Halo: Reach Beta

**Cledus** · #1 02-14-2010, 04:03 PM

Reports say if you own ODST then you'll be able to play the beta for Halo:Reach come May 3rd. Why is Cledus posting about anything Halo? Well...because Bungie is promising this Halo will make alot of changes:

Quote:

made it clear that Reach really will be that "generational leap" that the studio is promising. They say it will be the definitive Halo game. We're inclined to believe. Everybody that saw the demo walked away talking about how great Halo: Reach looks.

Now if Bungie can just figure out that a 100% headshot from a battle rifle (3 round burst) should kill any player, then they maybe can win ole CJ over. That plus making the melee system balanced would atleast get me to "try" the next Halo.

**Scotty Thompson** · #2 02-14-2010, 05:49 PM

You never played Team Swat I take it? Where a single head shot killed you. It was great.

**RedLdr** · #3 02-14-2010, 06:05 PM

They need to remake halo combat evolved with xbox live. Its awesome on the pc, but it would be better on live.

**Decapit8** · #4 02-14-2010, 06:10 PM

even though its not my favorite game ever, i still think halo has the most balanced and least problematic multiplayer experiences around. Every time I die in halo, it was because I did something wrong, not because the game decided to spawn me on somebody's claymore, and not because someone was running around carepackage glitching or anything like that.

**ZiPP3RZ** · #5 02-14-2010, 10:55 PM

I agree with jeff. Bungie makes games that truly work with levels that don't generally contain exploits.

I love team swat, but every game needs to be looked at as an individual game, not as compared to others. The main complaint I hear about halo is "how hard it is to kill someone compared to ___________" . I mean, to be fair, a single bullet in MW2 to the head doesn't even score a kill point blank.

If you get used to the gameplay mechanic of halo as a unique entity, it has one of the most rewarding experiences out there. And I enjoy a ranking system where you can actually LOSE levels

**Cledus** · #6 02-15-2010, 12:16 PM

Halo's melee system is a joke...basing who dies by the melee if both players melee somewhat at the same time on who has the most health is 100% idiotic, instead of basing it on who actually melee'ed first.

And I know Halo does a better job on playlists. But I just cant buyin to the gameplay like everyone else with all the 20 feet jumps, shields, pickup weapons, and useless items. Halo is less of a "skill" game in my opinion. It's too easy to "get good".

**Decapit8** · #7 02-15-2010, 07:42 PM

idk... i picked up call of duty mw2 and my kdr has never been below 2.0 on the leaderboards, playing in pubs is basically a joke and ive only finished less that 20 games with a kdr less that 1.

playing team doubles and swat it probably took me several days playtime to get ranked up into the mid 30s and i hit a wall and simply couldnt get ranked any higher than like 40 in any playlist.

halo centers much more around outsmarting your enemies, and each of the "power" weapons actually requires skill. granted, i have more fun at mw2 just because im better at it, but i still think it takes more practice to get good at halo than a call of duty game.

and as far as the melee system, id much rather the guy with less health die than the guy that can press the button the fastest.

**ZiPP3RZ** · #8 02-16-2010, 06:26 PM

Yah didn't they patch the original melee system BECAUSE no one liked it? You could unload a whole clip in someone, tactically working down their sheilds for your team, and they'd come up and melee you without a bullet and you would die.

Now it is more of a rock, paper, scissors. Or a duel.

If you are going to go in for the melee you better be confident you have more damage on them they do on you. I mean, essentially mw2 melee is a joke also...commando and sprint? Really?

And if someone has commando, they don't slide towards you, it has been tested and almost an instant thing. I've shot people charging me, and they die, but I still do too.

I just stay away from mw2 melee though personally, i play with tactical controls because I choose to play tactically. If the enemy can get within range of me without me getting the jump on them I have failed.

I can say right now though, I'll be at the midnight release for Reach and on all the next day...and day after...and day after...

**Cledus** · #9 02-17-2010, 12:42 PM

So you're saying you'd whether it be a "gamble" or "coin flip" on whether you win the melee battle? I would much whether have the person that melee'ed first win...or just have the melee do X amount of damage and then if that puts their health to zero they die, if not they live and have the choice to melee you. It would be the samething as shooting someone with a gun...would you like it if you shot someone first but you died since you had less health...shouldnt the guy who pulled the trigger first win?

I agree that the whole "commando thing" in mw2 is gay, but it is balanced. For every good game those annoying knifers have they have 5 shitty ones.

**ZiPP3RZ** · #10 02-17-2010, 02:07 PM

No, the halo system originally did X-amount of damage. But due to latency it was impossible to tell who ACTUALLY hit first. Much like on COD where u unload bullets in someone, but their killcam showed that you never actually shot.

The halo3 replays were much the same, so if you honestly want to commit to a melee, you need to be sure YOU are getting the jump on them. It isn't a coinflip, its still tactical. I never am pissed in halo that I got melee'd when I melee'd them first, because we both win. More often than not I can backstep enough to shoot them or dodge a melee, then move in for my own.

My main point is that halo3 gets bashed for its shields, jumping, melee, and mechanics for no good reason. Thats like saying I think mw2 is dumb because i can't switch shoulders of my weapon like i can in GRAW. Or that the fact that saints row doesn't have destructible environments like Red Faction that it is lacking. Every game is COMPLETELY unique and requires you to play differently and treat it as its own. Part of what I think defines "gaming" and "gamers" is their ability to succeed in different conditions. If games were meant to be similar we would only ever buy DLC lol

Not saying that halo2 or 3 is for everyone, but it seems that halo gets the short end of the stick, despite defining what is expected from online play, and paving the way for consoles to drive out PCs from gaming.

**Cledus** · #11 02-17-2010, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZiPP3RZ

The halo3 replays were much the same, so if you honestly want to commit to a melee, you need to be sure YOU are getting the jump on them. It isn't a coinflip, its still tactical. I never am pissed in halo that I got melee'd when I melee'd them first, because we both win. More often than not I can backstep enough to shoot them or dodge a melee, then move in for my own.

The problem is your calling a battle in one spot where 100s of bullets are flying around, rockets being fired, snipers shooting at everyone, players shotguning, and everyone jumping 20 feet in the air "tactical".

Quote:

My main point is that halo3 gets bashed for its shields, jumping, melee, and mechanics for no good reason. Thats like saying I think mw2 is dumb because i can't switch shoulders of my weapon like i can in GRAW. Or that the fact that saints row doesn't have destructible environments like Red Faction that it is lacking. Every game is COMPLETELY unique and requires you to play differently and treat it as its own. Part of what I think defines "gaming" and "gamers" is their ability to succeed in different conditions. If games were meant to be similar we would only ever buy DLC lol

Obivously every game is unique. Im not saying every game should be just like MW2. I'm just pointing out the "flaws" of the game. Saying Halo has the perfect melee system is just plain stupid. The melee system isn't where Halo loses me though, its the jumping and shields (taking 3 clips to kill someone) that loses me. The only shooters Ill play "hardcore" or those where it only takes a few bulelts to kill someone. I'll leave the shields and rocket launchers to the kids...

Just like Jeff said, he had to work hard to get "good" at Halo when MW2 was "easy" for him. MW2 is easy for him because theres a large distance between his skill level and the kid that just got the game. In Halo that distance isnt so much, making it harder for Jeff to "stand out" as a "great" player.

**ZiPP3RZ** · #12 02-17-2010, 06:28 PM

LoL as usual agree to disagree then.

My argument was against people's belief halo is a KIDS game. It isn't that Jeff had to work hard to DISTINGUISH himself...but to meet the level of difficulty of halo players who already had the game figured out. Losing in Halo does what ALL games should, demotes you. People who boost or hack to 50 get demolished and demoted sometimes straight to 48 if some 20s come in and work them. And regardless of how they quit the game (even dashboarding or pulling the plug) they lose rank points.

I guess the difference is that halo 3 doesn't have as STEEP of a reward to tactics. It really forces you to work together with your team however. Games that don't seem obvious candidates for intimate teamwork are often the best place to employ it. Working together in MW2 is simply holding a unified front. Areas of combat seem to shift much more often in halo and the spawns don't suck ass.

I mean, that's not to say i am a halo fanboy, I certainly enjoy other games, however its sad to see such a defining game to the xbox world to get so much hate. Most people over the age of 18 seem to think if they admit to enjoying halo that they'll be ridiculed for not playing a "grown-up" game. Yet, I encounter just as many screaming little modding kids on mw2 as i ever did on halo 2 or 3. If not moreso due to the cheaper prices of consoles now.

**Cledus** · #13 02-17-2010, 08:10 PM

For the record, Halo has done ALOT of things right and paved the way for games like MW on the console. Their overall layout is way better than anyother game. They have a better ranking system, even though I think a game needs something like MW's pretisge system. I have way better playlists. Even though Halo 3 didnt have clan support they have done that. They do alot better job with DLC. Their games always have tons less flaws and exploits. The list could go on, but in a nut shell...the actually gameplay wouldnt be considered a "tactical shooter" and thats more my style.