Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Reach was the BIGGEST letdown of ALL letdowns in Halo games.
  • Subject: Reach was the BIGGEST letdown of ALL letdowns in Halo games.
Subject: Reach was the BIGGEST letdown of ALL letdowns in Halo games.
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: THREE FOUR THREE
Halo CE: GOLDEN.

Halo 2: Auto-aim and bullet magnetism at an all time high. This being said, the better shooter always won.

Halo 3: Auto-aim and magnetism are toned down, but a random BR spread is added. This being said, the better shooter in close and medium range (medium range being most frequent for encounters to take place in, in Halo) still won. Mid-Long/Long range combat is slightly tarnished through randomness.

Reach: Auto-aim and magnetism changes are indescribable due to the addition of hitscan (which was a good choice. Congrats on doing at least one thing right, Bungie), but they're nearly the same as Halo 3's. This alone is a disappointment. A dynamic spread and respective reticle bloom is added to all precision weapons (dynamic spreads (what many refer to as "bloom") have always been in Halo--just on automatic weapons only). Due to bloom's addition, the better player is no longer the better player. Instances such as this are frequent. Medium range combat (again, the range that the majority of battles take place in) is completely ruined and random. It's 100% teamshotting, no individual battles/skill. There is no "out-dmr'ing" people; it's "who is the better team?", and that's it.

Reach has tarnished Halo. It has brought this mentality to the weak-minded that "competitive players hate change." No. We don't hate change. We hate retarded change--change that utterly ruins the competitive merit of the game.

Thank you so much for your time.




Relevant:


Irrelevant:

[Edited on 09.07.2011 5:24 PM PDT]

  • 09.07.2011 4:59 PM PDT

My legit Killtrocity

Camping like a 'mouth breather'
If Fed Ex and UPS merged into one company, would it be called Fed Up?

I don't want to start another account for a digital number that has no true value in ten years.

IDK the hype wasn't there unlike the previous games.

  • 09.07.2011 5:02 PM PDT

lolumadbro?

  • 09.07.2011 5:03 PM PDT

I'm an avid gamer who owns a 360, a PS3, a Wii, a 3DS, a Gameboy Advance SP, and a Laptop with Steam. Feel free to add me. I spend most of my gaming time on myu PS3.

PSN ID: SuperSaiyan3Jedi
Steam ID: psn_supersaiyan3jedi


Posted by: WFO x SnakeEyes
That's really sad if you think reach has the best multiplayer.


Why can't people have a different opinion than you without you persecuting them. Why exactly. Nobody is insulting your preferences, so why do you find it necessary?

  • 09.07.2011 5:09 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Member

I agree and I think anybody who enjoys playing Reach and thinks it's the best of the Halos (or at least better than Halo 3) plays very little and has the rank of below a Field Marshall, which indicated that his playtime is roughly low.

From this statement I come to the conclusion that only casual players find this game "fun", and if they played 6-8 hours a day every day, they would find themselves in a world of hurt.

I had fun in this game for 3 weeks. After that, it was all playing solely for rank/credits. After I realized this game was a complete joke (which was sometime in February through April), I completely stopped playing.

I have enough experience in this game to have a decent-standing opinion. I dare you to play this game like I did, day after day, hour after hour, and see if it's still "fun". No, seriously, unless you do this or already have done this, my statement stands as fact.

Halo 3 was never like this. Halo 2 was never like this. They were fun. They had an enormous amount of replay value and to this day (at least Halo 3) can still be enjoyed. Halo: Reach is nothing near to this.

  • 09.07.2011 5:09 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Kira Onime

Posted by: THREE FOUR THREE
It has brought this mentality to the weak-minded that "competitive players hate change." No. We don't hate change. We hate retarded change--change that utterly ruins the competitive merit of the game.



This part is something too many reachTards think.

  • 09.07.2011 5:09 PM PDT

I'm an avid gamer who owns a 360, a PS3, a Wii, a 3DS, a Gameboy Advance SP, and a Laptop with Steam. Feel free to add me. I spend most of my gaming time on myu PS3.

PSN ID: SuperSaiyan3Jedi
Steam ID: psn_supersaiyan3jedi

Posted by: FatM
I agree and I think anybody who enjoys playing Reach and thinks it's the best of the Halos (or at least better than Halo 3) plays very little and has the rank of below a Field Marshall, which indicated that his playtime is roughly low.

From this statement I come to the conclusion that only casual players find this game "fun", and if they played 6-8 hours a day every day, they would find themselves in a world of hurt.

I had fun in this game for 3 weeks. After that, it was all playing solely for rank/credits. After I realized this game was a complete joke (which was sometime in February through April), I completely stopped playing.

I have enough experience in this game to have a decent-standing opinion. I dare you to play this game like I did, day after day, hour after hour, and see if it's still "fun". No, seriously, unless you do this or already have done this, my statement stands as fact.

Halo 3 was never like this. Halo 2 was never like this. They were fun. They had an enormous amount of replay value and to this day (at least Halo 3) can still be enjoyed. Halo: Reach is nothing near to this.


I love Halo. Ever since Combat Evolved, I was hooked. I love Reach. You can have an opinion, but you csn't dictate what other people should think about something. I suck worse in Reach than I do in 3, but I only care about having a good time, so explain that to me.

  • 09.07.2011 5:13 PM PDT

Bloom is the worst game mechanic ever implemented into Halo, thank you for ruining the game Bungie. Your swan song is garbage.


Posted by: THREE FOUR THREE
Halo CE: GOLDEN.

Halo 2: Auto-aim and bullet magnetism at an all time high. This being said, the better shooter always won.

Halo 3: Auto-aim and magnetism are toned down, but a random BR spread is added. This being said, the better shooter in close and medium range (medium range being most frequent for encounters to take place in, in Halo) still won. Mid-Long/Long range combat is slightly tarnished through randomness.

Reach: Auto-aim and magnetism changes are indescribable due to the addition of hitscan (which was a good choice. Congrats on doing at least one thing right, Bungie), but they're nearly the same as Halo 3's. This alone is a disappointment. A dynamic spread and respective reticle bloom is added to all precision weapons (dynamic spreads (what many refer to as "bloom") have always been in Halo--just on automatic weapons only). Due to bloom's addition, the better player is no longer the better player. Instances such as this are frequent. Medium range combat (again, the range that the majority of battles take place in) is completely ruined and random. It's 100% teamshotting, no individual battles/skill. There is no "out-dmr'ing" people; it's "who is the better team?", and that's it.

Reach has tarnished Halo. It has brought this mentality to the weak-minded that "competitive players hate change." No. We don't hate change. We hate retarded change--change that utterly ruins the competitive merit of the game.

Thank you so much for your time.


epic post is epic. seriously this post is epic

  • 09.07.2011 5:13 PM PDT

Bloom is the worst game mechanic ever implemented into Halo, thank you for ruining the game Bungie. Your swan song is garbage.


Posted by: Legion64
Don't worry. You will soon worship Reach once Halo 4 comes out. It always happens.

Halo: CE people hate Halo 2.

Halo 2 people hate Halo 3.

Halo 3 people hate Reach.

Reach people will hate Halo 4.

And so on. It will happen, you can't stop it. Deal with it. Adapt.


Or we could just ask the developers to stop making progressively worse games. Unfortunately each game has been worse and worse, and its not nostalgia. each game has been slower than the last both in general movement speed and in regards to kill times.

  • 09.07.2011 5:23 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Member

Posted by: SSJ3Jedi
I love Halo. Ever since Combat Evolved, I was hooked. I love Reach. You can have an opinion, but you csn't dictate what other people should think about something. I suck worse in Reach than I do in 3, but I only care about having a good time, so explain that to me.
What I'm about to tell you isn't some sort of rank flaming. This has nothing to do with how "good" or "bad" you are. This has to do with experience and play time in the game.

Your rank? You're such a low rank and have such a low amount of play time in this game that you have no place to say if this game is good or not. Sure, your opinion still stands, but what really pisses me off is when people think that their opinion stands as high as being fact.

Even if this record does not completely describe your play time accurately in this game, I can almost guarantee that your play time is well below an amount that can define you as a casual player.

Let's settle something here: hardcore fans who decide to spend hours upon hours a day, days upon days a year have the higher opinion automatically. Sure it sounds a bit ludicrous, but why do I say this? Because casual fans can immerse themselves in the game to the point where they themselves can become hardcore fans. Sure, not all who play this game will do so, but the more who do this the better.

That's the thing about Reach. Many of the players who have strived to become hardcore fans like myself and many others have grown a bitter taste for this game. Ask any high-ranking player who even plays this game to this day. Ask him if Reach is better than Halo 2 or 3. I can almost guarantee that his answer will be a definite no.

I'm sorry if I have to go on some rant, but seeing people who play "casually" and will eventually move onto Modern Warfare 3 that say that "Reach is teh best" disgust me. I think game will be dead by mid next year.

This game was built for casuals. Someone with a high play time can only disprove this otherwise.

  • 09.07.2011 5:28 PM PDT

I respect your opinion even though I disagree for the most part.

However I think you're a dumbass for thinking your poorly written opinion is fact.

  • 09.07.2011 5:28 PM PDT

Revielle- A small community with the goals of making a difference for our members. We hope to bring together people of far distances, and many differences, into our community for long lasting friendships and new gaming experiences.

So stop reading and join already or Get Simmonsized!

Ironicaly (at least to you) its still the best Halo game out now.

  • 09.07.2011 5:32 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Member

Posted by: Legion64
Don't worry. You will soon worship Reach once Halo 4 comes out. It always happens.

Halo: CE people hate Halo 2.

Halo 2 people hate Halo 3.

Halo 3 people hate Reach.

Reach people will hate Halo 4.

And so on. It will happen, you can't stop it. Deal with it. Adapt.
Lolno

First off, I have already established in my head that if Halo 4 sucks, I'm done with the Halo series of games.

Second, if this does somehow become true (and I pray that it doesn't), I will not say Reach is better. I will not even compare Halo 4 to the hunk of -blam!- Reach was. I will compare Halo 4 to Halo 3 and Halo 2 and others in the Halo game trilogy. Halo: Reach isn't a Halo game.

I always see this argument come up and I really can't wrap my head around such an ignorant assumption.

Transformers 2 was horrible. Everyone who watched the first in the trilogy thought so. When Transformers 3 came out did people say Transformers 2 was better? No, they didn't, because it indeed was not. Transformers 3 might have not been as good as the first, but it was hell of a lot better than the second. This is just an example. People learn from their mistakes, and hopefully 343 learned from Bungie's.

  • 09.07.2011 5:35 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Without The Flood, I wouldn't know what an opinion is.

First and only time I'll ever do this: cOLD

  • 09.07.2011 5:40 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: lxl Syphon lxl22
Let me guess, when Halo 4 comes ouut you're gonna complain how it sucks and how Reach was the best Halo ever like everyone else?

Reach is a great game, period.

honestly, no. If halo 4 sucked, I wouldn't return to reach and call it the greatest halo ever, and I'm pretty sure anyone half-minded wouldn't do that. They'd drop halo for something better. Well, that is, if 343's TU won't save reach, which I hope won't happen.

  • 09.07.2011 5:44 PM PDT

I'm an avid gamer who owns a 360, a PS3, a Wii, a 3DS, a Gameboy Advance SP, and a Laptop with Steam. Feel free to add me. I spend most of my gaming time on myu PS3.

PSN ID: SuperSaiyan3Jedi
Steam ID: psn_supersaiyan3jedi


Posted by: FatM
Posted by: SSJ3Jedi
I love Halo. Ever since Combat Evolved, I was hooked. I love Reach. You can have an opinion, but you csn't dictate what other people should think about something. I suck worse in Reach than I do in 3, but I only care about having a good time, so explain that to me.
What I'm about to tell you isn't some sort of rank flaming. This has nothing to do with how "good" or "bad" you are. This has to do with experience and play time in the game.

Your rank? You're such a low rank and have such a low amount of play time in this game that you have no place to say if this game is good or not. Sure, your opinion still stands, but what really pisses me off is when people think that their opinion stands as high as being fact.

Even if this record does not completely describe your play time accurately in this game, I can almost guarantee that your play time is well below an amount that can define you as a casual player.

Let's settle something here: hardcore fans who decide to spend hours upon hours a day, days upon days a year have the higher opinion automatically. Sure it sounds a bit ludicrous, but why do I say this? Because casual fans can immerse themselves in the game to the point where they themselves can become hardcore fans. Sure, not all who play this game will do so, but the more who do this the better.

That's the thing about Reach. Many of the players who have strived to become hardcore fans like myself and many others have grown a bitter taste for this game. Ask any high-ranking player who even plays this game to this day. Ask him if Reach is better than Halo 2 or 3. I can almost guarantee that his answer will be a definite no.

I'm sorry if I have to go on some rant, but seeing people who play "casually" and will eventually move onto Modern Warfare 3 that say that "Reach is teh best" disgust me. I think game will be dead by mid next year.

This game was built for casuals. Someone with a high play time can only disprove this otherwise.


I don't see why it's necessary to classify gamers as hardcore or casual. It's become apparent that ever since the Wii has started dominating the industry the word casual has been used with some form of prejudice, and undeservedly I might add. The Wii has plenty of great games, including Super Mario Galaxy, which is IMO the best game ever made.

Do you have any idea how many times I've been scoffed at for believing that? It wasn't too long ago that Nintendo was considered the most hardcore thing out there, so the fact that Nintendo is seen as casual fare really baffles me, especially considering that most people who criticize probably don't give their console a chance out of being referred to as a casual gamer.

Why can't we all be gamers? Why can't we just have fun? Why do we have to be rampant flamer fanboys who feel like they have to regulate what other people should or shouldn't like? I may suck at Halo something awful, but I honestly hold this franchise dear to me ever since I first played Combat Evolved. I have fun with all of them, including Reach, and my poor skill is not a deciding factor in which is better for me. Hell, my favorite is the original. I AM a gamer. My first game was Super Mario Bros/Duck Hunt, which I played when I was five, and I've been gaming and will continue gaming, currently with the PS3, 360, Wii, Laptop with Steam, 3DS, and GameBoy Advance Sp that I have at my disposal (but mostly PS3 :P). And for the record, I can't stand CoD anymore. I'll be getting my hands on Battlefield 3, Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary, Gears of War 3, Resistance 3, and most importantly of all, Uncharted 3.

[Edited on 09.07.2011 5:47 PM PDT]

  • 09.07.2011 5:45 PM PDT

I still think I was more disappointed with Halo 2 than I was with any other Halo game. I really disliked it. A lot. A LOT. I mean, I really hated that game. It was horrid.

Halo: CE was so good, there was no way any game could be anything but a let down after it.

[Edited on 09.07.2011 5:47 PM PDT]

  • 09.07.2011 5:46 PM PDT

Have you ever seen the blast radius of an actual plasma grenade?

halo reach...biggest let down in video game hisotry.

  • 09.07.2011 5:47 PM PDT


Posted by: LegacyXx
halo reach...biggest let down in video game hisotry.


Duke would like a word with you. Maybe Sonic as well.

  • 09.07.2011 5:48 PM PDT

I'm an avid gamer who owns a 360, a PS3, a Wii, a 3DS, a Gameboy Advance SP, and a Laptop with Steam. Feel free to add me. I spend most of my gaming time on myu PS3.

PSN ID: SuperSaiyan3Jedi
Steam ID: psn_supersaiyan3jedi


Posted by: LegacyXx
halo reach...biggest let down in video game hisotry.


IMO, that title belongs to Metroid: Other M, GTA IV, Too Human, Duke Nukem: Forever, or Gran Turismo 5.

[Edited on 09.07.2011 5:49 PM PDT]

  • 09.07.2011 5:49 PM PDT


Posted by: LegacyXx
halo reach...biggest let down in video game hisotry.

Clearly you never played Morrowind followed by Oblivion.

  • 09.07.2011 5:49 PM PDT

Why can't people just stop whining and adapt to what each new game brings? The developers know what is best for the game and how to make it work, not you or me. Complaining about something that you don't even understand gets nobody anywhere.

Plus, whole OP is opinion.

  • 09.07.2011 5:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Negabite
The guy you 'out played' only fired 4 shots. willing to guess you died shortly after you killed him.
He only had time to fire 4 shots.

Why? Because the last 2 were spammed by the person who won.

  • 09.08.2011 3:22 PM PDT

Flash Kicks beat Armor Lock.

TheLab.

With high aim assist and bullet magnetism... how exactly does the better shooter always win?

  • 09.08.2011 3:24 PM PDT

Hi.

Posted by: Darkside Eric
With high aim assist and bullet magnetism... how exactly does the better shooter always win?
Both players have the exact same amount of aim assist and bullet magnetism at all times. I don't see how it produces any other results besides making aiming easier (for both players).

  • 09.08.2011 3:33 PM PDT