Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: 343 Ruined Halo Reach.
  • Subject: 343 Ruined Halo Reach.
Subject: 343 Ruined Halo Reach.

Posted by: NobleAni
guys, you're havng a go at each other about not having the power to move on but since neither of you are doing , that proves you are as bad as each other!!

And now you complain about the complaners complaining.

Need a subject update ... "Who ruined the halo reach forum".
Or was 343 AGAIN ... damm they are cunning.

  • 12.02.2012 2:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

I aint complaining, I'm simply saying discuss the topic at hand or move on. Ether way there is no need to be rude.

  • 12.02.2012 2:26 AM PDT


Posted by: NobleAni


Welcome to the interent. Better get used to it.

[Edited on 12.02.2012 2:54 AM PST]

  • 12.02.2012 2:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

haha I am used to it, I'm just still under the impression that people should know how to behave civilly to eachother, no matter how much they dislike anothers opinions,I know I can but whatever, my moral values are not always of significance to others. :) lol

  • 12.02.2012 3:31 AM PDT

343 had great ideas its just how I feel is that Bungie could of finished what they started they had a great run. 343 had some good ideas like not wasting a load out on sprinting was pretty neat, even though its almost like COD now.

  • 12.02.2012 6:37 PM PDT

Why Bungie, why would you do this?! - Halo Community

How can people still find discussion value in this thread when OP is an idiot.

  • 12.02.2012 7:09 PM PDT

Posted by: NobleAni
I aint complaining, I'm simply saying discuss the topic at hand or move on. Ether way there is no need to be rude.

Ok,
#1 - read original reply, at least I responded to the topic
(ironically both of your posts made NO reference)

#2 "need to be rude" ... say what?!?
How is me pointing out your "complaining about the complainers complaining" being rude?!?

How was your post not a complaint - didnt sound like an endorsement, nor did your reply.

Honestly ... not sure if you are trolling or just not aware of how ironic you are being.

  • 12.03.2012 3:44 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

I agree, Bungie probably coul have finished it but, on the other hand, was it good for Halo to take a new angle? Gve t a new feel, especially if there is going to be 1, possibly 2 more games, I wonder what Halo 4 would have been like if 343 hadn't taken over? :)

  • 12.03.2012 3:30 PM PDT

Posted by: x Foman123 x

Posted by: TH3_AV3NG3R
What house has a rocket pod, has legs, and has a long narrow barrel that probably shoots something powerful?

Sounds like you're describing the lower half of my body, actually.


Posted by: dancar1
343 Ruined Halo Reach.

343 ruined Halo 4.

It was ruined before it was released.

  • 12.03.2012 3:35 PM PDT

Well if 343 wasn't there I don't know what would of happened maybe was getting tired of doing halo games I mean they have started a new project already. Maybe they would of ruined it, I mean some people said that Halo Reach sucked, but I thought it was pretty good.

  • 12.03.2012 7:22 PM PDT

A MAN CHOOSES, A SLAVE OBEYS.

I somewhat agree. 343i segmented the player base, ruined firefight limited and the TU sucks.

  • 12.03.2012 9:48 PM PDT

Posted by: NobleAni
I wonder what Halo 4 would have been like if 343 hadn't taken over? :)

It wouldn't have been.

bungie didnt even want to do reach, but was forced to under contract. They went the cry moar about how Microsoft was "restricting their creativity" and causing key staff to leave (funny, many of them went to 343 eventually).

So in short, there wouldnt have been a H4 if it was left to bungie. Still not good that 343 went with the crap reach engine, but thats another story.

  • 12.04.2012 3:52 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

Fair point, I guess bungie were getting tired of makng Halo, I don't know why though, since it's one of the biggest Xbox franchises, it must have mde loads of money for them, maybe the new ones will fetch even more than the earlier ones like Halo 2 for example, I don't know, It's just an observaton. Either way, I still don't understand why Bungie would give it up!? lol

  • 12.04.2012 8:36 AM PDT

Do everyone a favor, get some intelligence, grow a set, bust a nut, and shut the fu­ck up.
Posted by: Anto91
you're retared for not knowing inside jokes
retard

People still post in this forum?

  • 12.04.2012 9:30 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

yeah!! :D lol jokes

  • 12.04.2012 1:32 PM PDT

Posted by: NobleAni
Fair point, I guess bungie were getting tired of makng Halo, I don't know why though, since it's one of the biggest Xbox franchises, it must have mde loads of money for them

Why ... greed, ego ... you pick.

Like a little kid who does well under a good mentor ... bungie thought themselves better than Microsoft.

Staff were leaving, bungie threw cry moar session - especially when Microsoft started hedging their bets by having Halo Wars made by another studio as a trial.

And what have bungie achieved since being granted their freedom in 2007 ... Aerospace
(And ironically, in this failed attempt to play publisher, they made more demands than Microsoft ever did ... even the one game was forced to change its title)

  • 12.05.2012 4:41 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

I think they paniked a bit, after not making Halo wars, and staff were leaving, they didn't want to be the ones who 'ruined' Halo,knowing how much it meant to the public, they didn't want to make it with less staff and not have it meet the publics expectations, but giving it to 343 was a good choice,better than they originally thoguht, I think!
(And by the way, was it 343 or Bungie that did Halo:Combat Evolved Anniversary?)

  • 12.05.2012 8:54 AM PDT

.

[Edited on 12.06.2012 11:04 AM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 9:19 AM PDT

Nice very nice.

  • 12.05.2012 2:42 PM PDT

Posted by: Mythical Wolf
You really need to do your research before you post because what you said is a pile of crap. To answer your question, here

Steady on there wolfie, you are never going to get that 'forum mod' assignment you sooooo want by harassing another forum member ... thats a big no-no - lol.

Plus what did NobleAni post that wasn't common public knowledge?
- 'not making Halo wars', true
(to use you own standard of proof)
- 'I think they paniked a bit', obvious
(again, to your own standard of proof)
- 'staff were leaving', again public knowledge. Many reference on the net to bungies struggle with this in the final days ... maybe the most vocal was Peter Tamte (former Bungie VP - kinda think he may know?)

Only point I could concede was the "they didn't want to be the ones who 'ruined' Halo". I also suspect they did want to kill it off - how else can anyone explain bungie producing reach?!?
Why would any studio produce a game which will later be a direct competitor to your next title ... but perhaps NobleAni is a little more innocent.

  • 12.05.2012 4:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

Actually 'mythical wolf', it was my opinion, and what I have deducted from my breif foray into the other forums posts, if you didn't like that then I'm sorry, but you can't stop me having an opinion, no matter how 'correct' it is.

[Edited on 12.06.2012 11:02 AM PST]

  • 12.06.2012 10:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Because the Magnum is easily THE best gun in Halo:combat evolved, thenthey ruin it in Halo:3 lol

And "Oh godlike one", all of that is true, I was kind of summing up my thoughts, and as for the 'they didn't want to be the ones who 'ruined' halo', I had no idea whether it was actual fact or 'a load of crap' (as it was put so kindly above) I was simply making a suggestion . And what do you mean by 'innocent'? Its not an acusation of any kind, I just don't want to try and understand it, but take it the wrong way, or miss read it. :)

[Edited on 12.06.2012 11:04 AM PST]

  • 12.06.2012 11:01 AM PDT

0/10

  • 12.06.2012 12:24 PM PDT

Posted by: NobleAni
And what do you mean by 'innocent'?

Untainted, willing to believe.
Some view bungie in the same light as they existed 14 years ago, as an actual bunch of gamers who formed a studio - not what they are, a commercial organisation who need to pay bills and investors (and now live with Activision).

So in your 'simply making a suggestion' you had done so in an 'innocent' hope/belief ... but not necessarily with any 'idea whether it was actual fact' (as you put it). Being innocent is not a bad thing.

No different to the OP stating that "343 Ruined Halo Reach" ... it is the application of a single cause to massive effect, when in reality there a many causes. If the OP had listed every cause that brought reach into being, every influence 343's involvement would be but a few small lines.

To quote the game "if only it were so simple".

  • 12.06.2012 4:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

No different to the OP stating that "343 Ruined Halo Reach" ... it is the application of a single cause to massive effect, when in reality there a many causes. If the OP had listed every cause that brought reach into being, every influence 343's involvement would be but a few small lines May phat dien ok guy

  • 12.06.2012 7:42 PM PDT