By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - I never thought it would come to this, but after Reach, Halo 3 feels...

1337 Gamer said:
i prefer halo 3. It honestly was a game that took alot more skill. its hard to win if you cant get control of power weapons and thats the way i like it. Halo reach is 2 steps backwards in my opinion.


but thats not skill? thats a one sidded advantage. (srry it's just my opinion) now don't get me wrong. i'd prefer demolition, heavy artillery, or power weapons over any other so i can wipeout my opponent out. but thats why when i go against people i pull out my n64 put in 007 select weapon type and show i can either beat them with power weapons or pistols. but i do agree that if it's harder to get those power weapons. it does provide for more skill.



Around the Network
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
i didn't like any halo until reach! it just seems so smooth.

*Steeples fingers* Excellent. . .



1337 Gamer said:
selnor said:
1337 Gamer said:
i prefer halo 3. It honestly was a game that took alot more skill. its hard to win if you cant get control of power weapons and thats the way i like it. Halo reach is 2 steps backwards in my opinion.


See IMO Halo 3 has been shown up with Reach. Halo 3 was nothing more than map control. And there is very little strategy other than luck which can take away Map control.

Wrong. Ive played halo 3 probably more than anyone else on this forum and the statement you just said is completly wrong. I would consider my self quite good at halo 3 and gaining map control and weapon control takes skill. Yet even if you dont have them if you are good enough you can break the other teams control. it all just comes down to skill. Skill > Luck or anything else in halo 3.

 

Halo reach and Halo CE, 2, 3 are alike in that they both share the title Halo. Other than that they are so different it isnt even funny. Im glad that people like reach and good for them but most halo purists such as myself are less than pleased with the changes. Halo reach makes it easy for bad people to be just as good as "pro" players. It takes much of the skill out of playing halo.


First of all, are those your only halo 3 stats in your sig? If thats so you certanly didn't play halo 1/3 as much as me. Between bimmy123, cr33py h3rp3 and my other alt accounts I've played over 4000 matches of halo 3.

But thats not the point...both games take skill obviously. But halo reach has added control for people that are skilled enough to take advantage of it. The new radar gives you an extra level of strategy, power ups all have strenghts and weaknesses. the game has new elements which add to the strategy and attack arsenal. To me, Halo 3 just feels...simple...after Reach.

Halo reach is also slightly more balanced when it comes to regular weapons... Like both games have the power weapons but would you take on a Br with an assault rifle in halo 3? what about handgun? You'd have to be insane or insanely good to take a br down with either...in Reach you actually have a good shot.



1337 Gamer said:
selnor said:
1337 Gamer said:
i prefer halo 3. It honestly was a game that took alot more skill. its hard to win if you cant get control of power weapons and thats the way i like it. Halo reach is 2 steps backwards in my opinion.


See IMO Halo 3 has been shown up with Reach. Halo 3 was nothing more than map control. And there is very little strategy other than luck which can take away Map control.

Wrong. Ive played halo 3 probably more than anyone else on this forum and the statement you just said is completly wrong. I would consider my self quite good at halo 3 and gaining map control and weapon control takes skill. Yet even if you dont have them if you are good enough you can break the other teams control. it all just comes down to skill. Skill > Luck or anything else in halo 3.

 

Halo reach and Halo CE, 2, 3 are alike in that they both share the title Halo. Other than that they are so different it isnt even funny. Im glad that people like reach and good for them but most halo purists such as myself are less than pleased with the changes. Halo reach makes it easy for bad people to be just as good as "pro" players. It takes much of the skill out of playing halo.

Well as a member of Bungie.net I disagree. I have read many comments on Feedback there. There is far less hate for Reach beta than the thousands of hate messages Halo 3 beta got. Of course there is skill in Halo 3. But Everyone starting on level playing field ( Reach ) > MAp Control ( Halo 3 )


1337 Gamer said:
i prefer halo 3. It honestly was a game that took alot more skill. its hard to win if you cant get control of power weapons and thats the way i like it. Halo reach is 2 steps backwards in my opinion.

Map control is a legit strategy. Going for power weapons is a legit strategy. But when someone wins solely based on the fact that they have the power weapons is cheap and bullshit. If Halo made the power weapons respawn then I would agree with you but when 1 person has it and nobody else has access to it your argument is void in my opinion. Quake 3 Arena was a game all about map control and power weapons ala railgun but the railgun respawned which made it legit. Halo:Reach finally brings a little more balance and strategy to Halo in my opinion.



Around the Network
CommonMan said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
i didn't like any halo until reach! it just seems so smooth.

*Steeples fingers* Excellent. . .

Lol @ using Steeple as a verb   (I know what image you meant to convey, just a funny way of saying it!)



nightsurge said:
CommonMan said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
i didn't like any halo until reach! it just seems so smooth.

*Steeples fingers* Excellent. . .

Lol @ using Steeple as a verb   (I know what image you meant to convey, just a funny way of saying it!)

I checked with Mr. Burns before using it, didn't want him releasing the hounds on me for perjury.



tuscaniman said:
1337 Gamer said:
i prefer halo 3. It honestly was a game that took alot more skill. its hard to win if you cant get control of power weapons and thats the way i like it. Halo reach is 2 steps backwards in my opinion.

Map control is a legit strategy. Going for power weapons is a legit strategy. But when someone wins solely based on the fact that they have the power weapons is cheap and bullshit. If Halo made the power weapons respawn then I would agree with you but when 1 person has it and nobody else has access to it your argument is void in my opinion. Quake 3 Arena was a game all about map control and power weapons ala railgun but the railgun respawned which made it legit. Halo:Reach finally brings a little more balance and strategy to Halo in my opinion.

uh power weapons DO respawn in halo... And what you said about q3:Arena applies to halo 3 except bout the railgun lol.



I mostly play RTS and Moba style games now adays as well as ALOT of benchmarking. I do play other games however such as the witcher 3 and Crysis 3, and recently Ashes of the Singularity. I love gaming on the cutting edge and refuse to accept any compromises. Proud member of the Glorious PC Gaming Master Race. Long Live SHIO!!!! 

Reach's execution and overall gameplay experience is pretty awesome...everything just seems to flow in it.



"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."

- From By Schism Rent Asunder

It's like MW2 to Cod4. 4 feels like somethings wrong when you go back to play it.



19:44:34 Skeezer METAL GEAR ONLINE
19:44:36 Skeezer FAILURE
19:44:51 ABadClown You're right!
19:44:55 ABadClown Hur hur hur
19:45:01 Skeezer i meant
19:45:04 Skeezer YOU ARE A FAILKURE
19:45:08 Skeezer FAILURE*