- firecrakcer
- |
- Exalted Member
Posted by: TransmutationXx
...graphically and environmentally wise. (And a bit gameplay wise.)
As many of you know MW2 just came out and for those who have played the campaign will know what I'm talking about.
But for those who don't let me clarify. By graphically and environmentally wise I mean in a few levels of MW2 it shows citys on fire, buildings blown up, destroyed, the sky filled with helicopters, gun shots and smoke and fire and well it looks like a REAL battlefield. Most of you may have noticed that Halo shows none (if barely) any characteristics resembling a war. And you would think aliens invading earth and planets and trying to kill of the human race would be more bloodshot and darker looking then just humans against humans.
Gameplay wise - No I don't mean knifes, sprint button, or anything Call of Dutyish. I mean like I don't know...put some action into the game? Action like you have no gun and your hopelessly outnumbered running for your life and trying to escape/evade covenant squads. Something that pretty much keeps us on the edge of our seats.
tl;dr version: Make the enviroment more darker and look like a real battlefield and put some action into the game that'll keep us on the edge.
Thoughts? Comments?
(Oh and no I'm not a Call of Duty fanboy before anyones says that. I just simply thought the game was amazing due to its environment and the keep you on the edge of your seat moments and I'm hoping Bungie thinks about this to make Halo: Reach the best damn game out there.)
Posted by: Plain Ben
Man, you should have reworded and removed the words 'Modern Warfare 2', then you wouldn't have these complaint posts.
I for one, agree that Halo should have a similar feel to what the Call of Duty franchise has achieved, warzones that actually have action in the background. Parts of missions where certain circumstances change the gameplay for a while.
Posted by: Frost1691 1691
Of course Halo isn't CoD. Why is it that it's always compared to CoD? There are other FPS's out there with the same basic level of action that CoD has. The real problem I see with Halo is that it doesn't feel like you're in any real danger. On the other hand, in games like CoD, all of the explosions, gunfire everywhere, buildings blowing up, give you feeling of real danger. In Halo it just feels like you're a one man army walking through levels killing anything in your past. There isn't any real challenge. And this doesn't make any sense. It seems that if you're desperately fighting for the survival of all mankind against blood thirsty religious fanatics that want your head on a pike, then you should maybe feel like you're in danger. Halo does not deliver in that aspect.
Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
Also agreed 100%. The ONLY thing holding Halo's campaign back from GREATNESS is the lack of adrenaline missions. If Halo had more of its story-telling from a 1st person helmet cam and more adrenaline missions where you would play in a scenario outside of the normal fps, say like gunning Covenant down from a Pelican or using a MAC Blast on a Cruiser, then Halo would be THAT MUCH BETTER.
Posted by: flamedude
Most of us have always wanted epic battles in Halo games, and I'd love to see it in Reach. Dozens of Scorpions duking it out with Scarabs and Wraiths, Longsword strikes, Gauss Hogs wailing on Choppers, CCS glassings, shiva nukes, Spartans, ODST drops, machine gun fire, crashing ships, supermacs, jackal snipers, spec op elites. I want all of that.
I was always disappointed that the battles of New Mombasa were so...... empty.
^Bolded parts. =)
And everything MLG Cheehwawa said. =)
YOU WILL BURN FOR YOUR SIN BURN!!!!!!!!!