Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: The Ultimate Reasons Why Halo 1 > Halo 2 In Terms of Skill Required
  • Subject: The Ultimate Reasons Why Halo 1 > Halo 2 In Terms of Skill Required
Subject: The Ultimate Reasons Why Halo 1 > Halo 2 In Terms of Skill Required

1: Melee

Halo 1 had longer melee range than Halo 2, but you had to actualy aim the melee. Even from behind you could miss and end up hitting someone in the side of the arm.

Halo 2 introduced Jesus Christ lunge where your character does some retarded animation for half a second and you lunge across the room at anybody even close to your recticle. You automatically hit center mass which means from behind you get insta-kill.

2: Aim Assist and Bullet Magnetism

Halo 1 did not have any aim assist, (besides the Xbox version which I think only had it in the campaign) but did have bullet magnetism. Bullet magnetism allows for the projectile fired from your weapon to track the target you are aiming at. Some weapons had more or less bullet magnetism. (overcharged plasma pistol > M6D Magnum) You still had to aim at or ahead of your target in order to hit.

Halo 2 buffed up bullet magnetism by 7 x Jesus. It also added a game breaking amount of aim assist. If your targeting recticle is anwhere close to someone then the bullets will quite litteraly curve in air on their suicidal journy to impact the person you are aiming in the general direction in.

3: Map Design

Halo 1 maps were generaly very open (Chiron was NOT one of them) and required that you and your team fight for control of as much as the map as possible in order to surround the opposite team and kill them. Some of the maps had obious camping spots, but the gameplay mechanics of Halo 1 allowed for campers to be easily dealt with by anyone with a pistol, gernade, and good general knowledge of the map.

Alot of Halo 2 maps were small. (even maps based off Halo 1 maps had objects on them that blocked movement or sightlines) Many of them promoted camping in a corner or having your whole team camp in one room or building in order to win as quickly and as easily as possible. Some maps even had special camping spots that were purposly hard to get to so a camper would be protected. Camping slows down games and that typically makes them alot less fun.

4: Game Speed

Halo 1 had generally fast gameplay and movement speeds were rather fast compared to most games at the time the game was released.

Halo 2 slowed down gameplay with slower movement speeds, more places where you have to jump to get to another section of the map, and almost constant gernade spamming on smaller maps. (though this is probably do to Halo 2's population of little noobs that think they are video game gods because they can get easy kills in a horribly unbalanced game)

5: Weapon Balance

In Halo 1 every weapon had its place. The pistol may have seemed overpowerd but it is best at medium range and can sometimes fail to other weapons at point blank and long ranges. The shotgun was surprisingly good at medium range which makes someone with the shotgun not screwed when he starts getting pistol sprayed.

In Halo 2 the battle rifle was the anti everything weapon. The pistol was usless unless using the noob combo. Speaking of noob combo... it was by far easiest to use in Halo 2. (for the obious reason listed above) The SMG was generaly worthless. The shotgun's only use in the whole game was to kill teamates in campaign and take their weapons. Need I say more?

6: Multiplayer Glitches/Issues

Halo 1 had... backpack reloading? Weird death positions? Some lag? Nothing game breaking.

Halo 2 had button combos, super jumps, Mario Brothers N64 netcode, mods, modz, MODZZZZ!!!

7: Player Base

Halo 1 usually has 500-1000 players online in the day time.

Halo 2 had a sad group of no more than 50 people that think they are gods for being on the game where you can multikills with one battle rifle clip while camping ontop of a building that requires practically Jesus jumping out of the map and then spraying in every direction and letting the aim assist and bullet magnetism get you massive amounts of kill while you are eating pizza and recording everything for your "UBER PRO 1337 HALO 2 MONTAGE!!!".

Basicaly people like Dusk who are actualy good at a game that takes skill to be good in are cool and people like Ben that play Halo 2 thinking they are a video game god are just idiots.


Have a LOGICAL reason why I am wrong? I doubt it.

[Edited on 06.22.2011 8:09 AM PDT]

  • 06.22.2011 8:06 AM PDT

Posted by: Steeel Woool
We know.

Trust me some people don't. I have seen alot of ignorant and self proclaimed game 'gods' on this forum.

  • 06.22.2011 8:28 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Heroic Member

"A life lived for others is the only life worth living" - Albert Einstein

"I have your RCON right here." - Iggwilv

"Always my pleasure to be lazy." - InvasionImminent

I agree that in many ways Halo: Combat Evolved took more skill, but, it did have aim assist during Multiplayer. It also had bullet magnetism (In fact, that's why you're supposed to aim with your crosshairs focus slightly above an enemy's head to ensure a headshot with the pistol)

Also, I always felt that Halo: Combat Evolved was more focused on individual skill than team skill. Map control didn't seem as important until Halo 2 came around. Everyone seemed to be just fine with their individual skill in any situation at all (Mainly due to the Pistol being so powerful).

The only time I've seen map control being used in Halo PC now is just for spawn killing while playing CTF on Blood Gulch (Which is beyond broken if you ask me)

Oh, and another thing, no, Halo was not fast paced for its time. The only game that was out during the time of Halo that was slower paced in movement speed was Counter-Strike which was incredibly faster with kill times and Quake/Unreal Tournament were much faster when it came to movement speed. They were about equal, maybe even faster, in kill times, though. Games have been becoming much slower than in the past. If you want proof of that, here's a free, wonderful, updated version of a game made in late 1999. Then there's Starsiege Tribes... My God, hardly any game wants to get in a competition when it comes to a fast paced competition with that game.

In fact, now that I think about it, Halo is probably the most responsible for the slowing of FPS games in the market as of today. With the slowed down gameplay to better suit the consoles and the popularization of the franchise, it led to an FPS craze that was focused towards the consoles. When FPS developers saw that, they immediately followed in Bungie's example making their games to better suit consoles. You can clearly see this in the latest games out of two genres I mentioned before. Quake 4 and Unreal Tournament 3. Both had been dumbed down for console gameplay and ultimately payed the price for it.

(Yes, this is all coming from someone that loves the Halo franchise more than any other franchise out there. I'm not one to look through bias eyes, though.)

[Edited on 06.22.2011 11:09 AM PDT]

  • 06.22.2011 9:04 AM PDT

Posted by: HiredN00bs
Arrogant hyperbolic exclamations of woe? Seems like a normal day for Halo/Bungie.net.


Posted by: the omega man117

Halo 1 did not have any aim assist

3: Map Design

4: Game Speed

5: Weapon Balance


I disagree with all of these points.

Try sniping your teammate. That's what it's like without aim assist.

Halo CE maps were a lot more simple, but Halo 2 maps were able to accomodate much more styles of gameplay and gametypes. By the way, good maps don't have an impact on the skill gap.

CE had faster kill times, H2 was the faster-paced game. By fast pace I mean a lot of action and movement, and Halo 2 clearly excels there. Pace also has very little impact on the skill gap.

CE had no real weapon balance. Pistol overpowered everything but Sniper and Rockets, it was a better choice at ranges where other weapons should've been more appropiate.

CE does have a significantly larger skill gap, but some of your reasons don't really provide any evidence for that.

  • 06.22.2011 10:03 AM PDT

Xfire username: rustbandit

Add me to your friends list if you haven't already. It's a lot more fun to play with people from The Maw and people I know than random noobs.

They dumbed down all the games since Halo 1, each one getting a bit worse IMO to cater to the largest possible audience.

  • 06.22.2011 11:15 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member

Halo 1&2 PC forum's resident OC ReMixer. Like rockified and metalized video game music? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Yeah. That's right. I don't have a 50 in H3. I never got Onyx in Reach. If a game sucks too much, I won't even bother trying for such trivial "accolades". Besides, I've done way more things that take far more skill and talent than anything that can be done in a video game.

Posted by: Method Man NYC
Try sniping your teammate. That's what it's like without aim assist.

I did this before. It's easy. If you think it's hard, you're bad.

I guess it doesn't really bother me considering just about every game I play is made for men instead of little kids and doesn't have aim assist. Hell, UT doesn't even have vector assist.

Posted by: Method Man NYC
Halo CE maps were a lot more simple, but Halo 2 maps were able to accomodate much more styles of gameplay and gametypes. By the way, good maps don't have an impact on the skill gap.

Yes they do. Let's say, for example, that a map has spots allowing for easy continuous camping. That map caters to bad players. Halo 2 and beyond had a lot of those maps.

Posted by: Method Man NYC
CE had faster kill times, H2 was the faster-paced game. By fast pace I mean a lot of action and movement, and Halo 2 clearly excels there. Pace also has very little impact on the skill gap.

I was following you until the last line. Faster pacing increases the skill gap by putting pressure on the player and rewarding those who think fast and have faster reflexes.

Posted by: Method Man NYC
CE had no real weapon balance. Pistol overpowered everything but Sniper and Rockets, it was a better choice at ranges where other weapons should've been more appropriate.

This is true, but Halo CE's pistol was essentially dangerous only in the hands of someone that's good, and allowing everyone to start with it made it possible for a good player to continuously defeat lesser players, even if they found power weapons. This allowed for more consistency across matches and forced equally skilled players to use different weapons circumstantially as opposed to the catch-all power weapons have been since H2.

As for the OP, I agree for the most part, except for when you said Halo was faster paced compared to most games at the time. It really wasn't.

[Edited on 06.22.2011 11:32 AM PDT]

  • 06.22.2011 11:31 AM PDT

As for the OP, I agree for the most part, except for when you said Halo was faster paced compared to most games at the time. It really wasn't.

I meant games that came out at about the same time as Halo 1.

If you are refering to Counter Strike then that came out 2 years after Halo 1. (Halo 1: 2001 Counter Strike: 2003)

  • 06.22.2011 11:50 AM PDT

Posted by: Nessy

The bungie.net community is the halo PC community that is renowned for being unbelieveably sucky.

It is well known that Halo 2 was totally noobified by Bungie. It was perfect for the emerging Xbox kids to enjoy though. Easy kills, no fall damage, swords, all that jazz made kids happy to play it.

And for your 7 reasons, we could probably list 30 more easily as a group.

Oh and btw, Unreal Tournament actually had a faster pace of play than Halo.



[Edited on 06.22.2011 12:29 PM PDT]

  • 06.22.2011 12:27 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Heroic Member

"A life lived for others is the only life worth living" - Albert Einstein

"I have your RCON right here." - Iggwilv

"Always my pleasure to be lazy." - InvasionImminent


Posted by: the omega man117
If you are refering to Counter Strike then that came out 2 years after Halo 1. (Halo 1: 2001 Counter Strike: 2003)
*facepalm* Counter-Strike for the PC was originally a mod that came out for Half-Life in 1999, Valve made a retail version in 2000, then it came out for the Xbox in 2004. Get your facts right.

Also, all the games I listed came out before Halo. Quake/II/III (III came out in 1999), Starsiege Tribes (1998), Unreal Tournament (1999), Counter-Strike (1999/2000), all games that came out before Halo. When PC was still thought of as the only platform you could ever logically play a FPS. I still think it's the only truly logical place to play one. Bungie did an amazing job with the controls for Halo to work on the Xbox, but it's like a peg leg compared to a fully functioning human leg. Now you have socks (Games) that are catered to fit that peg leg (Consoles) instead of a real human leg. (PC)

Actually... Now that I think of it... Can you name one FPS that came out before/during the time Halo came out that was slower paced than Halo?

[Edited on 06.22.2011 2:39 PM PDT]

  • 06.22.2011 2:16 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member

Halo 1&2 PC forum's resident OC ReMixer. Like rockified and metalized video game music? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Yeah. That's right. I don't have a 50 in H3. I never got Onyx in Reach. If a game sucks too much, I won't even bother trying for such trivial "accolades". Besides, I've done way more things that take far more skill and talent than anything that can be done in a video game.


Posted by: Dr Syx
Actually... Now that I think of it... Can you name one FPS that came out before/during the time Halo came out that was slower paced than Halo?

This right here is a pretty good question. Though I think Rainbow 6 games' multiplayer might have been the case.

  • 06.22.2011 9:00 PM PDT


Posted by: DusK

Posted by: Dr Syx
Actually... Now that I think of it... Can you name one FPS that came out before/during the time Halo came out that was slower paced than Halo?

This right here is a pretty good question. Though I think Rainbow 6 games' multiplayer might have been the case.


To an extent Ghost Recon and Splinter Cell would be too. All Tom Clancey games tend to be slow, but that is just because they are incredibly realistic in almost every way and very difficult.

  • 06.23.2011 3:22 AM PDT

Halo 3

I think a couple of people here have already touched on the logical and even obvious counter-arguments to these "golden reasons". Not in the mood to type so much, so in stead of typing about what I disagree on, i'll type about what I do agree on.

1. Melee: I'd much rather have a melee that requires skill in order to pull off; it will reduce a lot of major close-range havoc and keep the skirmishes mid to long range- which I PERSONALLY like.

2. Yeah, Halo 2 Vista has a smaller population

3. Multiplayer glitches (although I haven't experienced any of it during my H2V, xbox connect, and xbox live playtime...or I was never aware of them being used)

  • 06.23.2011 2:01 PM PDT

to be honest, i don't care if the weapons are balanced or if the game is slow or fast or if it caters to noobs. all i care is if the game is fun, which both were to me.

  • 06.23.2011 5:59 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member

Halo 1&2 PC forum's resident OC ReMixer. Like rockified and metalized video game music? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Yeah. That's right. I don't have a 50 in H3. I never got Onyx in Reach. If a game sucks too much, I won't even bother trying for such trivial "accolades". Besides, I've done way more things that take far more skill and talent than anything that can be done in a video game.


Posted by: Ben2974
I think a couple of people here have already touched on the logical and even obvious counter-arguments to these "golden reasons".

Uh, no, it was just one guy, and I completely destroyed his flawed arguments.

[Edited on 06.23.2011 6:56 PM PDT]

  • 06.23.2011 6:43 PM PDT

"Uh, no, it was just one, guy, and I completely destroyed his flawed arguments."

woah man. comma overuse there...

  • 06.23.2011 6:47 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member

Halo 1&2 PC forum's resident OC ReMixer. Like rockified and metalized video game music? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Yeah. That's right. I don't have a 50 in H3. I never got Onyx in Reach. If a game sucks too much, I won't even bother trying for such trivial "accolades". Besides, I've done way more things that take far more skill and talent than anything that can be done in a video game.

Good find. Hand must've slipped or something.

  • 06.23.2011 6:56 PM PDT

Halo 3

Method man and Dr Syx were the 2 people I nicknamed as the "couple" who had their counter-reasoning put togethe. And no you did not destroy Method's arguments.

  • 06.23.2011 7:03 PM PDT


Posted by: Ben2974
Method man and Dr Syx were the 2 people I nicknamed as the "couple" who had their counter-reasoning put togethe. And no you did not destroy Method's arguments.


He kinda did...

  • 06.23.2011 7:15 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member

Halo 1&2 PC forum's resident OC ReMixer. Like rockified and metalized video game music? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Yeah. That's right. I don't have a 50 in H3. I never got Onyx in Reach. If a game sucks too much, I won't even bother trying for such trivial "accolades". Besides, I've done way more things that take far more skill and talent than anything that can be done in a video game.

Posted by: Ben2974
Method man and Dr Syx were the 2 people I nicknamed as the "couple" who had their counter-reasoning put togethe. And no you did not destroy Method's arguments.

Uh, yeah, I did. Go ahead and try to explain how I didn't, though. This thread could use more comedy.

  • 06.23.2011 7:52 PM PDT

Posted by: DusK
Uh, yeah, I did. Go ahead and try to explain how I didn't, though. This thread could use more comedy.


i don't think you need a comma after 'didn't'

  • 06.23.2011 7:54 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member

Halo 1&2 PC forum's resident OC ReMixer. Like rockified and metalized video game music? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Yeah. That's right. I don't have a 50 in H3. I never got Onyx in Reach. If a game sucks too much, I won't even bother trying for such trivial "accolades". Besides, I've done way more things that take far more skill and talent than anything that can be done in a video game.

Commas go before adverbs. I used it properly that time.

  • 06.23.2011 7:56 PM PDT

my bad.

  • 06.23.2011 8:24 PM PDT

Halo 3


Posted by: DusK
Posted by: Method Man NYC
Try sniping your teammate. That's what it's like without aim assist.

I did this before. It's easy. If you think it's hard, you're bad.

I guess it doesn't really bother me considering just about every game I play is made for men instead of little kids and doesn't have aim assist. Hell, UT doesn't even have vector assist.

Posted by: Method Man NYC
Halo CE maps were a lot more simple, but Halo 2 maps were able to accomodate much more styles of gameplay and gametypes. By the way, good maps don't have an impact on the skill gap.

Yes they do. Let's say, for example, that a map has spots allowing for easy continuous camping. That map caters to bad players. Halo 2 and beyond had a lot of those maps.

Posted by: Method Man NYC
CE had faster kill times, H2 was the faster-paced game. By fast pace I mean a lot of action and movement, and Halo 2 clearly excels there. Pace also has very little impact on the skill gap.

I was following you until the last line. Faster pacing increases the skill gap by putting pressure on the player and rewarding those who think fast and have faster reflexes.

Posted by: Method Man NYC
CE had no real weapon balance. Pistol overpowered everything but Sniper and Rockets, it was a better choice at ranges where other weapons should've been more appropriate.

This is true, but Halo CE's pistol was essentially dangerous only in the hands of someone that's good, and allowing everyone to start with it made it possible for a good player to continuously defeat lesser players, even if they found power weapons. This allowed for more consistency across matches and forced equally skilled players to use different weapons circumstantially as opposed to the catch-all power weapons have been since H2.

As for the OP, I agree for the most part, except for when you said Halo was faster paced compared to most games at the time. It really wasn't.





ok well let me start off by saying this: We're comparing, essentially, (since we've spun off topic and people tried to incorporate H2X into this argument) Halo PC vs H2V. So I'm going to let all of you know that, like many have posted before and around the net that aim assist is almost required for console games since you don't have such an easy time aiming with the stick when compared to a mouse. So therefore, even though aim assist seems to help the "would be noobs", it also helps the pros. So basically this makes the gameplay reach a new level of gameplay since EVERYONE can play on a higher level- some more than others.

Hence this is why you see faster paced action going on in Halo 2 than in Halo 1. So that takes out the "faster kill times"/"fast pace gaming and skill gap" bs argument out of the way.

Secondly:

If you want to compare overpowered weapons between H1 and H2, then you can match H1's pistol to that of H2's BattleRifle. BOTH games had unbalanced weaponry. You can take out a tank in Halo 1 with a pistol before the tank has a chance to knock you out. In H2 the firing rate is a god damn automatic-- and it's strong as hell, too! But i'd be in favor of the Halo 2's weaponry anyways, because the battlerifle has its challenge: the carbine. But both of these H2 weapons aren't enough to destroy a tank 1 on 1, unlike Halo 1. What's the pistol's rival in H1? The rockets? I Hope so! And not even....you have to be close range with those rockets if you want to win a duel versus a dude whipping the pistol! The pistol is powerful, precise, and consistent.

Thirdly:

"Yes they do. Let's say, for example, that a map has spots allowing for easy continuous camping. That map caters to bad players. Halo 2 and beyond had a lot of those maps."

Hold on, let's not forget the abundance of small/medium-sized maps in Halo 1 like Chiron, Battle Creek, Derelict, and Wizard.

Halo 2 had its share of large maps too: Coagulation, Containment, Headlong, Waterworks, etc.

There are maps in both games that have many spots to hide and get your shotgun out, but yes I do believe that Halo2's maps generally have more things jutting out from the ground making for new fighting methods and stuff like Method himself described a little bit earlier. But just because SOME players in games enjoy hide and seek doesn't mean they all do. You're letting those players represent the game's population as a whole, which is stupid to do. And besides, it's not the camper's fault that the other player isn't being cautious. The good players know what's up, though. They won't fall for bs like that more than once per match.


And I'd just like to finish off by mentioning Method's first statement in response to OP Try sniping your teammate. That's what it's like without aim assist.. Basically it's proof to the stick vs mouse theory. yeah, everyone has done it dusk, even me.

Comedy!



[Edited on 06.23.2011 8:41 PM PDT]

  • 06.23.2011 8:31 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Legendary Member

Halo 1&2 PC forum's resident OC ReMixer. Like rockified and metalized video game music? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Yeah. That's right. I don't have a 50 in H3. I never got Onyx in Reach. If a game sucks too much, I won't even bother trying for such trivial "accolades". Besides, I've done way more things that take far more skill and talent than anything that can be done in a video game.


Posted by: Ben2974
ok well let me start off by saying this: We're comparing, essentially, (since we've spun off topic and people tried to incorporate H2X into this argument) Halo PC vs H2V. So I'm going to let all of you know that, like many have posted before and around the net that aim assist is almost required for console games since you don't have such an easy time aiming with the stick when compared to a mouse. So therefore, even though aim assist seems to help the "would be noobs", it also helps the pros. So basically this makes the gameplay reach a new level of gameplay since EVERYONE can play on a higher level- some more than others.

Hence this is why you see faster paced action going on in Halo 2 than in Halo 1. So that takes out the "faster kill times"/"fast pace gaming and skill gap" bs argument out of the way.

The old "aim assist is required for a console game" argument. Again.

Let's take a look at this, barring the inclusion of vector assist, which is reasonable. Boot up Unreal Championship. No aim assist. Bad Company 2. No aim assist. Team Fortress 2. No freakin' aim assist on any of these console releases, and they all have two things you can observe:

a. A massive gap in the skills of players across the board. There are straight up dominators, guys who can't get a kill for crap, and everything in between.
b. People getting kills consistently and frequently. If your argument of aim assist being required was true, that wouldn't happen at all. Therefore, aim assist is not required for a console FPS game to be playable. The only ones that say it is suck at FPS games.

Posted by: Ben2974
Secondly:

If you want to compare overpowered weapons between H1 and H2, then you can match H1's pistol to that of H2's BattleRifle. BOTH games had unbalanced weaponry. You can take out a tank in Halo 1 with a pistol before the tank has a chance to knock you out. In H2 the firing rate is a god damn automatic-- and it's strong as hell, too! But i'd be in favor of the Halo 2's weaponry anyways, because the battlerifle has its challenge: the carbine. But both of these H2 weapons aren't enough to destroy a tank 1 on 1, unlike Halo 1. What's the pistol's rival in H1? The rockets? I Hope so! And not even....you have to be close range with those rockets if you want to win a duel versus a dude whipping the pistol! The pistol is powerful, precise, and consistent.

You forgot to add "and useless in the hands of anyone that isn't good" at the end of that last sentence, which basically renders all of your ranting moot. A high-powered weapon that requires a good amount of skill to use effectively levels the playing field in all situations for experienced players. It essentially means that if you're good, you'll come out on top consistently, and if you're bad, you won't.

In Halo 2, that was changed for the worse. The lack of a powerful-yet-skill-based starting weapon, and a focus on the ridiculous "power weapon" concept, rewards bad players by allowing them to run across these weapons during the game and easily kills players that are significantly more skilled than they are. It allows bad players to beat good players. If you think that should ever happen in competitive FPS, you need a lobotomy.

Posted by: Ben2974
Hold on, let's not forget the abundance of small/medium-sized maps in Halo 1 like Chiron, Battle Creek, Derelict, and Wizard

Halo 2 had its share of large maps too: Coagulation, Containment, Headlong, Waterworks, etc.

In every single Halo CE map you listed, camping is not a good strategy for winning a game. You camp on any of those maps, you're going to lose against better players.

Contrarily, in every Halo 2 map you listed, camping is extremely effective for winning games.

Terrible way to start your point.

Posted by: Ben2974
There are maps in both games that have many spots to hide and get your shotgun out, but yes I do believe that Halo2's maps generally have more things jutting out from the ground making for new fighting methods and stuff like Method himself described a little bit earlier. But just because SOME players in games enjoy hide and seek doesn't mean they all do. You're letting those players represent the game's population as a whole, which is stupid to do. And besides, it's not the camper's fault that the other player isn't being cautious. The good players know what's up, though. They won't fall for bs like that more than once per match.

Starting from Halo 2, being cautious didn't help. Too many spots that reward camping and have no flank points. You never saw that in HCE maps.


And I'd just like to finish off by mentioning Method's first statement in response to OP Try sniping your teammate. That's what it's like without aim assist. was very stupid to say. Way to go, method >.>

Posted by: Ben2974
How was my stand-up performance?!

You're a regular Carlos Mencia. And by that, I mean you pretty much just used old material that nobody's laughing at anymore. I had high hopes for you, but you let me down. :(

  • 06.23.2011 8:58 PM PDT