Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: I hope its a better story then halo 2 and 3
  • Subject: I hope its a better story then halo 2 and 3
Subject: I hope its a better story then halo 2 and 3

Ok my favorite game of all time on xbox is halo 1, it was amazing new and did what it said on the case (combat evolved) the story was amazing levels amazing just did everything right. Then i couldnt wait for halo 2 i played it was a good game but lacked story and the amazing levels halo1 had...i felt it boring and just silly at some stages and the ending....i wont even begin. but halo3 i felt hope the trailers were amazing i wanted it then and their but it was all wrong story wise, levels were not as bad as halo 2. online was amazing dont get me wrong but the main point im getting at here is Bungie are very talented but cant tell a story at all. and i just hope they dont F it up with reach.

  • 07.07.2009 3:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Damn skippy.

  • 07.07.2009 3:19 PM PDT

My Bungiepedia Article | My Halo Reach Service Record | The Mile High Club - For Bad Company 2, Halo, and CoD!

Nyan nyan, nyan nyan, ni hao nyan! Gorgeous, delicious, deculture!

I personally loved the story behind Halo 2. The Halo 3 story was mediocre, but I believed it did a decent job of wrapping up the trilogy.

As for your remark on Bungie being unable to tell a story; you should play Halo: Combat Evolved. It's one of my favorite games purely because of the great storyline.

However, I too believe that Halo: Reach's story should be able to trump Halo 2 and 3's storylines. Here's hoping that this is acccomplished.


EDIT - Upon re-reading your post, I noticed that I skipped over the fact that you had played Halo: Combat Evolved. What did you think of the storyline in that?

[Edited on 07.07.2009 4:38 PM PDT]

  • 07.07.2009 4:37 PM PDT

On Waypoint I'm rocketFox;
http://halo.xbox.com/forums/members/rocketfox/default.aspx

Old GTs; RebelRobot, Flamedude

I loved all 3 stories in the trilogy. Halo1 perhaps has the tightest and most focused but it is a very simple story compared to the other 2. If Reach turns out like the first 3 Halo games then I'm not going to worry.

  • 07.07.2009 5:01 PM PDT

Loyalty is all I have.

just no cliffhanger and I'll be happy..oh wait from the beginning we know the end lol

  • 07.07.2009 5:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Halo 1 had.. mystery and you were alone most of time it was awesome
halo 2 wasn't mysterious at all kind of predictable except for the whole YOU CAN PLAYZ AN ELITE thing which i thought sucked I mean it wouldn't be so bad if we fought a different enemy not just different looking covies. I mean come on and halo 3 was the worst of all of them they tried to make it epic by adding scarabs and calling it a huge battle but it was so easy and repetitive, I want halo 1 feel back.

  • 07.07.2009 5:11 PM PDT

Personally I like the story of all 3. But if I had to choose which one I liked the least it'd probably be Halo 2.

  • 07.07.2009 5:28 PM PDT

Halo 2 was where the story really got going. Halo 1 was more of an introduction in a way.

  • 07.07.2009 5:28 PM PDT

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Halo 2 was where the story really got going. Halo 1 was more of an introduction in a way.


Where it really got going mediocre, they handled it as if everyone was reading the novels in between the games, which few were. Personally i don't think the writing for any one of them sucked, but the pacing and presentation for 2 was terrible, with 3 being better but not by much.

  • 07.07.2009 5:37 PM PDT

Posted by: SweetTRIX
Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Halo 2 was where the story really got going. Halo 1 was more of an introduction in a way.


Where it really got going mediocre, they handled it as if everyone was reading the novels in between the games, which few were. Personally i don't think the writing for any one of them sucked, but the pacing and presentation for 2 was terrible, with 3 being better but not by much.

Maybe you should really pay attention a bit more. Because no story from the books is needed.

Are you part of the number of people who can't pay attention to actual spoken dialogue during both cutscenes and in game when, say, guilty spark is talking to you or whatever?

Because shield worlds, who the prophets are, the purpose of the ark, etc. are all told within halo. the books are just some extra backstory.

[Edited on 07.07.2009 5:52 PM PDT]

  • 07.07.2009 5:51 PM PDT

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: SweetTRIX
Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Halo 2 was where the story really got going. Halo 1 was more of an introduction in a way.


Where it really got going mediocre, they handled it as if everyone was reading the novels in between the games, which few were. Personally i don't think the writing for any one of them sucked, but the pacing and presentation for 2 was terrible, with 3 being better but not by much.

Maybe you should really pay attention a bit more. Because no story from the books is needed.

Are you part of the number of people who can't pay attention to actual spoken dialogue during both cutscenes and in game when, say, guilty spark is talking to you or whatever?

Because shield worlds, who the prophets are, the purpose of the ark, etc. are all told within halo. the books are just some extra backstory.


Your joking right? Those things are talked about but never fleshed out in the second game, ever. Don't try to make me look stupid because you like to get by with tidbits of info when others actually like a fleshed out story.

The inclusion of the Brutes and the direction of the Covenant is unjustified and unexplained, until you read FIrst Strike and Contact Harvest. There are many instanced where you don't understand the reasoning behind something unless you read the novels. Johnson survival of Halo, the need for MC to have new armor, not to mention how the hell he got back to Earth in a short range interceptor.

All your comment did was prove that your understanding of the Halo universe is limited, and that you prefer it that way, or simply that you are a liar. Because if all you have ever known about Halo was given to you through the games, you would know very little.

  • 07.07.2009 6:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Your friendly and eccentric Sangheili forum-poster. :)

I felt that the story was the best in Halo 1, Halo 2 got everything right except the overall length and Halo 3's was very disappointing, mainly because I didn't get to finish the fight myself. There never was a Gravemind boss battle, I wanted to take him on personally, and killing Truth was just a cutscene, when he should've been a boss. Plus it was also short. I would've loved a boss battle with these two main figures I "started" the fight with, then I would truly feel like I finished the fight. Hopefully Reach's campaign will be able to top Halo 1's which was the most epic of them all.

  • 07.07.2009 6:34 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Some can come away from reading "War and Peace" thinking it a simple adventure story, while others can read the ingredients on a gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe.

The Halo 1 feeling was awsome. You where a lone soilder (most of the time) against an Alien Armada in a strange and highly advance artifitial world shwroded in mystery. I want that feel beack. It was epic and had something that all other games lack. AWSOMNESS

  • 07.07.2009 6:47 PM PDT

Posted by: [/quote]

Your joking right? Those things are talked about but never fleshed out in the second game, ever. Don't try to make me look stupid because you like to get by with tidbits of info when others actually like a fleshed out story.

The inclusion of the Brutes and the direction of the Covenant is unjustified and unexplained, until you read FIrst Strike and Contact Harvest. There are many instanced where you don't understand the reasoning behind something unless you read the novels. Johnson survival of Halo, the need for MC to have new armor, not to mention how the hell he got back to Earth in a short range interceptor.

All your comment did was prove that your understanding of the Halo universe is limited, and that you prefer it that way, or simply that you are a liar. Because if all you have ever known about Halo was given to you through the games, you would know very little.

You kind of proved my point. None of those things are really needed, just little additional info.

  • 07.07.2009 6:51 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Your friendly and eccentric Sangheili forum-poster. :)

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: [/quote]

Your joking right? Those things are talked about but never fleshed out in the second game, ever. Don't try to make me look stupid because you like to get by with tidbits of info when others actually like a fleshed out story.

The inclusion of the Brutes and the direction of the Covenant is unjustified and unexplained, until you read FIrst Strike and Contact Harvest. There are many instanced where you don't understand the reasoning behind something unless you read the novels. Johnson survival of Halo, the need for MC to have new armor, not to mention how the hell he got back to Earth in a short range interceptor.

All your comment did was prove that your understanding of the Halo universe is limited, and that you prefer it that way, or simply that you are a liar. Because if all you have ever known about Halo was given to you through the games, you would know very little.

You kind of proved my point. None of those things are really needed, just little additional info.


Actually half the things in the game wouldn't even make any sense to you if you didn't read the books, so the info is kind of needed.

  • 07.07.2009 6:54 PM PDT

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"

Posted by: Honourable Elite
Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: [/quote]

Your joking right? Those things are talked about but never fleshed out in the second game, ever. Don't try to make me look stupid because you like to get by with tidbits of info when others actually like a fleshed out story.

The inclusion of the Brutes and the direction of the Covenant is unjustified and unexplained, until you read FIrst Strike and Contact Harvest. There are many instanced where you don't understand the reasoning behind something unless you read the novels. Johnson survival of Halo, the need for MC to have new armor, not to mention how the hell he got back to Earth in a short range interceptor.

All your comment did was prove that your understanding of the Halo universe is limited, and that you prefer it that way, or simply that you are a liar. Because if all you have ever known about Halo was given to you through the games, you would know very little.

You kind of proved my point. None of those things are really needed, just little additional info.


Actually half the things in the game wouldn't even make any sense to you if you didn't read the books, so the info is kind of needed.


Agreed, if anything he proved my point that he prefers simplicity. Which isn't wrong so much as it is sad. That little additional info accounts for the majority of the meat in the Halo universe.

  • 07.07.2009 6:59 PM PDT

i loved halo 1 it was amazing the story amazing the first level on the beach really made it like a movie but.. i just felt 2 and 3 lacked depth.

  • 07.12.2009 3:14 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I agree. I kind of already know what the story line is going to be about based on the book The Fall of Reach. But, I would love for bungie to throw something in there that would just make everyone say "Wow. Didn't see that coming". That is what I think kind of lacked in halo 3. I could always tell what was going to happen next and there were no surprises. I know that bungie will do a good job in multiplayer, im just worried about the campaign storyline.

  • 07.12.2009 3:20 AM PDT

Halo 2 had an amazing story. Defending Earth, playing as the Covenant, the Gravemind, the Schism, the battle with Tartarus...amazing.

  • 07.12.2009 3:26 AM PDT

Posted by: SweetTRIX
Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Halo 2 was where the story really got going. Halo 1 was more of an introduction in a way.


Where it really got going mediocre, they handled it as if everyone was reading the novels in between the games, which few were. Personally i don't think the writing for any one of them sucked, but the pacing and presentation for 2 was terrible, with 3 being better but not by much.


I actually played all the games before reading the books, and I understood them fully. Halo 2 wasn't hard to get, at first I was confused as to what Brutes were, then I realised they were new additions to the Covenant who gained enough political favour with the Prophets (Who I realised to be the leaders), enough to overthrow the Elites. Thus, the Elites joined with the humans.

Bungie did a great job distancing the books from the games.

  • 07.12.2009 3:30 AM PDT

well if you read the first book you will get a insite to what the games out come will be. The first book was grate i loved it , the story was good it made me want to keep reading to find out what happed next so i think the games story will be the best out of all the games if you have not all ready i say you should read the first book ( i hope that bungie doesnt f it up but if they tell it like the book you will be praying for more i know i will )

  • 07.12.2009 8:03 AM PDT