Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Halo 3 vs. Halo Reach
  • Subject: Halo 3 vs. Halo Reach
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Halo 3 vs. Halo Reach

We all know that Halo muiltiplayer has been better than any type of muiltiplayer. That means no overpowered weapons and no commando or juggernaut perks. This game is almost flawless but untill Halo Reach came and it seemed almost a diffrent type of game by introduceing armor abilities like armorlock and jetpack instead or the original ativecamo and overshield that one will pick up on the battlefield. This changed the way may people looked at Halo because of the new system of choseing a class. This messed up the Halo experance or made it better.

Halo 4 has been leaked before E3 and during E3 every Halo fan went crazy when Cortana cried for the Chief's help. Many people were not blind and saw John 117 used a jetpack but that was never a jetpack it was a anti-grav thrusters used to navigate the space and he has always had them but never wanted to use them for some reason. 343 has said that they are more likely to bring the DMR back instead or the BR and I have no info on the Neddle Rifle and the Carbine if anyone does comment on which one is rumored to be in Halo 4.

So which is better Halo 3 or Halo Reach? Did Halo Reach screw up or set it straight by having classes and creating the DMR and removing the BR. Also the armor abilities... I understand they are good change to the gameplay but Bungie has added a very popular classic playlist without armor abilities I wonder why they would do that hmmmm... Halo 3 forced many people to become good at fored to wield and make things float while Halo Reach made things easier but the skilled map makers hated the change because anyone is now a master of forge. Also why do Bungie make the Elites armor sets and not there own credit bought armor eventhough the armor sets look great but everyone has Field Marshall or Officer.

I want to know what does the fan and the community want. Do you want Credits or Highest Skill and Exp? Do you want to buy or unlock armor? Do you like that the Elite are massive or do you like the hunched over dinos of Halo 3? What about the turret overheat so noobs can shoot in circles forever? Do you want to be able to snipe the Ghost's engine and blow it up like in Halo 2 and Halo Reach? Do you want to customize Elites like Halo 3 or Halo Reach? The magnum of Halo C.E. or the magnum of Halo 3? What about BTB? Now all you do is get the tank and sniper and that team always wins.
A 3 Legged Goat Fabled Heroic Member
commented this on I Miss Big Team Batlle:

I agree 100% and I posted a thread on this earlier. Right now, BTB is all about the Sniper, DMR, and Tank. It just isn't fun, because these 3 things always dominate the game. There's no map movement. There's no vehicle gameplay. There's no strategic pushes. It's just camping with overpowered weapons and long-ranged fighting.

I put this on Halo Reach forums too so show them that we have more Halo 3 fans!


Forum:I Miss Big Team Battle

Bungie Profile: A 3 Legged Goat

  • 06.25.2011 2:25 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: HUNTFIN
Do you want to buy or unlock armor?
The only reason why I worked to get achievements was so that I could get the armor. Edit: And the skulls.

Posted by: HUNTFIN
Do you like that the Elite are massive or do you like the hunched over dinos of Halo 3?
Lower ranking Elites deserve to be hunchbacks. Halo: Reach's Elite Minors and Majors cause me more rage than Ultras.

If Halo 4 has Elites, the lower ranking ones should be hunchbacks and the higher ranking ones should be standing.

Posted by: HUNTFIN
Do you want to be able to snipe the Ghost's engine and blow it up like in Halo 2 and Halo Reach?
I don't really care. I just want Halo 3's Wraith back.

Posted by: HUNTFIN
Do you want to customize Elites like Halo 3 or Halo Reach?
Mixed armor ftw.

Posted by: HUNTFIN
The magnum of Halo C.E. or the magnum of Halo 3?
Halo: Reach's Pistol is not Halo CE's Pistol. It has so many nerfs that it's practically balanced if not only good for 1-2 shots per 3 seconds.

I want Halo 3's Magnum, because it had good range, high flesh damage, and it was possible to get headshots faster (slow rof > having to wait when you know your weapon has a fast rof and could kick ass if it weren't for this horrible bloom imposed on it).

Posted by: HUNTFIN
I put this on Halo Reach forums too so show them that we have more Halo 3 fans!
I understand where you're coming from and your obvious bias toward Halo 3, but quantity doesn't matter. Quality does. The better way to outmatch them is to show them that we are more reasonable than them.

Posted by: HUNTFIN
Forum:I Miss Big Team Battle

Bungie Profile: A 3 Legged Goat
Fixed those for you. :-)

[Edited on 06.25.2011 3:07 AM PDT]

  • 06.25.2011 3:07 AM PDT

In memory of those fallen in the defense of Earth and her colonies.

March 3, 2553

Halo Reach sucks, fails period.

  • 06.25.2011 5:29 AM PDT

By and large Halo 3 is better than Halo: Reach. There are some things I like from Reach and some things I like from Halo 3. Mainly, the credits system was a good idea and I think in future games it should remain. At the same time, I don't care how bad someone is, 1-50 is how it should be. The entire, "Let's downplay skill by emphasizing play time" is stupid. How can a game be competitive if there is no way to measure skill? In Halo: Reach you can't look at someone's rank and get an instant picture of whether or not the person you are playing is good, bad, bought, or something in between.

If there's one thing I hope 343 brings back it's 1-50 ranks. If they keep the stupid crap that Bungie made for Reach I will not buy it. I've played a total of about 200 games of Halo: Reach. Honestly, it's just not Halo. It's some Call of Duty/Halo fusion that tries to be both, but ends up being nothing like either. Arena is a pitiful excuse for a ranked gametype and MLG really doesn't work if, again, there is no way to measure skill.

  • 06.25.2011 6:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I'm listeni- Oh wait I don't give a -blam!- what you have to say.

Reach is, bluntly, a bad game. Bungie didn't realise that sometimes, less is more; they tried to cram too many features into one package. They may have worked well apart but together they just become gimmicky.
The gameplay feels awkward.
The DMR has the skill gap of the Halo 3 AR.
Bad players in Halo 3 are on a more even par with good players.
The hitscan and bloom make connection even more relevant to the outcomes of battles.

The slayer nerds who play Reach only do so because it's the current game, in truth they dislike it but they have to maintain their tryhard status by devoting their days to a game that sucks.

  • 06.25.2011 7:33 AM PDT

You are now reading my signature, the following proceeds as the amazing group i am in and the best person in Bungie.net who i am not stalking at al... >.>

The Reach Asset

Xhavalor is amazing <3

Im i the only non-bias person in this forum? I like both of them. The multiplayer in Halo 3 had it right but still had a load of problems. I just prefer Reach overall because i have never been a multiplayer person. I would rather go forge something or have some fun in customs. Halo 3 was and always will be my faviroute Halo but atm im sticking with Reach just because Halo 3's multiplayer isn't as great as it was a year ago.

  • 06.25.2011 7:36 AM PDT

I like both, but Halo 3 gets my vote. I wasn't ready to leave the Chief and the Flood. I missed the original Halo experience.

  • 06.25.2011 9:07 AM PDT

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

dropshock.net


Posted by: haloanyonehome
I like both, but Halo 3 gets my vote. I wasn't ready to leave the Chief and the Flood. I missed the original Halo experience.

  • 06.25.2011 9:22 AM PDT

I agree halo 3 is better I still play it more than reach and I think it has a better ranking system for measuring skill and how good someone is,in reach sitting in firefight all day getting credits doesn't take skill. Hopefully halo 4 won't have credits again like reach did and i hope they measure it on a base skill from 1-50.

[Edited on 06.25.2011 9:51 AM PDT]

  • 06.25.2011 9:51 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

After reading through 3 Legged Goat's thread in the Halo: Reach Forum, I now realize that I have been playing/supporting a game that I dislike immensely.

And I take up my former position: Halo 3 is vastly superior to Halo: Reach.

[Edited on 06.25.2011 9:53 AM PDT]

  • 06.25.2011 9:52 AM PDT

Ok I have noticed both Halo Reach forum and Halo 3 on this topic has recieved the same ammount of replays while the Halo Reach people say it is a tie we all know who the winner is so good job and lets hope Halo 4 keeps it Master Chief style!

  • 06.25.2011 1:29 PM PDT

You are now reading my signature, the following proceeds as the amazing group i am in and the best person in Bungie.net who i am not stalking at al... >.>

The Reach Asset

Xhavalor is amazing <3


Posted by: HUNTFIN
Ok I have noticed both Halo Reach forum and Halo 3 on this topic has recieved the same ammount of replays while the Halo Reach people say it is a tie we all know who the winner is so good job and lets hope Halo 4 keeps it Master Chief style!


No, we don't because your being biased about it. Your ment to be neutral when asking things like this otherwise it is pointless. I agree that Halo 3 has a lot more good qualities. But your not stating any good qualities about Reach and therefore this thread is irrelavent.

  • 06.25.2011 2:20 PM PDT

i am myself

halo 3 by far

  • 06.25.2011 4:05 PM PDT

I have played on every button layout for Halo 3 in matchmaking.
It changes with my mood.

Halo 3

  • 06.25.2011 4:39 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Sometimes, I dream about cheese.


Posted by: Frasier Crane
Reach is, bluntly, a bad game. Bungie didn't realise that sometimes, less is more; they tried to cram too many features into one package.


IMO most of the new weapons in reach where terrible. what was bungie thinking puting the plasma launcher into the game!

armour abilities make reach less enjoyable not to mention its terrible maps, many other major and minor flaws in reach so yes, 3 is better.

however halo 2 was my best experience out of the halo series followed by combat evolved. bungie did such a good job on that game, no other game will be as exciting when playing it for the first time as halo 2.
only flaw in 2 was the carbine was overpowered when comparing it to the br considering its higher rof.
i miss the m6c pistol from halo 2 - awesome design, short range, low - medium damage, high rof. how a pistol is meant to be.

halo 3 has a few flaws like its underpowered brute shot but still better then reach

  • 06.25.2011 7:51 PM PDT

Halo 3 SO much better

  • 06.25.2011 8:27 PM PDT

Pesonally i think Reach is jsut to easy. Like with the snipe you dont even need to hit his head to dome him... I like H3 jsut because there is no noob with armour lock and it actually takes skill to do HLG in H3. In Reach everyone just uses their dumb ass Jet pack... In my eyes its not even a match H3 beats reach in EVERYTHING...

  • 06.25.2011 8:33 PM PDT

Halo 3 forever!

Halo 3 is overall just better than reach. If you look at it from the 3rd person view you can easily see that halo 3 is alot stronger and has more fun gameplay. I give halo 3 a 9/10, and reach a 6/10.
Plus if you have invested in halo reach your not looking ahead, better things are coming out twice as fast as halo 3, so that means your wasting money on a short lasting product

  • 06.25.2011 10:44 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: killingfrenzy11
Im i the only non-bias person in this forum? I like both of them. The multiplayer in Halo 3 had it right but still had a load of problems. I just prefer Reach overall because i have never been a multiplayer person. I would rather go forge something or have some fun in customs. Halo 3 was and always will be my faviroute Halo but atm im sticking with Reach just because Halo 3's multiplayer isn't as great as it was a year ago.


Of course H3 had problems, no ones denying that. Compared to Reach though, those problems are very small and insignificant.

  • 06.26.2011 4:08 AM PDT

Fear the Flight of the Falcon!

I love both games.

Halo 3 lags a lot more than Reach, which is the simple reason why I play Reach more.

However, I love AAs. The way they were implemented is horrible. Movement speed, jump height, etc. etc. etc. should have been kept the same, rather than nerfed to "compensated" for sprint, jetpack, etc. Sprint should just be slower, Jetpacke not as high, and the movement speed should have remained the same.

People who say that AAs require no skill have no skill; yes, you can use them, and use them effectively, as a first-time player, but a skilled player can always beat the noob. Always. AL is nothing but a delay; an annoying one, yes, but only a delay. CQB was not ruined by it; back up and wait. It's not that hard. And are you really complaining about having been killed while waiting for someone to come out of AL? That's teamwork. Teamwork is good.

Bloom--meh, I don't notice it because I lag so much that I can put a whole clip in someone without effect and then get hit only twice and die (doesn't mean I spam).

Grenades would be fine if the movement speed/jump height were standard Halo.

The maps in Reach...let's just consider this. Halo 3 had (has) a higher movement speed and jump height than Reach, yet all it's maps were not only smaller, but more crammed with vehicles. Why was Sandtrap Heavy so much fun? Because there was always a battle, always a vehicle, always a power weapon; basically always multiple options on what to do, not just "run out of my base and get sniped/DMRd from across the map...5 seconds later repeat. 5 seconds later grab a Ghost that respawned, but don't make it across Hemmorhage because you got DMRd...5 seconds later..." THAT'S NOT HALO!!

AAs are great; they're fun, and I'm gonna use the catchphrase from the game Othelo here: "A minute to learn, a lifetime to master." Maybe not a lifetime, but you know what I mean.

Reach also departed from some great things; the armor in H3, while it looked like clay, looked a lot better (although I'm pretty happy with my Pilot right now...). The detail in Reach is fantastic, the overall look was better in H3.

One giant thing that stands out is the lighting; remember playing through the H3 campaign, turning a corner, and there is a gold brute standing there, the light reflecting off his armor. It was a great effect; why did it leave? I know Bungie wanted to make the game dark, or whatever, but that doesn't mean they needed to make it look bad. Take a look at the difference between the H3 and Reach Phantom--H3's is waaaaay better! Same with the Ghost (although it's horrible to drive after using Reach's). Next time you're just screwing around, take a Carbine and wander around a dark map (Guardian, for example). Find a light source and play around in it, watching the Carbine. It looks fantastic!

That being said, Reach's lighting does some stuff really well. Take a Banshee in Forge World and move it around the hangar; watch how the light and shadows play off the curves; while it doesn't shine, like H3 did and how I prefer it, the reflection is much more accurate to real life; meaning it is where it would be if the Banshee and lights were real.

I mentioned briefly the DMR; it's horrible. I fail to see how armor 500 years in the future is worse than it is today, in that a handheld rifle can blow up a tank. wtf Bungie. Remember when players actually had to work to bring down a vehicle? Not any more!

Halo 3's meleeing system seemed random; I still don't see how it works. I've punched a guy who had full shields and he died, than turned around and got punched by the same weapon, with my shields down, and lived. I have no idea what happens. Reach's fixes that, although somehow it lags and someone packs two punches in one, and double pummels/beat downs are a lot less frequent than they were in H3. However, it was fun in H3 to grab a brute shot simply because it was good at meleeing: what I'm getting at is that not only did you have to take into account the power of the weapon, you had to worry about it's melee value as well.

While on the topic of weapons, Reach has some good ones and some bad ones. The rocket launcher is now effected by gravity (realistic, but since when was Halo realistic? it was way better the other way), the DMR (BR) is a spartan laser in disguise, the spartan laser doesn't shoot through vehicles all the time, has less ammo, and won't even kill a (fully shielded) tank in one shot. The concussion rifle is somehow always stronger for the other guy (meh), the focus rifle is a useless a piece of blam (really, a "sniper" that gives your exact location? Gimme back mah particle rifle!), the grenade launcher is awesome, the plasma pistol has a use (short of duel-wielding), the sword loses too much energy, the hammer is horrible, creates a small shockwave, has little ammo, lags like crap--basically, every good, iconic, and fun weapon got nerfed or isn't even there (FLAMETHROWER!!!!!!), and was replaced with something stupid and crappy.

I mentioned dual-wielding: why isn't it there? There is no reason for it not to be there.

The custom game settings in Reach are horrible; most of the fantastic gametypes from H3 aren't possible, despite the improved Forge that would make them so much better.



Reach is fun to play, but has many problems. Halo 3 lags a lot, and takes too long to find a game. Reach has much better graphics (although the ragdoll in H3 was a lot of fun), and H3 has the same, annoying sound every single time you die. So which is better? Reach is; it screwed up a lot of we know of Halo, but aside from that is a great game. If it was the first of the series, everyone would love it. However, Halo 3 was more, well, Halo, so it is better as a Halo fan. I'm just going to wait for Halo 4 and hope they blend both.

  • 06.26.2011 6:03 AM PDT

You are now reading my signature, the following proceeds as the amazing group i am in and the best person in Bungie.net who i am not stalking at al... >.>

The Reach Asset

Xhavalor is amazing <3


Posted by: leonitusrokz
I love both games.

Halo 3 lags a lot more than Reach, which is the simple reason why I play Reach more.

However, I love AAs. The way they were implemented is horrible. Movement speed, jump height, etc. etc. etc. should have been kept the same, rather than nerfed to "compensated" for sprint, jetpack, etc. Sprint should just be slower, Jetpacke not as high, and the movement speed should have remained the same.

People who say that AAs require no skill have no skill; yes, you can use them, and use them effectively, as a first-time player, but a skilled player can always beat the noob. Always. AL is nothing but a delay; an annoying one, yes, but only a delay. CQB was not ruined by it; back up and wait. It's not that hard. And are you really complaining about having been killed while waiting for someone to come out of AL? That's teamwork. Teamwork is good.

Bloom--meh, I don't notice it because I lag so much that I can put a whole clip in someone without effect and then get hit only twice and die (doesn't mean I spam).

Grenades would be fine if the movement speed/jump height were standard Halo.

The maps in Reach...let's just consider this. Halo 3 had (has) a higher movement speed and jump height than Reach, yet all it's maps were not only smaller, but more crammed with vehicles. Why was Sandtrap Heavy so much fun? Because there was always a battle, always a vehicle, always a power weapon; basically always multiple options on what to do, not just "run out of my base and get sniped/DMRd from across the map...5 seconds later repeat. 5 seconds later grab a Ghost that respawned, but don't make it across Hemmorhage because you got DMRd...5 seconds later..." THAT'S NOT HALO!!

AAs are great; they're fun, and I'm gonna use the catchphrase from the game Othelo here: "A minute to learn, a lifetime to master." Maybe not a lifetime, but you know what I mean.

Reach also departed from some great things; the armor in H3, while it looked like clay, looked a lot better (although I'm pretty happy with my Pilot right now...). The detail in Reach is fantastic, the overall look was better in H3.

One giant thing that stands out is the lighting; remember playing through the H3 campaign, turning a corner, and there is a gold brute standing there, the light reflecting off his armor. It was a great effect; why did it leave? I know Bungie wanted to make the game dark, or whatever, but that doesn't mean they needed to make it look bad. Take a look at the difference between the H3 and Reach Phantom--H3's is waaaaay better! Same with the Ghost (although it's horrible to drive after using Reach's). Next time you're just screwing around, take a Carbine and wander around a dark map (Guardian, for example). Find a light source and play around in it, watching the Carbine. It looks fantastic!

That being said, Reach's lighting does some stuff really well. Take a Banshee in Forge World and move it around the hangar; watch how the light and shadows play off the curves; while it doesn't shine, like H3 did and how I prefer it, the reflection is much more accurate to real life; meaning it is where it would be if the Banshee and lights were real.

I mentioned briefly the DMR; it's horrible. I fail to see how armor 500 years in the future is worse than it is today, in that a handheld rifle can blow up a tank. wtf Bungie. Remember when players actually had to work to bring down a vehicle? Not any more!

Halo 3's meleeing system seemed random; I still don't see how it works. I've punched a guy who had full shields and he died, than turned around and got punched by the same weapon, with my shields down, and lived. I have no idea what happens. Reach's fixes that, although somehow it lags and someone packs two punches in one, and double pummels/beat downs are a lot less frequent than they were in H3. However, it was fun in H3 to grab a brute shot simply because it was good at meleeing: what I'm getting at is that not only did you have to take into account the power of the weapon, you had to worry about it's melee value as well.

While on the topic of weapons, Reach has some good ones and some bad ones. The rocket launcher is now effected by gravity (realistic, but since when was Halo realistic? it was way better the other way), the DMR (BR) is a spartan laser in disguise, the spartan laser doesn't shoot through vehicles all the time, has less ammo, and won't even kill a (fully shielded) tank in one shot. The concussion rifle is somehow always stronger for the other guy (meh), the focus rifle is a useless a piece of blam (really, a "sniper" that gives your exact location? Gimme back mah particle rifle!), the grenade launcher is awesome, the plasma pistol has a use (short of duel-wielding), the sword loses too much energy, the hammer is horrible, creates a small shockwave, has little ammo, lags like crap--basically, every good, iconic, and fun weapon got nerfed or isn't even there (FLAMETHROWER!!!!!!), and was replaced with something stupid and crappy.

I mentioned dual-wielding: why isn't it there? There is no reason for it not to be there.

The custom game settings in Reach are horrible; most of the fantastic gametypes from H3 aren't possible, despite the improved Forge that would make them so much better.



Reach is fun to play, but has many problems. Halo 3 lags a lot, and takes too long to find a game. Reach has much better graphics (although the ragdoll in H3 was a lot of fun), and H3 has the same, annoying sound every single time you die. So which is better? Reach is; it screwed up a lot of we know of Halo, but aside from that is a great game. If it was the first of the series, everyone would love it. However, Halo 3 was more, well, Halo, so it is better as a Halo fan. I'm just going to wait for Halo 4 and hope they blend both.


There is hope for humanity.

This was the non-biased attitude i was looking for op. Next time be neutral and don't make it obvious that you will pick Halo 3 no matter what.

  • 06.26.2011 6:08 AM PDT

Fear the Flight of the Falcon!


Posted by: killingfrenzy11

There is hope for humanity.

This was the non-biased attitude i was looking for op. Next time be neutral and don't make it obvious that you will pick Halo 3 no matter what.
Thank you. I try to be as little biased as possible, and I also try to use logic instead of my personal preferrences. Just doin' my best :)

Actually (you guys are gonna hate me for this) Halo 3 was my first Halo. I didn't play CE or H2 until after H3, so H3 is how I view Halo as it should be...from what I've heard of the general community's perspective, it was "as bad" as Reach "is" in it's day...obviously there is huge gaps in vantage points. Whatever. Helps me be more unbiased :)

  • 06.26.2011 10:33 AM PDT

Halo 3 seems to be more enjoyable than reach and I don't know why but I probably like halo 3 better.( but reach's forge is amazing)

  • 06.26.2011 10:51 AM PDT


Posted by: BuIIet900
Pesonally i think Reach is jsut to easy. Like with the snipe you dont even need to hit his head to dome him... I like H3 jsut because there is no noob with armour lock and it actually takes skill to do HLG in H3. In Reach everyone just uses their dumb ass Jet pack... In my eyes its not even a match H3 beats reach in EVERYTHING...


But forge

  • 06.26.2011 10:52 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2