Is this better or worse than Halo: Reach?

#21RayzerTagPosted 11/23/2012 12:07:38 PM(edited)
The singleplayer is about the same. Halo 4 has much better characters than Reach's bland soldier parade, and it's story is fortunately much less down to earth. Where in Reach's campaign everyone could have been swapped with generic soldiers, this game's vide is truly alien. The graphics are astonishing help convey this theme. However, there are not as much vehicle sections as in 3 (about as much as Reach) and the new enemies aren't as fun to fight as Covenant.

The multiplayer is a collosal step forward from Reach. There are a lot of small flaws, but overall 343 really NAILED the map design and weapon balance, making this one of the most enjoyable competitive multiplayers this generation.

I would give it an 8/10, compared to 3's and Reach's 9/10 and 6/10 respectively.

EDIT: wait, is this a joke topic?
#22InjuredNoodlePosted 11/23/2012 12:03:19 PM
Far worse, its call of halo now, this is not Halo.
#23VoltageousPosted 11/23/2012 12:05:01 PM
Worse because no Halo game ever can compare to the fun times/enjoyment I got out of Halo: Reach. Halo: Reach was Bungie's perfected masterpiece game.
#24Brendy_BoyPosted 11/23/2012 12:08:23 PM
Far better than Reach.
Xbox Live Gamertag: Brendover
PSN: BabyInABrender
#25SGUxD3ST1NYPosted 11/23/2012 12:18:23 PM
Single Player- Worse
Multiplayer- Better
#26SeikenZPosted 11/23/2012 12:22:41 PM
Reach > Halo 4 in multiplayer
#27wg64ZPosted 11/23/2012 12:34:59 PM
Yeah Reach was much better all around I'd say.
#28xnxbxaxPosted 11/23/2012 12:35:59 PM
A lot better.
#29splodesplodePosted 11/23/2012 12:40:13 PM
A poll woulda been great. Worse IMO
#30Cosmic_DiabeticPosted 11/23/2012 12:43:43 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]