Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [84 votes]: Reach should be more campaign focused rather than multiplayer...right?
  • Poll [84 votes]: Reach should be more campaign focused rather than multiplayer...right?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Reach should be more campaign focused rather than multiplayer...right?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Oh yes I did!

Poll: Reach should be more campaign focused rather than multiplayer...right?  [closed]
Halo: Reach should be more Singleplayer focused.:  71%
(60 Votes)
Halo: Reach should be more Multiplayer focused.:  29%
(24 Votes)
Total Votes: 84

I have heard that Reach is going to be more multiplayer focused rather than single player (and I wish I had the link) but I believe that its the single player that makes a solid game, not playing online. Don't get me wrong, a great multiplayer is important, but I would rather have an exciting long campaign. Oh..and no horrible escape the random flying apparatus level at the end of Halo Reach. Please.

  • 08.06.2009 1:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Single Player must come first.

  • 08.06.2009 1:01 PM PDT

┗┫━━ ┃ ━━┣┛  ┣┫ Go and get a life!
 ┃ ━━━━━ ┃ ┏┳┫┣┳┓and stop wasting
 ┗━━┳━┳━━┛ ┃    ┃ other peoples
━━━━┃ ┃    ┗━┳┳━┛time! LOL

id rather multiplayer, but its your opinion

  • 08.06.2009 1:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Oh yes I did!

Posted by: Tonoottu
Why not both equally focused? Multiplayer homes a greater amount of gamers than campaign. Even campaign is a must to be good but both should so be equally balanced. Unlike in H2 and H3 where MP was higher in the totem poll


The amount of people who buy Halo: Reach is irrelevant to how much we will enjoy it. And I agree they should be equal if possible but single player should be the focus. Multiplayer should be done and improved if enough time is available.

  • 08.06.2009 1:06 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I'm the multiplayer kind of guy, but a good story always holds me over.

  • 08.06.2009 1:14 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member
  • gamertag: lex255
  • user homepage:

I need a dropshield dropshield

i like more multiplayer than campaign

  • 08.06.2009 1:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

It's kind of funny how games that have multiplayer thrown in at the last second end up being really fun. For example, Halo: Combat Evolved.

  • 08.06.2009 1:15 PM PDT

7 lines isn't long enough for a signiture! =P

MegaHaxPwnage

Well i guess that the campaign comes first although it would be nice if the multiplayer and single player was very awesomeness

  • 08.06.2009 1:17 PM PDT

Posted by: Sgt Johnson ODST
Single Player must come first.

  • 08.06.2009 1:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I want a 20 hour campaign

  • 08.06.2009 1:43 PM PDT

Chunky_Lover's Average Joe Interview

Bungie All Star Contest Winner Weeks 6,8 and 12

Single Player followed closely by Multiplayer.

  • 08.06.2009 1:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

No.

They both need to be equally good. Otherwise the game will suffer.

Example? I only had the urge to play the Darkness one time through. It had a BRILLIANT campaign... But the multyplayer was tacked on and so halfassed. I ended up trading it.

I need a story. Especially in these shallow times where mindless multyplayer reigns supreme over these mindless tweens and tots. Hell, Halo is one of the best games at multyplayer, because the MP and the SP feel like the exact same game. I just think they need to do what they've always been doing (with the exception of H3).

They really need to make up for Halo 3.

[Edited on 08.06.2009 1:56 PM PDT]

  • 08.06.2009 1:55 PM PDT

Posted by; A random forum poster
Posted by; ghostvirus
This apple is brown, and rotten. This orange on the other hand, is in relatively average shape. So the orange is definitely the preferable option.
----------You can't compare apples and oranges. You're so dumb.

Halo: Reach was just announced two months ago. Even if ODST wasn't just a month a way, we wouldn't know anything other than what the reveal trailer hints at.

You don't have any link to back this up, because there is no link. You made it up, or someone else made it up, and you just bought it up.

I personally feel like multiplayer is more important, its what im going to spend most of my time with. That being said, I also think a solid campaign is vitally important. And im going to get a lot of replay value out of that as well.

In my opinion, the escape in Halo 3 was awesome. So I can't really agree with your closing sentence. If they can make an escape sequence that isn't a carbon copy of Halo 3, and Halo: CE but new, and fun, then im more than happy to let them do.

---------------------

They really need to make up for Halo 3.

Not really. Sorry but Halo 3 is by far the best of the Halo games. and this is coming from someone, who played through both Halo CE, and Halo 2 in the last 5 days. And am playing through Halo 3, again.

Reason why:

- Skulls allow you to optimize the difficulty. If you don't want to play something as hard as Legendary, but harder than heroic, put on some skulls. Not nessarily even the skulls that turn the games formula upside down. But the ones that increase the capabilities of your enemies. This also applies to people who want something harder than legendary. Not even Halo: CE on legendary, is harder than Halo 3 if you just add, thunderstorm (all enemies rank up), Mythic (enemies have double health), and thunderstorm (enemies more effective at dodging projectiles, grenades, and vehicles). Never mind if you add Catch (enemies more effective at throwing grenades), and Cowbell (explosives do more damage, have bigger effect radius) as well.

- This is the first time, the Covenant react realistically with one another. Brutes give the illusion of communicating with one another. For example, I experienced one Brute telling another one to, "stay here, incase he comes back". He did just that, and the Brute that gave the order moved so he could watch the other possible way I could travel. There are a lot more examples of this.

- Unlike in other Halo games, the Covenant don't magically know your there unless your wearing camo, or the only enemies nearby are sleeping grunts. If you give Brutes a sign that your nearby, but you vanish out of sight, they will go searching for you. In one particular spart in Crows Nest, the Brute saw me go in one direction. Then he lost sight of me. While I was heading in one particular direction. I changed directions and hid behind a crate. If I continued in the same direction, there was a door way, slightly elevated. As I hid behind the crates, he headed in my direction. I peeked around the corner of the crate, and I watched the Brute walk alongside the wall, and then turn to look in the direction of the doorway. Before he looked straight and saw me.

- FAR greater animations, and enemy- player interaction. Yesterday, I noticed an animation I don't think I have seen before. I made the mistake of letting a marine drive the hog, a mistake in any Halo game. He procceeded to drive towards a location, that gets swarmed by drones. The drones flew through the energy shield. A couple of them landed on the hog, grabbed it, started to fly upwards. And fliped the hog.

- The levels are designed a lot better. In most encounters, there is some kind of way of appropriately flanking enemies, some kind of way to get a vantage point.

I could go on, and on.



[Edited on 08.06.2009 2:31 PM PDT]

  • 08.06.2009 2:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Campagin should be the focus on this one and i am not so good in mp

  • 08.06.2009 2:07 PM PDT

I'm THE one and only Big, Angry Worm. Tapeworm...?

Multiplayer. ODST is singleplayer, I want REACH to be a whole new Multiplayer, because Halo3 Multiplayer is ruined.

  • 08.06.2009 2:08 PM PDT

I'm THE one and only Big, Angry Worm. Tapeworm...?

Posted by: CallofDutydanny
Campagin should be the focus on this one and i am not so good in mp


Whole new chance of getting good in MP, if it doesn't work, go play social with friends!

  • 08.06.2009 2:10 PM PDT

Kick start a craze

Reach is a huge part of the halo universe. There's no way bungie would name the game after it if they weren't going to make the campaign the absolute best it can be. It's not like they would say "Let's make a halo based on Reach with more Spartans! But first things first, let's make the multiplayer."

  • 08.06.2009 2:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Oh yes I did!

Posted by: ghostvirus
Halo: Reach was just announced two months ago. Even if ODST wasn't just a month a way, we wouldn't know anything other than what the reveal trailer hints at.

You don't have any link to back this up, because there is no link. You made it up, or someone else made it up, and you just bought it up.

I personally feel like multiplayer is more important, its what im going to spend most of my time with. That being said, I also think a solid campaign is vitally important. And im going to get a lot of replay value out of that as well.

So to sum it up you think im lying. -.- Since I don't have evidence to back it up all I can say is that I hope everyone believes me. Regardless, I think single player should be the prime focus this time.

In my opinion, the escape in Halo 3 was awesome. So I can't really agree with your closing sentence. If they can make an escape sequence that isn't a carbon copy of Halo 3, and Halo: CE but new, and thats fun, then im more than happy to let them do.

  • 08.06.2009 2:17 PM PDT

...

Multiplayer is key. Bungie (and MS)has realized this.

After all, it was the multiplayer that got me hooked on this game when i played it at my friends house 2 years back. And im sure many people got hooked that same way i did.

That's what so clever about autumn releases..(if there's a kickass multiplayer)

First you sell the game to the hardcoregamers, halofans, etc.
Then you sell the game again to the hardcoregamers friends that got hooked at their friends house, just in time for christma$.


Not saying Reach will be released in the autumn though...:P

And that's why you always should put a great addictive multiplayer with your great singleplayer, wich i think we will get with Reach.

[Edited on 08.06.2009 2:41 PM PDT]

  • 08.06.2009 2:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Multiplayer is what's going to keep the game alive throughout the years, so it's more important and should have more time put into it.

  • 08.06.2009 2:49 PM PDT

...

Posted by: Captain Ezikiel
Reach is a huge part of the halo universe. There's no way bungie would name the game after it if they weren't going to make the campaign the absolute best it can be. It's not like they would say "Let's make a halo based on Reach with more Spartans! But first things first, let's make the multiplayer."


The funny thing is, i actually think that's way it was done. You build the mechanics of the game first, in a multiplayer enviroment, like a test, playground if you will. Then you expand the universe into a singleplayer game. We get the Reach MP Beta first remember? So it's very likely that they started on that from the getgo. Sure, they would most certainly also have alot of concept art, code and story ready and plotted out at an early stage of development.

  • 08.06.2009 2:51 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: GroteBozePier
Multiplayer. ODST is singleplayer, I want REACH to be a whole new Multiplayer, because Halo3 Multiplayer is ruined .

*Facepalm* Now you see this people?!

  • 08.06.2009 4:04 PM PDT

It should have a good balance of both, a campaign that is fun and has plenty of replayability, and a multiplayer system that is like Halo 3's.

  • 08.06.2009 4:15 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2