Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Reach is better. Logical reasoning and proof inside.
  • Subject: Reach is better. Logical reasoning and proof inside.
Subject: Reach is better. Logical reasoning and proof inside.

Well Ruckus, I am happy you enjoyed Halo 4. My experience was quite the opposite, but you already know that. There really isn't much more to discuss given that the rest is based on the individual's experiences and preferences.

  • 11.25.2012 7:41 PM PDT
  • gamertag: ankerd
  • user homepage:

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

#6 In the Country.

Halocharts.com

I will read OP later. But I think Reach is better than H4 it both of their current states.

  • 11.25.2012 11:26 PM PDT

There's always room for you, If you want to be my friend.

Reach is teh best.

  • 11.25.2012 11:42 PM PDT

On Waypoint I'm rocketFox;
http://halo.xbox.com/forums/members/rocketfox/default.aspx

Old GTs; RebelRobot, Flamedude

I've never thought Reach was the best Halo game but I've always thought it was good. H4 on the other hand has been very disappointing, ping-ponging between excellent and crushingly bad in the space of 10 seconds. Excellent core gameplay versus confusingly terrible rules and bad UI and map design and missing bits and on and on and on.

Reach isn't the best.... but it's a lot better than H4. Reach has consistency and focus, and H4 is just a hilarious mess.

  • 11.26.2012 12:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: boomdeyadah

Posted by: ShadowLordDaniel
And 343 said they didn't need a Beta... not when you have game-breaking glitches 24/7.
It's funny cause there is BXR and double shot in H4.
Got video of this (other than the one you have in mind)?

Halo 3 had a similar video and it was fake.

As for Reach, more or less. I'm not terribly interested in either of them but Halo 4 does keep me more occupied. Four major finds within 2 weeks. Not bad for my first time preordered Halo game. I've always loved collecting MP armor, even if I never use them.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 12:10 AM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 12:07 AM PDT

<(-_-)> Teh mokey is not amused

I like both of them.
Problem haters?

  • 11.26.2012 3:03 AM PDT

Posted by: SubtleSpartan
I like both of them.
Problem haters?

OP's opinion in ONLY his opinion.
Shame he failed to compare the online number, as compared to reach during its initial launch ... the opinion of many.

Agree, that like reach it will die quickly, but it is doing better that reach.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 5:16 AM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 4:48 AM PDT

Posted by: noobslayer957
Funny. I remember when I enjoyed the reach forum. Now it's just full of -blam!-, and the only active users are generally full of -blam!-. I mourn thee, bungie.net. Well, back to trolling on equestrian forums.

lol ... troll make up trolling forum tag and then complains about trolling. Someone feeling a little redundant?

(and please, no links to those pictures of you and your rather large stallion)

  • 11.26.2012 5:15 AM PDT

Halo 2 > Halo 3 > Halo 3 ODST > Halo Reach > Halo CE

Based on campaigns.

I actually agree. After playing Halo 4 I regretted selling my Reach, but if Halo 3 had more population then I wouldn't really care

  • 11.26.2012 9:03 AM PDT

☆☆☆Does anyone even read this?☆☆☆

||DeviantArt || File Share||

Posted by: snip3r dud33
Honestly, this is a good cover up for all the idiots who won't know its a cover up .


Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Posted by: ShadowLordDaniel
And 343 said they didn't need a Beta... not when you have game-breaking glitches 24/7. Reach had glitches, but not as bad as Halo 4, hell, some of Reach's glitches were funny as hell.


H4 main glitch was the decision to use the crap reach engine. 343 had to make a choice, wait an extra 2 years and watch the halo brand fade ... or go quick by using the reach engine.

Wrong choice.
Done further damage to the Halo brand ... reach delivered the mortal wound, looks like reach2.0 could now finish the job.

Kinda funny how reach had a huge dive in online numbers within the first two weeks of launch ... why did they think reach2.0 would be any better.


Source, 343-fanboy?

  • 11.26.2012 9:14 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Reach sucks, but it's light years ahead of Halo 4.

  • 11.26.2012 9:40 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Posted by: SubtleSpartan
I like both of them.
Problem haters?

OP's opinion in ONLY his opinion.
Shame he failed to compare the online number, as compared to reach during its initial launch ... the opinion of many.

Agree, that like reach it will die quickly, but it is doing better that reach.

Reach peaked at almost 900k. Halo 4 never hit 500k. In fact you have to go to Waypoint to see the total players online. Halo 4 is doing worse than Reach.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 9:46 AM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 9:44 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: nightspark

Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Posted by: SubtleSpartan
I like both of them.
Problem haters?

OP's opinion in ONLY his opinion.
Shame he failed to compare the online number, as compared to reach during its initial launch ... the opinion of many.

Agree, that like reach it will die quickly, but it is doing better that reach.

Reach peaked at almost 900k. Halo 4 never hit 500k. In fact you have to go to Waypoint to see the total players online. Halo 4 is doing worse than Reach.


Could use wayback machine to check population, but it's in Beta so information gathered from that date might be of a bit. The game did reach about 800k at peak hours, many of us contributed to that.

First Sunday during Reach launch week at that time wayback machine saved this info, about 764k players online.

http://web.archive.org/web/20100918015607/http://www.bungie.n et/Stats/Reach/online.aspx?

Compare that to peak population first Sunday in Halo 4.

http://halocharts.com/2012/chart/dailypeakpopulation/all




[Edited on 11.26.2012 11:00 AM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 10:58 AM PDT

Do, or do not. There is no try.

Reach wasn't nearly as disappointing as 4 is for me only after 3 weeks in.

  • 11.26.2012 12:22 PM PDT

Posted by: Suikoden
Could use wayback machine to check population, but it's in Beta so information gathered from that date might be of a bit. The game did reach about 800k at peak hours, many of us contributed to that.

First Sunday during Reach launch week at that time wayback machine saved this info, about 764k players online.

http://web.archive.org/web/20100918015607/http://www.bungie.n et/Stats/Reach/online.aspx?

Compare that to peak population first Sunday in Halo 4.

http://halocharts.com/2012/chart/dailypeakpopulation/all
lmao

[Edited on 11.26.2012 12:23 PM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 12:22 PM PDT

Whelp, Halo is on the decline.

  • 11.26.2012 6:04 PM PDT

I intend to live forever, or die trying,

so far, so good.


Posted by: ShadowLordDaniel
And 343 said they didn't need a Beta... not when you have game-breaking glitches 24/7. Reach had glitches, but not as bad as Halo 4, hell, some of Reach's glitches were funny as hell. "Lightspeed glitch, anyone?"

You've pretty much summed it all up, OP. I can't see Halo 4 lasting very long. I've seen one guy at SR 110 in MM today. How is that even possible?


People said the same thing about Halo REACH when it came out.

Halo 4 will prosper, and I hope REACH and Halo 3 continue to prosper, they are all great games, and it is fun going back to the older games now and then.

Yes Halo 4 has some problems, the Lag is my biggest issue, "No Good Connection" option WTF.

Hopefully the bugs can be fixed sooner than they were for REACH.

  • 11.26.2012 6:20 PM PDT

"If you want to test a man's character, give him power" -- Abraham Lincoln


Posted by: SubtleSpartan
I like both of them.
Problem haters?

  • 11.26.2012 6:44 PM PDT

Posted by: NinStarRune
Source, 343-fanboy?

Source ... what rock have you been living under if you dont know that Halo 4 uses the crap reach engine ... do your own search, not doing your homework for you.
Or - since you insist on a source - prove otherwise.

343 fanboy - nope, far from it.
343 was just plain stupid to use the reach engine, even said so in my OP if you could only read.

Although we cant hold 343 to blame for the actual reach engine ... that was bungie. Was bad when reach was launched and dropped from #1 spot after JUST TWO WEEKS, despite record pre-release and day-1 unit sales.
Why would people stop playing - it was crap.

[edit:] Ok, here is your source ... cant resist a challenge.
Not actually a challenge ... first link using google search terms "halo 4 using reach engine" - lol

[Edited on 11.27.2012 3:53 AM PST]

  • 11.27.2012 3:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Posted by: ShadowLordDaniel
And 343 said they didn't need a Beta... not when you have game-breaking glitches 24/7. Reach had glitches, but not as bad as Halo 4, hell, some of Reach's glitches were funny as hell.


H4 main glitch was the decision to use the crap reach engine. 343 had to make a choice, wait an extra 2 years and watch the halo brand fade ... or go quick by using the reach engine.

Wrong choice.
Done further damage to the Halo brand ... reach delivered the mortal wound, looks like reach2.0 could now finish the job.

Kinda funny how reach had a huge dive in online numbers within the first two weeks of launch ... why did they think reach2.0 would be any better.

So what if they used the Reach engine. Reach used the Halo 3 engine, Halo 3 used the Halo 2 engine, and Halo 2 used the CE engine. So I guess the bugs, glitches and exploits in H4 are all CE's fault. 343i chose to be retards and not properly beta test the game. There will always be bugs in software, you job as a dev is to squash as many as them as you can before your product ships. A public beta would have found a lot of them. Blame incompetent devs, not the engine.

  • 11.27.2012 9:05 AM 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: The Ruckus 2010
Halo 4 was superior to Halo: Reach's campaign in that the story was more tangible throughout the campaign and you what you were being told in the story was reflected in the campaign itself. In Reach, they had to tell you that the planet was falling, yet you never really saw it on the scale you should have. Even when New Alexandria was being destroyed, I still felt like the Covenant was being pushed back, not vice-versa. Although, New Alexandria came the closest to portraying the desperation of the situation. The story was just bland. There was virtually no characterization of any of the Spartans which left you feeling no impact when they started getting picked off like Whack-A-Moles. The only part of the story that was left was as follows:

We must have been playing two different games.

-Covenant are on Reach
-Evacuate civilians
-lol u r died

It was more than that. For some reason you missed the plot of the story in that little fiasco.

[Edited on 11.27.2012 11:59 AM PST]

  • 11.27.2012 11:58 AM PDT


Posted by: flamedude
I've never thought Reach was the best Halo game but I've always thought it was good. H4 on the other hand has been very disappointing, ping-ponging between excellent and crushingly bad in the space of 10 seconds. Excellent core gameplay versus confusingly terrible rules and bad UI and map design and missing bits and on and on and on.

Reach isn't the best.... but it's a lot better than H4. Reach has consistency and focus, and H4 is just a hilarious mess.


Everything you said sums up my feeling towards both of the games.

  • 11.27.2012 2:32 PM PDT


Posted by: nightspark
Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Posted by: ShadowLordDaniel
And 343 said they didn't need a Beta... not when you have game-breaking glitches 24/7. Reach had glitches, but not as bad as Halo 4, hell, some of Reach's glitches were funny as hell.


H4 main glitch was the decision to use the crap reach engine. 343 had to make a choice, wait an extra 2 years and watch the halo brand fade ... or go quick by using the reach engine.

Wrong choice.
Done further damage to the Halo brand ... reach delivered the mortal wound, looks like reach2.0 could now finish the job.

Kinda funny how reach had a huge dive in online numbers within the first two weeks of launch ... why did they think reach2.0 would be any better.

So what if they used the Reach engine. Reach used the Halo 3 engine, Halo 3 used the Halo 2 engine, and Halo 2 used the CE engine. So I guess the bugs, glitches and exploits in H4 are all CE's fault. 343i chose to be retards and not properly beta test the game. There will always be bugs in software, you job as a dev is to squash as many as them as you can before your product ships. A public beta would have found a lot of them. Blame incompetent devs, not the engine.


Agreed. A public beta would have brought out most of the issues earlier in the production of the game rather than having the issues surface once the game hit the selves. I look primarily at the forge, the theatre, and the file share searching being the most prominent issues.

  • 11.27.2012 2:36 PM PDT

Hashtag: first_world_problems
"Not enough polar bears in teh judicial system!"


Posted by: Oh GodLike One
Posted by: noobslayer957
Funny. I remember when I enjoyed the reach forum. Now it's just full of -blam!-, and the only active users are generally full of -blam!-. I mourn thee, bungie.net. Well, back to trolling on equestrian forums.

lol ... troll make up trolling forum tag and then complains about trolling. Someone feeling a little redundant?

(and please, no links to those pictures of you and your rather large stallion)

Dude, just because I abuse bronies doesn't make me one. I mean, really, I have five alts on the damn site.


[Edited on 11.27.2012 2:37 PM PST]

  • 11.27.2012 2:36 PM PDT

First we have ...
Posted by: noobslayer957
Well, back to trolling on equestrian forums.


and then the two part confession ...
Posted by: noobslayer957
Dude, just because I abuse bronies doesn't make me one. I mean, really, I have five alts on the damn site.
lol ... did someone accuse you of being a brown horse or little pony ('bronies'?!?).
And dont think you abusing a horse would turn you into one (but also doesnt mean you should stop it). All very confusing, for you and us both.

And onto the "I have five alts" ... mmmm.
May want to keep that quiet, you may attract the attention of the fourm ninjas who will close down all 5 accounts very quickly.

  • 11.28.2012 3:47 AM PDT