Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Go To Halo Reach Already :p :)
  • Subject: Go To Halo Reach Already :p :)
Subject: Go To Halo Reach Already :p :)

ahha its really fun as you can see
vvvvv
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6MNsdPtnKI

  • 10.26.2010 11:45 AM PDT

reach is terrible.

3 is better

  • 10.26.2010 1:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The legendary ending for Halo 4 is Masturcheef and Arby making love.

As comparing your post and your video, what are you trying to imply?

  • 10.26.2010 2:16 PM PDT

Better luck next time buddy.

Wrong forum. Go to reach's.

  • 10.26.2010 2:56 PM PDT

I am mediocre

Check out my Youtube Channel
Youtube channel name - XLGstudio

http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/


Posted by: StealthyBush
reach is terrible.

3 is better
thank you for being the 0.7% of the halo population that KNOWS that Halo 3>Reach

  • 10.26.2010 5:15 PM PDT

The reason why we dislike Reach's Multiplayer is because it's too random (AAs, bloom, grenade spam with lowered movement speed and underpowered weapons) and caters to the "casual" side of Gameplay too much. The skill gap is also very low.

We're not necessarily "competitive", we just hate inconsistent Gameplay. We also like Gameplay where the skilled players can win, and the lesser skilled players will lose, and they have to practice.

  • 10.26.2010 7:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: StealthyBush
reach is terrible.

3 is better

  • 10.26.2010 9:12 PM PDT

Posted by: Ruby of Blue
The reason why we dislike Reach's Multiplayer is because it's too random (AAs, bloom, grenade spam with lowered movement speed and underpowered weapons) and caters to the "casual" side of Gameplay too much. The skill gap is also very low.

We're not necessarily "competitive", we just hate inconsistent Gameplay. We also like Gameplay where the skilled players can win, and the lesser skilled players will lose, and they have to practice.

This. If you don't mind, I am seriously going to copy and paste this to any person that says lrn2adapt.

  • 10.26.2010 9:45 PM PDT

imo reach is still better =p

  • 10.27.2010 6:36 AM PDT

youre just saying that because you havent been on reach, name one thing that is better on halo 3 than on halo reach

  • 10.27.2010 6:55 AM PDT

"Tough luck, catch and lag ON!"


Posted by: godxsmeuxdog
youre just saying that because you havent been on reach, name one thing that is better on halo 3 than on halo reach

Grenades, movement speed, jump height, rank system, lack of AA's, maps, classic Halo feel.
Check my Reach stats. I've played plenty, I'm better at Reach than I am at Halo 3, and I don't like Reach. There goes the stupid "lolyounoob" argument.
Reach gameplay is grenades, AA's and melée. It takes emphasis off of the shooting, makes the skill gap narrow enough to step over, and it's shallow as hell with the lack of weapon variety and tactics.

  • 10.27.2010 9:05 AM PDT

We have been raised for combat...
We carry our banner to our fights...
Alone we are a menace, together we are a threat...
Born to raise hell, live to drop back in it...
Never retreat, never surrender... we are spartans.

Posted by: Ruby of Blue
The reason why we dislike Reach's Multiplayer is because it's too random (AAs, bloom, grenade spam with lowered movement speed and underpowered weapons) and caters to the "casual" side of Gameplay too much. The skill gap is also very low.

We're not necessarily "competitive", we just hate inconsistent Gameplay. We also like Gameplay where the skilled players can win, and the lesser skilled players will lose, and they have to practice.


I kind of see your point but here's what you're saying: You want the trully skilled to have more chances to win then the lesser skilled so they can learn and progress (understandable), but by the time they do the more skilled will be better then before so equal chances of winning are off.

Also, AA are ment for the player to adapt (HEAR ME OUT ON THIS!!!)to a wide variety of situations, the AA are much like the equipments in Halo 3, only has a faster reaction time and is always with you.

The Bloom also forces the player to adapt a new skill, one that doesn't consist of spamming bullets. (on a personal note: if you spammed a bloomed weapon a lot then you just plain suck or have a VERY happy trigger-finger) and swat is more enjoyable.

Not to mentioned Bloom was ALWAYS PRESENT IN THE HALO GAMES, except now we are aware of it (try firering an AR with burst fire to a wall then use spamming on it, you'll see a diference).

I get you guys might not like Halo Reach, but there's more pace in it then in Halo 3 and equal chances of winning for each side. Not mention fewer betrayals.

  • 10.27.2010 11:31 AM PDT

We have been raised for combat...
We carry our banner to our fights...
Alone we are a menace, together we are a threat...
Born to raise hell, live to drop back in it...
Never retreat, never surrender... we are spartans.

Posted by: Pixie CatGirl

Posted by: godxsmeuxdog
youre just saying that because you havent been on reach, name one thing that is better on halo 3 than on halo reach

Grenades, movement speed, jump height, rank system, lack of AA's, maps, classic Halo feel.
Check my Reach stats. I've played plenty, I'm better at Reach than I am at Halo 3, and I don't like Reach. There goes the stupid "lolyounoob" argument.
Reach gameplay is grenades, AA's and melée. It takes emphasis off of the shooting, makes the skill gap narrow enough to step over, and it's shallow as hell with the lack of weapon variety and tactics.


Rank system, grenades and maps are one thing, but other things like the jump height amd movement speed are like this because we are no longer a Spartan-II but a Spartan-III (cheaper version of the Spartans)

  • 10.27.2010 11:34 AM PDT

We have been raised for combat...
We carry our banner to our fights...
Alone we are a menace, together we are a threat...
Born to raise hell, live to drop back in it...
Never retreat, never surrender... we are spartans.

Posted by: NintenToad64

Posted by: Commando Santos
Posted by: Ruby of Blue
The reason why we dislike Reach's Multiplayer is because it's too random (AAs, bloom, grenade spam with lowered movement speed and underpowered weapons) and caters to the "casual" side of Gameplay too much. The skill gap is also very low.

We're not necessarily "competitive", we just hate inconsistent Gameplay. We also like Gameplay where the skilled players can win, and the lesser skilled players will lose, and they have to practice.


I kind of see your point but here's what you're saying: You want the trully skilled to have more chances to win then the lesser skilled so they can learn and progress (understandable), but by the time they do the more skilled will be better then before so equal chances of winning are off.

Also, AA are ment for the player to adapt (HEAR ME OUT ON THIS!!!)to a wide variety of situations, the AA are much like the equipments in Halo 3, only has a faster reaction time and is always with you.

The Bloom also forces the player to adapt a new skill, one that doesn't consist of spamming bullets. (on a personal note: if you spammed a bloomed weapon a lot then you just plain suck or have a VERY happy trigger-finger) and swat is more enjoyable.

Not to mentioned Bloom was ALWAYS PRESENT IN THE HALO GAMES, except now we are aware of it (try firering an AR with burst fire to a wall then use spamming on it, you'll see a diference).

I get you guys might not like Halo Reach, but there's more pace in it then in Halo 3 and equal chances of winning for each side. Not mention fewer betrayals.


You're using the exact same arguments that you've heard over on the Reach board without actually understanding what you're saying.

I considering commenting on everything you've said but soon realized it would be all for nothing...just like every argument on the Reach board. It keeps going in circles of misinformed lack of understanding.


Actually I did understand what he said, just didn't go deep enough.

You see: What I did was instead of trying to make people to join reach I just gave a logical insight of what it's about. Yes it keeps going in circles but it had the intention of awarering of why it's so new now.

I hoped you understood, I sometimes make things harder to see then it should be. lol

[Edited on 10.27.2010 12:04 PM PDT]

  • 10.27.2010 12:04 PM PDT

:3 I will die. :[

A few things to inevitably quarrel about.

The Bloom is random,when pacing shots one can just spam a 5-shot depending on Host or connection standards.

The Rockets in the game are seriously over-powered anything in the radius of about 5 ft can already kill.Unlike,Halo 3 you have a fair chance to dodge that rocket.

The grenades tend to be like Mini-nukes and most people just spam whenever they pick up a grenade.During countless days,playing the game what annoys me are the spammy DMR 5-shots when you are pacing shots waiting for your reticule to reset and enemies that keep throwing endless Frag grenades,down the hallway or up a lift.

  • 10.27.2010 8:57 PM PDT

ughh threads like these are pointless, its just back and forth seems never ending...if you dont like reach keep it to yourself cause no one else cares about people who are soo jaded

  • 10.27.2010 9:16 PM PDT

bailey

i hate randoms talking -blam!- about halo 3

  • 10.28.2010 3:11 AM PDT

I tried Reach already, it wasn't any fun. Halo 3 is the superior game in regards to gameplay and maps. However Reach is less laggy from what I've seen and the voting system is better in my opinion. It's too bad too, if Reach was skill based like the previous games it could have been awesome.

  • 10.28.2010 3:40 AM PDT

"Tough luck, catch and lag ON!"


Posted by: Commando Santos
Posted by: Pixie CatGirl

Posted by: godxsmeuxdog
youre just saying that because you havent been on reach, name one thing that is better on halo 3 than on halo reach

Grenades, movement speed, jump height, rank system, lack of AA's, maps, classic Halo feel.
Check my Reach stats. I've played plenty, I'm better at Reach than I am at Halo 3, and I don't like Reach. There goes the stupid "lolyounoob" argument.
Reach gameplay is grenades, AA's and melée. It takes emphasis off of the shooting, makes the skill gap narrow enough to step over, and it's shallow as hell with the lack of weapon variety and tactics.


Rank system, grenades and maps are one thing, but other things like the jump height amd movement speed are like this because we are no longer a Spartan-II but a Spartan-III (cheaper version of the Spartans)

Multiplayer isn't canon.

  • 10.28.2010 3:56 AM PDT

You should all really stop comparing Reach and 3. Yes, they're both Halo titles from the same company, etc etc, but they're really very different games - as they were MEANT to be.

I'm more of a fan of Halo 3 first off. Not for any gameplay reason or whatever, but because I played it for 3 years and have so many awesome memories. I understand all the arguments from both sides, but many of them are opinionated and narrow-minded. I've played 10,000 matchmaking games on Halo 3, and have played Reach since launch day, and I can honestly say there's nothing wrong with the gameplay of either game. The skill gap on both is fine. Check my stats for both games (keeping in mind Halo 3 is mostly 50 high MLG, and yet still good). I've managed to perform almost identically on both games. As with both games also, with the right settings (i.e MLG/Arena) the better team, in my experience, nearly always wins.

Basically, if you find the gameplay too random, you're not doing it right. I hate the learn to adapt thing, but honestly, it's a COMPLETELY different game, so you DO have to make some changes to succeed as much as you have on another. Stop comparing Reach to 3, and instead, treat it like a brand new game from a brand new company. If Reach were a completely seperate game from the Halo franchise, you'd probably love it.

  • 10.28.2010 7:05 AM PDT