Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Was Halo 2 really that much better?
  • Subject: Was Halo 2 really that much better?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Was Halo 2 really that much better?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: jaythenerdkid
I definitely believe every wildly inflated claim ITT.

Weow kid, do you even lift?


Skype: au-simon

Posted by: raiderftball64
Posted by: WjB456
Why did the OP get banned?
I didn't realize mods came to this forum.
Probably logged onto a banned account, or was banned in another forum.

  • 02.17.2011 6:52 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

He was posting in Reach and flood forums.

  • 02.17.2011 6:57 PM PDT

I breathe BR, not kidding homie.

yea honeslty, h3 was the thing for me, i definitley had time w/ h2, but h3 was like the thing for me, im just going off t4r since u blacklisted, but yea, 3 was gr8, thought it was a good sequel to h2

  • 02.17.2011 7:01 PM PDT


Posted by: Mike Huntt
Posted by: raiderftball64
Posted by: WjB456
Why did the OP get banned?
I didn't realize mods came to this forum.
Probably logged onto a banned account, or was banned in another forum.
Heh, I kind of pulled a super retard on the Flood forum so yeah (this is the OP)

  • 02.17.2011 7:47 PM PDT

It was much, much better than halo 3.

  • 02.17.2011 8:24 PM PDT

Being Happy is so much cooler than being Sad =)


Posted by: Lokis Paralax
It was much, much better than halo 3.
State your reasons noob!

  • 02.17.2011 8:24 PM PDT

Posted by: AJ is UnLoved

Posted by: Lokis Paralax
It was much, much better than halo 3.
State your reasons noob!
for one it was fun, for two the game-play get didn't overly stale.

[Edited on 02.17.2011 8:37 PM PST]

  • 02.17.2011 8:33 PM PDT

Being Happy is so much cooler than being Sad =)

^Almost every new game is fun in a way. Dumb reason, sorry.

  • 02.17.2011 8:34 PM PDT

"Do you smell that son"
"No Captain, What is it"
"Napalm Son, I love the smell of Napalm in the morning"


Posted by: Mike Huntt

In Halo 2, you HAD to be good. You HAD to get the aforementioned qualities down-pat and perfect to get a high level. Anything in the 18-23 level was about equal to a 50 in Halo 3.



Fixed

anything between 18-23 was equal to an h3 50, i got to 28 and got 50's on all my accs, had 3 on my first acc, was never good enough to get past i think 28 on h2.

Guys that were over a 30 were unreal, the only legit H2 players ranked over 35 i ever knew of were asian triadz & haloshoota, i'm sure there were a few more but anyone over 23 definitely had a h3 50 without a doubt. The skill gap in H3 was never large enough, i'm able to get 50 and i'm not even good, other guys that i've played with were head and shoulders above me, an extra 20 levels would have helped H3.

Anyway, H2 BTB was the best, closely followed by hardcore and H2 Challenge, hell even doubles was good

[Edited on 02.18.2011 6:11 AM PST]

  • 02.18.2011 6:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Saperlipopette!

I think what made Halo 2 shine was its maps, the ranking system (which eventually became a problem), the multiplayer experience (a first for many) and the basic fast-paced gameplay.

For that guy who said people past people 30 needed button glitches, he is completely retarded. I was a 34 in Team Slayer and I never, ever used button glitches, super jumps or any of those idiotic things.

What ruined Halo 2 for me and many others was the amount of cheating going on, from bridgers, modders to stand-byers, cheating was a huge issue before the last rank reset and not much could be done about it. The main reason to cheat? Well, it was actually the ranking system.

In Halo 2 it was hard to rank up past certain level, not because you needed a lot of "experience points", but because past that certain level players were good. I suppose competitive play started at level 28, at level 31 things really started to get tough and from 34 to 37-39 it was where most of the good players were.

The real 40's and above was inhabited by real hardcore players, or cheaters.

It was because of people wanting to rank up that many decided to cheat their way up, and boy did they cheat. It got to the point where me and my friends decided to stop playing as a party, because going in as a party in the 30's meant that you would end up paired with cheaters, continuously.

In Halo 3 and Reach you have a super slow gameplay, Spartans seem to be obese and weak, they throw grenades like girls and being honest, most of the maps are boring.

The main reason games have changed so much is actually the players. People nowadays only want to kill other players, when in Halo 2 Team Skirmish (or Team Objective for Halo 3 players) had a healthy population and the competitive play was stunning. The gametypes encouraged this competitive play at higher levels also, take as an example territories, which was ruined in Halo 3, yet in Halo 2 it was somewhat popular.

This is just my point of view, take this opinion from someone who started playing as a complete noob, became somewhat decent (wanting to win every game) and ended up playing just to have some fun, regardless of the game's outcome. I played Halo 2 from release day on my other account, and stopped playing when Halo 3 was released.

[Edited on 02.18.2011 12:45 PM PST]

  • 02.18.2011 12:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Mezecs
  • user homepage:

Never ague with an idiot, they will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Posted by: TehTerminator
Simply put: NO!

Whoever says Halo 2 had the best multi-player experience in the series are wearing these.

By all means, I'm not implying Halo 2 is bad. In fact, it's a great game. But give me a break, it's far from the flawless multi-player masterpiece many fanboys claim it to be. Sure it may have contained the best maps in the series, but it also contained the worse weapon balance and had the most over-sized hitboxes. Halo 3's maps don't hold a candle to Halo 2's maps, but it had reasonable hit-box radius and FAR better weapon balance, including a better melee system.

Multi-player wise: Halo 3 > Halo: CE > Halo 2 > Halo: Reach

Surely you cant be serious, every one of them points in that video is worse in H3 except

>The plasma pistol is no longer a power weapon, so?
>No swipe-snipe because of no hit-scan, but I would take that over having to deal with the laggyness of leading my shots giving the host a huge advantage.


And for the record: CE > H2 > H3 > H:R

[Edited on 02.18.2011 5:36 PM PST]

  • 02.18.2011 5:32 PM PDT

LW 46 / TD 46 / TS 45 / TSW 37 / TSN 34 / MLG 25

dropshock.net


Posted by: Karnage VI
Posted by: TehTerminator
Simply put: NO!

Whoever says Halo 2 had the best multi-player experience in the series are wearing these.

By all means, I'm not implying Halo 2 is bad. In fact, it's a great game. But give me a break, it's far from the flawless multi-player masterpiece many fanboys claim it to be. Sure it may have contained the best maps in the series, but it also contained the worse weapon balance and had the most over-sized hitboxes. Halo 3's maps don't hold a candle to Halo 2's maps, but it had reasonable hit-box radius and FAR better weapon balance, including a better melee system.

Multi-player wise: Halo 3 > Halo: CE > Halo 2 > Halo: Reach

Surely you cant be serious, every one of them points in that video is worse in H3 except

>The plasma pistol is no longer a power weapon, so?
>No swipe-snipe because of no hit-scan, but I would take that over having to deal with the laggyness of leading my shots giving the host a huge advantage.


And for the record: CE > H2 > H3 > H:R

Yeah Reach sucks...

  • 02.19.2011 2:44 AM PDT

Posted by: spartain ken 15
You guys care too much.

Nope halo 3 was the best

  • 02.19.2011 7:44 AM PDT

50s in: Slayer, Doubles, Lone Wolves, Objective, Ranked BTB, Swat, Snipers.

They're about even for me.

H2 had great maps, but also had a lot of casual-friendly stuff like the noob combo, lock-on rockets, a ridiculously powerful sword. The melee system was spastic and the AA/bullet magnetism was way too strong. The SMG was the worst starting weapon ever and totally broke the gameplay. The game was incredibly glitchy, even though most of them did add a skill element. Don't forget that the FOV was about half of H1's; it was like you had tunnel vision. Terrible.

H3 had bad maps and some casual stuff like equipment, but was way more refined. Most of the glitches are gone, dual-wielding has been toned down, AA/bullet magnetism toned down, etc. The character moved slower though, which kind of negated the less bullet magnetism and took some skill out of the strafe.

Basically, both were very good, but flawed. I think H3 is the better overall game due to the better campaign and features, but H2 was the better multiplayer game due to the much better ranking system and the higher emphasis on individual skill. H1 tops both of them easily.

  • 02.19.2011 9:08 AM PDT

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.

Posted by: raiderftball64
H2 > All other Halo games
CoD Black Ops > Reach


Fix'd.

  • 02.19.2011 9:26 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Brother's account. My main is Guillotineee

The skill gap in Halo 2 and CE are extrememly apparent. Halo 3 has little if any skill gap.

[Edited on 02.19.2011 9:32 AM PST]

  • 02.19.2011 9:32 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend

Posted by: Hubris Ghost
The skill gap in Halo 2 and CE are extrememly apparent. Halo 3 has little if any skill gap.


That is not true at all

  • 02.19.2011 9:38 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member


Posted by: blankty
The BXR
I was pro

  • 02.19.2011 10:16 AM PDT

I liked Halo 2 better than either H3 or Reach, even though I was terribly bad at it. I am bad at H3 too, but it was more apparent in H2

[Edited on 02.19.2011 4:32 PM PST]

  • 02.19.2011 4:32 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2