Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Reach MP - This is what NEEDs to happen
  • Subject: Reach MP - This is what NEEDs to happen
Subject: Reach MP - This is what NEEDs to happen

Dogs, everywhere

Your a dirty cod player aren't you?

Ummm this posted more than i thought it would

[Edited on 07.12.2009 7:34 PM PDT]

  • 07.12.2009 7:33 PM PDT

Dogs, everywhere

Your a dirty COD player aren't you?

Sry triple post... somehow

[Edited on 07.12.2009 7:35 PM PDT]

  • 07.12.2009 7:34 PM PDT

In Soviet Russia you pilot many flying vehicles while Nikolai embarks on crazy journey of revenge filled with movie references....

Improved forge, and more armor customization.

  • 07.12.2009 8:07 PM PDT

Posted by: TheBigShow

E) Fall Damage : Fall damage, not only from a logistical standpoint in terms of the armor, should be standard in Reach's MP. Fall Damage forces players to think and plan their actions more carefully rather than throw themselves around with reckless abandon. A small slip-up could be fatal, and it adds a new dimension to levels and how players move about them. Additionally, the crouch land should be included as a way to prevent full fall damage on impact.

The Master Chief fell four kilometers at the beginning of Halo 3. And lived. No fall damage. Agree with everything else, except now it sounds like a mix between swat and COD4.

  • 07.12.2009 8:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: TW InKoGnIto
over powered BR



WHAT!?!?!

  • 07.12.2009 8:52 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: RED RECON 14
Posted by: TheBigShow

E) Fall Damage : Fall damage, not only from a logistical standpoint in terms of the armor, should be standard in Reach's MP. Fall Damage forces players to think and plan their actions more carefully rather than throw themselves around with reckless abandon. A small slip-up could be fatal, and it adds a new dimension to levels and how players move about them. Additionally, the crouch land should be included as a way to prevent full fall damage on impact.

The Master Chief fell four kilometers at the beginning of Halo 3. And lived. No fall damage. Agree with everything else, except now it sounds like a mix between swat and COD4.
You're forgetting that this takes place before Halo 1. And in Halo 1, Master Chief took fall damage. So it's logical to assume that fall damage should be in the game.

  • 07.12.2009 9:37 PM PDT

i like halo i have played it since halo came out

don;t forget better sentivte how fast ur gun moves i want to go to 100 10 way to slow for me

[Edited on 07.12.2009 10:03 PM PDT]

  • 07.12.2009 10:03 PM PDT

Posted by: Duardo
I'd love to be a 10 year old and tell my mom I'm going on an adventure out into the world catching Pokemon, with her full support. Never mind the fact that there are rapists, criminals, and murders out there, or the fact that I may get killed by a Pokemon.

Luckily I have Pikachu.

I've always disagreed with the removal of aim assist and I still do, sure certain weapons like the Assault Rifle and Rocket Launcher don't need it. But Halo 3 has proven that until Bungie adequitly tests their netcode aim assist should always be present in some form with rifles and Plasma/Spike grenades.

I'm also hoping Bungie brings back the Halo 2 Scorpion Tank, increases the splash damage on the Rocket Launcher, and completely removes the sword clash.

  • 07.12.2009 10:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Wow. After reading this i had the sudden urge to place a plastic grocery bag over my head and keep it there so all the pain would go away. I almost did. All you did in this post was describe combat evolved. Instead of saying all of that bologna you could have much more easily said, "Make multiplayer like Combat Evolved".

TERRIBLE IDEA.

The only good thing about that game was it's campaign's story line. All of the mechanics sucked.

All of the mechanics you want in Halo: Reach suck. No offense. "Still taking offense"

Let's see you make a video game and include what everyone wants. They're going forward, not back.

Bam! Said the lady!

[Edited on 07.13.2009 12:08 AM PDT]

  • 07.13.2009 12:07 AM PDT

Life is not a journey to the grave, with the intension of arriving safely.

I dissagrea with most of what has been said. it just sounds like he is alright at halo and wants more of a challenge. I hate to point this out, but most people average at halo lol. I wouldnt play it if it was the way it was being described in the first post. Maybe youd prefer that, but then you would be a jerk lol...

on to another topic...

loads of other furrums are saying they want to see more gore in Reach. Like arms coming off and loads of blood and things. Im not anti gore on the whole, but does anyone else think that would just change the game to much??

  • 07.13.2009 12:26 AM PDT

Posted by: TurretBuddyBoy
Let's see you make a video game and include what everyone wants. They're going forward, not back.


wow, someone else who actually has some sense. thank you.

everyone needs to take off their freakin nostalgia glasses quick! all i see anymore in this forum is complaining. everyone seems to want to play Halo: Combat Evolved Version 2.0.

get over it guys! the gaming community has moved on! Combat Evolved was great in it's day, but that day is long gone. there are bigger and better things out now. Halo 3 expanded the gameplay from the first two tremendously.

like Turret said, Bungie is going forward, not back.

  • 07.13.2009 12:26 AM PDT

Life is not a journey to the grave, with the intension of arriving safely.

sorry, posted twice by accident

[Edited on 07.13.2009 12:31 AM PDT]

  • 07.13.2009 12:30 AM PDT

I hunt for the Prophet of Contentment, the San 'Shyumm that murdered my son, and stole his birthright, his Energy Sword. They call our species Heretics. They claim to all that our tongues sting, our words a vile poison that feeds on the unworthy. I have seen the true face of Heresy. The head of a gallant warrior lay on the ground. His neck scorched and blistered, scarred by his own blade. I shall retrieve the weapon, and drive it through that bastard's heart! Punishment for his sins is nigh.

Posted by: TheBigShow
A) Longer range on all weapons :
B) A Mid-Range Weapon
C) Less Aim Assist
D) Fixed Melee
E) Fall Damage
F) Faster Kill Speed
G) Faster Strafe Speed
H) No Dual Wielding
I) Return of Plasma Freeze
J) Wider FOV
K) Balanced Vehicles


A: Not all weapons, the Shotgun, Sword, and Hammer are perfect, the AR should keep its range when bursted, but should be shorter range when full auto, and the Mauler should fire at a longer range, more like the HCE shotgun, a slug. Other weapons are fine, except the Carbine, BR and Magnum, which should be extended, and less effective at close range.

B: The Carbine is a single shot weapon that is accurate at fairly good ranges, it just needs a bit of an extension.

C: Agreed fully.

D: Agreed, Halo CE had a great Melee system, that required real skill to execute.

E: Agreed fully.

F: I disagree. I feel some weapons need a nurf in terms of overall power (BR, Carbine, and Magnum come to mind.) While others need a boost (Plasma Rifle especially) The idea is to force players to use weapon combinations for their advantages, to increase individual kill counts. (Plasma Rifle + BR SHOULD be more effective than just BR, but it isn't, and that is bad). Overall, I feel each seperate weapon should kill in 3-4 seconds on its own, but you should be able to pull off 1.5-2.5 seconds off a proper weapon combo. This isn't COD, you are SUPPOSED to have a chance to fight back if shot first.

G: Strafe is fine. It is unrealistic, and in a real situation doesnt make sense to begin with anyway, so why would you want it BETTER. (Even a Spartan can't dodge bullets like Neo)

H: Halo 2 did dual wielding right, holding 2 guns, meant you had 2 guns worth of power, at the sacrifice of grenades, and accuracy. In Halo 3, dual wielding is almost useless, because when you dual wield, weapons have 2/3s the power, bullets actually do LESS DAMAGE, this to me was stupid. Dual wielding is great if done like Halo 2's.

I: I agree fully.

J: I dont mind the FOV, but wider would be nicer.

K: Some vehicles need to be a little more fragile (Warthog), some need to do more damage (Prowler), some need to be faster (Chopper), some need less traction (Ghost). They just each need a little work is all.

  • 07.13.2009 12:48 AM PDT

I see no diffrence in eather COD 4 or halo 3 both games keep up a 30 FPS COD almost doubleing that your eyes cannot see past 24 FPS it's a proven fact so it dosen't matter on the amount of FPS as long it's over 30 FPS at all times it all good . It's not about the FPS but how that Frames smooth out over one another. That is decided by the game's engine. A game could have 100 FPS but without the smooth effect it will seem a lower frame rate

  • 07.13.2009 1:17 AM PDT

Posted by: srgt tris
You're a dirty COD player aren't you?


And I'll continue to be until Bungie gives me a reason not to. I fail to see how playing a better made game makes me "dirty."


  • 07.13.2009 9:15 AM PDT

Ive read the whole first post but not many other comments so im sorry if i go over any points already made before.

I think you have some nice ideas.. If you were going for a completely different style of FPS. Its fine for mentioned games like COD but for a game based 500 years from now involving the use of lasers, plasma weapons, ships the size of cities travelling the speed of light, a intergalactic parasite and an enormous alien race.. I dont think any of your points have much to stand on.

Also take Bungies general attitude to gaming, behind every event day, every new release and pretty much anything they do it all revolves around the word 'fun'. Whilst some of the aspects you want to see for this game would improve your fun i doubt it would satisfy 99% of the other Halo players, its too realistic, its complex and it sounds boring, something players of Halo come to avoid.

Take it from this view, from what we can see about Reach is it involves 5 Spartans. Spartans that are supposed to be able to destroy entire fleets of alien spacecrafts, Spartans than can stop a whole army of elites.. why on earth would people want to see this kind of hero be hurt by falling 20 or so feet? On top of this why wouldnt anyone want to see a variety of different Spartans wreaking havoc over several multiplayer maps rather than dying after a few poorly/well placed shots?

Also your point about the vehicles is rediculous, ofcourse weapons to stop them would be slow, I'd like to see you run with a missile pod and how can they not be super weapons? armies wouldnt use ghosts or warthogs that couldnt kill a single soldier or even knock him down. I do see the point of being annoyed at certain vehicles like the banshee posing a lot of problems but nigh on every other vehicle is easily destroyable with your spawning equipment.

In short however i suggest players of your caliber and viewpoint either stick to games such as COD or stick to playing team swat, ill think youll find most of what your looking for there.

TL;DR I think your wrong

  • 07.13.2009 9:41 AM PDT

I'm going to invade your heart like a barn swallow high on milk chocolate and grandma love.

Fairness is only possible within the limited powers of man. Elsewhere, there is only chance.

Thus I refute thee.

I would like to see the "plasma freeze" ability again.
And vehicles are fine. You can flip them with a well placed grenade. And the Spartan Laser can destroy any vehicle easily very quickly. I like vehicles, and I want SOME advantage to using them besides getting around the map quicker. I want them to be powerful.

  • 07.13.2009 9:50 AM PDT

Posted by: Lovz 2 Sp00ge
I think you have some nice ideas.. If you were going for a completely different style of FPS. Its fine for mentioned games like COD but for a game based 500 years from now involving the use of lasers, plasma weapons, ships the size of cities travelling the speed of light, a intergalactic parasite and an enormous alien race.. I dont think any of your points have much to stand on.


Actually, my ideas bring Halo closer to what it was originally. I'm not saying I want Reach to be a direct remake of Halo CE, I just want the gameplay to return to the simple-yet-deep formula that made the game a success in the first place. Rather than focus on a bunch of superfluous filler weapons, vehicles and equipment for variety, the game should focus on deep, balanced gameplay for variety.

Posted by: Lovz 2 Sp00ge
Also take Bungies general attitude to gaming, behind every event day, every new release and pretty much anything they do it all revolves around the word 'fun'. Whilst some of the aspects you want to see for this game would improve your fun i doubt it would satisfy 99% of the other Halo players, its too realistic, its complex and it sounds boring, something players of Halo come to avoid.


According to a lot of players I've talked to, Halo CE was the most "fun" Halo game out there. I would ask that you give the slightly faster, more skill-based gameplay a chance before you knock it as being "unfun."

Posted by: Lovz 2 Sp00ge
Take it from this view, from what we can see about Reach is it involves 5 Spartans. Spartans that are supposed to be able to destroy entire fleets of alien spacecrafts, Spartans than can stop a whole army of elites.. why on earth would people want to see this kind of hero be hurt by falling 20 or so feet? On top of this why wouldnt anyone want to see a variety of different Spartans wreaking havoc over several multiplayer maps rather than dying after a few poorly/well placed shots?


We would want to see it because it makes the gameplay better; which is my primary focus when dealing with games.


Posted by: Lovz 2 Sp00ge
In short however i suggest players of your caliber and viewpoint either stick to games such as COD or stick to playing team swat, ill think youll find most of what your looking for there


If thats the way you really think, than I can only assume you do not understand my viewpoint.

  • 07.13.2009 10:18 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Nosferatu486
Posted by: TurretBuddyBoy
Let's see you make a video game and include what everyone wants. They're going forward, not back.


wow, someone else who actually has some sense. thank you.

everyone needs to take off their freakin nostalgia glasses quick! all i see anymore in this forum is complaining. everyone seems to want to play Halo: Combat Evolved Version 2.0.

get over it guys! the gaming community has moved on! Combat Evolved was great in it's day, but that day is long gone. there are bigger and better things out now. Halo 3 expanded the gameplay from the first two tremendously.

like Turret said, Bungie is going forward, not back.
What's wrong with having the gameplay similar to Halo 1? Is it such a bad thing for a game to return to its roots? Nobody complained when Devil May Cry 3 did just that, it returned to its roots.

And if "everyone seems to want to play Halo: Combat Evolved Version 2.0.", what does that tell you?


[Edited on 07.16.2009 3:43 PM PDT]

  • 07.14.2009 11:38 AM PDT

Posted by: TurretBuddyBoy
Wow. After reading this i had the sudden urge to place a plastic grocery bag over my head and keep it there so all the pain would go away. I almost did.
That's an excellent idea. Get everyone who agrees with you to do the same. We should be left with people who like superior gameplay.All you did in this post was describe combat evolved. Instead of saying all of that bologna you could have much more easily said, "Make multiplayer like Combat Evolved".

TERRIBLE IDEA.

The only good thing about that game was it's campaign's story line. All of the mechanics sucked.

All of the mechanics you want in Halo: Reach suck. No offense. "Still taking offense"
No. Halo: CE mechanics were superior in almost every way. Its multiplayer lacked features, but it had the best gameplay of the series.

Let's see you make a video game and include what everyone wants.I wouldn't want to cater to the lowest common denominator; I would prefer to make the best game possible. That would mean disappointing the more casual players. It's a worthwhile sacrifice. A lot of people should still buy the game, because it has Halo in the title. They're going forward, not back.They've been going backwards since Halo 2 launched. It's time that they turn around and move in the correct direction.

  • 07.14.2009 12:37 PM PDT

My honor student can beat up your honor student.

Halo CE had the best gameplay mechanics and some of the best missions ever conceived. I think it is a great idea to re-introduce some of those defining features into the prequel. It also makes sense timeline-wise, so those people who want to have Halo 3-esque gameplay, it's not going to happen.

  • 07.14.2009 12:47 PM PDT

Clearly because the desktop uses a 3 prong plug and a laptop uses a 2 prong plug, the microwave will fill your car with tostitos better

Posted by: ElementalRunner
I would like to see the "plasma freeze" ability again.


This is one of my biggest wants. It would make using plasma weapons... bearable.

  • 09.09.2009 6:59 AM PDT

A - Isn't really needed. There are 2 weapons with mid-range and 3 with long range. Good enough.

B - Use the carbine.

C - Never seen that happen, but i woudn't mind seeing that change.

D - True

E - NO, we are spartans, not some -blam!- UNSC.

F - NO, it's good as it is. Except that some weapons are way to weak from mid-range if they aren't close range.

G - It's already good enough. Otherwise you can playj custom matches and change the speed.

H - Why not, halo is fun because it has some dual weilding weapons that other games don't have. YOu even get the option tho choose which weapons you want to combine. It's strategy.

I - Agreed with this one. The new plasma rifles suck, those from halo 2 were great.

J - Don't know what you mean with this one.

K - vehicles are meant to be better than normal weapons. They are also an easy target for almost everything like, rocket launcher, spartan laser, missile pod, bruteshot, plasma grenade, trip mine, power drainer. I think they are good enough.

  • 09.09.2009 7:32 AM PDT

Clearly because the desktop uses a 3 prong plug and a laptop uses a 2 prong plug, the microwave will fill your car with tostitos better

Posted by: darknessis 12
A - Isn't really needed. There are 2 weapons with mid-range and 3 with long range. Good enough.

B - Use the carbine.

C - Never seen that happen, but i woudn't mind seeing that change.

D - True

E - NO, we are spartans, not some -blam!- UNSC.

F - NO, it's good as it is. Except that some weapons are way to weak from mid-range if they aren't close range.

G - It's already good enough. Otherwise you can playj custom matches and change the speed.

H - Why not, halo is fun because it has some dual weilding weapons that other games don't have. YOu even get the option tho choose which weapons you want to combine. It's strategy.

I - Agreed with this one. The new plasma rifles suck, those from halo 2 were great.

J - Don't know what you mean with this one.

K - vehicles are meant to be better than normal weapons. They are also an easy target for almost everything like, rocket launcher, spartan laser, missile pod, bruteshot, plasma grenade, trip mine, power drainer. I think they are good enough.


A. The BR really is the only mid range weapon (and arguably the needler. The carbine isn't on most of the maps and you can't start with it in Halo. The only other long range weapons are the Spartan Laser (which is used pretty much for destroying vehicles), and both snipers, of which the Covenant sniper isn't on most maps either. The arsenal is way too limited. Whereas we have 10+ close range weapons. That's double the amount of mid - long range weapons put together, what do we need all of those for?

B. Tell me where to find a carbine on most maps and I would use it. If it was a viable starting weapon I would all be for having some carbine starts. The problem is its only on a few maps and usually only one or two are on the maps that it is actually on.

C. I just straight up think there is too much aim assist in Halo. If you play enough, you will see -blam!- happen.

D. Yep

E. I'm on the fence on this one. It really depends what else is in the game for me. I wouldn't mind if it made a return or if it stayed out of a game, either way is fine with me.

F. I like faster kill speeds because it means my enemies can't just put their heads down and run away while I basically throw rocks at them. It just gives players undeserved second chances.

G. You can't actually change the speed of the strafe in Halo... if you just increase player speed it takes a longer time for the player to slow down and turn directions because they are going to fast in one direction. You would move and strafe faster up to a certain point, but if you keep turning the speed up all you do is actually hurt strafe speed in Halo.

H. I'm on the fence on this issue. I like the concept of dual wielding, I don't like the execution that Bungie had. Making the weapons when you only have one of them half guns was not the way to do it.

I. Agreed. I -blam!- love plasma freeze.

J. I haven't really noticed the change, I have no opinion now that I think about it.

K. I almost never use vehicles in H3, and I don't really care, I stopped playing BTB in H2. I have no opinion.

  • 09.09.2009 7:47 AM PDT