Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [15 votes]: Do you want to see the return of the MA5B and the BR55?
  • Poll [15 votes]: Do you want to see the return of the MA5B and the BR55?
Subject: Do you want to see the return of the MA5B and the BR55?

Lets Boogie

Poll: Do you want to see the return of the MA5B and the BR55?  [closed]
Yes:  53%
(8 Votes)
No:  20%
(3 Votes)
I want the MA5C and BR55HB SR, Screw Canon:  7%
(1 Votes)
dont care:  20%
(3 Votes)
Total Votes: 15

I believe the MA5B assault Rifle will make an appearance.

This is before the days of Halo 3 so the MA5B has not been replaced by the MA5C (replaced does not mean removed from the UNSC arsenal, im sure it was still used by some even though the MA5C was around)

The BR55 existed during the halo 1 days as well. It did not make an appearance on the PoA because the crew were not expecting to be fighting on the ground. The BR55 is a weapon more for open combat on the ground while the MA5B is better for close quarter fighting (like inside ships).

When i mean BR55 i do NOT mean the BR55HB SR (halo 3 version), which was the final version of the BR.

Therefore the BR would have to have the halo 2 skin.

I sure hope Bungie is not cheap and decides to put in the MA5C or the BR55HB SR therefore creating inconsistency issues.

I have always wanted to use the MA5B again.

If bungie put the BR55HB SR in Halo Reach it would be like putting the M16A4 in a game set in the Vietnam War (M16, M16A1's).


  • 10.22.2009 5:59 PM PDT

...Does it matter what the gun is called? Its going to be balanced for whatever weapon set they have in Reach of course, but does the name of the gun honestly make a difference?

  • 10.22.2009 6:01 PM PDT

93% of statistics are lies. Formerly Xfire Grunt. Unfortunately, you can't change the WLID for your BNET account, so I had to create an alternate account. My other WLID was spam city (and it was my e-mail account too).

In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.

  • 10.22.2009 6:06 PM PDT

Online ID: GriffGraff15

They should take out the BR in my opinion, but they won't. I like the Halo CE AR a lot more then the H3 one. In H3 the assault rifle was useless

  • 10.22.2009 6:09 PM PDT

Lets Boogie

Posted by: Hylebos
...Does it matter what the gun is called? Its going to be balanced for whatever weapon set they have in Reach of course, but does the name of the gun honestly make a difference?


The name of the gun is important. The name of the gun tells what variant it is. Different names = differences in guns.

The MA5B has a 60 round mag, bulkier, and has a shorter barrel then the MA5C. So yes names do matter. You cant just swap a name on a gun then make the gun not act like the variant it is supposed to be.

Names are also important for Continuity.



  • 10.22.2009 6:12 PM PDT

Lets Boogie

Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.


If the BR55 is in Halo reach they cant make it look EXACTLY like the halo 3 version. Sure it can look better graphically but they should not add any physical differences from the halo 2 version.

And yes Canon is important. Without Canon the halo universe would be nothing.

  • 10.22.2009 6:18 PM PDT

(;3=

Posted by: haloplayer2kill
Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.


If the BR55 is in Halo reach they cant make it look EXACTLY like the halo 3 version. Sure it can look better graphically but they should not add any physical differences from the halo 2 version.

And yes Canon is important. Without Canon the halo universe would be nothing.


yes canon is important or else we would have random dick monsters floating around our screen and then we will be like WTF

  • 10.22.2009 6:22 PM PDT

93% of statistics are lies. Formerly Xfire Grunt. Unfortunately, you can't change the WLID for your BNET account, so I had to create an alternate account. My other WLID was spam city (and it was my e-mail account too).

Posted by: haloplayer2kill
Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.


If the BR55 is in Halo reach they cant make it look EXACTLY like the halo 3 version. Sure it can look better graphically but they should not add any physical differences from the halo 2 version.

And yes Canon is important. Without Canon the halo universe would be nothing.

Posted by: haloplayer2kill
Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.


If the BR55 is in Halo reach they cant make it look EXACTLY like the halo 3 version. Sure it can look better graphically but they should not add any physical differences from the halo 2 version.

And yes Canon is important. Without Canon the halo universe would be nothing.


No they can make it as different as they want. The Halo 2 version has low polygons and is an original Xbox Gun. The guns in newer games look a lot better and have a lot more detail/attatchments.

No canon like this is not important. Canon that is important is like Master Chief and things like that not a bunch of funny numbers after a gun that 95% of people don't eve know about. I didn't even know there was a difference other then new graphics/balance between the Halo 2 and Halo 3 guns.

  • 10.22.2009 6:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: westpointusma15
They should take out the BR in my opinion, but they won't. I like the Halo CE AR a lot more then the H3 one. In H3 the assault rifle was useless


Halo CE AR or was useless too; Much funner to use granted but at least it was fun to use.

The Halo 3 AR or MA5C got 1 improvement over the Halo CE AR or MA5B.
-it was actually accurate when fired in short controlled burst, the MA5B was more accurate when fired in burst too but was still pathetic

However the MA5C took 2 steps backwards
- it sounded like a BB gun
- it did little armor damage because bungie emphasized the AR rush, which BTW dose anyone agree the Iconic gun of Halo should not be a purpose built bludgeoning tool

So i would want an accurate MA5B.




[Edited on 10.22.2009 6:29 PM PDT]

  • 10.22.2009 6:25 PM PDT

they should have brs but not ars im so prejudice aginst the ar its not even funny

  • 10.22.2009 6:52 PM PDT

Lets Boogie


Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about. [/quote]

If the BR55 is in Halo reach they cant make it look EXACTLY like the halo 3 version. Sure it can look better graphically but they should not add any physical differences from the halo 2 version.

And yes Canon is important. Without Canon the halo universe would be nothing.[/quote]

No they can make it as different as they want. The Halo 2 version has low polygons and is an original Xbox Gun. The guns in newer games look a lot better and have a lot more detail/attatchments.

No canon like this is not important. Canon that is important is like Master Chief and things like that not a bunch of funny numbers after a gun that 95% of people don't eve know about. I didn't even know there was a difference other then new graphics/balance between the Halo 2 and Halo 3 guns.


You have to keep weapons consistent with the times they were around.

You have to keep with Canon because "Halo Reach" is HISTORY in the halo universe. You cant change history.

Example:

No matter what i do i cant change the history of the M16A1 in the Vietnam War. If i make a video game set in the Vietnam War i cant make the M16A1 to look or act like the M16A2 because that would be inconstant.

Picture of M16A1

http://www.hardscrabblefarm.com/images/vietnam/manual-of-arms /m16-26.jpg

On of the differences between the M16A1 and A2 was that the A1 had a safe/semi/full auto (like the AK47), while the A2 had a safe/semi/burst fire.

Picture of M16A2

http://www.fnmfg.com/train/m16/m16a2.gif

Therefore you cant have the AR in Halo Reach have a 32 mag, longer barrel, and look like the MA5C. That would bring up questions on why the MA5C is around during the halo 1 days.

Since "Halo Reach" is a prequel it has to have the technology during those days. That also means the Spartans have to have Mark V armor (halo 1 version), not Mark V1.

MA5B Picture

http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/File:MA5B.jpg

MA5C Picture

http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/File:MA5C_ICWS_Assault_Rifle.jpg

Yes the MA5B graphics do have to be changed to look more like halo 3 in Halo Reach but the gun still has to be the same. The MA5B is bulkier, carries more rounds in a mag, and has a shorter barrel, then the MA5C, it was also less accurate. Your still have to keep those differences or else there would be no point in calling the MA5B a MA5B.







[Edited on 10.22.2009 6:57 PM PDT]

  • 10.22.2009 6:52 PM PDT

The strongest Rivals are also the strongest allies.

Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.

i would like canon > gameplay/grathics.

  • 10.22.2009 6:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.


I think Bungie stopped caring about making guns make sense after halo CE

If bungi wants guns that could work they need to remodel a few of the UNMC weapons

I'll use the BR as an example

The breach and bolt assembly is not above the the magazine, and the charging handle and breach is on the wrong side; yet it ejects round on the right side.

there is no way 36 rounds fits in the short magazine and, the Magazine is too long for 9.5x40mm rounds. unless there is a mechanism with two rows of bullet but, in that case a longer magazine would be more practical.

[Edited on 10.22.2009 8:22 PM PDT]

  • 10.22.2009 7:20 PM PDT

93% of statistics are lies. Formerly Xfire Grunt. Unfortunately, you can't change the WLID for your BNET account, so I had to create an alternate account. My other WLID was spam city (and it was my e-mail account too).

Posted by: haloplayer2kill

Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about. [/quote]

If the BR55 is in Halo reach they cant make it look EXACTLY like the halo 3 version. Sure it can look better graphically but they should not add any physical differences from the halo 2 version.

And yes Canon is important. Without Canon the halo universe would be nothing.[/quote]

No they can make it as different as they want. The Halo 2 version has low polygons and is an original Xbox Gun. The guns in newer games look a lot better and have a lot more detail/attatchments.

No canon like this is not important. Canon that is important is like Master Chief and things like that not a bunch of funny numbers after a gun that 95% of people don't eve know about. I didn't even know there was a difference other then new graphics/balance between the Halo 2 and Halo 3 guns.


You have to keep weapons consistent with the times they were around.

You have to keep with Canon because "Halo Reach" is HISTORY in the halo universe. You cant change history.

Example:

No matter what i do i cant change the history of the M16A1 in the Vietnam War. If i make a video game set in the Vietnam War i cant make the M16A1 to look or act like the M16A2 because that would be inconstant.

Picture of M16A1

http://www.hardscrabblefarm.com/images/vietnam/manual-of-arms /m16-26.jpg

On of the differences between the M16A1 and A2 was that the A1 had a safe/semi/full auto (like the AK47), while the A2 had a safe/semi/burst fire.

Picture of M16A2

http://www.fnmfg.com/train/m16/m16a2.gif

Therefore you cant have the AR in Halo Reach have a 32 mag, longer barrel, and look like the MA5C. That would bring up questions on why the MA5C is around during the halo 1 days.

Since "Halo Reach" is a prequel it has to have the technology during those days. That also means the Spartans have to have Mark V armor (halo 1 version), not Mark V1.

MA5B Picture

http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/File:MA5B.jpg

MA5C Picture

http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/File:MA5C_ICWS_Assault_Rifle.jpg

Yes the MA5B graphics do have to be changed to look more like halo 3 in Halo Reach but the gun still has to be the same. The MA5B is bulkier, carries more rounds in a mag, and has a shorter barrel, then the MA5C, it was also less accurate. Your still have to keep those differences or else there would be no point in calling the MA5B a MA5B.


The Plasma Rifle doesn't look the same in halo 1 and Halo 3.

IT is dual wieldable in halo 2 but not dual wieldable in Halo 3.

All of these are just minor quibbles.

Just say its a prototype BR. Because Reach was destroyed it wasn't implemented.

All of these things can be overcome easily. Just say its a prototype.

I mean seriously its just a graphical improvement here. Its not like they are rewriting any serious canon here.

You are talking about history, this is a video game. You don't know the whole story anyways.

  • 10.22.2009 8:09 PM PDT

93% of statistics are lies. Formerly Xfire Grunt. Unfortunately, you can't change the WLID for your BNET account, so I had to create an alternate account. My other WLID was spam city (and it was my e-mail account too).

Posted by: BOB THE DOCTER
Posted by: Ksychutrya
In regards to the skin...

the only reason there is a difference is there is a higher polygon count for rendering in Halo 3.

The Halo:Reach BR should look even more realisitic. Canon be damned. Gameplay/Graphics > Minor Canon holes, that only canon fanboys care about.

i would like canon > gameplay/grathics.


Read a book then. You get lots of canon that way. Gameplay is more important then anything. Because its a game.

  • 10.22.2009 8:10 PM PDT