77 réponses à ce sujet

[KainrycKarr]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Ultimately, I think ME and Halo scratch two different itches.

They do. But can never resist the urge to Hate on Halo.

[Da_Lion_Man]

I don't like the current Halo much, but saw the teaser of Halo 4 and there's something about that teaser/game that makes me like it... it's a really strange feeling.

I'll keep an eye on the game and 343, who knows their idea of Halo appeals to me more.

[GreenDragon37]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Son, you dumb? It's year 2011, Mass Effect 3 is a 2012 release.

So is Halo 4. However, I'm a long-time fan of both series (except Reach), so I'll get both. ME3 first, of course.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 10 juin 2011 - 03:41 .

[TexasToast712]

KainrycKarr wrote...
But can never resist the urge to Hate on Halo.

You should see a doctor. Hater.

[Haristo]

oh you mean like ME2 sucked punched REACH ?

I like the HALO setting but Mass Effect own it on every single points, and ME's gameplay is superiour.

[TexasToast712]

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

[GreenDragon37]

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula formula from competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 10 juin 2011 - 03:44 .

[Bad King]

slimgrin wrote...

Actually, ME3 looked kinda like Halo to me.

Looks a lot more like Unreal Tournament to me with teh lazor tanks, controllable mechs and mounted machine guns.

[GreenDragon37]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula froma  competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

I agree that Reach was dissapointing. WHERE WERE THE VEHICLES? There was hardly any of that.

But how did they break canon? Unless you are talking about when Kat died (if that was her name).

The vehicles like the Warthog were made weaker in reach. Heck, they're weaker as a whole because the sniper and DMR can kill them and the DMR can flip a 2 ton Hog!

The Campaign was a flop too. There were no "epic battles" like they promised, all of that happened in the background. We just sat back and did crappy skirmish missions. The characters were bland and uninteresting, the only one showing promise being Jorge.

Also, the first Halo book (Halo: The Fall of Reach), which came out a month before Halo CE was popular, and approved as Canon by Bungie. Reach changed that. Even the new editions of the book do not address the issues between the book and the game.

You can understand why people are upset, including myself.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 10 juin 2011 - 03:50 .

[HTTP 404]

is halo 4 coming out next year?

Idk, bungie isn't even making this one right?

[FluffyScarf]

Good thing the UT series is a classic then. Kind of like how Skyrim looks almost The Sims-like with its cooking, chopping and dress ups.

[TexasToast712]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula formula from competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

You mean they changed Halo from a MLG dominated formula to a formula that is funner and less uber competitive? Thats why its the best one so far. It focuses on the fun.

[GreenDragon37]

HTTP 404 wrote...

is halo 4 coming out next year?

Idk, bungie isn't even making this one right?

Yes, 343i is making the new one, and I'm glad. Bungie dropped the ball with Reach. It's probably the most unpopular Halo game. If you don't know what I mean, go to Bungie.net and Halo Waypoint. There's a huge backlash against Reach.

[GreenDragon37]

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula formula from competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

You mean they changed Halo from a MLG dominated formula to a formula that is funner and less uber competitive? Thats why its the best one so far. It focuses on the fun.

Which means you never liked the previous games to begin with. The previous games were all more popular than Reach. The original trilogy was fun for all, not just competitives. Now they injected BS like Armor Lock to help out the nooby players, and Active Camo so people could hide on big maps with the sniper and not be found. Jet Pack breaks map control, Hologram is useless, Drop Shield can be spammed so that it's tougher for the enemy team to get the objective. Vehicles were nerfed because bad players complained they were hard to kill, when they really weren't.

Not to mention that these are the worst maps Bungie has rolled out.

Halo was always fun, you were probably bad at the old ones.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 10 juin 2011 - 03:57 .

[sponge56]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula formula from competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

Please don't appear as if YOU are THE halo fan who speaks for everyone.  I happen to love reach and all the other Halo's. And how was the competeive formula changed? Multiplayer was made better than ever, and legendary was frikin impossible, even in co-op.  In fact, you are the only halo fan I have come across whod doesn't like reach

[TexasToast712]

GreenDragon37 wrote...
Halo was always fun, you probably bad at the old ones.

Still is fun, I also was a fan of CE, not so much H2 and H3 Multi and hey, your over competitive douche bag attitude is showing.

Take your complaints to the bungie forum.

[GreenDragon37]

sponge56 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula formula from competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

Please don't appear as if YOU are THE halo fan who speaks for everyone.  I happen to love reach and all the other Halo's. And how was the competeive formula changed? Multiplayer was made better than ever, and legendary was frikin impossible, even in co-op.  In fact, you are the only halo fan I have come across whod doesn't like reach

Lol, go to Bungie.net and Halo Waypoint, I'm not the only one.

[sp0ck 06]

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula formula from competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

You mean they changed Halo from a MLG dominated formula to a formula that is funner and less uber competitive? Thats why its the best one so far. It focuses on the fun.

No, Reach was bad.  Halo was never uber-competetive like Counter Strike or even (arguably) Modern Warfare.  It was always a casual-friendly environment.  Reach, however took this to teh extreme.  The bloom mechanics of the battle rifle (which was a default weapon) worked in such a way that luck mattered more than skill.  This was great for the new players because they could just fire away and wind up with a few lucky kills, but for more experienced Halo vets it was a nightmare.  I was never some harcore Halo MLG guy or anything but I've played the games for years and I know when I should win a gun battle.  Most deaths were the result of bad luck or being instantly spawn killed.  The game was just infuriating to play.  Add to that after all the teasers which made it out to be a step foward for the franchise and it ended up being a blatant cash-cow that added nothing to Halo 3 (which was a great game).  The campaign was boring and less spectactular than 3.  The only good part were the armor abilities but even those were just abused in multiplayer and became another headache.

Modifié par sp0ck 06, 10 juin 2011 - 03:59 .

[HTTP 404]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

is halo 4 coming out next year?

Idk, bungie isn't even making this one right?

Halo 4 should be released in 2012.

Yes, Bungie isn't making this one.

ahh, that is interesting.  It would be a surprise if Halo 4 doesn't win GoTY, even if the game turns out to be utter crap. 

[TexasToast712]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

No, Reach was bad.  Halo was never uber-competetive like Counter Strike or even (arguably) Modern Warfare.  It was always a casual-friendly environment.  Reach, however took this to teh extreme.  The bloom mechanics of the battle rifle (which was a default weapon) worked in such a way that luck mattered more than skill.  This was great for the new players because they could just fire away and wind up with a few lucky kills, but for more experienced Halo vets it was a nightmare.  I was never some harcore Halo MLG guy or anything but I've played the games for years and I know when I should win a gun battle.  Most deaths were the result of bad luck or being instantly spawn killed.  The game was just infuriating to play.  Add to that after all the teasers which made it out to be a step foward for the franchise and it ended up being a blatant cash-cow that added nothing to Halo 3 (which was a great game).  The campaign was boring and less spectactular than 3.  The only good part were the armor abilities but even those were just abused in multiplayer and became another headache.

No. Iam a Halo vet and I think Reach is superior. You dont speak for everyone.

[sp0ck 06]

TexasToast712 wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

No, Reach was bad.  Halo was never uber-competetive like Counter Strike or even (arguably) Modern Warfare.  It was always a casual-friendly environment.  Reach, however took this to teh extreme.  The bloom mechanics of the battle rifle (which was a default weapon) worked in such a way that luck mattered more than skill.  This was great for the new players because they could just fire away and wind up with a few lucky kills, but for more experienced Halo vets it was a nightmare.  I was never some harcore Halo MLG guy or anything but I've played the games for years and I know when I should win a gun battle.  Most deaths were the result of bad luck or being instantly spawn killed.  The game was just infuriating to play.  Add to that after all the teasers which made it out to be a step foward for the franchise and it ended up being a blatant cash-cow that added nothing to Halo 3 (which was a great game).  The campaign was boring and less spectactular than 3.  The only good part were the armor abilities but even those were just abused in multiplayer and became another headache.

No. Iam a Halo vet and I think Reach is superior. You dont speak for everyone.

Fine, but I strongly believe you are in the minority.

[sponge56]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

sponge56 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
(except Reach),

What you talking about? Reach was the best so far.

Reach was the worst Halo game to date. It's despised by most of the original fans for a reason. Bungie changed the Halo formula formula from competitive formula that was fun for all, to a game that was meant for a Casual experience only. Plus they broke Canon.

It's more like Crysis and CoD than Halo.

Please don't appear as if YOU are THE halo fan who speaks for everyone.  I happen to love reach and all the other Halo's. And how was the competeive formula changed? Multiplayer was made better than ever, and legendary was frikin impossible, even in co-op.  In fact, you are the only halo fan I have come across whod doesn't like reach

Lol, go to Bungie.net and Halo Waypoint, I'm not the only one.

Ok I understand that, what I meant was you were the first person ive seen who doesn't like reach, and I know about 30 other people who have it and love it

[TexasToast712]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

No, Reach was bad.  Halo was never uber-competetive like Counter Strike or even (arguably) Modern Warfare.  It was always a casual-friendly environment.  Reach, however took this to teh extreme.  The bloom mechanics of the battle rifle (which was a default weapon) worked in such a way that luck mattered more than skill.  This was great for the new players because they could just fire away and wind up with a few lucky kills, but for more experienced Halo vets it was a nightmare.  I was never some harcore Halo MLG guy or anything but I've played the games for years and I know when I should win a gun battle.  Most deaths were the result of bad luck or being instantly spawn killed.  The game was just infuriating to play.  Add to that after all the teasers which made it out to be a step foward for the franchise and it ended up being a blatant cash-cow that added nothing to Halo 3 (which was a great game).  The campaign was boring and less spectactular than 3.  The only good part were the armor abilities but even those were just abused in multiplayer and became another headache.

No. Iam a Halo vet and I think Reach is superior. You dont speak for everyone.

Fine, but I strongly believe you are in the minority.

Judging by the fact that the only ones complaining are the competitive/MLG which are the minority I find your logic flawed.