Better than reach?

Hey guys, I’m considering buying this game, but I was wondering, is it more fun than reach? does it have firefight? how about co-op campaign, and custom games?

The $64,000 question. Some people like it better than Reach (me), and others hate both and prefer H2 or H3. If loadouts didn’t bother you in Reach then they won’t in 4. If sprint didn’t bother you in Reach then it won’t in 4. If you even care about weapons-on-map vs. personal ordnance then you need to get a life. You’re looking at a pretty small multiplayer population, so if you’re a really bad or really good player then you’ll probably be disappointed by matches that are either too easy or too hard. Average players will have no problem, unless they want to play the really obscure playlists where there is almost no population left at all. There is no Firefight, but there is Spartan Ops. Not the same, but similar, each has it’s strengths. Don’t know what they’re charging for the game these days, but it’s worth it imo.

Reach is way better. I’d recommend you not get Halo 4 and stick with Reach.

I would get it because it has much more ways to customize your guy and there is co-op campaign and custom games

> 2533274873843883;2:
> If you even care about weapons-on-map vs. personal ordnance then you need to get a life.

Are you serious? You realize a lot of people left this game and personal ordinance was a huge factor in that right? I don’t mind ordinance as much as some other things in h4 but I cant deny that it completely ruins competitive gameplay.

Just because you might not mind ordinance doesn’t mean you have to resort to such ignorance against people who disagree.

OP, I would recommend getting h4 because despite its problems it is much better than Reach. Armor abilities are way less overpowered, the game has a working BR and a skill system (even if it does suck), and in my opinion gameplay seems to just flow better than in Reach. Both games have roughly the same quality of campaign, although h4’s Spartan Ops is much more enjoyable than Reach’s firefight.

> 2533274879684063;5:
> > 2533274873843883;2:
> > If you even care about weapons-on-map vs. personal ordnance then you need to get a life.
>
>
> Are you serious? You realize a lot of people left this game and personal ordinance was a huge factor in that right? I don’t mind ordinance as much as some other things in h4 but I cant deny that it completely ruins competitive gameplay.
>
> Just because you might not mind ordinance doesn’t mean you have to resort to such ignorance against people who disagree.
>
> OP, I would recommend getting h4 because despite its problems it is much better than Reach. Armor abilities are way less overpowered, the game has a working BR and a skill system (even if it does suck), and in my opinion gameplay seems to just flow better than in Reach. Both games have roughly the same quality of campaign, although h4’s Spartan Ops is much more enjoyable than Reach’s firefight.

Apologies. That was poorly worded. As was your choice of the word “ruin.” Personal Ordnance does not ruin Halo. It changes Halo. The superior player will succeed in either environment. The inferior player will fail in either environment. Ditto sprint. Ditto AAs. I’m not trying to say that anyone is wrong to dislike them, I’m just saying that a narrowed skill gap is still a skill gap nonetheless.

> 2533274873843883;6:
> > 2533274879684063;5:
> > > 2533274873843883;2:
> > > If you even care about weapons-on-map vs. personal ordnance then you need to get a life.
> >
> >
> > Are you serious? You realize a lot of people left this game and personal ordinance was a huge factor in that right? I don’t mind ordinance as much as some other things in h4 but I cant deny that it completely ruins competitive gameplay.
> >
> > Just because you might not mind ordinance doesn’t mean you have to resort to such ignorance against people who disagree.
> >
> > OP, I would recommend getting h4 because despite its problems it is much better than Reach. Armor abilities are way less overpowered, the game has a working BR and a skill system (even if it does suck), and in my opinion gameplay seems to just flow better than in Reach. Both games have roughly the same quality of campaign, although h4’s Spartan Ops is much more enjoyable than Reach’s firefight.
>
>
> Apologies. That was poorly worded. As was your choice of the word “ruin.” Personal Ordnance does not ruin Halo. It changes Halo. The superior player will succeed in either environment. The inferior player will fail in either environment. Ditto sprint. Ditto AAs. I’m not trying to say that anyone is wrong to dislike them, I’m just saying that a narrowed skill gap is still a skill gap nonetheless.

I would argue that ordinance has a more detrimental effect on competitive gameplay than most variables in h4. I agree with you 100% when you say, " a narrowed skill gap is still a skill gap nonetheless.", but its hard to see how its fair when a bad player calls in an overshield and then kills a good player just because of ordinance. Like I said earlier, ordinance is not my biggest issue with this game, far from it actually, but IMHO it still has a hugely detrimental effect.

With that said tho, I don’t want to derail this thread and you have shown yourself to be very reasonable, so no worries.

IMO Halo 4> Reach. I liked both, but prefer Halo 4. Only way to know which one you will like better is to try it out, and since you can probably buy Halo 4 for like $10 then I would say definitely go for it.

> 2533274879684063;7:
> > 2533274873843883;6:
> > > 2533274879684063;5:
> > > > 2533274873843883;2:
> > > > If you even care about weapons-on-map vs. personal ordnance then you need to get a life.
> > >
> > >
> > > Are you serious? You realize a lot of people left this game and personal ordinance was a huge factor in that right? I don’t mind ordinance as much as some other things in h4 but I cant deny that it completely ruins competitive gameplay.
> > >
> > > Just because you might not mind ordinance doesn’t mean you have to resort to such ignorance against people who disagree.
> > >
> > > OP, I would recommend getting h4 because despite its problems it is much better than Reach. Armor abilities are way less overpowered, the game has a working BR and a skill system (even if it does suck), and in my opinion gameplay seems to just flow better than in Reach. Both games have roughly the same quality of campaign, although h4’s Spartan Ops is much more enjoyable than Reach’s firefight.
> >
> >
> > Apologies. That was poorly worded. As was your choice of the word “ruin.” Personal Ordnance does not ruin Halo. It changes Halo. The superior player will succeed in either environment. The inferior player will fail in either environment. Ditto sprint. Ditto AAs. I’m not trying to say that anyone is wrong to dislike them, I’m just saying that a narrowed skill gap is still a skill gap nonetheless.
>
>
> I would argue that ordinance has a more detrimental effect on competitive gameplay than most variables in h4. I agree with you 100% when you say, " a narrowed skill gap is still a skill gap nonetheless.", but its hard to see how its fair when a bad player calls in an overshield and then kills a good player just because of ordinance. Like I said earlier, ordinance is not my biggest issue with this game, far from it actually, but IMHO it still has a hugely detrimental effect.
>
> With that said tho, I don’t want to derail this thread and you have shown yourself to be very reasonable, so no worries.

I know what you’re saying about that ordnance drop, I really do, but…

…the inferior player who got the overshield also got the kill? Okay. But it’s really unlikely that one or two kills will swing the game. Narrow the margin of victory perhaps, but even that probably not by much. That player, if really a “bad player,” will still lose. The “better player” is far more likely to get more drops, and hence still maintain an advantage of unbalanced unfairness.

And what if the overshield had been on-map, as in Halo 3, and the same bad player had simply spawned next to it? Is that unfair? What if he had fought his way to it, but completely on the backs of teammates, without contributing to the skirmish at all? And Halo is, at its core, all about balancing the game as much as possible and then finding all kinds of ways to unbalance it. Otherwise, why power weapons? Why power-ups? Why AAs? Why vehicles? Why cover? Why shields? Why not just have eight guys spawn in a six-sided box with the same weapons and last one standing wins?

I agree 100% that it subjectively feels wrong for that bad player to get the kill… but no different than some hack climbing into the back of a warthog and getting five or six or seven easy kills off of better players just because he gets the gunner seat over his seven teammates. And no one would argue that vehicles are unfair. Except me. I hate them. But I accept them because… well, because fifteen years ago somebody at Bungie decided that vehicular gameplay would be a part of Halo. Later somebody at 343 decided that ordnance drops would be part of the game, and so be it.

And again, I get it when people hate on the fact that the skill gap is narrowed, but for myself, I always found that Halo 3 didn’t so much have a skill gap as it had a skill chasm. So I’m okay with a little narrowing. I prefer a game that makes a little bit more room on the battlefield for the weekend warrior. If the game is nothing more than a killing field for the MLG/esports crowd, then pretty soon people like me (mediocre at best) will be forced to play Call of Duty instead. And I really don’t want to play Call of Duty. Ever. Yuck.

The only reason I play halo 4 is because I’m a stat -Yoink!-. Reach was my bread and butter. I recommend you get halo 4 if you’re looking for somthing more, but it’s a completely different game. Also a quiet small population you’ll be playing with quiet a bit of skilled players since the games been out for 3 years now.