Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: is halo reach as good as halo 1?
  • Subject: is halo reach as good as halo 1?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: is halo reach as good as halo 1?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MisguidedDrake4
No.
/thread

  • 10.01.2012 5:53 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Halo Reach is nowhere near as good as Halo Combat Evolved. The only thing in Halo Reach that's better than Halo Combat Evolved is the graphics.

[Edited on 10.01.2012 12:27 PM PDT]

  • 10.01.2012 12:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: beenlord
what i ment is does it take more skill than halo 2?
Reach cheapens up the experience by making every explosion a hazard; blast radius is ridiculous.

Both:

-large hitboxes
-a lot of autoaim and magnetism, particularly for heavy explosive weapons
-huge lunge
-crappy sandbox dominated by precision weapons

But Halo 2 has better:

-player (responsive strafe, jump height, no fall damage)
-maps (powerups)
-vehicles (not easily flipped Hog, Scorpion still suited for lone wolf play style)

Posted by: beenlord
do the weapons feal as powerful as they did in halo 1?
The plasma pistol got a much needed buff, but like in Halo 2/3, the sandbox is dominated by precision weapons.

The AR and plasma rifle are outclassed in every way. Half of the power weapons suck: plasma launcher, focus rifle, concussion rifle.

Posted by: beenlord
does the health system not feal so forgiving?
It's about the same as Halo 3, but damage, hitscan, lack of a proper strafe, etc. factor considerably; the enemies can kill you very quickly unless you use cover or the crutches (AAs). Aim does not always work.

Just like in Halo 2/3, use cover to beat the campaign. Except this time, you have health packs and drop shield which makes it even more easier.

Posted by: beenlord
is the pistol nerfed to death or does it have that same "kick" it did in the first game?
It manages to be more unpleasant to use than the Halo 2 pistol since it's inconsistent due to a lot of Bloom (which is far more annoying than spread) but it can get headshots without wasting half a clip, does have some degree of stopping power (not nearly as much as the CE or Halo 3 pistol), and can feel great (mostly because one of it's melee animations resembles the CE one).

Posted by: Wikked Navajoe
Posted by: TheSpiderChief
Depends on what you mean by "good".
This. For example:
Nostalgia: Halo CE

Complexity: Reach
Creative approach: CE (i.e. using grenades to move power ups)

Technical approach: Reach (heavily AA based, maps designed for AAs)

[Edited on 10.01.2012 1:04 PM PDT]

  • 10.01.2012 12:59 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Honorable Heroic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Your 'beliefs' mean less than dick to me.


Posted by: MisguidedDrake4
No.

  • 10.01.2012 1:04 PM PDT


Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Well, if by 'good' you mean made bungie a heap of cash.

But lets face it ... once you cut MC out of the game its no longer actually a halo game. Once bungie got away with it with ODST ... (the expansion pack - no matter what bungie tried to call it)... they thought no one would notice with reach.

Plus CE was a great multiplayer game ... it insipred people to play as an actual team, none of the stupid barbie dress-up individual rewards ... ad bungie put it, 'reach fails 2010'

I like ODST.

  • 10.01.2012 3:42 PM PDT

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

I guess it really depends on your point of view. For me, I find that Reach has a lot of potential but doesn't live up to it. Certain things are similar to Halo:CE and are very close to touching that glory once again but, end up failing due to implementation. E.g. the magnum, without bloom it would have been very nearly the same weapon it was in CE. With it, it's painful to use and gets dropped fast for the DMR, which, ironically, is just an oversized magnum with even worse bloom.

If you can pick Reach up for 30 bucks or so, go for it. If not don't worry. There is nothing story wise, or gameplay wise that you'll be missing. Especially seeing as how H4 will launch here in a month and Reach's multiplayer will be deader than doornails at that time.

  • 10.03.2012 6:19 AM PDT

Posted by: EvilIguana343
Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Well, if by 'good' you mean made bungie a heap of cash.

But lets face it ... once you cut MC out of the game its no longer actually a halo game. Once bungie got away with it with ODST ... (the expansion pack - no matter what bungie tried to call it)... they thought no one would notice with reach.

Plus CE was a great multiplayer game ... it insipred people to play as an actual team, none of the stupid barbie dress-up individual rewards ... ad bungie put it, 'reach fails 2010'

I like ODST.

I liked ODST as well ... but it would have done better if it had been released as a game in its own right. Apart from having a similar story backdrop, it was nothing like halo.

I liked the blast-from-the-past idea of the terminals ... but this and the other concepts was lost in people comparing it to halo. Even bungie starting off with the expansion pack idea was cheap, more like selling your own game short.

  • 10.03.2012 6:32 AM PDT

You got stuck by FalconStickr

You can not compare Halo games to one another. They are equally awesome for different reasons.

  • 10.03.2012 7:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

lol

  • 10.05.2012 2:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag: ankerd
  • user homepage:

Bringing in Fikst. Bringing back lmao.
Inheritor # 475 world,

#6 In the Country.

Halocharts.com

k

  • 10.05.2012 2:52 AM PDT

Posted by: FalconStickr
You can not compare Halo games to one another. They are equally awesome for different reasons.

But he was asking about reach ... an obviously "NOT" halo game.

Only way reach was 'awesome' was in the way it dropped from the #1 spot in two weeks - even though it broke record pre-order numbers (and cost more than other xbox games released at the same time).

But then most people wouldnt use the word 'awesome' to describe an epic fail like that.

  • 10.05.2012 3:22 AM PDT

The Internet is an empowerment tool that's agnostic; it doesn't care about race, gender, or age.


Posted by: FalconStickr
You can not compare Halo games to one another. They are equally awesome for different reasons.


lol.

  • 10.05.2012 4:45 PM PDT

No, reach is a bad game and you will want to punch yourself in the face if you play default reach

  • 10.05.2012 5:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Sometimes, I dream about cheese.


Posted by: beenlord
i hated halo 2 compared to halo 1
if we're gonna compare Halo: Combat Evolved to later titles in the series then we might as well hate the rest

OT: no, Halo: Combat Evolved actually has decent multiplayer maps and no weapon in Halo: Combat Evolved sucks

  • 10.05.2012 5:07 PM PDT

Absolutely not.

  • 10.05.2012 5:51 PM PDT


Posted by: DethBySword
no Halo games touch the majesty of Halo 1 IMO

  • 10.05.2012 6:58 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

my gt is Godzillla....i just didnt link it properly

the graphics are better

  • 10.05.2012 7:01 PM PDT

Posted by: path1k
Posted by: beenlord
i hated halo 2 compared to halo 1
if we're gonna compare Halo: Combat Evolved to later titles in the series then we might as well hate the rest

OT: no, Halo: Combat Evolved actually has decent multiplayer maps and no weapon in Halo: Combat Evolved sucks


100% win.

CE was the true game.
The maps where interesting - not the over-balanced maps of reach. If you spawned on the bad side of a map - tough, fight harder.

And multiplayer (PC) was about team play and having fun. Games could last for hours, and you could opt out and back in when the interuption happened ... with reach you get penalised, and no-one, no backup, is sent in to make up the missing numbers.

All because of the "its all about me" game style that reach became. Reach has big team battle, but there is no team factor, just a race to the better vehicle/weapon, even melee of ur own team to get a better score.

CE was the original, the King.

  • 10.06.2012 2:33 AM PDT

lol not even close

  • 10.06.2012 9:01 AM PDT

It's not even f­ucking close.

  • 10.06.2012 9:05 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2