Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: I noticed something..
  • Subject: I noticed something..
Subject: I noticed something..

Don't bring a sword to a gunfight.

People on the forum will help you if u need help. That's good. However a lot of others like to complain that Reach is the "worst game ever" Why is that? I used to be like that then I gave it a try and its not a bad game. Just a different approch to a game we all love. Do people just not like change? Is Reach the same concept as the Spyro franchize? What do you all think?

BTW: Excuse my spelling errors please.

  • 12.29.2011 5:38 PM PDT

Posted by: aBlueBookshelf
Goat was famous. Irie was infamous. Gh0st was FaMaS.

My stats in Halol 4

Typical Waypoint post.
no it's "its got to go" you wouldn't say the "it is got to go" would you?

Reach outside of MLG blows.

  • 12.29.2011 5:39 PM PDT

Bungie tried out way to many new changes. That's why people are going "Reach is the worst game". People don't like drastic changes. Look at CoD, same gameplay with new additions every year.

  • 12.29.2011 5:41 PM PDT

Don't bring a sword to a gunfight.


Posted by: boomdeyadah
Bungie tried out way to many new changes. That's why people are going "Reach is the worst game". People don't like drastic changes. Look at CoD, same gameplay with new additions every year.

Yes but cod is turning into the same game over and over. 1 or 2 changes is basically a waste of money. You want mw3? get the second its cheaper.

  • 12.29.2011 6:17 PM PDT

Fhtagn

Reach's nowhere near Halo 3 or any other Halo for that matters. It's just too noob-friendly, random and laggy. They could have changed a bit and let everything that worked be.

  • 12.29.2011 6:27 PM PDT

Posted by: SpeedyandRose
Posted by: boomdeyadah
Bungie tried out way to many new changes. That's why people are going "Reach is the worst game". People don't like drastic changes. Look at CoD, same gameplay with new additions every year.

Yes but cod is turning into the same game over and over. 1 or 2 changes is basically a waste of money. You want mw3? get the second its cheaper.
What makes it any different than CE to 2 or 2 to 3? Halo 2 brought dual wielding and vehicle jacking, both noticable changes that were widely accepted, but the gameplay was still close to CE.

Same thing with Halo 3. Halo 3 brought Equipment (you can also include Forge and Theater) which added a whole new element but the overall gameplay was still the same. Reach basically threw it all away with things like Armor Abilities, which removed the "everyone spawns with the same weapons" and added unnecessary randomness or increased kill times or even ruin map control (an important key to victory in any Halo). Same thing with Bloom, unnecessary randomness to precision weapons and drastically increased kill times. Precision weapons in the past were consistent and now turned to be as random as an AR.

  • 12.29.2011 7:19 PM PDT

"Per audacia ad astra"
"In the feel clutch of circumstance I have winced
Nor cried aloud
under the bludgeonings of chance.
My head is bloody
but unbowed" ~ Sir William Earnest Henley

Reach blows.
I have 26 days play time, because I kept thinking it would get better.
It's a piece of crap

  • 12.29.2011 7:23 PM PDT

Don't bring a sword to a gunfight.


Posted by: boomdeyadah
Posted by: SpeedyandRose
Posted by: boomdeyadah
Bungie tried out way to many new changes. That's why people are going "Reach is the worst game". People don't like drastic changes. Look at CoD, same gameplay with new additions every year.

Yes but cod is turning into the same game over and over. 1 or 2 changes is basically a waste of money. You want mw3? get the second its cheaper.
What makes it any different than CE to 2 or 2 to 3? Halo 2 brought dual wielding and vehicle jacking, both noticable changes that were widely accepted, but the gameplay was still close to CE.

Same thing with Halo 3. Halo 3 brought Equipment (you can also include Forge and Theater) which added a whole new element but the overall gameplay was still the same. Reach basically threw it all away with things like Armor Abilities, which removed the "everyone spawns with the same weapons" and added unnecessary randomness or increased kill times or even ruin map control (an important key to victory in any Halo). Same thing with Bloom, unnecessary randomness to precision weapons and drastically increased kill times. Precision weapons in the past were consistent and now turned to be as random as an AR.

Hm.. I can see your point there. However,many people state that 'change is good' but you are saying that to much change can cause chaos in society. I supose the regular formula for sequals is that of what you said. Normally this works fine in the examples of Halo 1-3. Sometimes, however, people need to test a new type of experence by changing a game a lot in order to (in the game creators oppinion) make it better. This is what Bungie tried to do like many others. Although hard core fans hate the newer game type some learn to accept and or enjoy the new items that were included in such a game.
Now my question to you sir is this; Do you like Reach? Or are you the Halo 1-3 Fan? I am both and will not 'attack' ur oppinion. =)

  • 12.29.2011 11:28 PM PDT

Stranded at the gas station of love using the self-service pump


Posted by: boomdeyadah
Bungie tried out way to many new changes. That's why people are going "Reach is the worst game". People don't like drastic changes. Look at CoD, same gameplay with new additions every year.


That is actually a rather ironic phenomenon. The marketplace has nothing but praise for a game that defies the standard and branches out into something new and fun, as long as it's fun and rewarding. However, the marketplace reacts in a decidedly opposite way when it comes to franchises.

I find it to be amusing when a critic needs to tear apart a game like Reach because "it's so different than other Halo games." While that may be true, Reach is not replacing those other games, it is a new and different game.

Did I enjoy the other Halo titles? Of course. Do I enjoy Reach? Also, yes. I can recognize that while they share a fictional universe, they are still completely different games.

If Reach were marketed as a stand-alone title with minimal variations that removed it from the Halo universe, it would have been dramatically more positively received.

The issue is not that people don't like drastic changes, it's that their expectation is setting themselves up to be stubbornly disappointed. Reach is not a bad game in it's own right, but it's a bad Halo game for many of these players. If that's how they need to perceive it, then they are missing out on a quality game.

  • 12.29.2011 11:57 PM PDT

Posted by: SpeedyandRose
People on the forum will help you if u need help. That's good. However a lot of others like to complain that Reach is the "worst game ever" Why is that? I used to be like that then I gave it a try and its not a bad game. Just a different approch to a game we all love. Do people just not like change? Is Reach the same concept as the Spyro franchize? What do you all think?

BTW: Excuse my spelling errors please.

People like change as long as it's for the better. Bungie added in terrible, game ruining changes, and ran with it because they didn't care about Halo anymore. They wanted out, that's what I think.

Awesome Halo games + terrible changes = not an awesome Halo.

  • 12.30.2011 12:34 AM PDT

In space, no one can see your shame. The utter beauty of the stars and galaxies will leave you lost in the desolate wasteland of rocks and dust, and that, children, is why astronauts are crazy people.
On a side note, I am a grammar & vocab-friendly guy. So don't assume I'm a smart ass if you get into a complex argument with me...

The issue is not that people don't like drastic changes, it's that their expectation is setting themselves up to be stubbornly disappointed. Reach is not a bad game in it's own right, but it's a bad Halo game for many of these players. If that's how they need to perceive it, then they are missing out on a quality game.

That's the case for some people, but for me, I miss the good old days of Halo 3. There are some things in Reach that just flat out disappoint me.

  • 12.30.2011 1:02 AM PDT

O hai


Posted by: SpeedyandRose
People on the forum will help you if u need help. That's good. However a lot of others like to complain that Reach is the "worst game ever" Why is that? I used to be like that then I gave it a try and its not a bad game. Just a different approch to a game we all love. Do people just not like change? Is Reach the same concept as the Spyro franchize? What do you all think?

BTW: Excuse my spelling errors please.

people are afraid of change. they get in a rut and like to stay in it. sad really. it prevents any kind of advancement.

  • 12.30.2011 1:50 AM PDT

/=\ncient \_|_/arriors

I find myself in agreement (mostly) with boomdeyadah.

Like I said before: it looks like Bungie was pointing to the bleachers when the released Reach. Their vision for what the game can become was probably too far reaching for the production time and hardware available.

There are the purists that want to keep changes and advancements small without messing with core gameplay. Nope... Bungie swung for the fences...

There are those who want the latest, greatest and best changes to a game to push the genre to the edge. Nope... Bungie hit shallow.

When you have two such polarized groups going after the flaws of a single game, it just makes it look worse than it is.

I'm hoping that 343i can clean up some of the mess, and refocus the series for Halo4

  • 12.30.2011 8:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Hey, uh, if you like vs threads, then check out this little group right here, if you have the time. It's pretty fun, just hop right in.

Posted by: boomdeyadah
Bungie tried out way too many new changes. That's why people are going "Reach is the worst game". People don't like drastic changes. Look at CoD, same gameplay with new additions every year.

  • 12.30.2011 8:03 AM PDT

Veritas, Macto, Respecio

its like this with any game you play that has multiplayer or any game in general for that matter. not every one will be happy with the way a game is made. there will always be someone that hates something about a game.

as people have posted before me, its like COD or even better Madden. they release the same game every year with hardly any changes. and people still buy the game cuz they go onto the forums and complain about how they want this removed or that to be nerfed or add something to the game. and they get their expectations too high cuz they think that their 1 post is going to make a difference and when they get the game and see that hardly anything changed especially the way they wanted it, they complain even more about it.

its a never ending cycle because these same people keep on buying the next installment with this delusion that "hey they might have put it in this one" or they buy the next game and keep it hoping that their suggestion might make it in the game via DLC or TU.

fact of the matter is, no one will ever be happy with a game no matter what it is. all we have to do is just tough it out and learn how to adapt to whatever changed and if not, take it back and go to another game.

  • 12.30.2011 8:24 AM PDT

Posted by: Azrael203
its like this with any game you play that has multiplayer or any game in general for that matter. not every one will be happy with the way a game is made. there will always be someone that hates something about a game.

The difference is that with Halo 2 or Halo 3, most people disliked very few aspects of the game, and those aspects people didn't like were usually very minor and easy to put up with, while in Halo Reach most people seem to dislike very many aspects of the game, and they're a lot harder to deal with and a lot more frustrating.
Posted by: Azrael203
as people have posted before me, its like COD or even better Madden. they release the same game every year with hardly any changes. and people still buy the game cuz they go onto the forums and complain about how they want this removed or that to be nerfed or add something to the game. and they get their expectations too high cuz they think that their 1 post is going to make a difference and when they get the game and see that hardly anything changed especially the way they wanted it, they complain even more about it.

its a never ending cycle because these same people keep on buying the next installment with this delusion that "hey they might have put it in this one" or they buy the next game and keep it hoping that their suggestion might make it in the game via DLC or TU.

The difference is that while CoD and Madden might not be making much progress (or maybe any progress at all), they aren't digressing in progress like Halo Reach digressed from the progress of the other Halo games. In Halo Reach, bungie didn't just add in terrible changes, they took out things that made Halo great and replaced them with crap, particularly in the multiplayer. I can only write from experience, but I don't think anybody really expects CoD to change; I know none of my friends or I do. And there's a lot of easier ways to find out if a game has changed, one is called YouTube. The reason people keep buying it is because it's the newest Call of Duty, everybody's gonna be playing it, and most people enjoy playing it. Generally I enjoy playing Halo Reach, but I don't enjoy it nearly as much as I enjoyed playing Halo 2 or even 3, and that seems to be the consensus.
Posted by: Azrael203
fact of the matter is, no one will ever be happy with a game no matter what it is. all we have to do is just tough it out and learn how to adapt to whatever changed and if not, take it back and go to another game.

Wrong. I was happy with Halo 2. I had so much fun with that game. I'd even be good with Halo 3. The only reasons I don't play those over Reach is because 2 can't be played online anymore and none of my friends have 3 anymore, but they do have and play Reach, so I have adapted. Humans adapt, but they also change things for their own good. You have internet; I'm assuming you live in a house or apartment or something, right? I seriously doubt you hunt or grow everything you eat. That's because humans got tired of adapting, they decided they wanted to change the world they lived in and make a better, easier life for themselves. Welcome to civilization. Now all I want is a great, fun video game like Halo 2 to waste my time on. If you can't honestly see why saying "adapt" isn't a valid argument under these circumstances, then you're not intelligent enough to debate with.

  • 12.30.2011 8:39 PM PDT

Lol

Reach is fine, as long as you don't try to play the game at a competitive level. Most of the things such as AA's and Bloom only affect the game when your playing against good people that do anything to win. If you play the game casually none of the things moaned and groaned about in these forums you will experience in such a horrible way.

  • 12.30.2011 8:46 PM PDT

great graphics game engine is different to other halos and games therefore making it a great game

  • 12.30.2011 9:19 PM PDT

Que Custodiet Ipsos Custodes

--Tea-baggers are funny, it's as if they think they are far more hetero than the people who do it in real life, because they use their e-ballsacks to do it. What a manly victory dance.
~ManBearPig_06~

The engine and networking improved, but the game changes allow people to play with a larger variety of playstyles, some of which people despise and attribute the game as the cause, rather than the community.

Bungie had an idea for the 'intended' use of many of their changes, but there was far more leeway to break off from those intended styles compared to the other games. Spawn camping seems more prevalent, people use armor lock and sprint to abuse the quick melee's in the game, and people use a gap in coding to shoot banshee bombs while they are flipping, to name a few.

I still don't think it's a bad game.

[Edited on 12.30.2011 10:00 PM PST]

  • 12.30.2011 9:59 PM PDT

fear me, for i am pro sauce

i like certain parts of reach but i think bungie changed their winning combination from the previous games too much, too much change at once is a bad thing but you have to get a balance between too much change and not enough

  • 12.30.2011 10:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag: AAN2
  • user homepage:

-AAN2-

The main reason that hardcore halo fans (the ones who know every spartan-II designation and name) was Bungie butchering a much loved story for the sake of profit. (search some threads like "canon breaches" or somesuch for more info)
Another reason a lot of people hate Reach is that Bungie put out the Beta, and listened to the minority of feedback over the majority. Most people didn't want AL to make it to the final game (according to pregame and postgame lobbies on the Beta), yet, it still made it.
Another reason that people don't like Halo Reach is because it takes away (in a big way) from feeling like a walking tank. Of course, no one would ADMIT this, but that's the truth of it. In the other Halo releases (aside from CE) "easy" difficulty was near impossible to die on, especially if you knew what you are doing. Now, the AI is a bit more upgraded, you do not strafe as fast, your shields take longer to recharge, and (this is the big one for most players) your jump height is nowhere NEAR what it used to be.
Multiplayer wise, the weapons have a much higher bullet spread than any other Halo release (even ODST), people move slower (which increases the chance of spamming working), jump height is decreased (which means grenades have a larger chance of killing you), and spawn trapping is a far more common occurrence (at least in MY memory).
Add that to the fact that even if you majorly suck, you can still get a kill or two on someone who knows everything about the game and utilizes their skills in-game out of sheer LUCK, and you got yourself a fairly bad game.
That isn't to say that it doesn't have redeeming qualities, but overall, these reasons are why many people call it "lolreach".

  • 12.30.2011 10:18 PM PDT