Date of Lies
Banned
GamerXL said:
Those are mostly details anyway, I'm not really complaining.
Official Halo 2 Thread
- Thread starter LukeSmith
- Start date
Those are mostly details anyway, I'm not really complaining.
I actually thought the military stuff was pretty well done, the ribbons are real ribbons and the insignia on the officer's hats are US Navy officer insignia. Nice considering that Master Chief is a Navy rank as well. The ranks don't seem to match up with the shoulderboards and I noticed a few made up ranks as well, but hey, nobody's perfect.
Sp3eD
0G M3mbeR
I am honestly not sure if I am dissapointed or not about Halo 2. The multiplayer matchmaking thing is complete garbage. Half the time it stalls on the menu and sits for 5 minutes looking for a game. Also why do I have to join a game with a full 8 people? Sometimes I like to just DM with 2 or 3 people so it isn't just a clusterfuck spam fest (which 8 players ALWAYS turns into that no matter the level). From what I have seen from Optimatch it will always get the max number of players in the game before it even thinks about starting.
I am also not digging the weapon balance at all. Duel weapons are godlike mid/short range. Charged up Alien pistol + SMG is the ultimate unstoppable combo which is odd because you can get those guns together quickly on every map after you die. Kind of lame to abuse :-/
I am also not digging the weapon balance at all. Duel weapons are godlike mid/short range. Charged up Alien pistol + SMG is the ultimate unstoppable combo which is odd because you can get those guns together quickly on every map after you die. Kind of lame to abuse :-/
Sp3eD said:
duel weilding rocks, for close to med close range only. thats where the balance comes into play. every weapon has specific uses. its knowing each, and effectively using them in all situations that is the true balance of the game.
i will say though, i would have agreed with you after my first few hours of multiplayer. hang in there, it just takes getting used to
Just finished playing for a few hours. The biggest standout to me is that the music is absolutely fantastic. The game is good too, but it is exactly like Halo 1. So it's exactly like a great game yes, but it's not hitting me like I though it would. There isn't much to complain about however, except for the cutscenes. The texture pop-in is horrible, with things like ship seats appearing out of nowhere behind a persons head. The framerate stutters often in the cutscenes too. Haven't seen any framerate issues that caused the actual playable game to slowup too much which is good. The graphics, while very good, are nothing to jump up and down about. It looks exactly the same as Halo 1, exactly. Anyways, so far it's exactly what I expected, Halo 1.5. I would have liked something a bit fresher, but how often do we get releases of this quality anyways.
Great Wasabi Man
Member
I played a bit....mostly XBL....been enjoying it more then Halo 1, from watching the movies I thught it would be a much faster paced game (of course I just started)
The A.I is smarter but still does some really stupid things, like flying into walls over and over till you walk near, taking cover and if you come the other way around them they won't see you even when you shoot them.
It looks cool...but it's bump mapping insanity!?!?!!?1
I wasn't a big fan of Halo1 but I really like Halo 2...it's a fun game.
The A.I is smarter but still does some really stupid things, like flying into walls over and over till you walk near, taking cover and if you come the other way around them they won't see you even when you shoot them.
It looks cool...but it's bump mapping insanity!?!?!!?1
I wasn't a big fan of Halo1 but I really like Halo 2...it's a fun game.
i really cant fathom how people think the game looks the same as part 1. oh well, more enjoyment for me.
my only real complaint with the game is how "boxed in" the player is. in halo 1, if you managed to find a banshee where maybe you werent supposed to, you could freely fly around the level, and even by pass large sections of maps. for example, on assualt on the control room, there is a part where you can knock a banshee off of a ledge with a rocket before the elite pilots it to gun you down. when you get the banshee, you can literally fly through the rest of the stage to the end.
it doesnt seem you can do that in halo 2
. today i was screwing around on the bridge portion towards the beginning of the game, just stealing ghosts and shit. so, i climbed up on the side of the bridge, and managed to jump off the bridge onto a banshee flying by and jack the driver. i thought, "fucking awesome, i can freely explore this iant city!". nope, you can go a ways from the bridge on the water, but eventually you hit an invisable wall. you also cant progress past the "toll booth" at the end of the bridge while in a banshee.
there have been several areas similar to this, usually involving the banshee (for obvious reasons). i suppose it makes perfect sense not to allow the gamer to by pass entire chunks of maps, or make things to easy. i can see that allowing a player to explore where he shouldnt would likely break a lot of the illusion (2d trees of in the distance, basic fakery for objects your not supposed to see up close), but its still a damn shame, and kind of removes a bit of the "sandbox" gameplay that was in halo 1.
enough seneless bitching about mostly meaningless shit, back to the best game ever made
my only real complaint with the game is how "boxed in" the player is. in halo 1, if you managed to find a banshee where maybe you werent supposed to, you could freely fly around the level, and even by pass large sections of maps. for example, on assualt on the control room, there is a part where you can knock a banshee off of a ledge with a rocket before the elite pilots it to gun you down. when you get the banshee, you can literally fly through the rest of the stage to the end.
it doesnt seem you can do that in halo 2
. today i was screwing around on the bridge portion towards the beginning of the game, just stealing ghosts and shit. so, i climbed up on the side of the bridge, and managed to jump off the bridge onto a banshee flying by and jack the driver. i thought, "fucking awesome, i can freely explore this iant city!". nope, you can go a ways from the bridge on the water, but eventually you hit an invisable wall. you also cant progress past the "toll booth" at the end of the bridge while in a banshee. there have been several areas similar to this, usually involving the banshee (for obvious reasons). i suppose it makes perfect sense not to allow the gamer to by pass entire chunks of maps, or make things to easy. i can see that allowing a player to explore where he shouldnt would likely break a lot of the illusion (2d trees of in the distance, basic fakery for objects your not supposed to see up close), but its still a damn shame, and kind of removes a bit of the "sandbox" gameplay that was in halo 1.
enough seneless bitching about mostly meaningless shit, back to the best game ever made
Battle rifle useless? No way. Play on Legendary and you'll almost always be praying for rifle ammo pickups. The only problem is that if you don't get headshots or at least hits in the upper body, it's not that helpful. It can take nine rounds just to down a grunt if you are careless about it.
Plasma pistol useless? No way. The charged shot now has semi-homing capabilities, making it even more useful than the original.
Take down shields with plasma pistol, then get a quick headshot with battle rifle....good for Legendary Elites or suckers in multiplayer.
Almost all of the enemies have a "firing rhythm" that you can learn and exploit. Elites fire three plasma rifle bursts, and then their rifle overheats (time to attack!). Seems a little lame that they don't take cover while their rifle cools, but if they didn't the game might be too insanely difficult.
Plasma pistol useless? No way. The charged shot now has semi-homing capabilities, making it even more useful than the original.
Take down shields with plasma pistol, then get a quick headshot with battle rifle....good for Legendary Elites or suckers in multiplayer.
Almost all of the enemies have a "firing rhythm" that you can learn and exploit. Elites fire three plasma rifle bursts, and then their rifle overheats (time to attack!). Seems a little lame that they don't take cover while their rifle cools, but if they didn't the game might be too insanely difficult.
border said:
I agree with most of what you said, Border. Except the above. The charged shot from the Plasma Pistol had a semi-homing in the first game. I personally couldn't beat the first Halo on Legendary without using it 80+% of the time. It was basically an essential weapon on levels w/ elites and Jackals.
random thoughts:
the good:
1) singleplayer - as far as i'm concerned, it is miles ahead of halo 1's singleplayer experience. playing alongside covenant for a change is pretty fun (even if i do repeatedly kill them by accident) and for some reason it feels so...different even though the basic properties are still the same.
2) weapon changes - i like the battle rifle a lot, although i thought it would switch to semiauto when zoomed in, rather than 3 round burst nonstop. it's almost as powerful as the pistol in halo 1. the needler is actually useful, if not actually really good for a change. especially dual wielding two needlers is great. dual wielding itself adds an interesting twist.
the bad:
1) multiplayer - it's probably just because i'm not used to it yet, but i still like halo 1's multiplayer better right now. it just doesn't feel...the same. the lack of health packs and a health meter make it feel really different, and overall it feels a little less strategic and more arcadelike. not that the original was realistic or anything, but it did have a great balance of strategy and madness. now it seems to be shifted a bit towards the madness end. also, the maps are almost too big sometimes. anyways, i probably need to play it more.
2) all those stupidass emblems and color options are pretty stupid.
the good:
1) singleplayer - as far as i'm concerned, it is miles ahead of halo 1's singleplayer experience. playing alongside covenant for a change is pretty fun (even if i do repeatedly kill them by accident) and for some reason it feels so...different even though the basic properties are still the same.
2) weapon changes - i like the battle rifle a lot, although i thought it would switch to semiauto when zoomed in, rather than 3 round burst nonstop. it's almost as powerful as the pistol in halo 1. the needler is actually useful, if not actually really good for a change. especially dual wielding two needlers is great. dual wielding itself adds an interesting twist.
the bad:
1) multiplayer - it's probably just because i'm not used to it yet, but i still like halo 1's multiplayer better right now. it just doesn't feel...the same. the lack of health packs and a health meter make it feel really different, and overall it feels a little less strategic and more arcadelike. not that the original was realistic or anything, but it did have a great balance of strategy and madness. now it seems to be shifted a bit towards the madness end. also, the maps are almost too big sometimes. anyways, i probably need to play it more.
2) all those stupidass emblems and color options are pretty stupid.
Fixed2BeBroken
Member
Dracos said:
what the hell?
Well if the plasma pistol had homing in Halo 1, then it's certainly a lot more noticeable now. It won't go around corners but it will arc maybe 70 degrees. I made it through Legendary Halo 1 without it....I just relied on sniper rifle or plasma grenades for the Elites.
I don't think that the maps are too big, or at least not any worse than in the first game....Headlong and Burial Mounds are pretty good for 2vs2 (or 4P Slayer) if you have sniper rifles, which was pretty much the same way it worked in Halo 1 with Blood Gulch or that icy tundra map. But 4-player Boarding Action sucked even with sniper enabled....just like Waterworks sucks without a big group. I'd say the two games are about equal. Almost all of the maps can be enjoyed with a smaller group, but the ones that can't get boring very fast.
Seems ridiculous to say that the marines are not multicultural enough. Yeah there are rednecks, but there's also plenty of foul-mouthed Austrailians and chicanos.
The ending will be debated for probably years to come (assuming that the campaign mode isn't extended through Downloadable Content). In one sense, it's like ending Star Wars: A New Hope just before Luke leaves to blow up the Death Star -- totally unsatisfying and anti-climactic. In another sense, it's like the ending of The Matrix.....cutting off the narrative just when it seems to be getting good, and leaving you starved for more but still feeling pretty good.
I don't think that the maps are too big, or at least not any worse than in the first game....Headlong and Burial Mounds are pretty good for 2vs2 (or 4P Slayer) if you have sniper rifles, which was pretty much the same way it worked in Halo 1 with Blood Gulch or that icy tundra map. But 4-player Boarding Action sucked even with sniper enabled....just like Waterworks sucks without a big group. I'd say the two games are about equal. Almost all of the maps can be enjoyed with a smaller group, but the ones that can't get boring very fast.
Seems ridiculous to say that the marines are not multicultural enough. Yeah there are rednecks, but there's also plenty of foul-mouthed Austrailians and chicanos.
The ending will be debated for probably years to come (assuming that the campaign mode isn't extended through Downloadable Content). In one sense, it's like ending Star Wars: A New Hope just before Luke leaves to blow up the Death Star -- totally unsatisfying and anti-climactic. In another sense, it's like the ending of The Matrix.....cutting off the narrative just when it seems to be getting good, and leaving you starved for more but still feeling pretty good.
Ehhhh, I don't think so. Swords are only good in tight corridors where you can't be shot from afar. Using them on a map like Burial Mounds or Zanzibar won't get you very far. Even a "small but open" map like Foundation or Ascension will favor ranged weapons over swords.
You just have to choose weapons appropriate for each map. Swords (and shotguns) are only super-effective on Lockout, Midship, and Ivory Tower. Other settings will force you to use weapons with range.
I am still debating about the usefulness of the Battle Rifle and Carbine in multiplayer. Even from a distance, the Battle Rifle is not that great....someone can easily find cover before you take down their shields. The carbine has such a high rate of fire that it could prove to be more practical....so long as you get headshots.
I am still debating about the usefulness of the Battle Rifle and Carbine in multiplayer. Even from a distance, the Battle Rifle is not that great....someone can easily find cover before you take down their shields. The carbine has such a high rate of fire that it could prove to be more practical....so long as you get headshots.
LakeEarth said:
yeah, if hes anywere near you witha sword, you should not use the BR (which is only good from med-far to far ranges IMO). try a plasma pistol + smg, pistol + smg or duel pistols. hell, any duel combo should work decently. if that fails, a rocket should put him in his place
i played a game with a friend on headlong. he was battling with someone else in the open with the sword and he cut that guy down. i jumped down into the open with a rocket launcher and fired to take him out, but missed. he charged at me with his sword ready and i freaked when i realized that was my last rocket, and my only other weapon was a single smg.
so, i did the only thing i could do (aside from run
), and began to sporadically fire off the smg to both conserve ammo so i didnt have to reload, and to drain his shields at least a bit. by the time he got in closer range, i unloaded the remainign portion of the clip into him as he jumped into the air towards me and began to "charge" sword first. so, in one final act of desperation, i melee attack him with my lonely smg... and killed the bastard!
:lol
so, i did the only thing i could do (aside from run
), and began to sporadically fire off the smg to both conserve ammo so i didnt have to reload, and to drain his shields at least a bit. by the time he got in closer range, i unloaded the remainign portion of the clip into him as he jumped into the air towards me and began to "charge" sword first. so, in one final act of desperation, i melee attack him with my lonely smg... and killed the bastard!:lol
tigerfan12345
Member
its strange, im loving the battle rifle, and I usually hate med-long range weapons. But I've found that I can be deadly accurate with it if i just go stay cool and really aim for headshots, and not waste shots.
Just beat it......I cannot believe the ending. If you can even call it one.
I still don't get a few things...
I still don't get a few things...
So what is the ark, Earth?
Why do the Prophets want to kill everything? And why did Regret attack Earth alone?
What is the Arbitor?
Why did the prophets and Brutes turn on the others?
Why do the Prophets want to kill everything? And why did Regret attack Earth alone?
What is the Arbitor?
Why did the prophets and Brutes turn on the others?
Well, just finished about 3 hours of drinking and blasting fools. A fun FPS, but aiming is really hit and miss with the joypad. One match I'd own everybody, the next I couldn't hit the ocean if I had a full clip. That's my complaint about all console-based FPS games, though, so it's nothing I can blame on Halo 2 per se. I guess with all that frantic action, I want precise controls, and this ain't it.
Halo 2 will be all about the single player campaign for me.
Halo 2 will be all about the single player campaign for me.
Duckhuntdog
Member
Warned you guys that some of you wouldn't like the ending.
Geez Anyanka, if you can keep track of the ridiculously convoluted "plot" (if you can call it that) of Mortal Kombat, I'd think that you can keep track of Halo 2Anyanka said:
j/kYes, Earth is where the Halos can be detonated by remote.
The Prophets don't know that the Halos kill all life. They just think that it starts some great spiritual journey.
"Arbiter" is an honorary position given to Elites throughout the history of the Covenant. Like being a knight or something.
Prophets and Brutes don't really turn on each other, do they? They leave that one Prophet to die, but that's because they don't believe he has the conviction to follow through (errr, or something). Any other betrayals you can probably just chalk up to either side being power-hungry.
The Prophets don't know that the Halos kill all life. They just think that it starts some great spiritual journey.
"Arbiter" is an honorary position given to Elites throughout the history of the Covenant. Like being a knight or something.
Prophets and Brutes don't really turn on each other, do they? They leave that one Prophet to die, but that's because they don't believe he has the conviction to follow through (errr, or something). Any other betrayals you can probably just chalk up to either side being power-hungry.
The Brutes and Prophets are together, but they turn on the others. At the end the elites, grunts and hunters were all helping me. It was just the brutes and jackels fighting. So the Covenent are badly weakened now....
How did the big tenticle flood plant thing of doom teleport us out of his lair?
did Regret just screw up when attacking us, or did he have his own agenda?
How did the big tenticle flood plant thing of doom teleport us out of his lair?
did Regret just screw up when attacking us, or did he have his own agenda?
also one last thing:
Did guilty spark say the forerunners all commit suicide after figuring out how to contain the flood?
It was something like "after all strategic parameters have been met, the rings were activated and killed all sentient life in the galaxy, including themselves."
I thought the whole point was they would kill this galaxy to keep the flood from spreading to another one (if they were advanced enough, they could have ships capable of reaching other galaxies.
It was something like "after all strategic parameters have been met, the rings were activated and killed all sentient life in the galaxy, including themselves."
I thought the whole point was they would kill this galaxy to keep the flood from spreading to another one (if they were advanced enough, they could have ships capable of reaching other galaxies.
For Anyanka:
For Mooreberg:
What leads you to think that the Brutes and Prophets turned on each other? Maybe I just missed it. Towards the end it is Brutes VS Elites, Jackals, Grunts. If you want to read into the developers' comments that the whole story "could be read" as an indictment of Bush's foreign policy, then it is essentially about the misuse of fundamentalist ideology as a means of gaining power and glory. Even if there is evidence of the Brutes betraying the Prophets, it is because one side seeks an ultimate triumph even if they must sacrifice allies (much like the US pushed away European allies and disregarded any dissent).
The abilities of the Flood leader are unknown as of yet. If he can teleport Master Chief and the Arbiter wherever he likes, then it's not to big of a leap to assume that he can teleport himself into the floating Covenant base.
Regret screwed up because he didn't think that the Earth/Arc was the humans' stronghold. He expected minimal resistance and didn't have a fleet strong enough for the invasion.
The abilities of the Flood leader are unknown as of yet. If he can teleport Master Chief and the Arbiter wherever he likes, then it's not to big of a leap to assume that he can teleport himself into the floating Covenant base.
Regret screwed up because he didn't think that the Earth/Arc was the humans' stronghold. He expected minimal resistance and didn't have a fleet strong enough for the invasion.
For Mooreberg:
Halos kill off all organic lifeforms. The Forerunners were inorganic (robots with AI or something I guess), so the detonation of a Halo would not affect them. Whether they still exist or not, I am not sure. You might be remembering the line wrong...I don't remember them saying that a Halo detonation killed the Forerunners. Then again, I might not be remembering right either...
(late-game story spoilers)
edit:
at one point, guilty spark calls miranda keyes a "reclaimer." of course that's also how he refers to mc in the first game. previously i think it was speculated that mc's armor led guilty spark to mistake him for a forerunner. but now it seems that humans generally are "reclaimers." obviously humans figure prominently in the forerunners' plans for the halos. perhaps the forerunners had some interaction with the ancient world, or created humans, or were humans. i wonder if halo 3 will get into some screwy chariot of the gods shit.
edit:
i think the final covenant split is brutes, prophets, drones, and jackals vs. elites, hunters, and grunts. and i got the sense that the prophets were aware that the halos would destroy all sentient life, but that they saw this in metaphysical terms, and were misleading the rest of the covenant. i think that's why truth is relatively untroubled by the civil war, and leaves one of the other hierarchs when he's attacked by the flood -- it's all irrelevant, because he knows the what the halos will do. i'll have to pay more attention to the story on this playthrough.
Actually, if you read the "Conversations from the Universe" manual that comes with the game (or at least with the LE version), you will very quickly understand that the robots
. It's technically not a "late game" spoiler....though obviously you will miss it if you rush to play the game rather than reading all the included documention.
refer to all humans as "Reclaimers"