Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: I really enjoyed the ViDoc, but the last part made me certain...
  • Subject: I really enjoyed the ViDoc, but the last part made me certain...
Subject: I really enjoyed the ViDoc, but the last part made me certain...

to be or not to be...that is the question.


Posted by: UnfitFatbill
I agree :)

And Halo 2 was the best Halo for me. Funny how they thought it a failure


dude...exactly what i was thinking

  • 08.07.2011 8:47 AM PDT


Posted by: CheeseDanish780

Posted by: UnfitFatbill
I agree :)

And Halo 2 was the best Halo for me. Funny how they thought it a failure


dude...exactly what i was thinking


It's simply because the amount of stuff they were forced to cut, not the finished product. They are talking development, not release.

  • 08.07.2011 8:55 AM PDT


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: CheeseDanish780

Posted by: UnfitFatbill
I agree :)

And Halo 2 was the best Halo for me. Funny how they thought it a failure


dude...exactly what i was thinking


It's simply because the amount of stuff they were forced to cut, not the finished product. They are talking development, not release.


I imagine a lot of people say Halo 2 was the best just to be part of the cool crowd. This forum is pathetic.

  • 08.07.2011 9:28 AM PDT


Posted by: EdSoulman
I imagine a lot of people say Halo 2 was the best just to be part of the cool crowd. This forum is pathetic.


"HALO 2 HAS THE BEST MP, EVER!" Despite being shown how much the auto-aim was... (rocket fired at a guy's foot hits his face.)

Then again, some of those guy's says the CE pistol was supposed to be an overpowered piece of -blam!- anti-everything pocket sniper rifle. And then go on to say it's fine and normal.

  • 08.07.2011 9:30 AM PDT

Couldn't agree more.

  • 08.07.2011 12:23 PM PDT

Signatures are for squares.


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: EdSoulman
I imagine a lot of people say Halo 2 was the best just to be part of the cool crowd. This forum is pathetic.


"HALO 2 HAS THE BEST MP, EVER!" Despite being shown how much the auto-aim was... (rocket fired at a guy's foot hits his face.)


You crack me up, you know?

If somebody bad mouths Reach, you jump in saying, "IT'S ALL OPINION, REACH IS GREAT." But here people are saying they love Halo 2, and YOU'RE the one jumping in badmouthing people who like it.

Halo 2 is simply more fun. It doesn't matter how much "auto aim" there was. It's about the gameplay experience and the multiplayer maps. Halo 2 simply shines the most.

  • 08.07.2011 12:51 PM PDT

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

Posted by: privet caboose
Halo 2 is simply more fun. It doesn't matter how much "auto aim" there was. It's about the gameplay experience and the multiplayer maps. Halo 2 simply shines the most.


Agreed. Halo 2 had its flaws but it was truly a fantastic game, so popular it was still the most played online game when the 360 was released.

Compare Halo 2's maps to Reach's... I think the difference is pretty darn clear. Reach's are all awful (albeit Powerhouse) but Halo 2 has maps like Relic, Coagulation, Waterworks, Ascension, Beaver Creek, Terminal and so many others that were fun to play.

  • 08.07.2011 12:56 PM PDT

Halo 2 was only considered a failure because of the cuts made to it. I personally love all my Halo games, and while I wish Bungie would continue making Halo I am now happier than before. Why you may ask well We are still getting Halo games (CEA looks awesome) and now we are getting new stuff from Bungie at the same time. I will follow Bungie wherever they go except MAC gaming and can't wait to hear details on their next game.

  • 08.07.2011 1:50 PM PDT


*starts eating popcorn*

  • 08.07.2011 1:54 PM PDT

52,000 kills in Halo 2 and more legendary playthroughs in CE than you can imagine. I am truly a God.
.................................,-;;-=-,_____
,-------------------------.___/-----i````````'\--`\ .
|-------------xvxvxvxvxvxv--o-~~~~~~o--,\======
|_______|_o_./``/--/`;````~----------------~`
....................../_/`` BR-55

I'm happy Bungie is moving on one level, but I like Reach a lot.

  • 08.07.2011 1:59 PM PDT

52,000 kills in Halo 2 and more legendary playthroughs in CE than you can imagine. I am truly a God.
.................................,-;;-=-,_____
,-------------------------.___/-----i````````'\--`\ .
|-------------xvxvxvxvxvxv--o-~~~~~~o--,\======
|_______|_o_./``/--/`;````~----------------~`
....................../_/`` BR-55


Posted by: EdSoulman

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: CheeseDanish780

Posted by: UnfitFatbill
I agree :)

And Halo 2 was the best Halo for me. Funny how they thought it a failure


dude...exactly what i was thinking


It's simply because the amount of stuff they were forced to cut, not the finished product. They are talking development, not release.


I imagine a lot of people say Halo 2 was the best just to be part of the cool crowd. This forum is pathetic.


I love for Halo 2 makes this forum pathetic, right....

  • 08.07.2011 2:01 PM PDT


Posted by: privet caboose

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: EdSoulman
I imagine a lot of people say Halo 2 was the best just to be part of the cool crowd. This forum is pathetic.


"HALO 2 HAS THE BEST MP, EVER!" Despite being shown how much the auto-aim was... (rocket fired at a guy's foot hits his face.)


You crack me up, you know?

If somebody bad mouths Reach, you jump in saying, "IT'S ALL OPINION, REACH IS GREAT." But here people are saying they love Halo 2, and YOU'RE the one jumping in badmouthing people who like it.

Halo 2 is simply more fun. It doesn't matter how much "auto aim" there was. It's about the gameplay experience and the multiplayer maps. Halo 2 simply shines the most.


I'm not talking about it being fun or not. I'm talking just outright "This system is the best, fact."

I don't care about the people who view Halo 2 as the best and believe that, as long as they don't try to display it as fact and how everybody should think that way.

  • 08.07.2011 2:15 PM PDT

Gamertag: GRUNTYTHIRST77

I didn't realize that people like me who think reach really is the best halo game are the minority. I have been enjoying it almost every day since it came out. Having said that I am also glad they are starting something new, i'm excited at the possibility that they could be working on something which could change the gaming world like combat evolved did...

  • 08.07.2011 2:23 PM PDT

Want to see advanced Halo stats not offered by other Halo stat websites? Check out MetaHalo.com, the stats website I am working on. Reach stats currently in development.

Like BTB? Check out bigteambattle.net!


Posted by: gruntythirst77
I didn't realize that people like me who think reach really is the best halo game are the minority.


It's pretty much impossible to know who the minority really is, though in my opinion people like you are the minority. From my experience I find that Reach is generally regarded as a disappointment among fans of the first three Halo games.

  • 08.08.2011 6:27 AM PDT

Riverside23: For all the women of the group, if you've got a real man at least let him have his big piece of chicken.

WhtButterflyLiz: lol. Bring home bigger chikkinz, then, real man!!!

DEATHPIMP72: *throws pterodactyl on table*
Suck it JoeSki!!!

Posted by: ev1l tr1t0n
Posted by: gruntythirst77
I didn't realize that people like me who think reach really is the best halo game are the minority.


It's pretty much impossible to know who the minority really is, though in my opinion people like you are the minority. From my experience I find that Reach is generally regarded as a disappointment among fans of the first three Halo games.


Vocal minority, to be sure. Which isn't that surprising. People pissy about Reach feel the need to argue their point, compile lists, and generally bemoan the state of the game. Makes em feel better. People happy with the game have no need or desire to justify why they like the game. Makes no difference to them. The only "for Reach" arguments I see are from the youngins who think its necessary for their favorite game to be most popular and think unique user counts are the end all, be all metric of game success.

  • 08.08.2011 6:34 AM PDT

Posted by: Matu Flp Krawfe
Popularity: a measure of how many people like a particular thing.

Assumption: the more people that like a game, (IE. the more popular it is) the more people will play it. Ergo, popularity can be inferred from an online population.

It may not be the only indicator, but it's certainly one you can use here.


The populations count is an indication of its popularity, yes, but it is not the ultimate and deciding factor of whether it is really popular or not. This has been brought up before, and it's a very good point so I'll say it again, a lot of Halo's original players have grown up a lot since they first started playing, they can't be on every single second of every day or even be on every day anymore (that is most definitely the case with me) and not everybody is solely focused on or obsessed with one game, sometimes I just don't want to play Halo.

And not to mention there are more great (or just popular) video games these days than ever before, and that also effects population. So yes, it's good to get an estimate from, but a population count is not absolute law in determining what is popular or not.

An entertainment product that fails to actually entertain the user is, by definition, a failure. And I can say that in an objective sense because I'm damn well sure that whatever you're getting out of Reach, it's not fun, joy, or any other positive emotional response that could satisfy the above criteria of "entertainment." Schadenfreude or the junky's rush, perhaps, but nothing relevant to the discussion here.

Bull--blam!---blam!-! Who are you to say whether I enjoy a game/movie/book or not! You're not me, you're not in my head, you have no way of knowing what I do or do not enjoy. I enjoy Reach very much, I have joy (and rage, and sadness, and any other emotion one can have while playing any game, video game or otherwise) while playing the game. Reach is just as much fun for me as any of the other Halo games ever were. I -blam!- KNOW what I enjoy, and it's not your place or anybody else's to tell me that I don't enjoy it! Don't try to tell me what I do or do not like or whether I enjoy it or not!

An opinion is not necessarily fact but that is not to say that it can't be fact. It was Darwin's opinion that the biodiversity of life was in part a product of natural selection, and despite his subjective perspective he hit upon the truth there to describe fact.

And in the same way, with the powers of observation and reason anyone here may be striking truth with their "foolish" opinions so please don't act like a jackass and discount anyone for not being omniscient.


And Darwin's theory of Natural Selection was proved, for the most part, accurate through scientific observation and examination. And far as I have heard and read Darwin didn't really go around touting his theory as absolute and irrefutable fact, unlike a lot of the people I have seen making claims about Reach. And I have certainly not seen very many people using any sort of scientific approach to backing up their claims.

What I have seen on here the vast majority of the time is making claims that ultimately boil down to, in its very simplest form, "Reach sucks, and that is a fact" using nothing to back it up other than that is what they think.

And I'm not trying to say that anyone is automatically wrong, I am saying that it would be far wiser to not claim their opinion to be irrefutable fact. By all means they can say what they want and think what they want about the game, but rather than saying "Reach is the worst game ever, I know this for a fact and you're ignorant and a fanboy/girl for disagreeing", they should be wording their claims more like this "I don't like Reach, I think it was a horrible game and one of the worst I've ever played, here's why I think that *proceed to give evidence/examples that backs up and supports point*".

See the difference and which one is better?

  • 08.08.2011 8:30 AM PDT

are you retarded they said there done with halo

  • 08.08.2011 9:11 AM PDT

Riverside23: For all the women of the group, if you've got a real man at least let him have his big piece of chicken.

WhtButterflyLiz: lol. Bring home bigger chikkinz, then, real man!!!

DEATHPIMP72: *throws pterodactyl on table*
Suck it JoeSki!!!

Posted by: raganok99
Halo: Reach wasn't quite popular, based on player counts. (yes, player counted does determine how it is popular.) and Halo 3 had more players online everyday from 2007 to 2009, beating Cod4 and WaW and being equal to MW2. Halo: Reach had only like, 1/8th of players count and it is ranked third in the entire xbox live.

And, Halo: Reach was a failed experiment with new gimmicks, even Bungie and 343i knows it. You guys may use argument that Bungie and 343i said that they thought it was perfect and best FPS game ever which it is obvious lie...

Anybody took any business classes or economics classes would know this obvious statement. It is called business move where a business lies about its produce by saying: "Oh yeah, this is best product or whatever." That is what it designed to keep its popularity up or keep people to buying it. It's all of making profit in the business world.


LOL! You know absolutely nothing of business. That, or the institution you studied business is bunk. And your professional experience in business is bunk.

  • 08.08.2011 9:14 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Gleebl

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
But did it go across the galaxy? (as the guy implied, ODST campaign sucked because it was all on a single planet.)


I said it was boring because it all took place in the same city, meaning everything looked the same. I was comparing it to Halo 3 when I mentioned Galaxies, seeing as you'd think Bungie would try to top their previous efforts, but any kind of variation, a la CE, would have been appreciated.

But then the first, third and fifth levels would've been repeated for the final three levels.

Also, I enjoy Reach...

but I can admit its flaws such as horrible maps (I'm looking at you, Sword Base), unbalanced/OP AAs (sans Sprint IMO, and is the reason I only really play SWAT), bloom (to an extent), cardboard characters (sans Jorge to an extent thanks to his actor actually trying) and a terrible story. Seeing Bungie fail in every way to address these issues has made me quite happy that 343I is taking over.

Also, as someone else said, Halo was dethroned by the time CoD 4 came out. The only reason Halo 3 was able to surpass it was because WaW split the CoD population.

[Edited on 08.08.2011 9:51 AM PDT]

  • 08.08.2011 9:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I heard someone say once (paraphrasing here) "Multiflag on Blood Gulch with your friends is what makes Halo, Halo." I GUARANTEE that more people agree with that sentiment than "Getting a 50 in MLG is what makes Halo, Halo." - Oboewan42
Meta | NHL | Kotor


Posted by: ev1l tr1t0n
...that it's a really good thing Bungie is no longer developing Halo games. Don't get me wrong, I love Bungie, I can't wait for their next game and on paper Reach is the ultimate Halo game. In practice, however, it is not.

I'm not going to delve into it since countless people have already beat the problems to death in the Reach and Optimatch forums, but these issues with several of the core elements of the game kept it from being the ultimate Halo game it was on paper. And... in the ViDoc, it seemed like Bungie completely ignored that. All they did was repeatedly praise Reach like it was a last sales pitch. No admission of failure, which seems odd considering the admission of failure with Halo 2 (which could hardly be called a failure).

It bothers me that Bungie is so blind to Reach's faults, so that's why I'm happy Bungie is no longer working on Halo. A fresh set of developers is exactly what Halo needed. Thank you, Bungie, for creating such an amazing universe that I have invested thousands of hours into, both in game and out and thank you for handing it off to a team of Halo fans.


Explain to us the logic in badmouthing their final Halo creation in their final Bungie-Halo ViDoc.

  • 08.08.2011 10:15 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: LonE ZealoT

Posted by: ev1l tr1t0n
...that it's a really good thing Bungie is no longer developing Halo games. Don't get me wrong, I love Bungie, I can't wait for their next game and on paper Reach is the ultimate Halo game. In practice, however, it is not.

I'm not going to delve into it since countless people have already beat the problems to death in the Reach and Optimatch forums, but these issues with several of the core elements of the game kept it from being the ultimate Halo game it was on paper. And... in the ViDoc, it seemed like Bungie completely ignored that. All they did was repeatedly praise Reach like it was a last sales pitch. No admission of failure, which seems odd considering the admission of failure with Halo 2 (which could hardly be called a failure).

It bothers me that Bungie is so blind to Reach's faults, so that's why I'm happy Bungie is no longer working on Halo. A fresh set of developers is exactly what Halo needed. Thank you, Bungie, for creating such an amazing universe that I have invested thousands of hours into, both in game and out and thank you for handing it off to a team of Halo fans.


Explain to us the logic in badmouthing their final Halo creation in their final Bungie-Halo ViDoc.

Reality is sometimes cruel?

  • 08.08.2011 10:18 AM PDT

Riverside23: For all the women of the group, if you've got a real man at least let him have his big piece of chicken.

WhtButterflyLiz: lol. Bring home bigger chikkinz, then, real man!!!

DEATHPIMP72: *throws pterodactyl on table*
Suck it JoeSki!!!

Posted by: LonE ZealoT
Explain to us the logic in badmouthing their final Halo creation in their final Bungie-Halo ViDoc.


Its not about badmouthing their own creation. Its about their perception of success and failure. They accomplished what they wanted with both the process and end product. Halo 2 was a failure because the process and end product was not what they wanted. The percieved failure of Reach is up to each person to decide for their own. But to think Bungie must accept failure because you feel it is failure is both arrogant and foolish.

  • 08.08.2011 10:21 AM PDT

Posted by: FaJiTa TuEsDaY
only eat one small snack a week to save money on food and just have water toilet and lights to save money thats my plan

Though the Earth is dying we must enrich her body, for the ground we tread is hφly.

I'm a lion in a world where everybody's content with being cats.

Posted by: longhorn10
Its not about badmouthing their own creation. Its about their perception of success and failure. They accomplished what they wanted with both the process and end product. Halo 2 was a failure because the process and end product was not what they wanted. The percieved failure of Reach is up to each person to decide for their own. But to think Bungie must accept failure because you feel it is failure is both arrogant and foolish.
Yep, what he said

  • 08.08.2011 10:30 AM PDT

Sales figures...

Bungie rate their own success not by xbox live population but by sales figures.

Reach sold very solid numbers and made a sweet profit. The map packs also made a sweet profit.

Sure xbox live numbers have dwindled after that but overall in the eyes of a company Reach game sales and add-ons sales are still massively successful.

Just look at the numbers.

I agree the trend of huge sales and disappointed players eventually equals the franchise being abandoned. However well all know we'll all try the next halo game.

  • 08.08.2011 6:55 PM PDT