In Halo 3 you could have the joy of dual wielding maulers, not in Reach
In Halo 3 you were able to drive a sweet vehicle called a chopper, not in Reach.
In Halo 3 infection was extremely fun for some reason, not in Reach.
In Halo 3 you had the opportunity to shoot a carbine which overpowered the BR, not in Reach, you get a piece of poop needler that people never even look at.
In Halo 3, there were variations of maps called “Heavy” in BTB, not in Reach since maps were designed so poorly
In Halo 3, there were about 7 (i think) Ranked playlists, including Snipers, SWAT, Lone Wolves, and MLG. Not in Reach, you have 2 playlists only in the highly ignored “Arena”.
In Halo 3 forged maps looked beautiful because of the nice textures and shapes they had. Not in Reach, welcome to grayland!
In Halo 3 the graphics were beautiful bright colorful and vibrant, not in Reach, since your losing the human-covenant war bungie also decided to make it feel like your losing all the joy in your life.
In Halo Reach there was a thing called armor lock…
In Halo Reach you had loadouts, and each of those loadouts each included a different armor ability, each of which was very useful at deforming the Halo formula enough to lower Halo’s population to what it is today.
This really belongs in the Halo 3 section, and Titled…Why I like Halo 3 better than Halo:Reach.
We all know the differences, and we all have our own little gripes about it, but this type of topic is way old, and really getting pointless to even make a thread about them, in these forms, or on Bungie’s site.
Maybe Halo 4 will be more to your liking, and bring back the things you are missing so much.
Well I wouldn’t exactly say this is pointless. Commenting on Reach through the comparison with a better game can supply quite valuable feedback for avoiding the same pitfalls in Halo 4. And just as well as you can say “this should be in the Halo 3 forum”, someone there can say it should belong here instead. Or in Halo 4 for that matter, so I wouldn’t make the point so plainly.
Anyway,
In Halo 3 the AI didn’t just exist to make you it’s -Yoink-. There was fun involved there as well, and by that I don’t just mean “there wasn’t fun for me in their design.” No, I mean that there was no fun included in objective terms, as nothing that has been so cheatfully built and so terribly shortcutted can be said to exist for the purposes of entertainment.
> 8. In Halo 3 the graphics were beautiful bright colorful and vibrant, not in Reach, since your losing the human-covenant war bungie also decided to make it feel like your losing all the joy in your life.
WTF are you smoking bro. Reach still looks like a 5 year old went crazy with a box of bright -Yoink- colored crayolas.
> 6. In Halo 3, there were about 7 (i think) Ranked playlists, including Snipers, SWAT, Lone Wolves, and MLG. Not in Reach, you have 2 playlists only in the highly ignored “Arena”.
>
> 7. In Halo 3 forged maps looked beautiful because of the nice textures and shapes they had. Not in Reach, welcome to grayland!
>
> 9. In Halo Reach there was a thing called armor lock…
>
> 10. In Halo Reach you had loadouts, and each of those loadouts each included a different armor ability, each of which was very useful at deforming the Halo formula enough to lower Halo’s population to what it is today.
The only 4 that I agree with.
While I wouldn’t mind the H3 population being what it used to be so it could be fun again, that’s more for nostalgia reasons. IMO the new MLG settings are better than H3 was. That’s just me though.
> > 8. In Halo 3 the graphics were beautiful bright colorful and vibrant, not in Reach, since your losing the human-covenant war bungie also decided to make it feel like your losing all the joy in your life.
>
> WTF are you smoking bro. Reach still looks like a 5 year old went crazy with a box of bright -Yoink!- colored crayolas.
I concur. Halo 3’s mp color scheme was bland. Each map was based mostly on one color
eg;Avalanche,Sandtrap,Cold Storage,Vahalla,Heretic,etc,.
Most of these so called reasons are more preferences/opinions than rational criticism ( i mean, dual wielding maulers? “it just feels better”? list goes on…).
So let’s all have a good laugh thanks to the OP’s witty appraisal of Halo 3, and move on.
And you know what else? From 2007 to 2010 I absolutely loved playing 3’s multiplayer. And now, since 2010, I’ve been playing Reach’s the same amount, and still loving it! Both 3 and Reach were (in my opinion) excellent Halo installments.
The list in the original post is your opinion, not mine. I appreciate your opinion, and always take the opinions’ of other into consideration, its just that the way I view the game is different than the way you do.
> And you know what else? From 2007 to 2010 I absolutely loved playing 3’s multiplayer. And now, since 2010, I’ve been playing Reach’s the same amount, and still loving it! Both 3 and Reach were (in my opinion) excellent Halo installments.
>
> The list in the original post is your opinion, not mine. I appreciate your opinion, and always take the opinions’ of other into consideration, its just that the way I view the game is different than the way you do.
10 reasons [and counting] why Halo 2 is better than Halo 3:
In Halo 2 you could have the joy of dual wielding weapons that were actually useful, like the PP/Plasma Rifle + Pistol or SMG. 2 Pistols was pretty good, too.
In Halo 2 you could drive vehicles around without fear of the absurdly overpowered laser, there was only the lock-on rocket launcher like the missile pod in Halo 3.
In Halo 2 infection was extremely fun for some reason, not in Halo 3. I think this is because part of the fun was how it was entirely the community’s game, as soon as Bungie acknowledged it, it lost a lot of fun.
In Halo 2 the Carbine and BR were both good, with no random spread on either weapon compared to how ridiculous they were in Halo 3. I knew my bullets would hit someone when I fired my gun.
In Halo 2 there was real variety in BTB, including putting players on the smaller maps (8v8 lockout etc) this was fun because those games were intense, and it saved the playlist from Halo 3’s deadly flaw (since they removed dlc req) Valhalla & Sandtrap, all day every day.
In Halo 2 virtually all playlists were ranked, and they had ranked clan battles too (which were amazing). Social Slayer was called Team Training and was clearly just there to warm people up. Not like in Halo 3 where half the players just play social all the time and never step into ranked.
In Halo 2 nobody cared about forge, because there were so many amazing maps in the first place, and the DLC was all very cheap/free after a short period of time. Not like Halo 3 where they had to make custom maps for half of the playlists because nobody wanted to play half of the terrible default maps.
In Halo 2 the graphics were bright and beautiful, with a real happy, but serious atmosphere about it. Not like in Halo 3 with its dopy dinos who can eat 20 headshots causing swat to be an elite-only zone. Also to be total bullcrap, thanks to Halo 3’s terrible hit registration and bullet spread.
In Halo 3 there’s a thing called Equipment…
In Halo 3 you have equipment, all of which served no purpose other than cheap life savers or unfair game turners. You can’t see what your opponent is going to do to you, when suddenly he throws down a health regenerator? That’s not really the Halo way.
Halo 3 may be better than Reach, but it’s awful in both matchmaking and game mechanics compared to its own predecessor. Obviously I’m being facetious in order to make my point, I’m sure Halo 2 would have been much more fun with forge and theater, but it was good enough without. I never cried out for new maps like I did with Halo 3 and Reach. Halo 3 could provide new maps of a decent quality, Reach’s are gray and have horrible frame-rate issues. Halo 2’s were good enough to use and get on with.
> 10 reasons:
>
> 1. In Halo 3 you could have the joy of dual wielding maulers, not in Reach
>
> 2. In Halo 3 you were able to drive a sweet vehicle called a chopper, not in Reach.
>
> 3. In Halo 3 infection was extremely fun for some reason, not in Reach.
>
> 4. In Halo 3 you had the opportunity to shoot a carbine which overpowered the BR, not in Reach, you get a piece of poop needler that people never even look at.
>
> 5. In Halo 3, there were variations of maps called “Heavy” in BTB, not in Reach since maps were designed so poorly
>
> 6. In Halo 3, there were about 7 (i think) Ranked playlists, including Snipers, SWAT, Lone Wolves, and MLG. Not in Reach, you have 2 playlists only in the highly ignored “Arena”.
>
> 7. In Halo 3 forged maps looked beautiful because of the nice textures and shapes they had. Not in Reach, welcome to grayland!
>
> 8. In Halo 3 the graphics were beautiful bright colorful and vibrant, not in Reach, since your losing the human-covenant war bungie also decided to make it feel like your losing all the joy in your life.
>
> 9. In Halo Reach there was a thing called armor lock…
>
> 10. In Halo Reach you had loadouts, and each of those loadouts each included a different armor ability, each of which was very useful at deforming the Halo formula enough to lower Halo’s population to what it is today.
dual wielding was a cheap gimmicky mechanic that i barley saw in h3 MP it was used more in campaign then anything.
chopper was only like on 1 or 2 maps in 3 and got destroyed as easily as a banshee in reach.
disagree. i loved both equally.
the fact that you call the BR OP makes me discredit this post.
because bigger maps without sprint took sometime to trek. thus needing heavy variants. reach doesn’t need “heavy” besides we all chose heavy for the elephant wich isn’t even in reach.
not all of us care about a number next to our name. a player should be judged by what he does in game not what his number or rank is.
h3 forge was clunky and frustrating. I prefer reaches forge spasificly because its more user friendly.
opinion.
wich has now been fixed in the TU so this is no longer relvent.
No. The decline in reaches population is due to newer games BLOOM and AA’s. wich AA’s for the most part arnt even bad, the only 2 that really “destroyed” reach was armor lock and jetpack. besides population shouldn’t determine how anyone plays a game or what you play. If you enjoy reach then play it.
TLDR: its an opnion on what one likes more. you like halo 3 so play it, the only thing your accomplishing by posting a thread such as this is how mature you arn’t and trying to boost your ego wich none of us care for. good day sir.
> 10 reasons:
>
> 1. In Halo 3 you could have the joy of dual wielding maulers, not in Reach
> <mark>Personal preference. Is it the end of the world? Doubtful.</mark>
>
> 2. In Halo 3 you were able to drive a sweet vehicle called a chopper, not in Reach.
> <mark>See above. Not to mention, All Covenant tech hadn’t been present on Reach. Learn to brush up on the lore instead of “just wanting what YOU want”.</mark>
>
> 3. In Halo 3 infection was extremely fun for some reason, not in Reach.
> <mark>See #1. This seems to be a big problem for you. YOU don’t speak for the community. Unless it’s a huge, noticeable 80/20 margin - tough tiger tails.</mark>
>
> 4. In Halo 3 you had the opportunity to shoot a carbine which overpowered the BR, not in Reach, you get a piece of poop needler that people never even look at.
> <mark>There’s that personal preference again. Not to mention, 9/10 matches I play in - Needles fly everywhere. So far, your “reasons” should have proof with them. It’s all solely your opinion.</mark>
>
> 5. In Halo 3, there were variations of maps called “Heavy” in BTB, not in Reach since maps were designed so poorly
> <mark>I see a huge box of Kleenex Tissues in your future.</mark>
>
> 6. In Halo 3, there were about 7 (i think) Ranked playlists, including Snipers, SWAT, Lone Wolves, and MLG. Not in Reach, you have 2 playlists only in the highly ignored “Arena”.
> <mark>If it’s “ignored” that’s based on the players choice. They don’t HAVE to play in it…or according to you, they MUST.</mark>
>
> 7. In Halo 3 forged maps looked beautiful because of the nice textures and shapes they had. Not in Reach, welcome to grayland!
> <mark>Funny because there’s forgers all over this place and I’m sure majority of them will disagree with you. The Community Creations forum immediately disproves your opinion.</mark>
>
> 8. In Halo 3 the graphics were beautiful bright colorful and vibrant, not in Reach, since your losing the human-covenant war bungie also decided to make it feel like your losing all the joy in your life.
> <mark>Everything was much more smoother and sharper in Reach. It was a story about loss and sacrifice. It was meant to get dark as it went along. You seem to forget the gorgeous bright colors in Winter Contingency, ONI Sword Base, New Alexandria and POA. Though I’m sure you spent every other minute running and posting on forums how bad your experience was WHILE playing.</mark>
>
> 9. In Halo Reach there was a thing called armor lock…
> <mark>And? Some people like it, some people don’t. In Halo 3, EVERYONE and their mother ran for 1 of two things - Power Ups or Power Weapons. Monotonous much? Oh wait…I’m echoing you…</mark>
>
> 10. In Halo Reach you had loadouts, and each of those loadouts each included a different armor ability, each of which was very useful at deforming the Halo formula enough to lower Halo’s population to what it is today.
> <mark>See above and Get over it</mark> Not necessarily in that order.
How do one possibly speak for the entire community? I’ve got no clue what the majority on these forums want, not to mention the entire community. All we can do is voice each of our opinions, though it would be nicer if you, the OP, actually stated them to be your own opinions.
No one wants to play in the arena because to some rank do matter, and neither do they want it to be reset or narrowed down to five “divisions”. Do I know that this applies to the entire community? No, solely my opinion but obviously there is something wrong with it.
Halo Reach had better graphics, true, but the map design in the multiplayer was a disgrace. Again, of course my own opinion but the low population again indicates that something is wrong.
And you can’t possibly say that the forged maps weren’t grey. Every little thing was grey. Add the “greyness” of the entire game and you got a grey -Yoink- game. Which I find boring and dull, which I can’t believe that some don’t.
> How do one possibly speak for the entire community? I’ve got no clue what the majority on these forums want, not to mention the entire community. All we can do is voice each of our opinions, though it would be nicer if you, the OP, actually stated them to be your own opinions.
> <mark>Peruse the forums more. There are more than enough claims from “veterans” and “true fans” that apparently think they deserve some say-so on “Where Halo Is Going”.</mark>
>
> No one wants to play in the arena because to some rank do matter, and neither do they want it to be reset or narrowed down to five “divisions”. Do I know that this applies to the entire community? No, solely my opinion but obviously there is something wrong with it.
> <mark>I don’t play Arena. I’m a casual and proud to just ENJOY a game. But that’s just me. It’s entertainment before it’s competitive regardless that it’s both. If you can’t enjoy it, you shouldn’t be playing is what I say.</mark>
>
> Halo Reach had better graphics, true, but the map design in the multiplayer was disgrace. Again, of course my own opinion but the low population again says that something is wrong.
> <mark>I don’t see the “disgrace”. Then again, I’m one who actually hates a lot of things about Halo 3 but that’s just my opinion. Again, this was Bungie’s last hurrah and they wanted to give something to everyone. Doing so means you can’t hold one group over the other. The population argument is void too b/c it rises and dips - Like Every Other Game.</mark>
>
> And you can’t possibly say that the forged maps weren’t grey. Every little thing was grey. Add the “greyness” of the entire game and you got a grey -Yoink!- game. Which I find boring and dull, which I can’t believe that some don’t.
> <mark>Over exaggeration. Believe it. Some people believe things that you might consider outlandish and absolutely unfathomable - but that’s the beauty of diversity. Also, I don’t really use Forge.</mark>
> <mark>The question is, Is the game truly unplayable? - No it’s not. Otherwise, the entire population against Reach would have fully migrated to Halo 3. They did not.</mark>
Shotgun has the same effect. Redundancy sucks, bro.
I never much cared for the chopper. And in reach we got the revenant. ehich is pretty much the offspring of a wraith tank and a chopper.
This is just you. Infection plays the same, only real problem is the lack of custom maps.
The Needle Rifle is awesome. Especially when team shooting.
LOL, the reason there are no HEAVY variants is because no one like HEAVY variants.
I definitely don’t see a problem with removing “Ranked” but I’m alone on this one. Have “ranked” and “social” did little but to further fragment the population, inspire elitism and boosting.
LOL forge maps were beautiful? I hope you like two different shades of brown. And as far as “grayland” welcome to Halo. Forerunner structures are gray. Ten years in and people still haven’t noticed this one. Halo is basically three colors: Green (grass), Gray (humans, forerunners), and purple (Covenant). If it took you ten years to complain about all the grau, congrats, you’re a moron.
The lighting and particle effects were way overdone in Halo 3. It looked like a cartoon, and you were half blinded by sunlight. The texture, lighting, animations, skyboxes and basically every aspect of the graphics were greatly enhanced.
Well, this is probably going to be the only point I would agree with.If AL hadn’t already been in a successfull FPS with far less complaints: Quake 3. And it was even MORE OP in Q3, the player using it could still shoot O_o
I can and will defend each and every AA there is (except AL, there’s really no excuse for that). Not to mention there’s more than one playlist and gametype without multiple load outs. Snipers, Swat, MLG, Living Dead, Vanilla Grifball, big team snipers, slayer pro, anniversary slayer… don’t like it? good news! you don’t have to ever use them.