Halo: REACH

[Na'viyä Tsamsiyu]

Wow, there isnt a topic, how sad. Well, since just about everything showing off the game is out now. What are your thoughts???

----Personal rant, not open for critique, just opinion:

Spoiler

Well, ive been playing Halo for about 5 years now, and have about 6,500 hrs clocked, so when i say i play, and i can play, im not just making myself look good (i didnt know how else to word that). Anyways, out of all the games i play, halo is my strongpoint, and the transition from H2 to H3 wasnt really too hard, though they did change some networking, added a couple new weapons, hit detection, blah blah blah...... The game was essentially the same. The thing halo is known for is its Skill factor to play it, and is also the downfall of most players who transition to other FPS because "People dont die in halo".

Which brings me to the whole point of my little rant here. Halo is a very FAIR in all aspects of the game, besides some lag, but thats netplay, kinda gotta get used to it. Why, because everyone starts with the same weapons, same health, and the power weapons are in the middle of the maps for everyone to get, and powerups are available the same.

The reason I got so bored with the COD (4 and MW2) games is because they (dont get me wrong, they are FRIKING SICK, really) aren't really fair in all aspects. Perks, weapons and other things like that throw off the gameplay in thew sense that there is always a counter out there, no matter how GOOD the other player is, e.g. "Juggernaut, Blast Sheild, Stopping Power, Lightweight, etc...) What im saying here is that you dont have to bee GOOD to get kills. Now im not saying the game dosent take skill, in fact, the skill to play that game is pretty intense, but the amount of people with that skill is very limited these days. Also, the unlockable weapons and levels, are also unfair because of course the stronger AR, in a no-lag, controlled environment  is going to win, let along if is has some stupid perk on it. Theres also no ranking system in the game, but that has nothing to do with the point here.

Now halo on the other hand, is balanced, and takes a little more marksmanship and tacs to actually kill someone in a good manner (not the shotty). If you have a BR and the other person has a BR, you darn well better be 100% better than the other person, or you WILL loose. This is what i like about halo, no matter what you are doing, you have to be better than the opponents to win. The satisfaction of a kill is why people play any online FPS, and the way to acquire kills in various games differs. In COD, it just (a more realistic) couple of bullets and your dead. UT3, is more of an arena shotter, rail gun rape fest. Halo you have to work with your sheilds and life in situations. And so on.

In games where people dont die in one shot, is where the short attention spanned people come into play, and get angry, then go to COD, where they can get kills (even thought they die like 1000 times, have no real SKILL at either game, and i have to carry them) and they are satisfied with the game. That leads to crap talking on Halo itself, and therefore they never play it again. Note: this is an unbias viewpoint on both games. I love them both, especially MW2, but you have to acknowledge these facts here please.

Now for the punch line after the explanation of the diffrence between those games, the FACTS.

Halo reach, looks to me like a game thats totally changes halo altogether, which is very bad. H2 reminds me of H3, just like COD4 reminds me of MW2, the game hasnt changed and thats what people like, an upgrade. In halo reach's predicament, its not like that. Its halo, but diffrent, very diffrent, and with features not "halo-oriented" like the dash feature, attatchable, regenerating cloaks, jetpacks (OMFG REALLY, thats retarted to me) and so on. All this you can start with, like choosing a class on cod, which ultimately takes the fair and balanced factor OUT of the game everyone knows so well and thats what pisses me off.

It prob will be a pretty good game, but as far as multiplayer goes, it is all destroyed in my mind. It will just end up getting boring like the COD's did just because of all the run-in-and-die factor, and the unfairness of another persons "perk".

The way i see it is if i cant kill the whole team is the same fasion as they are trying to kill me, with no pickups, or features (AR v AR, .50 cal v .50 cal, etc..) then the game just isnt balanced, therefore taking the real SKILL out of it.

Well, agree or not, acknowledge it, because it could come back around soon.....

Aside from this lengthy rant, what are your guys thoughts. I cant wait for it!!! See you on it later. 

[Duma Vadamee {Aungia Tsawkeyä}]

honastlly, i think reach looks bad-@$$. they made everything more realistic. (exsept the elites, they look cartoony, wich s**ks. and the new grunts look stupid.). when i watched the trailer, it reminded me of MW2 and the COD series. that belieavable man. they made everything down to the dirt look sick. heck, even the assult rifle looks sick, making it look like a weapon that id want to use.

But i disagree on the new game being un-balanced. i think the multiplayer gust got more intristing, thanks to new weapons,maps,and the fact that you can actually assassinate a player instede of hiting them in the back and "poof!" your dead.

So no, the game isnt going to be bad, its going to be the best theve made yet!

[Na'viyä Tsamsiyu]

Note: The only reason i say it takes the balance out is because if you can start with a jetpack, and i can start with a cloak, or sheild, its automatically thrown off, because you have advantges i dont, same for perks in the COD's.

Thats what i was getting at.

But as for the new weapons look, yeah, they are sick.

[Niwantaw]

COD is fair higher ranked guns arn't just plain better hell i used the famas till rank 40 and that is the basic gun!!
the higher ranked stuff is just better for some things (eg the FAL assult rifle semi auto but very damaging or the ACR low damage but high acuracy)
same with the perks (ninja - don't turn up on heart beat sensors)
they are not just plain better only in some respects
its only unbalaced if you do something stupid (eg turn up with a stinger and a riot shield)

[Hufwe Makto]

I think the throwing knife is cheap...

Ok back on topic. Sadly reach will be the last installment made by bungie. They are selling the lisence to microsoft game studios.

[Duma Vadamee {Aungia Tsawkeyä}]

i bet microsoft just goint to sruwe uf the halo franchise

['Itan Atxur]

Nah, Microsoft studios has a strong track record. But I love the new match making system.

What's the word on forge?

[Ikranä mokri]

in my opinion. having some of the perks on Halo reach could make it a much fairer fight, for instance, i am s*** at FPSs' (RPGs i can do, same with stratergy) so when i play a game like COD and im agaisnt people who i know are much better than me i know thats when my perks will be useful

with halo adding in thigns like a rechargeable cloak and jetpack will make the online much harder for everybody because people who aren't necessarily good at the game can have a fighting chance at people who are good.
to me it just sounds as if you dont want your kill/death ratio to be taken down by some s*** player like me because he used his mind and cloaked got behing you and knifed ur ass.

[Duma Vadamee {Aungia Tsawkeyä}]

rechargeable cloak and jetpack

really, they put those in?? man multiplayer is about to get much more fun and die-hard laughing!

['Itan Atxur]

I don't always require weapon or map ballence, but i do want to play against equally skilled players (or lack of skill in my case). Sometimes its fun to be on the side that starts out with garbage compared to the other side. Your pretty much doomed but if you win, it's bragging rights for life. It's never fun to be completely destroyed in a ballenced map because the other side just beat you at every turn.

[Duma Vadamee {Aungia Tsawkeyä}]

very true its very unfair when it isn't balanced....but still, it is fun to kick noob @$$! that will never grow old, i'll tell ya!