Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why Does This Game
  • Subject: Why Does This Game
Subject: Why Does This Game

WALL OF SHAME-Posting stupidity since 2010
__________________
Posted by: Maximus Decimus
Agreed. All the changes are good and add variety. Do we really want another Halo 3? Just running around with one gun and no armor abilities? It's good that 343 wants to try something new. Do we really want the same thing for three more games?

Someone's still salty that he can't break a 1.1 K/D in arena, am I right or am I right?

  • 05.10.2012 8:01 PM PDT

Planking : Parkour for people who don't move very fast.


Posted by: BansheeBomb
There is no gamble in a successful franchise. It's a guarantee that the title is going to make a lot of sales, due to the reputation of the series. The only thing that matters (unless you're a greedy developer) is if the game is well received by the fans. Because then the fans will want to buy the next installment (Halo 3-Halo Reach). Overall Reach was not well received, and therefore failed.


Protip : Any dev making games these days isn't in it for the puppy dogs and rainbows. Case in point. Reach 'bombed', so 343 decided to make 3 more games.


You know, right up until they pulled the population counter from B.net, it still tallied 600-700 thousand players a day. Yes, it's not Halo 3s numbers, but in the flooded market of shooters and other AAA games, that's still goddamn impressive that far along into the lifespan of a game (for a frame of reference, War for Cybertron, praised for being the best, most faithful Transformers game, had awesome gameplay, and it's numbers lingered within 6 months. But hey, it's still getting a sequel). It's still won 'Best of' awards. Even those that bag on Reach all the time can't stop playing.

You can't peg the success of a game on JUST the fan reaction. It will always be mix of factors. And like it or not, because of that, Reach was a success.

  • 05.10.2012 8:12 PM PDT

Posted by: WulfwoodsSins
Reach was a success.
lol

  • 05.10.2012 8:36 PM PDT

Posted by: General Dripik
When I play to win I voice message people call outs.

You know, right up until they pulled the population counter from B.net, it still tallied 600-700 thousand players a day.

Are you talking about Halo 3 or Reach? At the most 100,000 people are playing Reach.

You can't peg the success of a game on JUST the fan reaction. It will always be mix of factors. And like it or not, because of that, Reach was a success.

You can't 'peg the success' completely off of sales either. If a title sells that's good. But it matters more what the fans think because they're the people that are buying your product.

War for Cybertron, praised for being the best, most faithful Transformers game, had awesome gameplay, and it's numbers lingered within 6 months. But hey, it's still getting a sequel.

That proves my point. It was praised by fans and critics, and that's why there will be sequel, even though the numbers weren't that good. The devs know there are a lot of loyal fans that will purchase the sequel.

But in the flooded market of shooters and other AAA games, that's still goddamn impressive that far along into the lifespan of a game.


How is it then that Halo 3 maintained a good population even though there were numerous AAA titles?

[Edited on 05.10.2012 9:01 PM PDT]

  • 05.10.2012 8:58 PM PDT

Planking : Parkour for people who don't move very fast.


Posted by: boomdeyadah
Posted by: WulfwoodsSins
Reach was a success.
lol


lolitmademicrosoftbank

Like I said, like it or not. Don't shoot the messenger.

  • 05.10.2012 8:58 PM PDT

Planking : Parkour for people who don't move very fast.


Posted by: BansheeBomb
You know, right up until they pulled the population counter from B.net, it still tallied 600-700 thousand players a day.

Are you talking about Halo 3 or Reach? At the most 100,000 people are playing Reach.


I'm talking about Reach. What you see on the in game counter is people currently playing the game. Up until a few months ago, there was a page that displayed the user count over a 24 hour period.

You can't peg the success of a game on JUST the fan reaction. It will always be mix of factors. And like it or not, because of that, Reach was a success.

You can't 'peg the success' completely off of sales either. If a title sells that's good. But it matters more what the fans think because they're the people that are buying your product.


And they haven't. Granted, a portion of the community doesn't like Reach. It is far, far out weighed by the people that either do genuinely enjoy the game, or don't have any issue with it. Reach reviewed well when it was released. It won industry awards. They only people gripping are the competitive crowd, which is a fraction of the whole.

War for Cybertron, praised for being the best, most faithful Transformers game, had awesome gameplay, and it's numbers lingered within 6 months. But hey, it's still getting a sequel.

That proves my point. It was praised by fans and critics, and that's why there will be sequel, even though the numbers weren't that good. The devs know there are a lot of loyal fans that will purchase the sequel.


Again, like it or not, so was Reach. Critics certainly didn't have a problem with it. You don't hear IGN, or Game Informer knocking the game for Bloom, AAs, and slow kill times, do you? And there are FAR more people that will buy something with Halo on the box rather then Transformers. And it took way longer for Fall of Cybertron to be announced (Reach was released, TU'd, and Halo 4 was announced within that time frame, even.)

But in the flooded market of shooters and other AAA games, that's still goddamn impressive that far along into the lifespan of a game.

How is it then that Halo 3 maintained a good population even though there were numerous AAA titles?


Let's be honest. When Halo 3 released, the only games any one really seemed to care about were Gears, Assassins Creed, Oblivion, and Modern Warfare. There have been way more games, and way more users added to Live since then. To put it in better perspective, Major Nelson used to only use a Top 10 list. Now it's up to 20. If he still used 10 slots, Halo 3 wouldn't even be on the list.

  • 05.10.2012 9:20 PM PDT

Fair enough Reach was a success. It was a good game which made a good profit. But again, take a look in the long run.

Everyone is nuts off about Halo 4 becoming 'Reach 2.0'. Some have even sworn to not buy it. Take a look at the reach forums and community. All it is are SWAT kids and some -blam!-s like abluebookshelf. Even MLG, who had Halo as their wonder child, is having thoughts on pulling the plug on it (if they have not already).

Reach -blam!- Halo, to a point where the once majestic franchise may never recover from again.

  • 05.11.2012 12:28 AM PDT

Success from a business standpoint.


That's it.

  • 05.11.2012 1:10 AM PDT

Posted by: boomdeyadah
Success from a business standpoint.


That's it.

Not for those who started out with Reach and witnessed how good Bungie games are.

If anything, I strongly doubt that Bungie's next universe will surpass Halo in this generation of gamers.

[Edited on 05.11.2012 2:02 AM PDT]

  • 05.11.2012 2:01 AM PDT


Posted by: CharlesBrown33
Posted by: boomdeyadah
Success from a business standpoint.


That's it.

Not for those who started out with Reach and witnessed how good Bungie games are.

If anything, I strongly doubt that Bungie's next universe will surpass Halo in this generation of gamers.

And if they started with Halo 2 or 3 they would realize how bad Reach is.

  • 05.11.2012 5:56 PM PDT

Too allow more casual players to play the game without getting shat on, which in turn leads to more money. Bungie/343 are, after all, companies making money. The competitive players still have the playlists they deserve, so go play it.

  • 05.13.2012 2:10 AM PDT

Posted by: Tom T
Prolonged exposure to this forum is bad for your health.


Posted by: aBIueBooksheIf
because I like pen­is.

source


Posted by: NiRaC4ntSnip3
The competitive players still have the playlists they deserve, so go play it.


2 Playlists out of 22+ ?



suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure

  • 05.13.2012 6:42 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

All that is needed for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.


Posted by: AK FROST

Posted by: CharlesBrown33
Posted by: boomdeyadah
Success from a business standpoint.


That's it.

Not for those who started out with Reach and witnessed how good Bungie games are.

If anything, I strongly doubt that Bungie's next universe will surpass Halo in this generation of gamers.

And if they started with Halo 2 or 3 they would realize how bad Reach is.
I started with halo 2. I think that reach is the most flawed halo game to date, but is still a solid game that is fun to play.

  • 05.13.2012 7:34 AM PDT


Posted by: Kira Onime

Posted by: NiRaC4ntSnip3
The competitive players still have the playlists they deserve, so go play it.


2 Playlists out of 22+ ?



suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure

Yes. Why? You get what you asked for. I'm pretty competitive myself. All I usually play is lolArena or MLG and enjoy it. And if I'm not having fun, I may go into Living Dead or other playlists.

[Edited on 05.13.2012 7:49 PM PDT]

  • 05.13.2012 7:49 PM PDT