Halo 5 Firefight or Reach Firefight

I like to get some feedback from players-positives and negatives from both modes in each game. I like the requisition system in Firefight in Halo 5 but imo Halo 5 doesn’t compare due to the sheer amount of customability that reach had.

Can’t really compare the two firefight’s together. Halo 5 follows large scale battles with vehicles whilst Halo Reach follows survival based infantry combat. Reach has more versatility with customising options for firefight whilst Halo 5 is forced to stick within the rules of Warzone. I’d prefer firefight in Reach since I prefer infantry combat way more than vehicle combat which Halo 5 enforces with boss fights.

Reach/ODST FF was pretty straight forward. Fight off hordes of enemies.

H5 FF/Warzone is forced and too complicated. You have to think and strategize. Players tune out.

I prefer reach because it wasn’t vehicular based like halo 5. I loved reach’ s firefight arcade so much that I played 4500 matches of it and killed 450,000 covenant. and what made it so addictive was the DMR / sniper rifle/ active camo start with unlimited ammo. I would just find a perfect perch and snipe 100 aliens per game. Halo 5 is so focused on vehicles that I don’t think I’ve ever spawned a sniper in Halo 5 firefight. Which makes dredg sad cuz I used to love sniping in ff

i like more halo 5 firefight because it is more difficult (it launches more enemies, harder and with vehicles as advances in the rounds) and puts you limit 5 min. so you must finish it fast

Why not both for H6?

They arent comparable. No matter how we put it or try to hail 343 for their wzff “efforts”, at the end of the day it was a mode made for micro transactions and to make a quick buck off us the player.

Reach was defiantly more realistic, but Halo 5’s firefight is more fun because of the mass chaos that ensues after tanks are spawned.

Reach’s is way more fun. Spawn times aren’t stupid long like in 5. Also, you can pick a spawn location so you don’t have to spend another 30 seconds out of a short round to hoof it to the objective. While we’re on that, the variety of FF gametypes was much better in Reach. You want an arcadey mode where it’s explosions all the time, go for Fiesta FF. You want to get your -Yoink- kicked, go for Legendary. And so on.

But, player movement and loadout choice for FF in 5 is better than Reach.

But hey, the very design of Halo 5’s FF is meant to encourage you to use REQs. And what does that mean? Players are more likely to spend real money on more packs to replenish their supply. Whoopee, go Microsoft.

> 2533274901440231;7:
> They arent comparable. No matter how we put it or try to hail 343 for their wzff “efforts”, at the end of the day it was a mode made for micro transactions and to make a quick buck off us the player.

Agreed

> 2727626560040591;6:
> Why not both for H6?

only in our dreams :frowning:

> 2533274901440231;7:
> They arent comparable. No matter how we put it or try to hail 343 for their wzff “efforts”, at the end of the day it was a mode made for micro transactions and to make a quick buck off us the player.

seeing it from that point of view … you’re right, it’s the game in which more req points you win

I’m pretty sure the endless hours of gruntpocalypse speedrunning is half the reason I can aim well enough to get Onyx, so probably Reach ;p

H5 is just way too focused on vehicles and doesn’t have the customization factor… but then again, H5 is more fun with friends because it doesn’t have the terrible lag issues that Reach had.

While I played a lot of it, reach firefight (arcadefight) was not challenging with unlimited lives and ammo.

Firefight limited was much more challenging.

Halo 5 is ok, but being down to just vehicle, grunt mech, and warden commendations, it feels a bit tedious.

I like them both so much, and this feels like comparing apples and oranges. While both game modes are distinctly firefight, Reach firefight is far more about survival. There are few initial weapons, limited respawns, and the player or players have to survive wave after wave of enemies. In Halo 5, there are rounds instead of waves, respawns are not limited, and each round is timed. Most rounds involve killing a boss or a certain number of enemies. Also, there is no solo firefight in Halo 5. Players are never alone and have access to their reqs. Because of their differences, I cannot say one is better than the other.

In halo reach firefight you can basically do whatever you want. In halo 5 you’re burdened with forced rounds with certain bosses and enemies.

ODST’s Firefight is the best iteration imo, and even then its moreso the basis for a great gamemode than it is in its own right.

Maps ought to begin like Crater or Alpha Site with areas locked off and gradually open up as the game progresses. Each player would earn energy for their kills, which could be spent at weapon / vehicle terminals (like Warzone but without the pay-to-win REQ system) or on doors / path-clearing devices (1000 EG to melt an ice formation with a mining laser, burrow into a cave system using a drilling machine, blow up a comm tower to form a makeshift bridge, idk my point is there’s tons of potential).

Done correctly, this would be fantastic for player choice and expression; do you splurge your energy on power weapons for everyone? or do you pool your resources into opening up the next area? It could house a Scorpion or a Banshee that would save your life, but then again, there could be a mini-boss like a Brute Chieftain or a squad of Honor Guards. It’s the kind of risk vs reward that fuels replayability and would fix the repetitiveness and stagnation that Firefight has suffered in every iteration up to this point.

One map like this would be more replayable than any Firefight / Warzone map thus far, especially taking Custom Game options into consideration (playing the map in reverse, having the entire map open from the start, etc.).
The precedent has been set for a game-mode like this, Escalation in the Cybertron games being the closest example I can think of, and I think it would work perfectly with Halo’s Sandbox.

ODST and Reach firefight are far superior to Halo 5 because they support LAN (system link) co-op play. There may be other reasons, but that’s the biggest reason for me.

I actually prefer odst firefight,but if I had to choose between reach and 5 I would choose reach

> 2533274852319616;3:
> Reach/ODST FF was pretty straight forward. Fight off hordes of enemies.
>
> H5 FF/Warzone is forced and too complicated. You have to think and strategize. Players tune out.

I’ll take this a step further, because you make it sound on the surface as if players (such as myself) don’t want to think or strategize. I’m perfectly willing to do those things, and I would say that RFF required more than a little of both if you wanted to be good at it (although one of its charms was that it didn’t demand that anybody be good at it). But in WZFF you’re forced to think and strategize, not given the option, and moreover, once you’ve strategized your way through one match then you’ve unlocked the single path to success in that game. Have loads of vehicle reqs and spend them unstintingly. That’s not very nuanced gameplay in my opinion. One dimensional without any serious replay value. Whether or not it lures people into spending money or reqs is another issue worth discussing, but which I’ll leave aside for now.

And do not get me started on forced team play. Reach gave you the choice to team up or go solo. WZFF can’t give you that option because the formula was backed into as an after thought and doesn’t allow for any flexibility whatsoever. Swing and a miss.