> CoD takes more skill.
0/10
I agree. I’ve just heard so many people say that Reach is SOOOO slow I didn’t want to say it wasn’t and have people just think my viewpoint was skewed into irrelevance.
But yes again, thanks for elaborating on what I was trying to convey.
> Halo is a fast paced game, Halo: Reach was already a lot faster than Halo 2 and 3.
> But the reason why you can fight back in Halo is because it’s all about map knowledge and the kill times are longer.
> You can’t fight back in CoD, because you die in less than a second.
Are you kidding me? I thought Halo: Reach gameplay was much much slower than Halo 3 gameplay.
In fact, I played a game of Anniversary Slayer. That’s how Halo 4 gameplay should be like.
[deleted]
Im all for faster and overall more intense gameplay. However that doesnt mean you cannot control the pace of the match. If its a close game and both teams are working together, the pace can be slow when waiting for power weapons or an opportunity too push with your team. In terms of kill times I believe H2/H3 and ZB Reach were more or less ideal for the Halo standard.
To my understanding, the increased map size in Halo 4 will help the “issue” of speed.
IMO, the problem with Reach wasn’t so much the speed of the game, but the ability for AAs to effectively stop the game. AL, Jetpack and Camo (and Bubble shield) all do this.
To me, it looks as though the core game still won’t be as fast as many MLG games we’ve seen. So the game is naturally progressing with the audiences tastes. It’s still nothing like CoD, and you know it. <1 second killtimes isn’t what we’ll see in H4.
> > > CoD takes more skill.
> >
> > 0/10
>
> It is tho.
No COD takes almost no skill which is why bad players like you play it.
> CoD takes more skill.
Nope
> > Halo is a fast paced game, Halo: Reach was already a lot faster than Halo 2 and 3.
> > But the reason why you can fight back in Halo is because it’s all about map knowledge and the kill times are longer.
> > You can’t fight back in CoD, because you die in less than a second.
>
> Are you kidding me? I thought Halo: Reach gameplay was much much slower than Halo 3 gameplay.
>
> In fact, I played a game of Anniversary Slayer. That’s how Halo 4 gameplay should be like.
No, he’s right. I played Halo 3 this week and was like, woooow this is super slow! Still enjoyed the matches I played though. I hope they brought over Halo 3 jump height to Halo 4. I didn’t know how much I missed it untill I when back and played Halo 3.
Difference betwen the fastness of CoD and the fastness of Halo:
In CoD everybody runs around and kills superfast, respawns very fast and runs again.
In Halo you are hitted like crazy by all kind of things, 10% shield from a grenade, 10% shield from a far away DMR etc. putting you always in the action without the necessity of dying like crazy and giving you the opportunity to strike back and have fun.
I like the speed of Halo Reach
yeah i think it would stop alot of players leaving games because it will give halo a bit more addictive streak and postpone things like dinner and lunch
Well, the problem isn’t that we need faster gameplay, it’s that we need the gameplay to be close to the speed it was in the first three games. By adding sprint and AL, Reach slowed gameplay down quite a bit. When people got too wounded, they’d either run away, or lock down and wait for backup.
Hopefully Halo 4 will speed things back up to a normal pace by adding instant respawns, and having ordinance drops, (making power weapons even more ubiquitous, thereby increasing kill-rate). Also, since everyone will have sprint, nobody will be at a disadvantage when their opponent turns tail and runs away.
Interesting little debate.
I won’t engage in the Cod is better than or Halo is better than subject derails.
On topic,
Tactics, is a wonderful thing. Especially when the synergy of the team is harmonious.
Myself I attract to the Rainbow Six style (original xbox days) of pacing. Today things move faster - broader audience, gaming is a billion dollar industry, the mass appeal demands high twitch - the mass appeal dominant group is mostly younger gamers, and well, they are young - and in the young lifestyle all is fast paced, and so companies stay the path.
However, from experience, I have come to realize - that perspective of pacing within games can be subjective. Psychological. Certain elements attribute to the affect. Keen knowledge of the map does in fact slow down the pacing. Having insight on where most the traffic usually ascends, flanking routes, counters to the flanking routes - that along with skills mitigate how pacing is perceived onto ones perspective. The more you know more your awareness is elevates thus slowing down the “anxiety” of unfamiliarity which causes things in pacing to become… Well, fast.
Add to that a team you are comfortable with and watch how the tactics become strategies… Slowing down the pacing even more. Basically - psychological. Just my two cents on the subject.
I like it both fast and slow 
Lol. That what she said.
I prefer slayer and if i feel crazy ill hop into Infection
The other day me an 2 clan mates rolled into slayer and won 14 of the 16 games we played. just screwing around most of the time and acting dumb so I dunno how we did so well with the amount of shenanigans we were up to.
> CoD takes more skill.
Lolololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol.
Nope.
> CoD takes more skill.
I don’t think so. It’s too easy to get a kill in CoD. Even I can do decently, and I’m not too good at FPS. Also, CoD is a little too easy for veterans as opposed to noobs. Halo’s like that too, but there’s a plethora of game modes that allow noobs to enjoy it as much as the veterans. (I.e. Grifball)