Halo 2 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why Halo 2 is better than Halo 4?
  • Subject: Why Halo 2 is better than Halo 4?
Subject: Why Halo 2 is better than Halo 4?

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!


Posted by: InvasionImminent

Posted by: General Heed
I think you should go play Halo 3 again. As long as you are alive, your Wraith is indestructible. In Halo 3, there was no vehicle health as long as you're alive. Plus, the Wraith in Halo 3 had a slightly faster rate of fire and it's main gun had larger splash damage against enemies but not against you.

I did use it. Actually today on The Storm with a friend. The reticule didn't always shoot where I wanted at certain arks.

Technically, all the Halo games are very linear. ODST kind of walked the fine line, but in the end, it was still pretty linear compared to other games out there.
Silent Cartographer had a non-linear map design, while you could skip the door closing. That's about it for non-linearity in Halo CE. You could also skip the start of Outskirts in Halo 2, and it had a non-linear map design. In Reach you could skip the beginning of Winter Contingency, and it had a non-linear design. In ONI:Swordbase you could chose which station to go to first and had a somewhat non-linear design. New Alexandria has the most non-linear map design but sadly it had random objectives that were sadly necessary to use the majority of the map. Reach has the most non linear campaign, bar ODST.

I don't know if people ever noticed, but there's always been something up with Halo: Reach's graphics. Have you guys ever noticed that during fast motion or even any motion at all there'll be some kind of phantom blur effect.
It just appears at certain locations. Doesn't matter what I'm doing.


I never said the Wraith was super accurate. I just said it was a lot more powerful than its Halo: Reach counterpart.

Glitches aside, Halo, as it was meant to be played, is very linear story-wise. You get from checkpoint A to checkpoint B. Through glitches, like my Time Travel Glitch in Halo 3, you can definitely break the normal rules of the game, but if you play it as Bungie intended, it would be a very linear game.

I notice the blur thing whenever I start sprinting, meleeing, or reloading. It seems to be more prominent when there's a lot of other action on the map regardless of single player or multiplayer. Any idea why in those certain locations you see that blur effect in Halo: Reach? I've never been able to figure it out. One of the theories that was tossed around a few times was that the Halo: Reach engine is closer to the Halo 3 Engine than we thought and it just simply pushes the Halo 3 Engine to render more polygons and higher-res textures than it normally can, thus causing the blur effect which may be caused by low framerates from an inefficiently optimized engine. I don't know if that's the true cause though. What are your thoughts on that?

You wanna reply to the guy above with the long post about Halo: Reach? I figured you'd have more constructive things to say to him than I would.

  • 04.02.2012 12:16 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!

Posted by: Sliding Ghost
H3 and Reach are just like the other games. Very limited, very objective orientated. My first basis for Reach being linear was H3!! The outrageous Elite boarding melee speed was from H3, the inability to get out of the death trap was from H3, the decision to ruin the Wraith's traction and weight was from H3.


All I'll say is that Halo 3 is not at all limited compared to Halo: Reach. The whole 10-second kill barrier in Halo: Reach is one of the most limiting factors of campaign. In Halo 3, you have things such as the Time Travel Glitch which lets you skip half of a mission, remove most of the AI, skip objective points and mission parameters, and still finish the campaign. Halo: Reach was carefully designed to prevent the Time Travel Glitch from being used. If you skip objective points, you'll have no way to finish the mission. So glitch-wise Halo 3 had greater potential and more possibilities than Reach. Likewise, Halo 2 had even more possibilities, and Halo CE the most.

In Halo 3, you don't fight elites... therefore, elites would never board you. The only things that can board you are Brutes. But they don't instantly kill you. In fact, it takes several hits from them to kill you giving you plenty of time to shoot the wall to kill the Brute without killing yourself. The Wraith in Halo 3 is pretty much the same as the one in Halo 2. I don't know why they changed so much in Halo: Reach.

From what I can tell, Halo: Reach was built from the ground up to be a super-balanced game. In fact, I feel Halo: Reach is way too balanced sometimes. Halo games were never meant to be balanced. They were meant to be fun and if that meant the game had to be unbalanced with over powered weapons and vehicles, then so be it.

  • 04.02.2012 12:24 PM PDT


Posted by: Sliding Ghost


It seems you have a strong bias towards Reach haters, automatically assuming they haven't taken the time to look at what it has to offer. Well I have. I know about the flying Hunter glitch on Waterfront, the Pelican launch that you and others have been working on, the cloaked Hunter, the "friendly" Elites, the 2 Emiles glitch, the 3 invincible Grunts, etc. I have even stated that I am considering purchasing Reach.

I'm sorry for flaming in you in that case. But in all honesty go to the Reach forums and try to hold an honest opinion on something that Reach did well. You'll be flamed in less than a minute. Being a Reach fan, I have a mental block on all Reach haters. That is not to say I'm bias. Anyway I see now what you're saying. I hope you don't think anyless of me.

  • 04.02.2012 1:22 PM PDT


Posted by: General Heed


All I'll say is that Halo 3 is not at all limited compared to Halo: Reach. The whole 10-second kill barrier in Halo: Reach is one of the most limiting factors of campaign. In Halo 3, you have things such as the Time Travel Glitch which lets you skip half of a mission, remove most of the AI, skip objective points and mission parameters, and still finish the campaign. Halo: Reach was carefully designed to prevent the Time Travel Glitch from being used.

...

[Edited on 04.02.2012 1:26 PM PDT]

  • 04.02.2012 1:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: InvasionImminent

Posted by: Sliding Ghost


It seems you have a strong bias towards Reach haters, automatically assuming they haven't taken the time to look at what it has to offer. Well I have. I know about the flying Hunter glitch on Waterfront, the Pelican launch that you and others have been working on, the cloaked Hunter, the "friendly" Elites, the 2 Emiles glitch, the 3 invincible Grunts, etc. I have even stated that I am considering purchasing Reach.

I'm sorry for flaming in you in that case. But in all honesty go to the Reach forums and try to hold an honest opinion on something that Reach did well. You'll be flamed in less than a minute. Being a Reach fan, I have a mental block on all Reach haters. That is not to say I'm bias. Anyway I see now what you're saying.
Well, my hate for Reach is only a brief moment compared to my hate for H3.

As you can see here, I don't hate Reach 100%.

Posted by: InvasionImminent
I hope you don't think anyless of me.
Of course not.

[Edited on 04.02.2012 2:35 PM PDT]

  • 04.02.2012 2:22 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: General Heed
Halo games were never meant to be balanced. They were meant to be fun and if that meant the game had to be unbalanced with over powered weapons and vehicles, then so be it.
That doesn't make sense though.

Reach's Legendary (as well as H3's and to a lesser extent, H2's) all have this one thing in common...

"When people realized that sometimes, the game was hard for all the wrong reasons, they decided to make it more of a fair challenge."

This is the opposite case in the Halo series nowadays.

CE was legitimately difficult because you didn't have homing fuel rods coming at you or AI that could see or detect you from some distance.

H2 upped up the damage and put in hard to see and super efficient Jackal snipers, but that's all it did. Nearly all Elites had the same health and some Elites were nerfed to have the same shield strength as well.

The AI weren't superior than the player and they were as equal if not slightly on a better footing.

But in H3 and Reach, getting kills, generally (not in those special cases where you can assassinate an entire group of Covies), just doesn't feel that great.

[Edited on 04.02.2012 2:40 PM PDT]

  • 04.02.2012 2:33 PM PDT


Posted by: Sliding Ghost

As you can see here, I don't hate Reach 100%.

Well, if you ever get it, make sure to help us out on that pelican launch!

  • 04.02.2012 3:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: InvasionImminent

Posted by: Sliding Ghost

As you can see here, I don't hate Reach 100%.

Well, if you ever get it, make sure to help us out on that pelican launch!
Right now I have 260 ms points and I'll have 460-560 very soon. Not to mention I'm getting Anniversary within 5-10 days! :D

But by the looks of it, Co-op is required for that launch if I'm not mistaken.

  • 04.02.2012 3:30 PM PDT

Games I like:,
Half-Minute Hero
MBU
Portal
Halo 3 is the best Halo ever
Maps I like: Turf, Avalanche, Pylon, Sandbox, Breakpoint and many more.


Posted by: General Heed
Posted by: Sliding Ghost
H3 and Reach are just like the other games. Very limited, very objective orientated. My first basis for Reach being linear was H3!! The outrageous Elite boarding melee speed was from H3, the inability to get out of the death trap was from H3, the decision to ruin the Wraith's traction and weight was from H3.


All I'll say is that Halo 3 is not at all limited compared to Halo: Reach. The whole 10-second kill barrier in Halo: Reach is one of the most limiting factors of campaign. In Halo 3, you have things such as the Time Travel Glitch which lets you skip half of a mission, remove most of the AI, skip objective points and mission parameters, and still finish the campaign. Halo: Reach was carefully designed to prevent the Time Travel Glitch from being used. If you skip objective points, you'll have no way to finish the mission. So glitch-wise Halo 3 had greater potential and more possibilities than Reach. Likewise, Halo 2 had even more possibilities, and Halo CE the most.

In Halo 3, you don't fight elites... therefore, elites would never board you. The only things that can board you are Brutes. But they don't instantly kill you. In fact, it takes several hits from them to kill you giving you plenty of time to shoot the wall to kill the Brute without killing yourself. The Wraith in Halo 3 is pretty much the same as the one in Halo 2. I don't know why they changed so much in Halo: Reach.

From what I can tell, Halo: Reach was built from the ground up to be a super-balanced game. In fact, I feel Halo: Reach is way too balanced sometimes. Halo games were never meant to be balanced. They were meant to be fun and if that meant the game had to be unbalanced with over powered weapons and vehicles, then so be it.


Don't be alarmed, but I have always wanted to say hello to you. Your glitches in Halo 3 are the best.

Anyway, regarding the Reach graphics, if you really get up close to them, you'll see they are inferior to Halo 3. Take a barrier for instance; in Halo 3 the rivets were detailed, in Reach they are blurs. The turret, more detailed in Halo 3, Reach less.

Also, compared to other Halo games, many of Reach's maps were small. Once you see the crashed pelican with the mongooses on the ark, you have a huge part of a map to explore. That part alone is bigger than most of ONI Sword base, and there's still more space outside of the map, further into the mission etc.



[Edited on 04.02.2012 3:52 PM PDT]

  • 04.02.2012 3:41 PM PDT

RIP Halo 2: November 9, 2004-May 10, 2010
I was the 2nd to last person to get kicked off Halo 2, see the thread Here

Of course it's hard to trust anyone else with the Halo IP besides Bungie. But I have faith in 343 Industries, so far Halo 4 looks great and I'm going to keep up the optimism until I have a reason not to.

  • 04.02.2012 4:18 PM PDT

This is a Reach account that I created the day they announced his name in a bnet weekly update. Any stats regarding ODST or Halo 3 are irrelevant. Also, Halo CE master race. Halo 1 > other halo games > other games.

Account Status: Silver :(


Posted by: InvasionImminent

Posted by: General Heed


All I'll say is that Halo 3 is not at all limited compared to Halo: Reach. The whole 10-second kill barrier in Halo: Reach is one of the most limiting factors of campaign. In Halo 3, you have things such as the Time Travel Glitch which lets you skip half of a mission, remove most of the AI, skip objective points and mission parameters, and still finish the campaign. Halo: Reach was carefully designed to prevent the Time Travel Glitch from being used.

...


There's also a glitch where you can wait outside the door that closes and it will never close or open the rest of the mission. I trolled this once. The best thing to do is jump up into a crack near the top of the ridge and run into a glitched area. Then they have to nade or beat you down. By the time you respawn they won't even be close to the door so you can just run back out of the room.

  • 04.02.2012 6:23 PM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!


Posted by: Sliding Ghost

Posted by: General Heed
Halo games were never meant to be balanced. They were meant to be fun and if that meant the game had to be unbalanced with over powered weapons and vehicles, then so be it.
That doesn't make sense though.

Reach's Legendary (as well as H3's and to a lesser extent, H2's) all have this one thing in common...

"When people realized that sometimes, the game was hard for all the wrong reasons, they decided to make it more of a fair challenge."

This is the opposite case in the Halo series nowadays.

CE was legitimately difficult because you didn't have homing fuel rods coming at you or AI that could see or detect you from some distance.

H2 upped up the damage and put in hard to see and super efficient Jackal snipers, but that's all it did. Nearly all Elites had the same health and some Elites were nerfed to have the same shield strength as well.

The AI weren't superior than the player and they were as equal if not slightly on a better footing.

But in H3 and Reach, getting kills, generally (not in those special cases where you can assassinate an entire group of Covies), just doesn't feel that great.


Honestly, I felt the difficulty was the same for every Halo game except for Reach. In the first 3 Halo games, I always do the same thing in campaign which is to charge in guns blazing and melee everything that moves. It's worked the same for all 3 Halo games. However, in Halo: Reach and to a lesser extent ODST, you're no longer the same super soldier you were in the original games. The enemies are not only stronger and do more damage, but you are also weaker and do less damage. Whether that's a good thing or not is debatable.

I really don't care about the AI difficulty though. What I care most about is the story and Halo 3 had a pretty epic ending which I felt would've been the perfect way to end the series. In all the Halo games, the AI can go from impossible to kill, to vegetables. You have AI that hits you perfectly, then you have AI that keeps running into walls or blows him and his teammates up by accident. It's always been the same in every Halo game, even in Reach.

  • 04.02.2012 7:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: General Heed

Honestly, I felt the difficulty was the same for every Halo game except for Reach. In the first 3 Halo games, I always do the same thing in campaign which is to charge in guns blazing and melee everything that moves. It's worked the same for all 3 Halo games. However, in Halo: Reach and to a lesser extent ODST, you're no longer the same super soldier you were in the original games. The enemies are not only stronger and do more damage, but you are also weaker and do less damage. Whether that's a good thing or not is debatable.

I really don't care about the AI difficulty though. What I care most about is the story and Halo 3 had a pretty epic ending which I felt would've been the perfect way to end the series. In all the Halo games, the AI can go from impossible to kill, to vegetables. You have AI that hits you perfectly, then you have AI that keeps running into walls or blows him and his teammates up by accident. It's always been the same in every Halo game, even in Reach.
Well let me put it this way. H3, ODST, and Reach didn't have much AI manipulation.

In CE, messing with their senses was an alternative to standard fighting. Who needs fancy assassinations when you can get a good whack 90% of the time on Elites? Who needs rockets when you can trick Flood into running towards a grenade for inspection?

In H2, altering their positioning by exploiting their semi-omniscience (where you go, the enemy follows) made them easy prey.

H3: pretty much straightforward and easy. Brutes are boring (unpleasant to fight in H2)

ODST: some improvements from H3 but none too specific

Reach: hax and cheats and their semi-omniscience can't be exploited

  • 04.04.2012 7:43 AM PDT

"No Mission Too Difficult, No Sacrifice Too Great—Duty First!" - The fighting first's motto.

Losing internet 9/7/2012 until i don't know when. See you starside folks.


Fada beo Halo 2!


Posted by: Dr Syx

Posted by: Chief077
Only 4? huh, I heard it was more. :p
It's a bit of a myth that a large portion of Bungie left to work on Halo but as far as most people can tell it wasn't really that large. There are about four people I could name from the Working at 343 Industries video that did work on a previous Halo title but that's not to say there's more.

It's fair to point out that there were many people who have been in and out of Bungie during the development of the Halo games. People have this idea that a developer always has the same employees but that's not the case at all. For the most part the only employees that stay for a long amount of time are the ones that lead certain development areas. I'm talking about people like Joseph Staten. You have tons of contractors/employees that have only been a part of the team for a year or so working on games.

Saying that, people who lead specific teams inside the development of a game are vastly important. Some of the people who are known for going over to 343 Industries are in lead roles. People like Frank O'Connor (Franchise Development Director), Chad Armstrong/Shishka (Designer. Most likely for multiplayer), Vic DeLeon (Lead Mission Designer), Patrick Gillette (Gameplay Animator) are originally from Bungie and are now working at 343 Industries.

Something else I want to point out is that 343 Industries has around 300 employees working on this project alone. That's much more than what any other Halo ever had. In fact, that's double what any Halo ever had I'm willing to bet... Those positions are filled with people who have tons of experience in the gaming industry. Watching the Working at 343 Industries video, you can see the massive amount of talent they have working there. If you know the people inside the gaming industry you'll know this is an amazing team.


Yes, it is a great team, although it's sad that it's not Bungie. I must have heard crap about a big split up when it's only 4 people.

  • 04.04.2012 8:34 AM PDT

Bring Back Rocket Race!!!


Posted by: Sliding Ghost

Posted by: General Heed

Honestly, I felt the difficulty was the same for every Halo game except for Reach. In the first 3 Halo games, I always do the same thing in campaign which is to charge in guns blazing and melee everything that moves. It's worked the same for all 3 Halo games. However, in Halo: Reach and to a lesser extent ODST, you're no longer the same super soldier you were in the original games. The enemies are not only stronger and do more damage, but you are also weaker and do less damage. Whether that's a good thing or not is debatable.

I really don't care about the AI difficulty though. What I care most about is the story and Halo 3 had a pretty epic ending which I felt would've been the perfect way to end the series. In all the Halo games, the AI can go from impossible to kill, to vegetables. You have AI that hits you perfectly, then you have AI that keeps running into walls or blows him and his teammates up by accident. It's always been the same in every Halo game, even in Reach.
Well let me put it this way. H3, ODST, and Reach didn't have much AI manipulation.

In CE, messing with their senses was an alternative to standard fighting. Who needs fancy assassinations when you can get a good whack 90% of the time on Elites? Who needs rockets when you can trick Flood into running towards a grenade for inspection?

In H2, altering their positioning by exploiting their semi-omniscience (where you go, the enemy follows) made them easy prey.

H3: pretty much straightforward and easy. Brutes are boring (unpleasant to fight in H2)

ODST: some improvements from H3 but none too specific

Reach: hax and cheats and their semi-omniscience can't be exploited


Actually, Halo 3 did bring a lot of improvements to the AI. There was the new "pack mentality" of the Brutes where they learn to work with each other instead doing their own thing like in Halo 2. And in Halo 3, the most commonly used way to kill enemies is still the melee, according to the archived Halo 3 stats. And based on gameplay videos, most people like to charge at enemies while firing their assault rifles and then using a melee to finish off the enemy. Halo 3's gameplay style was pretty similar to Halo 1.

  • 04.04.2012 9:16 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: General Heed

Actually, Halo 3 did bring a lot of improvements to the AI. There was the new "pack mentality" of the Brutes where they learn to work with each other instead doing their own thing like in Halo 2.
Yes, I suppose that's true. H3 also had that H2 Armory skull effect where the AI notice their dead. If I killed enemies stealthily (and the only means to do that is assassination), I noticed Brutes breaking their patrol to look upon their recently killed ally. If I meleed an enemy through another enemy, they'd be alerted.

Posted by: General Heed

And in Halo 3, the most commonly used way to kill enemies is still the melee, according to the archived Halo 3 stats. And based on gameplay videos, most people like to charge at enemies while firing their assault rifles and then using a melee to finish off the enemy.
But are those melee kills satisfying? I think not. In CE and H2, getting subsequent assassinations on AI was certainly viable. In H3, that's rare, really rare.

Just for the note, I'm talking about campaign. The standard AR + beatdown rush in mp isn't always feasible in campaign on higher difficulties. Plus, it's just not satisfying.

I like doing the triple weapons glitch in Crow's Nest so I can use the SMG on Grunts and Jackals, plasma pistol or plasma rifle on Brutes, and get headshots with the BR. If H3 allowed us to carry one more weapon, the redundant sandbox argument wouldn't be that big (at least in campaign). I dislike using the noob combo all the time which is why I do stuff like this.

Posted by: General Heed
Halo 3's gameplay style was pretty similar to Halo 1.
I disagree. The damage might be similar (i.e. player's plasma pistol bolts do a bit of damage against Brute shielding) but the AI are not (lack of different appearances: squid head Elites, curlback Grunts, few returning reactions: 1 absent animation is when the AI try to get the stuck grenade off, AI seem speeded up).

Furthermore, the lack of button combos, backpack reloading, cancelling reload animation, etc. makes combat quite slow. It's quite annoying when I just have to take forever to reload when I'm being bombarded by a bunch of Grunts. If that were me IRL, I'd be reloading pretty fast.

[Edited on 04.04.2012 9:49 AM PDT]

  • 04.04.2012 9:40 AM PDT


Posted by: vBRUTALITYv
Cause Halo 2 was created by Bungie and not giving the torch by someone else.
how can you say anything about halo4 you never played it or seen anything about it?

  • 04.04.2012 9:27 PM PDT

cool story bro, but no one knows if halo 2 is better than halo 4 simply because none of us have played halo 4 yet...

  • 04.05.2012 4:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: InvasionImminent

Posted by: General Heed


All I'll say is that Halo 3 is not at all limited compared to Halo: Reach. The whole 10-second kill barrier in Halo: Reach is one of the most limiting factors of campaign. In Halo 3, you have things such as the Time Travel Glitch which lets you skip half of a mission, remove most of the AI, skip objective points and mission parameters, and still finish the campaign. Halo: Reach was carefully designed to prevent the Time Travel Glitch from being used.

...


Hey, I did that (on Legendary I might add) before it was hip and stylish.

  • 04.06.2012 9:43 AM PDT

This is a Reach account that I created the day they announced his name in a bnet weekly update. Any stats regarding ODST or Halo 3 are irrelevant. Also, Halo CE master race. Halo 1 > other halo games > other games.

Account Status: Silver :(

Guys you know what, you were right.

  • 04.06.2012 5:39 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Heroic Member

"A life lived for others is the only life worth living" - Albert Einstein

"I have your RCON right here." - Iggwilv

"Always my pleasure to be lazy." - InvasionImminent


Posted by: NOBLE SlX
Guys you know what, you were right.
I'm not taking this as fact until I read it for myself. Seems a bit early for him to already have it.

Edit: Never mind... Just saw the pictures...

There better be a classic playlist without any of this -blam!- out of box. If there isn't, I'm going to be craving blood. I don't care if they add it into the game as long as they give me an option to say "no" if I dislike it.

[Edited on 04.06.2012 6:16 PM PDT]

  • 04.06.2012 5:52 PM PDT


Posted by: NOBLE SlX
Guys you know what, you were right.

Halo's dead. It was getting bad before, but this is where it died. I guess I'll just spend even more of my time grinding away at the older games to give me a glimpse of what even attracted me to the series.

[Edited on 04.06.2012 6:20 PM PDT]

  • 04.06.2012 6:18 PM PDT

This is a Reach account that I created the day they announced his name in a bnet weekly update. Any stats regarding ODST or Halo 3 are irrelevant. Also, Halo CE master race. Halo 1 > other halo games > other games.

Account Status: Silver :(

343i shut down there forums (or they crashed) coz of this. I would like to see gameplay. All these changes are certainly going to effect map design so I want to see if this game is playable.

They said (although they said a lot of things) that vanilla will be available, but we don't know how many playlists or if they will be featured to give attention to casuals/newcomers.

[Edited on 04.06.2012 6:54 PM PDT]

  • 04.06.2012 6:48 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Heroic Member

"A life lived for others is the only life worth living" - Albert Einstein

"I have your RCON right here." - Iggwilv

"Always my pleasure to be lazy." - InvasionImminent


Posted by: NOBLE SlX
True, but what population will that get. Reach tells me that casuals will go into the new codified playlists.
The Reach playlists that weren't... well... like Reach didn't even release until a few months after it was out. Most people had just thrown the game out the window by that time. If it's released out of the box, competitive players will gravitate to it. That's my very last hope for this game at the moment.

  • 04.06.2012 6:55 PM PDT

This is a Reach account that I created the day they announced his name in a bnet weekly update. Any stats regarding ODST or Halo 3 are irrelevant. Also, Halo CE master race. Halo 1 > other halo games > other games.

Account Status: Silver :(

http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg611/Hunter7023/img006.p ng

If you read, it says that you have to unlock the armour abilities and weapons for your loadout, which means that it really is going in the cod route.

The OP didn't mention that you buy weapons!

[Edited on 04.06.2012 7:00 PM PDT]

  • 04.06.2012 6:59 PM PDT