Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [40 votes]: Should Reach hold on to halo's ideas and be limited to them?
  • Poll [40 votes]: Should Reach hold on to halo's ideas and be limited to them?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Should Reach hold on to halo's ideas and be limited to them?

Poll: Should Reach hold on to halo's ideas and be limited to them?  [closed]
NO!!!:  15%
(6 Votes)
YES! halos already perfect! dont change a thing!:  18%
(7 Votes)
yes:  10%
(4 Votes)
i dont care- im going to buy it either way:  5%
(2 Votes)
i just dont care:  0%
(0 Votes)
MIx and match! new ideas and old ones:  52%
(21 Votes)
throw away everything:  0%
(0 Votes)
Total Votes: 40

Ive heard a lot of ppl complaigning that reach shouldnt have things that halo didnt
but why?
whats wrong with change
its a new series
same universe
but why cant we have more playable characters
why cant we fly a pelican?
does the game even need to be canon?
should it stick to the ideas of the original 3?
ideas established 10 years ago
or is it time for something new?

  • 07.29.2009 8:34 PM PDT

Anyone have any thoughts about this?

  • 07.29.2009 8:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Halo needs to stay how it has been. If you don't like it there are other video game series. It pisses me of when people want class based multiplayer or anything similar.

  • 07.29.2009 8:54 PM PDT

Here’s what Luke had to say about the differences in treatment between the Spartans and Elites in Reach:

“Instead of piece-by-piece customization like the Spartans, Elite customization is a full model swap with models selected from the various Elite classes appearing throughout the Campaign. There are all kinds of reasons for this, not the least of which is our continued emphasis on the Spartan as your identity in Reach.”

They have been steadily expanding on the winning formula defined in H1. I want them to do their jobs, which they are happily doing.

  • 07.29.2009 8:56 PM PDT

I say why not add everything!
but give us the option to turn it off if we dont like it
why cant halo have classes for one small playlist?
I believe bungie should retain the essense of halo that everyone loves while still giving us new things to love

  • 07.29.2009 8:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Spartaman 117
I say why not add everything!
but give us the option to turn it off if we dont like it
why cant halo have classes for one small playlist?
I believe bungie should retain the essense of halo that everyone loves while still giving us new things to love


Then the online would be a mess.

  • 07.29.2009 9:07 PM PDT

Posted by: Bullet _ Sponge
[quote[/quote]

Then the online would be a mess.

That may not be true....
Is there really such thing as too much content?
as long as there is some way to filter it out
we could have 30-50playlists!
only problem is that people might get too spread out

  • 07.30.2009 1:09 PM PDT

I'm suprised that some people really think Halo is absoulely perfect....
They are amazing games but even the difference between halo ce and halo 3 is huge!
should halo reach really be exactly like halo 3?

  • 07.30.2009 1:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Reach should hold on to Halo 1's ideas and be limited to them.

  • 07.30.2009 1:35 PM PDT

Hmm ok but why does it need to be limited by them?
can someone plz explain

  • 07.30.2009 1:39 PM PDT

I'm 23, I have a house, dog, girlfriend, job and I have no interest in any fanboyism so if you're thinking about sending me a childish PM, don't be surprised when I don't call back.

Posted by: AK 47625714
Reach should hold on to Halo 1's ideas and be limited to them.


Why? you can't just state something and then step off your throne knowing your right, Why should it be anything like halo:CE?

  • 07.30.2009 1:43 PM PDT

Anyone care to explain why reach should be limited to halo:ce?

  • 07.30.2009 2:50 PM PDT

Im glad that reach is another fps
although 3rd person could be cool
does anyone think that they should re-think the hud?

  • 07.30.2009 7:06 PM PDT

IMO i think they need to make a squad based tactical game. Every played "brothers in arms"?. A game kinda like that in the halo universe would be pretty cwl. Reach is a perfect opputunity for this cuz now u got... guess wat... more than one spartan! yay! More than one spartan also prevents the arguing in halo 3 over "who gets to b master chief" :P

  • 07.30.2009 7:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

How bout this. Instead of changing Halo, lets change Call of Duty, Gears of War, and Battlefield. Call of Duty can have static crosshairs and energy shields. Gears of War can be first person and have dual-wielding. Battlefield can be a fast-paced, close quarters, run and gun Quake clone. How 'bout that? 'Cuz change is good right?

  • 07.30.2009 7:15 PM PDT

Posted by: McDullty
How bout this. Instead of changing Halo, lets change Call of Duty, Gears of War, and Battlefield. Call of Duty can have static crosshairs and energy shields. Gears of War can be first person and have dual-wielding. Battlefield can be a fast-paced, close quarters, run and gun Quake clone. How 'bout that? 'Cuz change is good right?

Alright!
i hear your sarcasm
but change is good!
try it for like one game in the series
if it sucks dont go back
if its awesome make like everyother game in that style
think about cod
the first 3 were wwii\
fourth was modern and that was a HUGE change
and it worked out great!

  • 07.30.2009 7:18 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: DJMcG
  • user homepage:

I'm not completely opposed to seeing change in Halo Reach. I get the idea that Bungie wants to do something different after doing the same thing for most of this decade, so I'm kind of expecting some change to happen in Halo Reach. But some of the ideas I've been hearing on this forum don't sound appealing to me. One of the things I like about Bungie is the way they seem to approach their games. They are aware of other games and take inspiration from them but ultimately hope only to do better than the games they have already made. Bungie may or may not take up some of the ideas mentioned, but for some reason, I just can't see Bungie using them.

My prediction is some form of a "squad" game, but its just a guess. We won't really know until more is said.

[Edited on 07.30.2009 7:20 PM PDT]

  • 07.30.2009 7:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Spartaman 117
Posted by: McDullty
How bout this. Instead of changing Halo, lets change Call of Duty, Gears of War, and Battlefield. Call of Duty can have static crosshairs and energy shields. Gears of War can be first person and have dual-wielding. Battlefield can be a fast-paced, close quarters, run and gun Quake clone. How 'bout that? 'Cuz change is good right?

Alright!
i hear your sarcasm
but change is good!
try it for like one game in the series
if it sucks dont go back
if its awesome make like everyother game in that style
think about cod
the first 3 were wwii\
fourth was modern and that was a HUGE change
and it worked out great!


Except that's a change of scenery, not a change of gameplay.

  • 07.30.2009 7:19 PM PDT

Posted by: McDullty
Posted by: Spartaman 117
Posted by: McDullty
How bout this. Instead of changing Halo, lets change Call of Duty, Gears of War, and Battlefield. Call of Duty can have static crosshairs and energy shields. Gears of War can be first person and have dual-wielding. Battlefield can be a fast-paced, close quarters, run and gun Quake clone. How 'bout that? 'Cuz change is good right?

Alright!
i hear your sarcasm
but change is good!
try it for like one game in the series
if it sucks dont go back
if its awesome make like everyother game in that style
think about cod
the first 3 were wwii\
fourth was modern and that was a HUGE change
and it worked out great!


Except that's a change of scenery, not a change of gameplay.

i beg to differ
modern combat is incomparible to combat 60 years ago
the entire multiplayer system was rethought
its not a huge change
but small changes are all we need
like wouldnt it be great to veto a map before it loads in halo
or to join/ leave a match part way through?
you cant say all changes are bad
itd b very hard to back up that statement

  • 07.30.2009 7:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Spartaman 117
Posted by: McDullty
How bout this. Instead of changing Halo, lets change Call of Duty, Gears of War, and Battlefield. Call of Duty can have static crosshairs and energy shields. Gears of War can be first person and have dual-wielding. Battlefield can be a fast-paced, close quarters, run and gun Quake clone. How 'bout that? 'Cuz change is good right?

Alright!
i hear your sarcasm
but change is good!
try it for like one game in the series
if it sucks dont go back
if its awesome make like everyother game in that style
think about cod
the first 3 were wwii\
fourth was modern and that was a HUGE change
and it worked out great!


Your argument is invalid. The gameplay remanded essentially the same. It was only a settings change.

  • 07.30.2009 7:24 PM PDT

Posted by: DJMcG9
I'm not completely opposed to seeing change in Halo Reach. I get the idea that Bungie wants to do something different after doing the same thing for most of this decade, so I'm kind of expecting some change to happen in Halo Reach. But some of the ideas I've been hearing on this forum don't sound appealing to me. One of the things I like about Bungie is the way they seem to approach their games. They are aware of other games and take inspiration from them but ultimately hope only to do better than the games they have already made. Bungie may or may not take up some of the ideas mentioned, but for some reason, I just can't see Bungie using them.

My prediction is some form of a "squad" game, but its just a guess. We won't really know until more is said.

a squad game could be really cool
if it worked just like how it is in the books

  • 07.30.2009 7:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Please list your idea of good changes that you think would work in Reach so we can see what you mean.

  • 07.30.2009 7:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Spartaman 117
Posted by: McDullty
Posted by: Spartaman 117
Posted by: McDullty
How bout this. Instead of changing Halo, lets change Call of Duty, Gears of War, and Battlefield. Call of Duty can have static crosshairs and energy shields. Gears of War can be first person and have dual-wielding. Battlefield can be a fast-paced, close quarters, run and gun Quake clone. How 'bout that? 'Cuz change is good right?

Alright!
i hear your sarcasm
but change is good!
try it for like one game in the series
if it sucks dont go back
if its awesome make like everyother game in that style
think about cod
the first 3 were wwii\
fourth was modern and that was a HUGE change
and it worked out great!


Except that's a change of scenery, not a change of gameplay.

i beg to differ
modern combat is incomparible to combat 60 years ago
the entire multiplayer system was rethought
its not a huge change
but small changes are all we need
like wouldnt it be great to veto a map before it loads in halo
or to join/ leave a match part way through?
you cant say all changes are bad
itd b very hard to back up that statement


Of course small changes would be good. Small additions and improvements, but not a complete redesign. And certainly not adding in really generic things from every other shooter on the planet like accuracy getting worse when you walk, or gun jamming, and crap like that.

Small changes isn't what this thread is about though, so I don't understand your point.

  • 07.30.2009 7:29 PM PDT

Posted by: Bullet _ Sponge
Please list your idea of good changes that you think would work in Reach so we can see what you mean.

Ok
well my list is pretty short
i mostly started this thread to see if anyone had some cool ideas
i think the squad based would be cool
i think that no matter what bungie does its gonna b awesome
i mentioned the vetoing for multiplayer
joining in the middle of a game
i have another thread about how different weapons could/shouldnt be changed
new weapons would be cool
more playable characters
like each spartan could play differently
the possiblities are almost enless

  • 07.30.2009 7:29 PM PDT



Of course small changes would be good. Small additions and improvements, but not a complete redesign. And certainly not adding in really generic things from every other shooter on the planet like accuracy getting worse when you walk, or gun jamming, and crap like that.

Small changes isn't what this thread is about though, so I don't understand your point.

i started the thread just to see if people were open to any kind of change
or how much
and if anyone had some really good ideas on how it could change

  • 07.30.2009 7:31 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2