Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Scale Of The Combat?
  • Subject: Scale Of The Combat?
Subject: Scale Of The Combat?

Everything Can Change On A New Years Day . . .

For those that have either read The Fall of Reach or payed very close attention to information given throughout the course of the series, you know about how epic the battle on Reach was.

I'm wondering if Halo Reach will have a comparable scale in terms of hundreds of units on screen while all hell is breaking loose. The XB360 hardware is more than capable of this as evidenced by games like Dead Rising and the upcoming Dead Rising 2.

What do you guys think?

  • 09.25.2009 12:18 AM PDT

Stop PMing me if you are group recruiting.

The Fall of Reach is a glorious one. I think the scale of war will be far higher than any FPS Halo we have played yet.

  • 09.25.2009 12:21 AM PDT

Posted by: XGS Che Guevara
For those that have either read The Fall of Reach or payed very close attention to information given throughout the course of the series, you know about how epic the battle on Reach was.

I'm wondering if Halo Reach will have a comparable scale in terms of hundreds of units on screen while all hell is breaking loose. The XB360 hardware is more than capable of this as evidenced by games like Dead Rising and the upcoming Dead Rising 2.

Edit: And I could live with the fact that there is little to nothing at all realistic regarding the human weaponry, but I love the halo mythology.

What do you guys think?


I felt the scope of the game seemed rather small. Where a few characters represent the entire leadership of the human species. Even though Reach specifically was an enormous battle, there is a certain awe factor by thought of massive battles including hundreds, thousands of ships, millions of soldiers, tons of vehicles, etc..

While I highly doubt that can be replicated in a video game, I sure hope the scope is much larger in Reach. But then I have an interest in military history and it may not be as appreciated by people who are not. :)

[Edited on 09.25.2009 12:58 AM PDT]

  • 09.25.2009 12:49 AM PDT

I AM AN MLG PRO

It is up to Bungie to make battles that don't necessarily involve these huge battles, but at least give the player the perception that they're involved in such a battle.

I expect a much larger scope, but I don't know how it will be put to use.

And furthermore if they have to scale down the graphics to make such a thing happen, I dont know if thats something I necessarily want.


  • 09.25.2009 1:43 AM PDT

Everything Can Change On A New Years Day . . .

I don't think they'd have to scale down the graphics much if at all.

And I agree with you about the perception of massive battles. I think the Halo 2 E3 in-game trailer was a good example of this.

[Edited on 09.25.2009 4:37 AM PDT]

  • 09.25.2009 4:37 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Senior Mythic Member

Proud frenchie, elite fan, anthro artist not hellbent on yiff convention/pics/whatever, mature and intelligent forum guy, 4chaner, halo 2 lover and halo 3 hater.

Posted by: XGS Che Guevara
I don't think they'd have to scale down the graphics much if at all.


yea, it's well known graphics don't drain processing power : generating all the effects, extra high res textures, sounds, landscape, lighting, shadows, HDR, particles and everything else going onscreen (multiplied by the number ofplayer if played in coop) doesn't drain any kind of power at all.
that's why MAG that has 256 players at one time looks like a good looking ps2 game and not a next gen game. the devs were just lazy to make it pretty.

the halo 2 E3 trailer was 100% scripted, except for the AI combats.

  • 09.25.2009 4:42 AM PDT