Pardon my incapability to comprehend the phenomenon that swooped the core community but why do so many fans consider Halo 2 to be the best in the series? I thought hardcore gamers valued diversity over simplicity. As far as I am concerned, Halo 2 is all about timing grenade tosses, strafing, and shooting a 3 shot burst weapon. That is a very simplistic 3 plot concept considering that the first two methods are not necessarily essential. Halo Reach drastically transforms the central core of Halo by incorporating Armor Abilities to warp the gameplay, which was received negatively by the core community.
Now we are met with Halo 4. A title that takes everything the community knows and loves and drags it to another playing field. If you are familiar with Halo 2-Reach your memory will serves as a good basis for understanding the flow of Halo 4. Glitches and elemental omissions aside, Halo 4 is definitely the most dynamic in the franchise; in thus, it forces the veterans players to revamp their long honed strategy.
When compared to Halo 2, Halo 4 is light years ahead in terms of multiplayer. In fact, if I had to put each title in order by enjoyability it would go as such: Halo Reach, Halo 4, Halo 3, Halo 3 ODST, Halo 2 and Combat Evolved. Until Halo 4 adds more gametypes and maps, it will stay below Halo Reach but presently I’m quite content with Halo 4. I don’t see how Halo 2 could possiblely be better in terms of competitiveness. Once CSR is set in place, maybe we will see new results from 343.
Halo 2 was simple… It had everything it needed, nothing too much and nothing too little. It was in the middle, solid gameplay. BR vs BR , didn’t have to worry about other factors such as jetpack, hologram, etc…
Also to add, my list would go like this…
Halo CE, halo 2, halo 3, halo 4, halo reach
Everything about Halo 2. The multiplayer on Xbox Live was the first of its kind. The ranking system was awesome and actually challenging because one loss was really a setback. I can say that I have never had as much fun online in a halo game than I did when I played Halo 2.
Halo 4 though is the most fun I’ve had online since Halo 3. I really liked Halo 3, but it didn’t capture my attention like Halo 2 did, and I didn’t play Reach online that much. I think once a good ranking system is added to Halo 4 it will really shine (with a couple of other tweaks of course).
Sorry but Halo 2 was not the best. Only thing I liked about Halo 2 was the Ranked Match and Online. But if you want to be real the Campaign was rushed and short with a lot of Graphical Glitches and the Multiplayer was plagued with the same thing except the glitches and crap were acceptable.
> > > The campaign was my favorite for many reasons, but the MM pretty much created the MLG, apparently.
> >
> > I could see why Halo 2 could boast its campaign above Halo 4s but the multiplayer is outdated and outclassed.
>
> In 2004, Halo 2 was the reason for console MM. Obviously it’s outdated now, and even though I know +/- 0 about MM in general, you can easily tell 343i tried to ‘copy’ other giants. And no, I don’t mean CoD.
I stated that it is outdated because people like to say that Halo 4 is the lesser of the two when it is clearly the more advanced of the two. The concept of copying is rather vague and hardly needs to be addressed. It is what keeps competition amongst companies alive and thriving. Mc Donalds didn’t get to where it is now by comming up with fresh ideas.
Diversity is not necessarily better than simplicity. I’m not into the “competitive” scene (yet), but I can understand why players who are would prefer Halo 2/3 over Reach or Halo 4. Halo 2/3 offered a level playing field from the beginning of every match. Each player had the same weapons and “abilities” (jump, strafe and shoot, basically), meaning the only differences separating players were skill and map knowledge.
Equality among players is the best foundation for competition, and both Halo 2 and 3 had that. With Reach and H4, the addition of loadouts and AA’s made for gameplay that, while “fair” in that all players could access them, is considered too diverse to support “proper” competition.
Other games are able to balance the diversity, but while H4 has seemed to to a better job than Reach, it is still not considered enough- particularly after three games that featured the standardized balance Halo players have come to expect.
It’s not that H4’s multiplayer is “truly bad”, it’s merely that it’s not what Halo players want.
Complex game mechanics does not equal complex tactics or increased depth, likewise simple game mechanics does not equal simple tactics or a lack of depth. Chess is a very simple game with simple mechnics, yet is is far more complex in its strategy than probably most board games with more complex mechanics. Halo 2 also had consistent game mechanics that did not get in the way of you controlling your spartan.
Add in the revolutions to online multiplayer (MM did not exist before H2) and you have the best Halo experience to date. Halo 2 will never be matched and it is due to developers psuedo complexity that they think is absolutely necessary.
> > The campaign was my favorite for many reasons, but the MM pretty much created the MLG, apparently.
>
> I could see why Halo 2 could boast its campaign above Halo 4s but the multiplayer is outdated and outclassed.
I loved Halo 2 campaign and multiplayer. It’s my favorite of the series.
But I think the reason people want it back so much is for nostalgic reasons, even if they did bring it back it will never return to what it once was.
I can see the Halo 2HD version with a few new maps for Halo 4 or Halo 5 like they did with CE Anniversary.
> > The campaign was my favorite for many reasons, but the MM pretty much created the MLG, apparently.
>
> I could see why Halo 2 could boast its campaign above Halo 4s but the multiplayer is outdated and outclassed.
explain.
halo 4s MP has nothing on halo 2, in halo 2 there was a lot of depth from meta game, you had to think of new ways to utilize pathing and lines of sight, different set ups and so on… in halo 4 this isn’t the case, instead its “oh this isn’t working, i’ll spawn with this”…
I don’t know, it’s weird. My recollection is of overwhelming hatred being directed at Halo 2 for any number of reasons. Hell, forget multiplayer. Even the campaign received continuous streams of hate for the somewhat inaccurate advertising preceding its release, and the"Finishing this fight" cliffhanger.
Much like Halo 4, I liked it more than most, but not as much as some.
> Pardon my incapability to comprehend the phenomenon that swooped the core community but why do so many fans consider Halo 2 to be the best in the series? I thought hardcore gamers valued diversity over simplicity. As far as I am concerned, Halo 2 is all about timing grenade tosses, strafing, and shooting a 3 shot burst weapon. That is a very simplistic 3 plot concept considering that the first two methods are not necessarily essential. Halo Reach drastically transforms the central core of Halo by incorporating Armor Abilities to warp the gameplay, which was received negatively by the core community.
>
> Now we are met with Halo 4. A title that takes everything the community knows and loves and drags it to another playing field. If you are familiar with Halo 2-Reach your memory will serves as a good basis for understanding the flow of Halo 4. Glitches and elemental omissions aside, Halo 4 is definitely the most dynamic in the franchise; in thus, it forces the veterans players to revamp their long honed strategy.
>
> When compared to Halo 2, Halo 4 is light years ahead in terms of multiplayer. <mark>In fact, if I had to put each title in order by enjoyability it would go as such: Halo Reach, Halo 4, Halo 3, Halo 3 ODST, Halo 2 and Combat Evolved.</mark> Until Halo 4 adds more gametypes and maps, it will stay below Halo Reach but presently I’m quite content with Halo 4. I don’t see how Halo 2 could possiblely be better in terms of competitiveness. Once CSR is set in place, maybe we will see new results from 343.
This just shows how blind you are to the issue, were you even old enough to play halo 2 during its online lifetime ?
> Diversity is not necessarily better than simplicity. I’m not into the “competitive” scene (yet), but I can understand why players who are would prefer Halo 2/3 over Reach or Halo 4. <mark>Halo 2/3 offered a level playing field from the beginning of every match. Each player had the same weapons and “abilities” (jump, strafe and shoot, basically), meaning the only differences separating players were skill and map knowledge.</mark>
>
> <mark>Equality among players is the best foundation for competition, and both Halo 2 and 3 had that.</mark> With Reach and H4, the addition of loadouts and AA’s made for gameplay that, while “fair” in that all players could access them, is considered too diverse to support “proper” competition.
QFT. I disagree with “fairness” of H4 though. You need to unlock weapons, grenades, AAs, perks, and specializations first. Maybe it’s more balanced than most of other modern games but still not fair. Also, Reach had pre-set loadouts and they mostly differed only in AA slot.
> > I stated that it is outdated because people like to say that Halo 4 is the lesser of the two when it is clearly the more advanced of the two. The concept of copying is rather vague and hardly needs to be addressed. It is what keeps competition amongst companies alive and thriving. Mc Donalds didn’t get to where it is now by comming up with fresh ideas.
>
> Halo, even though it has never truly been original, always did something that the majority didn’t. Vehicles, hijacking, dual wielding, aliens, shielding, etc weren’t original concepts whatsoever. But at that time, they weren’t as mainstream. That’s why I loved the campaign so much, because I could do thing in Halo 2 that I couldn’t in any other game, at that time.
>
> <mark>Halo fans also appreciate Halo as a fair, simple, ‘skill orientated’ game. Halo simply jumped onto the mainstream wagon, like every other damn FPS, and lost its charm.</mark>
I think it’s because it was a-lot of old players first xbox live game so it hold lots of nostalgia… I for one loved Halo combat evolved and when Halo 2 was released I were disappointed in it with the boring campaign missions(awesome cut-scenes though) and all lag, glitches, boosting and unfair multiplayer etc. It caused me to stop playing Halo and even xbox until the release of Halo 3 when I finally got around to get a new xbox and I’ve been playing Halo since then.
In my opinion Halo 2 and Reach were the worst Halo games of the series and Halo combat evolved and Halo 3 were the best. It’s too soon to say right now but I’m fairly certain that Halo 4 will also be one of my favorites.