Now before I begin, let me clarify that this is more an opinion piece than anything. With that said I think this is a widely shared opinion. Let me start with the obvious.. The original Halo: Combat Evolved was a great first person shooter. The campaign was and still is one of my favorite campaigns I’ve ever played. When Halo 2 came out for the original xbox the multi-player had me hooked immediately. And when Halo 3 hit the shelves I was standing in line at the midnight release.
While I wasn’t thoroughly impressed with the third installment of the series, I still played on a regular basis. Then came ODST and Halo Wars both mediocre games in my opinion. It’s safe to say I expected Reach to be different, and was unsure whether or not that would be a good thing. At first the new feel and class options were somewhat fun. However, after a while it got tiresome and old. I missed the BR, and the duel-wielding from Halo 2. I also have a major issue with most if not all of the player made maps you get thrown into. Some of them are so ridiculous it becomes infuriating not to mention the constant quitting out of fellow teammates (more so than any other game I’ve ever played) and the reoccurring timeout screen that follows and can last for up to ten minutes to the point where I get so mad I dashboard it. These are just a few of the issues I have with this game.
I have high hopes that Halo 4 will reignite my love for the Halo series, but at the same time I’m nervous to see what the outcome will be.
What are your thoughts on Halo: Reach and the upcoming release of Halo 4? Let us know in the comments below!
“Then came ODST and Halo Wars both mediocre games in my opinion.” Gah, this needs editing.
Quite frankly, I think Reach and Halo 2 are very different games. Enjoyable? Yes- it’s just that Reach is a lot more somber, whereas Halo 2 just screams “LET’S KICK SOME BLUE ALIEN BUTTOCKS!”.
I think Reach was better than ODST, though.
You do realise that isn’t halo 4 in the picture?
what is it?
lol its a fake; master chief’s armour looks dated and he’s holding the old styled battled rifle
ah, I see. I always thought it was from a super old build of Halo 4. haha
Troll is here
yea reach would go down as one of the worst games ever made on a big budget in my opinion. The 3rd one i didn’t care much for, although the 2nd one is like the best fps made thus far.
Since Halo 2, each Halo game’s game-play gradually became different. Foremost the frame rate and sluggish movement increased. I feel Bungie completely missed the point to their own success; quick arcade action. Hopefully 343 industries will reform Halo to its former glory. I personally want them to bring back the 1-50 ranking as with the new system you can never distinguish a good player by his stats. Much like COD, you have some completely awful players who just have way too much time on their hands!
I think Reach was the best Halo game yet. It was dark, tragic and not at all “cute” like the previous Halo games. The campaign had a sense of desperation to it, very much like Mass Effect 3. You knew that Reach was gonna fall, yet fought tooth and nail against it. Oh and it looked pretty awesome. No Flood!
AR Noob/DMR lover is what you are
Long live the battle rifle
Hey man, just because he likes Reach that much doesn’t make him a noob. Everyone has their own opinions. I personally liked Halo 3 and Reach about the same. Things that I loved about Halo 3 were: Campaign, great multiplayer map selection, and the armor customization felt better than reach’s. (Mainly because it felt like you earned your armor instead of just buying it with easily earned credits. ) I admit that I don’t remember much about the ranking systems, but I’m sure that they were better than Reach’s. Things I didn’t like about three was mostly the Battle Rifle. Ya, ya MLG players are probably thinking wtf are you even talking about but the Battle Rifle didn’t feel like it was really a medium range rifle like the way it was presented in the game. If you payed attention in the game the bullets didn’t always travel on BTB maps like Valhalla and you couldn’t make too accurate all the time which drove me completely insane.
The Battle Rifle was more of a closer range weapon that could mainly just be that weapon that you could use as an excuse as another powerful weapon option that had a little bit of more distance than the AR. ( I am also not a fan of 3 round burst weapons as well. )
Now as far as Reach goes here is what I didn’t like: Firefight, Campaign, ARMOR LOCK, map selection, the main ranking system. Firefight was kind of a bore, ODST’s firefight felt like a struggle for survival as you fought off waves of powerful brutes with your friends, but in this one, it felt too… simple. The fact that you could literally customize what enemies would come made it feel too predictable. The main thrill of what makes firefight a fun enjoyable game type is to throw in different and randomized challenges that the player is given. Not expecting of what is going to come up next is one of the main elements to the game type, which is why the game “Gears of War 3″ got its praise. You didn’t know what was coming, there were powerful enemies and you got to beat the #@!* out of anything that stood before you or die trying. In Reach, you also got the feel that you were sort of invincible. Campaign I admit the storyline was good, I enjoyed it. Replayability? None whatsoever. The campaign had boring gameplay that didn’t really present the dangerous horrors that the covenant had like in the previous games. In fact, you know what I missed the most? Taking out Scarabs! Yes you saw them, but did you take any out? NOPE. There really wasn’t any big ginormous battles between the covenant and the UNSC which was disappointing. I really do wish that the covenant felt like a really fearful enemy instead of just hearing people alarming the others to get to evac. The covenant in 3 were felt powerful and nearly relentless. The other thing that I miss in reach is actually fighting the flood. (not as only the campaign, but the flood in general.) Without the flood, the game had a lot less variety, making it fell a bit repetitive fighting the same enemy. Armor Lock was overpowered plain and simple. Ranking system was cheaply put together. Map selection was a big one for me. I didn’t like a lot of the maps that were built into the game because it mainly felt as if you could only go into 4v4 maps. Big Team Battle was one of my favorites in 3 and with all the vehicles spawning around you. The forge was a great feature to the game though which I admit I spent a ton of hours forging so me and my friends would play custom games on. But my custom maps and hemmorage were the only maps we really ever played on.
The great things about reach were: Invasion, Forge, and Team Snipers. Invasion was a lot of fun. It really put variety into online multiplayer since you had the chance to roleplay on two sides of the war. The unique custom loadouts allowed you to change the flow of the game. Forge was by far one of the best map editors ever in my opinion. The fact that you could build levels basically wherever you wanted in forge world was fantastic and it really allowed you to get on your creative side. Team snipers was indeed fun. Definitely one of my favorite game types that I played for hours on in. The excellent uses of sprint and hologram complimented some of the maneuvering strategies on getting around the map and ways to fool your foes.
In all Reach and Halo 3 felt the same for me. I liked them both in different perspectives. I played them for many hours. And 343 or Bungie, if you are ever reading this. I am not trying to trash talk you guys out. I just mainly wanted to express my opinion towards the past games. I really do hope that you guys bring back the glory of Halo and all that was great about it.
Wow … u sure know this stuff
Longest comment ever
Halo Reach had bad lighting bad graphics bad ranking system bad multi-player servers and most importantly made the game team-based you dont make Halo team based that and hit scan was a big negative as this makes the game More noob friendly