I must confess...I think Reach is the best...

#1dib153Posted 11/27/2013 12:08:03 AM
Because I haven't played Halo 4.

However, my defense of Reach was not unjustified. Having played 'em all up to Reach, I can say it was the best out of the previous 5 instalments.

And as a person having not played Halo 4, everything i've heard, seen, and read about makes me not want to give it a shot. It looks like a garbage game.

No offense to anybody in particular, but it seems as though people who covet the original have on a big pair of nostalgia goggles. Granted Halo 2 was a great game, the best of the OG trilogy, but Reach is better. But thats just me.

As the most recent and most active Halo board can it be designated a Community Board, and encompass the entirety of the franchise? Doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.

Thank you for your time, if you haven't tl/dr'd already
---
I'll stomp you in the face with my sandals enraged and tonight we shall rhyme in the shade~King Leonidas
#2lderivedxPosted 11/27/2013 3:34:06 AM
what
---
Derive's posts are like orgasms... that actually revolve around logic and reasoning. I enjoy reading them. - MIxeD
#3Razer1313Posted 11/27/2013 11:00:52 AM
If you're open minded you may enjoy it, I do. It brings halo into a new era of game design. But a lot of people do not like it because its more advanced and complex than the original 3. It takes more than strafing and shooting to kill somone with skill and even less skilled players can still evade death .
#4EternalDahakaPosted 11/27/2013 11:49:01 AM
As far as the smoothness of gameplay, I can certainly agree. Reach felt a little faster than 3/ODST and aiming was miles smoother. I've been compensating for bloom since CE[even though there was none] so the actual addition didn't affect me much.


My nostalgia goggles are only on for the campaign of the originals. Multiplayer was solid in the first 3, but going back to it now, it feels terribly sluggish and the aiming is clunky compared to the more recent ones.

dib153 posted...
As the most recent and most active Halo board can it be designated a Community Board, and encompass the entirety of the franchise? Doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.

I've used it that way. Most people here have played the other titles, and you'll probably get a response far sooner here.
#5SexPantherPandaPosted 11/30/2013 9:47:34 AM
As someone who bought halo 4 out of the gate yes it's not very fun online. It's just off and gets burning quick. But the single player is incredible seriously then most fun I've had with a halo campaign since 1. All thou reaches single player was fun.
#6DuwstaiPosted 12/3/2013 2:29:01 PM(edited)
EternalDahaka posted...
As far as the smoothness of gameplay, I can certainly agree. Reach felt a little faster than 3/ODST and aiming was miles smoother. I've been compensating for bloom since CE[even though there was none] so the actual addition didn't affect me much.


My nostalgia goggles are only on for the campaign of the originals. Multiplayer was solid in the first 3, but going back to it now, it feels terribly sluggish and the aiming is clunky compared to the more recent ones.

dib153 posted...
As the most recent and most active Halo board can it be designated a Community Board, and encompass the entirety of the franchise? Doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.

I've used it that way. Most people here have played the other titles, and you'll probably get a response far sooner here.


What? The aiming in CE and H2 were much smoother thanks to no aim acceleration. Hell, the gameplay overall in 2 was much faster, smoother, and more precise than in any recent Halo. Ever since 3 the controls have felt sluggish and clunky. The gameplay has slowed down immensely. H4 finally starting taking steps to make the gameplay faster and smoother but its still a huge letdown of a game thanks to other issues (I still enjoyed it somewhat though).

Play H2 and H3/ Reach back to back and youll see exactly what I mean. People for some reason forget how insanely smooth H2 was. I still play it all the time so its fresh in my mind. No nostalgia here as I still play it. It has plenty of flaws but clunkiness or sluggishness was not even close to one of them.
---
balls
#7EternalDahakaPosted 12/11/2013 7:05:38 PM
Duwstai posted...
What? The aiming in CE and H2 were much smoother thanks to no aim acceleration. Hell, the gameplay overall in 2 was much faster, smoother, and more precise than in any recent Halo. Ever since 3 the controls have felt sluggish and clunky. The gameplay has slowed down immensely. H4 finally starting taking steps to make the gameplay faster and smoother but its still a huge letdown of a game thanks to other issues (I still enjoyed it somewhat though).

I just played Halo 2 again, and you're absolutely right about that. Halo 2 has far better controls than I remembered and has a pretty decent 1:1 ratio pressure/speed gradient. Probably is the best controls in the series.

Side note: Halo 2 looks like it's in high definition on the 360, though stretched to force widescreen. Not sure if that's because of a recent update or the 360 upscaled it but it's interesting.


Halo: CE is clunky though. It doesn't have as many notches of slower speed as the newer titles. I've played that within the month so I'm pretty positive on that one.
I do prefer CE not having turn acceleration(any FPS really) but the notches of speed are why I'd prefer the other ones over CE.



Play H2 and H3/ Reach back to back and youll see exactly what I mean. People for some reason forget how insanely smooth H2 was. I still play it all the time so its fresh in my mind. No nostalgia here as I still play it. It has plenty of flaws but clunkiness or sluggishness was not even close to one of them.

Well Reach is in no way related to 3/ODST in terms of aiming. 3/ODST has a huge dead zone and relatively few speed notches while Reach is smooth, abet using acceleration rather than a 1:1 pressure/speed.
But yeah, going back to 2, 2 does win.