Title Update Discussion

[thy_ReaperMC]

> um… what?! if grenades and melees are all you need, what incentive is there to even go for power weapons?

Range and speed obviously. Snipers vs Grenades. Shotgun (I consider this a heavy weapon due to range, not power) vs Melee. Rockets are the faster, larger versions of Grenades but still much slower than a Sniper or Shotgun.
Note: A precision weapon can also shoot a Grenade or Rocket out of the air… just saying if the DMR is sooo worthless… why can it prevent at least 1 of the fectas from being a factor at all?

> um… what?! if grenades and melees are all you need, what incentive is there to even go for power weapons? t

They’re all we’ve ever needed in Halo (well not pre-path Halo2). Obviously the incentive is to kill the enemy with more ease than a regular weapon, grenade or melee. And from a range that melee and grenades are as little a factor as possible (tactics, due).

> there isnt a SINGLE GOOD REASON for no bleed melees to exist, at all. ZERO. ZILCH. NADDA.

1. It matches both universe lore and one scientific take on the technology now.
2. Weapon damage variances cause more random occurrences with bleed-through than without. Say we have 2 pairs of players shooting an enemy each. 1 pair has an AR and NR while the other has an AR and DMR. With equal number of shots on the AR, one weapon will statistically bleed-through sooner than the other weapon.
3. It may be that it would take only 4 head but still 8 body shots to kill with the DMR. While the NR is still a 6 and 9 shot. That taking into account how the Needler works and the idea that now shields must be downed to explode an enemy with it as well…

> because a lot of the time you simply cannot shoot their shields off before it would be relevant, try all you want, but sometimes it simply wont work because it wasnt viable in that situation.

I give you this, you do prevent yourself from saying absolutes all the time. They tend to show up in statements like these where, duh, of course it doesn’t work all the time. Part of a balanced system is that there is no one cheap way to play 100% of the time. Preventing one cheap tactic with another is playing the game at high skill levels.

> instead of grenades being a tool to aid in getting kills, they are ALL YOU NEED to get kills.

They’re all that’s ever been needed to get kills on small-medium sized maps in any Halo. But if they’re all I need, why the fear of the AAs?
They’re contradicting fears. You claim every system is broken in their own right, but also say all I have to do is exploit melees, or exploit grenades or exploit spamming the DMR and I’ll never loose… You’re right, to an extent. If a player is skilled, they exploit the entire system to win. And since I can exploit any single system as you claim for the win at anytime, in actuality, the ability to make them effectual exploits becomes a challenge and proves that the Trifecta of Grenades, Melee and Weapons has not been removed. AAs have only deepened the experience into a 3D Tetrahedron. You keep proving it more and more but ironically, label the conclusion opposite to the evidence.

[iQ_II_URZA]

first of all, you are right. even tho grenades are nukes, there is still incentive to pick power weapons up. i simply feel they are entirely too strong, and need to be tweaked ASAP. either longer fuse time, or smaller radius, or less damage. it really doesnt matter what area they nerf grenades from reach to the next halo game, but it simply must be done. im very tired of halo reach being a first person grenadier rather than a first person shooter. pretty flippin terrible that the grenades in reach are more consistent than the primary weapon for competitive games.

> just saying if the DMR is sooo worthless… why can it prevent at least 1 of the fectas from being a factor at all?

the DMR is worthless because of spamming adding random chance to damn near every single DMR only encounter, not because it isnt a good precision rifle.

> They’re all we’ve ever needed in Halo

yea, the difference here is, they use to take even the smallest bit of skill to use.

> They’re all we’ve ever needed in Halo. Obviously the incentive is to kill the enemy with more ease than a regular weapon, grenade or melee

see, thats the thing. grenades arent even remotely hard to use in Halo Reach because of their blast radius, their amazing ability to stick to the ground, their incredible damage, and their super short fuse time. throwing a mini nuke is a helluva lot easier than using almost every power weapon, the exceptions being… rockets at medium-close range, the sword, and the hammer. and yes, even the shotgun takes more skill to use than grenades. and there isnt a single thing that takes less skill than melees. they auto target for you, so theres almost no skill involved here.

> 1) lore and one scientific take

using lore and science, or realism to explain bad game mechanics is laughable. period.

> 2) Weapon damage variances cause more randomness

there isnt a single bit of ‘randomness’ involved with bleed through and weapon damage variances. not one bit. in an updated halo 3 melee system; you either deal more damage, or you dont. if you deal more damage, then melee, and they were below the threshold, it should result in a kill for you, and a death for them. your example is bad because weapons shouldnt deal the same amount of damage over every range. theres a difference between weapon balance and making every gun the exact same.

> 3) [weapon damage problems]

damage charts on weapons can be changed with ease. there is no sense in removing the viability of shooting from -some- close combat situations simply because your weapon damage charts are -Yoink!- thats a weapon balance issue, not a melee issue.

so… out of your 3 examples of why no-bleed is better, you havent given even one good example of why its even remotely better. try as much as you want, but you will never come up with a good reason simply because there isnt one. why? because its like this: have shooting to come out ahead be viable all the time, or have shooting to come out ahead be viable… some… of the time. one is clearly better.

> I give you this, you do prevent yourself from saying absolutes

thats the point, tho. i shouldnt have to think to myself “hmm should i continue shooting to pop his shields, then melee him, or should i just melee him then jump back and headshot him” in that split second that someone starts sprinting from out of cover to double derp me. no bleed melees are incredibly unintuitive here.

> Part of a balanced system is that there is no one cheap way to play 100% of the time. Preventing one cheap tactic with another is playing the game at high skill levels.

how about… no cheap tactics, ever? no noob tubes, no danger close, no SPAMMING, no MINI NUKES, no ARMOR LOCK, no NOBLEED. it is pretty ludicrous to say the game is ‘balanced’ because at high levels of play some of your games cheap tactics will beat others. how about game mechanics that promote NON-CHEAP tactics? that sounds better.

> [grenades and melees are all you need] But if they’re all I need, why the fear of the AAs?

again, ive told you this many times before, but why on earth would you want game mechanics that dont work BY THEMSELVES before you add them to the other game mechanics? it simply doesnt make any sense. ‘welp johnny, we’ve got some mini nukes as grenades, time to make armer lockz last 6 seconds!’ ‘no dave, thats a terrible idea, how about we just fix the grenades, then look at armor lock’

> They’re contradicting fears.

no, they arent. grenades are nukes, and armor abilities are horribly balanced. thats not contradictory at all. just because both are broken doesnt mean there is even the smallest bit of a link between the 2 (aside from all of them together making the game seem, and play awful).

> you say all I have to do is exploit melees, or exploit grenades or exploit spamming the DMR and I’ll never loose. You’re right, to an extent. If a player is skilled, they exploit the entire system to win.

what? i never said all you have to do is exploit melees or grenades or exploit spamming and you’ll never lose. the reason this doesnt work is because they are broken for EVERYONE. and yea, good players exploit the entire system to win, but that much is irrelevant.

> And since I can exploit any single system as you claim for the win at anytime, in actuality, the ability to make them effectual exploits becomes a challenge and proves that the Trifecta of Grenades, Melee and Weapons has not been removed.

again, exploiting the terrible mechanics wont give you an auto win. i really have no idea where you got this from lol. the fact of the matter is, because of these -Yoink!- mechanics, the game is LESS reliable in terms of skill and exploiting (or just using mechanics correctly in general) for gain. take the DMR as a prime example, i know the proper way to shoot it at every range. does it matter that i know this proper cadence, and have better aiming prowess? NOPE. people will still spam their bawls off and beat me simply because the game is horribly designed. before it would be… i would win vs any given person a pretty consistent % of the time. in halo reach, however, its almost entirely random. every single DMR battle boils down to luck, and chance. i dont win 60-40% against people, instead, i win. maybe, and they win. maybe.

[Razz_Pitazz]

um…this whole thread I didn’t need to read. I know what it says. You all know what it says. Bungie knows what it says. 343 knows what it says before it was even made. I just hope they are ready for this. This is a sad way to be handed the reigns of an epic franchise. It’s not dead yet. The community will latch on until 343 makes a statement as to their intentions with Halo Reach Matchmaking Community.

[thy_ReaperMC]

Honestly, I believe your comprehension skills are limited.

> i dont win 60-40% against people, instead, i win. maybe, and they win. maybe.

You own words tell me you have little understanding of what they mean. How can you say you used to win on average, 50% of the time, but in Reach, you may win or loose (indicating a 50% chance of winning), and the former is unacceptable?

I don’t need to address the rest as I find it just as contradictory as the noted quote.

[PhArmAssists]

> Honestly, I believe your comprehension skills are limited.
>
> > i dont win 60-40% against people, instead, i win. maybe, and they win. maybe.
>
> You own words tell me you have little understanding of what they mean. How can you say you used to win on average, 50% of the time, but in Reach, you may win or loose (indicating a 50% chance of winning), and the former is unacceptable?
>
> I don’t need to address the rest as I find it just as contradictory as the noted quote.

I strongly feel that the system(bloom) is effective at differentiating bad players from good players. It does NOT do a good job differentiating good players from great players. This game is way to easy to aim. Now, throw that in with a broken bloom system and its Halo:Reach special casino edition( now with free lucky rabbits foot). If there was faster movement and jump height WITHOUT bloom we are looking at the greatest halo game of all time. Team classic gets very close to this with the NR, but on crappy maps, with crappy spawns, and crappy crappy mega nades.

Point is timing your shots works great against kids with k/d less than 1.5-1.6. When I play better players who spam I am forced to fire faster and thus the dice role begins. For the kids that started at Halo 3 this may be ok to have to rely on teamwork at such an obnoxious level. I prefer the H2 CE days.

Also I don’t see a point continuing to argue. This game is blatantly created for a more casual crowed so lets accept that they got what they want. I might just have an aneurysm if I read one more “lore” or “realism” in their very questionable MP logic.

[thy_ReaperMC]

To reiterate: I don’t care so much that another player doesn’t find the whole virtual-world that is Halo as interesting as I do. I do care when someone belittles said virtual-world with lies and fallacies that lead to false interpretations.

It’s ok for someone to think that Reach, a game that is suppose to be easy to pick up and play but hard to master, doesn’t “punish” a player for not using a weapon properly. Though it’s probably more accurate to say than in a game designed as such, the bloom system rewards smart use but doesn’t punish improper use. One would think in a game meant to attract new players, the system would make sense to be more of a risk vs reward system instead of a risk vs punishment system.
It really makes one wonder how things could be considered fair if things weren’t 50% however to start with… anything other than 50-50 seems stacked in a direction to me.

As far as there being no way to distinguish good players from great players in Halo: Reach… I guess that’s why MLG has their own version of the playoffs at the end of their seasons. Because even they can’t distinguish between good teams and great teams before a match. They can only let the chips fall where they may and let the players duke it out and see who is left standing. Believe the Hype for proof that even in MLG, the “best” aren’t guaranteed to win. Only statistically favoured to win… oh look at that, favoured not guaranteed the win. Even in MLG, the “best man” isn’t always the one leaving the ThunderDome.

Also, the casual population of Halo is much smaller while the core group is very large. Statistically speaking, you should encounter more experienced Halo players in Reach than you would have in Halo2 or 3. Not only because 2 and 3 had smaller bases than Reach but because 2 and 3 had more inexperienced players playing than in Reach. With a smaller yet more experienced group to compete against, a skilled player’s experience should be more taxing than previous experiences due to the increased quality in player competition. It just happens, in a balanced sandbox that doesn’t have a single go-to weapon, those that judge others on one-weapon gunplay are left scratching their heads most times.

It is all elementary.

[Matthias_PDX]

> To reiterate: I don’t care so much that another player doesn’t find the whole virtual-world that is Halo as interesting as I do. I do care when someone belittles said virtual-world with lies and fallacies that lead to false interpretations.
>
> It’s ok for someone to think that Reach, a game that is suppose to be easy to pick up and play but hard to master, doesn’t “punish” a player for not using a weapon properly. Though it’s probably more accurate to say than in a game designed as such, the bloom system rewards smart use but doesn’t punish improper use. One would think in a game meant to attract new players, the system would make sense to be more of a risk vs reward system instead of a risk vs punishment system.
> It really makes one wonder how things could be considered fair if things weren’t 50% however to start with… anything other than 50-50 seems stacked in a direction to me.
>
> As far as there being no way to distinguish good players from great players in Halo: Reach… I guess that’s why MLG has their own version of the playoffs at the end of their seasons. Because even they can’t distinguish between good teams and great teams before a match. They can only let the chips fall where they may and let the players duke it out and see who is left standing. Believe the Hype for proof that even in MLG, the “best” aren’t guaranteed to win. Only statistically favoured to win… oh look at that, favoured not guaranteed the win. Even in MLG, the “best man” isn’t always the one leaving the ThunderDome.
>
> Also, the casual population of Halo is much smaller while the core group is very large. Statistically speaking, you should encounter more experienced Halo players in Reach than you would have in Halo2 or 3. Not only because 2 and 3 had smaller bases than Reach but because 2 and 3 had more inexperienced players playing than in Reach. With a smaller yet more experienced group to compete against, a skilled player’s experience should be more taxing than previous experiences due to the increased quality in player competition. It just happens, in a balanced sandbox that doesn’t have a single go-to weapon, those that judge others on one-weapon gunplay are left scratching their heads most times.
>
> It is all elementary.

I don’t think the population is as strong as you think it is. Whether its as large as Halo 3’s was at this time back in the day I can’t say for sure although I know for a fact a lot of people I know have left. Its really not the source of my arguement anyways, just saying its something to think about.

Listen, one thing we can agree on I believe is that there have been a lot of changes from Halo 3 to Reach. You can understand that a lot of people don’t like these changes right?

[thy_ReaperMC]

But of course. You should have seen me rant back when Halo2 came out. I was not happy with any of the changes made to help make Halo more accessible. But like all things, you can only surprise me once. And since my expectations ruined the sequel, not Bungie, I got over it and grew just a little more for understanding it.

[iQ_II_URZA]

> Honestly, I believe your comprehension skills are limited.
>
> > i dont win 60-40% against people, instead, i win. maybe, and they win. maybe.
>
> You own words tell me you have little understanding of what they mean. How can you say you used to win on average, 50% of the time, but in Reach, you may win or loose (indicating a 50% chance of winning), and the former is unacceptable?
>
> I don’t need to address the rest as I find it just as contradictory as the noted quote.

i gotta say i am completely astonished as to how you can look at the current DMR algorithm which enables players to OPTIMALLY spam till they hit 4 shots, then headshot, at the vast majority of ranges, and think that it is even remotely close to being optimal.

in my example, i was talking about halo when actual skill had a part in shooting, versus halo reach, where its completely random regardless of either players individual shooting prowess.

in halo 3, i would win, say 60% of the time against an above average player, and lose 40%. in halo reach, however, its completely random, regardless of either players skill.

is it really that hard for you to understand? lol

instead of halo being

aim -> shoot, rinse, repeat, person who aims better wins.

its

aim -> spam your bawls off and hope to god you win.

> I do care when someone belittles said virtual-world with lies and fallacies that lead to false interpretations.

these being what? lies and fallacies do not exist in my arguments. grenades are INCREDIBLY powerful, spamming adds random chance, and no bleed melees remove the viability of shooting some of the time.

those are my main points, and they are all 100% true.

> the bloom system rewards smart use but doesn’t punish improper use.

false. the bloom system doesnt reward anyone, because its horrible. who, exactly, is feeling accomplished that they out DMR’d someone by full auto spamming? who, exactly, is feeling the -rewards- of BARELY beating someone in a DMR battle when they try to use cadence, and have flawless aim, only to have some dimwit across the map spam the holy hell out of his DMR and almost win? it doesnt reward -smart use- in the least, because SPAMMING is SMART USE on the VAST MAJORITY OF RANGES, and the victor of SPAMMING CONTESTS ARE COMPLETELY RANDOM.

> It really makes one wonder how things could be considered fair if things weren’t 50% however to start with.

so its not fair that im better than someone? LAUGHABLE, YET AGAIN LOL.

> MLG and distinguishing good players

MLG teams use teamwork, but they still have to deal with the horrible game mechanics. how many of these pros actually think Halo Reach is even remotely close to being an ‘upgrade’ from ANY of the older halo games? not many.

> It just happens, in a balanced sandbox that doesn’t have a single go-to weapon, those that judge others on one-weapon gunplay are left scratching their heads most times.

yep, balance. throw a mini nuke! spam your bawls off and hope you win! dont even try to shoot in close combat because some of the time its not viable!

and honestly bro, i completely understand why you dont want to argue points with me. its pretty obvious you are having troubles coming up with reasonable explanations as to why halo reach is even remotely good for a halo game.

‘no bleed melees are rul gud cuz of lore and SCIENCE!’

oh my.

[system]

> But of course. You should have seen me rant back when Halo2 came out. I was not happy with any of the changes made to help make Halo more accessible. But like all things, you can only surprise me once. And since my expectations ruined the sequel, not Bungie, I got over it and grew just a little more for understanding it.

That’s exactly what’s going on here and I just don’t know how to get the haters to understand it.

Halo Reach is as competitive as ANY Halo out there.

They complain that the game isn’t fast enough AND that Spammers win too much…

People complaining about the mechanics of this game need to realize a few things.

1.) no one makes you play this game
2.) Other people LIKE this game.
3.) No player in Reach has DIFFERENT mechanics than you do.
4.) Since we’re ALL playing with the SAME mechanics, the winner will be the player with the most skill.
5.) Players are competitive, games are not. If you don’t want to compete at Halo Reach, then don’t, but but think that Halo Reach needs to change to make YOU more competitive.
6.) Competitive doesn’t mean slayer games with scores 50 to 35 or some BS like that.
7.) You wanted competitive games, Halo Reach supplies it in spades.

[coca_mola]

> 2.) Other people LIKE this game.

I think in this thread alone the majority is for a title update. All i ever see in this thread is about 2 people defending reach.

[system]

> > 2.) Other people LIKE this game.
>
> I think in this thread alone the majority is for a title update. All i ever see in this thread is about 2 people defending reach.

I do see that, but it doesn’t negate my point.

I mean, if you wanted the users in this thread to be an indicator of how many people want your changes… Then you would have to balance that against the THOUSANDS who aren’t posting, but do continue to play this game.

In which case, you’ll lose your argument every time.

The numbers don’t support a TU.

[iQ_II_URZA]

> 1.) no one makes you play this game

and i dont, because i dont play bad games.

> 2.) Other people LIKE this game.

whats your point? just because people like it doesnt mean its ok. some people like eating feces, does that mean its ok to do so? derp.

> 3.) No player in Reach has DIFFERENT mechanics than you do.

so, because everyone has the same bad mechanics the mechanics arent bad? brilliant logic.

> 4.) Since we’re ALL playing with the SAME mechanics, the winner will be the player with the most skill.

true, but if winning isnt fun because any random noob can just spam their DMR for wild success, the game stops being fun for competitive people.

> 5.) Players are competitive, games are not. If you don’t want to compete at Halo Reach, then don’t, but but think that Halo Reach needs to change to make YOU more competitive.

wat? we dont want change so we can be more competitive, we want change so the game isnt laughable when compared with every other halo game in each of its core game mechanics.

> 6.) Competitive doesn’t mean slayer games with scores 50 to 35 or some BS like that.

no, but competitive DOES mean having a primary weapon spawn where, when used against each other, the person who shoots better WINS. this is not how it is in reach. its completely random who wins DMR battles, regardless of how good people are at shooting. individual shooting skill couldnt matter any less because almost every DMR battle is a race for whomever can land the first 4 spammed shots, then follow up with a headshot. heck, even if you hit the first 4 spammed shots, you will still get beat by the random noob who just spams all the way, and gets a lucky headshot here and there.

> 7.) You wanted competitive games, Halo Reach supplies it in spades.

imma have to call BS on this one. halo reach isnt even remotely close to being a ‘competitive’ halo game. almost every single one of the games mechanics is specifically geared towards soccer mom gamers. in case you didnt notice, shooting skill is out the window, grenades are nukes, and you dont even have to shoot in close combat because you can just melee twice to kill the person trying to get ahead by shooting because sometimes it isnt viable.

you misunderstand. we dont want a more ‘competitive’ halo, we want a halo that has GOOD core game mechanics, which halo reach does not.

[system]

I can be every bit of obstinate as you can be about this.

> > 1.) no one makes you play this game
>
> and i dont, because i dont play bad games.

Since you don’t play Halo Reach, I’m going to dismiss your opinion of this game, you’ve pretty much admitted right there that you have no idea what you’re talking about. Heck, I could trust the opinion of someone who still plays, but is bad at this game over your own.

> > 2.) Other people LIKE this game.
>
> whats your point? just because people like it doesnt mean its ok. some people like eating feces, does that mean its ok to do so? derp.

Again, if you think this game is crap, don’t play it, I don’t want to play this game with people that don’t like it, you can stop now and make us both happy.

> > 3.) No player in Reach has DIFFERENT mechanics than you do.
>
> so, because everyone has the same bad mechanics the mechanics arent bad? brilliant logic.

Bad mechanic, good mechanic… Way to miss the point. The mechanic is intended, maybe it wasn’t made for your enjoyment? Sounds to me like I’m not the only one who doesn’t want you to play Reach.

> > 4.) Since we’re ALL playing with the SAME mechanics, the winner will be the player with the most skill.
>
> true, but if winning isnt fun because any random noob can just spam their DMR for wild success, the game stops being fun for competitive people.

The math that you anti-bloom people use PROVES that can only happen 24% of the time AT 10 forge units. That will hardly get ANYONE wild success at this game.

> > 5.) Players are competitive, games are not. If you don’t want to compete at Halo Reach, then don’t, but but think that Halo Reach needs to change to make YOU more competitive.
>
> wat? we dont want change so we can be more competitive, we want change so the game isnt laughable when compared with every other halo game in each of its core game mechanics.

“Laughable” I had no idea we were judging Halo the same way we would Ratchet and Clank. Get over yourself.

> > 6.) Competitive doesn’t mean slayer games with scores 50 to 35 or some BS like that.
>
> no, but competitive DOES mean having a primary weapon spawn where, when used against each other, the person who shoots better WINS. this is not how it is in reach. its completely random who wins DMR battles, regardless of how good people are at shooting. individual shooting skill couldnt matter any less because almost every DMR battle is a race for whomever can land the first 4 spammed shots, then follow up with a headshot. heck, even if you hit the first 4 spammed shots, you will still get beat by the random noob who just spams all the way, and gets a lucky headshot here and there.

Again, ANTI-BLOOM People ran the numbers. People who AGREE with YOU ran the numbers, and it comes out to be a static 24%. HOW THE EFFFFFFFFFF is that random at all?!?!? Get better, or get over it.

> > 7.) You wanted competitive games, Halo Reach supplies it in spades.
>
> imma have to call BS on this one. halo reach isnt even remotely close to being a ‘competitive’ halo game. almost every single one of the games mechanics is specifically geared towards soccer mom gamers. in case you didnt notice, shooting skill is out the window, grenades are nukes, and you dont even have to shoot in close combat because you can just melee twice to kill the person trying to get ahead by shooting because sometimes it isnt viable.
>
> you misunderstand. we dont want a more ‘competitive’ halo, we want a halo that has GOOD core game mechanics, which halo reach does not.

Halo Reach has the best multiplayer mechanics of any Halo in the last 8 years. I would HAPPILY take what Reach is over anything trying to be a Halo 2 or 3 remake.

You don’t like the mechanics, then don’t play, it’s that simple. Me and thousands of other people every day will continue to disagree with you by playing it.

You’ve been out voted.

[Madcat124]

You know, I just got off playing Halo 3 and I realized what I find wrong with Reach. It’s quite simple actually. It’s not fun…

I can’t really blame any one specific thing. It’s truly just a bunch of small problems that add up to make the game really un-entertaining. The sad thing is these things can be fixed with a bit of effort and by listening to the fan.

I see people saying it’s not competitive but I think it’s the opposite, I think it’s too competitve. Not the community though, but the way the game was designed. It just detracts from the actual fun.

Also, the maps currently out are pretty bad, at least in my opinion. More maps would be better. Not even real maps, but forge world maps. they’re not hard to make. And I don’t want to play community maps. I want to play other game types.

And you can’t say “Well, don’t play the game if you don’t like it” cause I do like it still. I like Halo, I’m a Halo fan. And because I am a Halo fan I want Halo to go back to being good old fun Halo, not Reach…

[iQ_II_URZA]

> Since you don’t play Halo Reach, I’m going to dismiss your opinion of this game

so because i dont like the game, and dont play it anymore, my opinion is invalid? that has to be one of the dumbest things i have ever heard on this forum, straight up.

> Again, if you think this game is crap, don’t play it, I don’t want to play this game with people that don’t like it, you can stop now and make us both happy.

i just said i dont play reach anymore.

> Bad mechanic, good mechanic… Way to miss the point. The mechanic is intended, maybe it wasn’t made for your enjoyment? Sounds to me like I’m not the only one who doesn’t want you to play Reach.

see, thats the thing. you guys are misguided in that you think that these terrible mechanics benefit… anyone, when they dont. who, exactly, benefits from the DMR algorithm in Halo Reach? no, really. give me 1 group of people who is benefited from having added luck here. think all you want, but you wont come up with a good example simply because NO ONE benefits from it.

> The math that you anti-bloom people use PROVES that can only happen 24% of the time AT 10 forge units. That will hardly get ANYONE wild success at this game.

yea, except, spamming is optimal up until this range. did you forget that? and because spamming is optimal up until this range, where EVEN AT THAT RANGE ITS SILL RANDOM, damn near every single encounter in reach is a metaphoric coin flip. good at shooting? good at cadence? TOO BAD, SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM.

> “Laughable” I had no idea we were judging Halo the same way we would Ratchet and Clank. Get over yourself.

thats exactly what i feel the new mechanics are. laughable. and, even then, thats giving them too much credit.

> Again, ANTI-BLOOM People ran the numbers. People who AGREE with YOU ran the numbers, and it comes out to be a static 24%. HOW THE EFFFFFFFFFF is that random at all?!?!? Get better, or get over it.

it really doesnt matter what word you use to describe when your game mechanics fail, because thats what they are, FAIL MECHANICS. how about you try your darndest to explain to us why this 24% of fail is better than ZERO% fail.
and, like i said before, spamming is OPTIMAL up until this range, too, so almost every single DMR battle is entirely random, or subject to chance.

heres a question that destroys you:

if 2 people have flawless aim, and are standing a consistent 5 forge blocks from each other, both using full auto spam till they hit 4 shots, then follow up with a headshot, who will win?

HERP DERP GET DESTROYED BY LOGIC.

thats the entire point. the DMR isnt consistent when used properly, even if you have better aim, or try to use a cadence because at the vast majority of ranges SPAMMING IS OPTIMAL, and SPAM BATTLES ARE COMPLETELY RANDOM IN THEIR OUTCOME.

> You don’t like the mechanics, then don’t play, it’s that simple. Me and thousands of other people every day will continue to disagree with you by playing it.
>
> You’ve been out voted.

so, if by popular vote, america decided to nuke the rest of the world, would that be ok? its popular vote after all.

see my point? votes, and the majority dont mean ANYTHING when the majority of the community has absolutely no idea whats going on in the first place.

how about you rack your brain for answers to some simple questions:

which is better:

halo where, if 2 people encounter each other with [primary weapon spawn for competitive games] only, the person who has better aim and shooting wins 100% of the time, regardless of the range. (every other halo)

or

halo where, if 2 people encounter each other with DMR’s only, the result is unknown, regardless of who shoots better, or who gets the first shot, unless its long range, where the better shooter will win. (halo reach)

how about this one

which is better:

grenades that aid in people getting kills, but are still dodgeable (halos 1, 2, and 3)

or

grenades that are so powerful, and so incredibly hard to dodge because of slow movement speed, extremely fast fuse time, the ability to stick to the ground, and huge radius; that they are considered to be MINI NUKES by a lot of people. (halo reach)

or this one

which is better:

shooting in close combat for benefit 100% of the time (halo 3)

or

shooting in close combat for benefit… some… of the time. (halo reach no-bleed)

see? when you look at the game from a standpoint of someone using actual LOGIC and THOUGHT PROCESS instead of just ‘i like reach better DURRRRR’, its pretty obvious that this game is trash when compared to the previous titles.

[Tamrit]

-Cough- needs to -cough- and get his -cough- out of his -cough- -cough-

'Cause honestly, I’m getting sick of all the -cough- he is coming out with.

Where are these two lonesome defenders getting their numbers from exactly? You say THOUSANDS of people play Halo Reach, love it, but don’t post anywhere to defend it. Well guess what? There’s also THOUSANDS of people who play Halo Reach, HATE IT, but don’t post anywhere about it. Fact of the matter is, there are a lot more people who dislike this game than people who genuinely do like it. Do we have to count the amount of people in this thread alone who have been agreeing with coca mola, and compare it to the TWO people who are disagreeing?

There are people like URZA who obviously have other games he loves to play, so he can easily toss Reach aside. I don’t like CoD, and I’m not too fond of GoW. Halo is the only game I’ve played religiously. Until Reach came out anyway. I played it everyday for the first couple of months.

Now there are gaps of many days, sometimes weeks where I just don’t bother playing it. And I know there are plenty of other people like me. My friends list was originally FULL of people who played Halo with me, all the time. When I moved over to Reach, I only had 2 friends play with me. Everyone else just gave up on Halo. They stuck with Halo 3 for a while. Some still play just that game. Most converted to Black Ops.

I always solidly believed that Halo made a much better FPS than CoD. I don’t think I can say that now.

I’m sure I already made a post giving SOLID EVIDENCE that the numbers of Halo Reach have sunk dramatically. Comparing the numbers to that of Halo 3, years after its release, was just unbelievable! It’s hard to imagine that a new game would be so lacking in players after only 8 months, when the one before it was still going strong after SO MANY YEARS.

Now, honestly, if you are going to keep going like this, then we should be the ones to disregard YOUR opinions.

No one cares to educate someone who will not learn.

[cpkbob]

> > Bad mechanic, good mechanic… Way to miss the point. The mechanic is intended, maybe it wasn’t made for your enjoyment? Sounds to me like I’m not the only one who doesn’t want you to play Reach.
>
> see, thats the thing. you guys are misguided in that you think that these terrible mechanics benefit… anyone, when they dont. who, exactly, benefits from the DMR algorithm in Halo Reach? no, really. give me 1 group of people who is benefited from having added luck here. think all you want, but you wont come up with a good example simply because NO ONE benefits from it

If no one benefits, everyone benefits. If one group benefits from it, it would be to all other groups detriment.

Same things goes for every mechanic you don’t like, and the entire game of Reach. Since it tries not to cater to one individual group of gamers, it does a bad job of satisfying the extreme groups, but an incredible job satisfying the general masses.

Im not saying I like or hate any of the discussed game machanics (bloom, AA, bleedthrough, etc…), but they are implemented as intended, so deal with it. If the bloom mechanic was so attrocious as everyone in here makes it out to be, why has nothing been done? Why hasn’t Bungie or 343 addressed it in anyway? Once again, I have no opinion on it.

Stop trying to make the game the way you want it. Play it or not. And please never says the that the majority of the community wants what you want, especially when you cite this thread as a representation of the Halo population.

---

If 343 really wanted to stop this entire mess of self-entitled threads, just make Forge far more complete. Make Forge apply to everything, and I mean everything (gun’s damage, rate of fire, recoil/bloom, reload time… players move speed, jump height…bleedthrough or not, more customizable AA)

[iQ_II_URZA]

>

i think you somehow think that the general masses are capable of forming their own opinion based on logic and even the slightest bit of thought process, when they clearly arent. halo fans will defend any mechanics that halo games have, simply because they are halo fans. thats how it has been with the majority, and thats how it will continue to be with the majority.

also, the people who care about the game enough that they would try to discuss it on the forums are the people game designers should be listening to in the first place, not the people who just play to see explosions and shoot bullets.

> If no one benefits, everyone benefits. If one group benefits from it, it would be to all other groups detriment.

bungie could have easily made GOOD game mechanics that keep people wanting more, and feeling like they are improving, but instead we have the opposite effect. we have bad game mechanics that make even just above average halo players feel like they have already hit the proverbial ‘skill ceiling’ so there really isnt much incentive to keep playing, especially when they see how they are getting killed by bad game mechanics over and over used by people who are worse than they are at the game.

people strive for mastery, that is a pretty fundamental part of the human psyche for most people, in some way or another. people like to see that they are learning, and progressing / getting better, and they also like to see that even tho they have progressed this far, they still have a LONG ways to go in terms of getting even better. unfortunately, with halo reach, things like ‘shooting skill’ are completely thrown out the window because 1v1 DMR battles dont function as they should.

the thing about adding GOOD game mechanics, however, is you have to pair them with a GOOD matchmaking system that actually pairs people with like-skilled opponents so people dont get discouraged when they are matched up against people who are far better than they are. both have to be implemented. unfortunately for all of us, in halo reach, neither was implemented, and the population suffers as a result.

> If the bloom mechanic was so attrocious as everyone in here makes it out to be, why has nothing been done?

because patching the game immediately takes money out of bungies bank account, without directly, and immediately influencing their incoming money. if patching the game would directly make bungie gain more money, they would have done it by now. the fact of the matter is they really could care less that they made a game with shoddy mechanics because they are already swimming in dollars.

to me, it seems like with a patch to this game they would attract a TON of halo fans to come back and re buy their recently sold halo reach copies because the mechanics arent terrible anymore. i would certainly buy the new map pack if the game was updated, and any subsequent map pack also! until then, however, the game simply isnt worth playing for me.

> If 343 really wanted to stop this entire mess of self-entitled threads, just make Forge far more complete. Make Forge apply to everything, and I mean everything (gun’s damage, rate of fire, recoil/bloom, reload time… players move speed, jump height…bleedthrough or not, more customizable AA)

this bit is actually a really good idea. i hope they do this with the next halo game, so even if they mess up the games mechanics they can still be fixed by competent people.

[system]

There is no incentive for me to play Reach.

The rank means nothing, the Challenges only get you Cr which means nothing. The armor selection is average at best, and the only reason it costs so much Cr is because they knew they were lacking in good customization.

The maps get worse each and every time I play this game. I want to know, What were they THINKING with Sword Base?! You cannot defend such a horrible map, you just can’t. The only map worth playing is Powerhouse and it almost never appears in Voting lobbies.

Speaking of voting, the voting system is worthless. When three sets of the same level appear in a voting booth, something is wrong. When Jetpack is useless and AL is game breaking something is wrong. When Invasion Slayer makes me quit out of nearly every game something is wrong. But has 343 adressed these issues? No.

Removing Bleed Through makes no sense, its lead to stupid gameplay beyond anything I could have imagined. Hell it was better in the Beta when we have fast melee, at least the pain ended quickly. But no, its just a beatdown fest in FFA gametypes, and constant SwordBlacking and AL EMP draining conflicts, sucking the fun out of Reach, each and every time.

Explain to me how I’m supposed to jump on the MMO Bungie bandwagon when this is the kind of support you give your game. By support I don’t mean one playlist update per month! I mean adressing the core issues that have been mentioned so many times, everyone is sick of hearing about them. End the issues and fix them please! I’m sorry Bungie, I love you but Reach needs help, the game is bloody boring the gameplay is slow, maps are average to awful and there is no reason, seriously NO REASON AT ALL to play this game.