes!

Are most of the main Halo games solo missions? You know, Chief by himself? I really like it when I'm with Noble Team or other soldiers. The way to talk to you and the difference in how they regard you is cool.

 

[NullPointer]

"Welcome to the Bullfrogs!" Haha, yes!

Are most of the main Halo games solo missions? You know, Chief by himself? I really like it when I'm with Noble Team or other soldiers. The way to talk to you and the difference in how they regard you is cool.

Mostly on your own yes, outside some missions with allied soldiers or when the Arbiter tags along in Halo 3. Co-op campaigns in Halo usually put the other player as a duplicate Master Chief, and Reach just duplicates Noble Six. Halo 3 has the second player as the Arbiter with allied elites for players three and four, but there is no effect on the story.

One of things I love about Halo 3 especially is that if you try and keep your allied soldiers alive, and arm them with some of the strongest weapons you find (rocket launchers/snipers/fuel rod cannons) you can absolutely devastate in combat. Soldiers never run out of ammo, so as long as a weapon even has one shot remaining, you can trade it with a soldier and let them loose.

Just be careful that they're not aiming in your general direction.

This just makes me think that earlier posters had it absolutely right - Halo 3 is the most replayable and emergent of the Halo campaigns. It just feels very weird to play after Reach since its a step back in terms of animation, models, faces, audio, image quality, etc. - the works really, but it does have some nice lighting effects and environments, and the most epic encounters in the whole series.

 

[dmg04]

Really, Grab a copy of Halo: CE whenever you can.

Honestly, that ENTIRE campaign is awesome. It really shines when you hit the second half, though. Nothing could ever top playing Two Betrayals with my brother on Legendary way back when.

Reach is awesome, but it was sort of a downer towards the end.

 

[Blue Ninja]

Mostly on your own yes, outside some missions with allied soldiers or when the Arbiter tags along in Halo 3. Co-op campaigns in Halo usually put the other player as a duplicate Master Chief, and Reach just duplicates Noble Six. Halo 3 has the second player as the Arbiter with allied elites for players three and four, but there is no effect on the story.

One of things I love about Halo 3 especially is that if you try and keep your allied soldiers alive, and arm them with some of the strongest weapons you find (rocket launchers/snipers/fuel rod cannons) you can absolutely devastate in combat. Soldiers never run out of ammo, so as long as a weapon even has one shot remaining, you can trade it with a soldier and let them loose.

Just be careful that they're not aiming in your general direction.

This just makes me think that earlier posters had it absolutely right - Halo 3 is the most replayable and emergent of the Halo campaigns. It just feels very weird to play after Reach since its a step back in terms of animation, models, faces, audio, image quality, etc. - the works really, but it does have some nice lighting effects and environments, and the most epic encounters in the whole series.

Man, Tsavo Highway on Legendary and a Troop Transport hog with every seat taken by a marine with a Fuel Rod Gun. I was an invincible death machine.