> > With them saying Reach is one of the best FPS games, I’m suddenly worried of 343 having Halo 4 in their hands.
>
> They really said this? Welp, I guess I’ll be done with this franchise shortly.
Do any of you understand how PR works? Do any of you really think Frankie or 343 would come out and say anything else in regards to the game they were just handed?
> Are they really too lazy to actually fix the bugs in the game?
It’s not laziness, it’s a mix of ignorance and stubbornness. Fixing Reach would mean that 343i had to admit that it’s broken, and that’s simply not going to happen.
And I’m not trying to bash 343i here, I’m just stating my opinion on the matter.
> What the hell? Not buying Halo CEA unless you address these claims
You were buying CEA for the multiplayer? What?
> > What the hell? Not buying Halo CEA unless you address these claims
>
> You were buying CEA for the multiplayer? What?
I agree with that. Why buy CEA for the multiplayer? Also, I don’t remember them ever saying they were going to fix things with a TU, just making changes for the CEA playlist to work properly.
> > With them saying Reach is one of the best FPS games, I’m suddenly worried of 343 having Halo 4 in their hands.
> > > With them saying Reach is one of the best FPS games, I’m suddenly worried of 343 having Halo 4 in their hands.
>
I feel a bit bad to reply in such a short way after all the trouble you probably went through researching and typing that up, even if you did just copy and paste it from a post you made in another thread.
What I’d like to say is, Halo 3 did not in any way keep #1 on the live charts put out by Major Nelson for it’s entire lifespan, but it did keep it for quite a while of it, at least longer than Reach seemed to have had it. The charts don’t have actual numbers, but do have ranking of games from highest populated to least, this being the most recent chart. While in theory there could have been a large increase in xbox live users playing CoD, while Reach has the same or more of a population than Halo 3, making it just appear like there is less people playing Reach than there actually is, but if so, where did all that many people come from in such a short amount of time to allow a split of community for CoD to still overtake a halo game? Maybe a combo of from other games and from people who never played CoD before picking it up then? Even then could that have been enough of a population increase to cause this, and if so, why all at the same time?
I’m not calling you a liar or anything, far from it in fact, but it just sort of doesn’t add up, even though the source I’m using is a vague (yet accurate) one at best.
Also, I’d hate to say this because then I’m just delving into mainly just theories, and that’s not a good argument, but still, isn’t it possible Urk lied? A studio talking down their own newest game, and one that was supposed to be the best one yet and the swan song, would be bad for sales I’m sure. Instead, you’d try to talk it up as much as you could, as you would probably love anything and everything that you make. For Urk to admit the game was the least popular, whether it truly is or not, would probably not end well. Just look at yesterday with Frankie saying he loved Reach and that the TU will not be “fixing” the game. Parts of the community went absolutely crazy and dramatic over this. Imagine if it was said Reach was the least popular and they had no plans on fixing it. Bungie would probably never hear the end of it.
> >
>
> I feel a bit bad to reply in such a short way after all the trouble you probably went through researching and typing that up, even if you did just copy and paste it from a post you made in another thread.
>
> What I’d like to say is, Halo 3 did not in any way keep #1 on the live charts put out by Major Nelson for it’s entire lifespan, but it did keep it for quite a while of it, at least longer than Reach seemed to have had it. The charts don’t have actual numbers, but do have ranking of games from highest populated to least, this being the most recent chart. While in theory there could have been a large increase in xbox live users playing CoD, while Reach has the same or more of a population than Halo 3, making it just appear like there is less people playing Reach than there actually is, but if so, where did all that many people come from in such a short amount of time to allow a split of community for CoD to still overtake a halo game? Maybe a combo of from other games and from people who never played CoD before picking it up then? Even then could that have been enough of a population increase to cause this, and if so, why all at the same time?
>
> I’m not calling you a liar or anything, far from it in fact, but it just sort of doesn’t add up, even though the source I’m using is a vague (yet accurate) one at best.
>
> Also, I’d hate to say this because then I’m just delving into mainly just theories, and that’s not a good argument, but still, isn’t it possible Urk lied? A studio talking down their own newest game, and one that was supposed to be the best one yet and the swan song, would be bad for sales I’m sure. Instead, you’d try to talk it up as much as you could, as you would probably love anything and everything that you make. For Urk to admit the game was the least popular, whether it truly is or not, would probably not end well. Just look at yesterday with Frankie saying he loved Reach and that the TU will not be “fixing” the game. Parts of the community went absolutely crazy and dramatic over this. Imagine if it was said Reach was the least popular and they had no plans on fixing it. Bungie would probably never hear the end of it.
Very true, other theories could exist, but with all of the facts we have, it’s impossible to deny that Halo: Reach is beating Halo 3. The main thing being the population counter being so flawed… I know for a 100% fact I saw 1.71 million players somehow. Even though Halo 3 only had 1.2 million unique players in the first 24 hours. That was released by Bungie right after the game was released, so Halo: Reach had 0 impact on that story.
The incredible success of the Call of Duty franchise shouldn’t be doubted. Sure, it surprised even me that Call of Duty took off the way it did considering how average the gameplay is. But it’s definitely possible that those games are just too incredibly popular and the momentum they carry with their millions upon millions of sales pushes all of their games into insanely high population counts.
All in all, it is yours to interpret. Sure, Urk could be lying for some reason. Sure, Halo: Reach could be the least popular and the population counts were just reported incorrectly for both games. That’s all in the realm of possibility.
But the probability of what I’m saying as the truth is far, far higher than it being false.
> > Im just upset about how he and the 343i team are remaking Halo CE. but they’re only doing the campaign. why would i buy another game when i have already beaten it.
> > Halo CE was the best game ever. its a bold statement but it was. i dont support them because they wont add in xbox live, when they should be doing it because that has massive high demand by the community
>
> It ‘was’ the best game out of the series… but its dated.
> Why do you think they are re-making Halo CE. Because its a celebration of Halo.
>
> They have re skinned it because they wish to show us how far Halo has come while playing the most fabled campaign.
> They added new terminals so they can tie up some loose ends, and to also prepare us for Halo 4.
>
> So lets add in Halo CE MP. It will be dated. the weapons wont be as tuned and there will be little balance at all.
> People will complain and it will destroy the memory of a legend.
> I played Halo CE MP on PC. I know how fun it was… but it was never meant to be used competitively.
Seriously?
The MLG forums basically unanimously agrees that Halo CE’s MP is the most balanced and most competitive Halo game by far. The reason they chose to use Reach for the MP was because Halo 1’s netcode wasn’t built for lan, and also so they wouldn’t have to split the current Halo community. Overall, from a business perspective, it was most likely the smart choice.
> The MLG forums basically unanimously agrees that Halo CE’s MP is the most balanced and most competitive Halo game by far. The reason they chose to use Reach for the MP was because Halo 1’s netcode wasn’t built for lan, and also so they wouldn’t have to split the current Halo community. Overall, from a business perspective, it was most likely the smart choice.
Yea, the only thing is it was the best because of the code you stated. No internet, no latency, no ping.
> Very true, other theories could exist, but with all of the facts we have, it’s impossible to deny that Halo: Reach is beating Halo 3. The main thing being the population counter being so flawed… I know for a 100% fact I saw 1.71 million players somehow. Even though Halo 3 only had 1.2 million unique players in the first 24 hours. That was released by Bungie right after the game was released, so Halo: Reach had 0 impact on that story.
>
> The incredible success of the Call of Duty franchise shouldn’t be doubted. Sure, it surprised even me that Call of Duty took off the way it did considering how average the gameplay is. But it’s definitely possible that those games are just too incredibly popular and the momentum they carry with their millions upon millions of sales pushes all of their games into insanely high population counts.
>
> All in all, it is yours to interpret. Sure, Urk could be lying for some reason. Sure, Halo: Reach could be the least popular and the population counts were just reported incorrectly for both games. That’s all in the realm of possibility.
>
> But the probability of what I’m saying as the truth is far, far higher than it being false.
I don’t think one should go off of numbers within the first few weeks. A game will always be hyped up like crazy and that will affect how many buy it/pre-order it and play it for the first few weeks, maybe even months. You’d likely get a more accurate population count to compare to another game at the same time in it’s life cycle after the hype has died down and it’s a matter of playing it because you like it and not because the hype you are riding on is practically forcing you to.
I know CoD is quite the big game, and seemed to have become so with MW2, but the population is split right now. Even with a large amount of people in the population, I’d still think Reach would have taken at least #2 if it was as popular as Halo 3, but with no real numbers to go by I guess I can’t really say that. 
I guess unless we see actual numbers not inflated or messed with at all, just raw numbers from MW2, Blops, Reach, and 3 at this time in Reach’s life cycle, it’s still going to be left a bit open ended. I’m sure you could find some numbers, but there’s no guarantee they are truly accurate.
> > The MLG forums basically unanimously agrees that Halo CE’s MP is the most balanced and most competitive Halo game by far. The reason they chose to use Reach for the MP was because Halo 1’s netcode wasn’t built for lan, and also so they wouldn’t have to split the current Halo community. Overall, from a business perspective, it was most likely the smart choice.
>
> Yea, the only thing is it was the best because of the code you stated. No internet, no latency, no ping.
Well comparing Halos 1-3 on LAN they still rank CE far above the rest.
Doesn’t Halo 3 count the players in all the gamemodes? Or was that Reach?
> > > Im just upset about how he and the 343i team are remaking Halo CE. but they’re only doing the campaign. why would i buy another game when i have already beaten it.
> > > Halo CE was the best game ever. its a bold statement but it was. i dont support them because they wont add in xbox live, when they should be doing it because that has massive high demand by the community
> >
> > It ‘was’ the best game out of the series… but its dated.
> > Why do you think they are re-making Halo CE. Because its a celebration of Halo.
> >
> > They have re skinned it because they wish to show us how far Halo has come while playing the most fabled campaign.
> > They added new terminals so they can tie up some loose ends, and to also prepare us for Halo 4.
> >
> > So lets add in Halo CE MP. It will be dated. the weapons wont be as tuned and there will be little balance at all.
> > People will complain and it will destroy the memory of a legend.
> > I played Halo CE MP on PC. I know how fun it was… but it was never meant to be used competitively.
>
> Seriously?
>
> The MLG forums basically unanimously agrees that Halo CE’s MP is the most balanced and most competitive Halo game by far. The reason they chose to use Reach for the MP was because Halo 1’s netcode wasn’t built for lan, and also so they wouldn’t have to split the current Halo community. Overall, from a business perspective, it was most likely the smart choice.
Yes. Actually.
If MLG was to jump off a bridge… you get the gist of out banter.
Just because they ‘say’ something is balanced or unbalanced doesn’t mean it is.
And as far as most of the community has said before, it was way too unbalanced compared to Halo 2 and 3. (And i never really like halo 2 multiplayer)
The more I read over the responses of the disappointed the more I am confused. What is so bad about this? Some people love the game the way it is. This is fair and just and I’m even more excited about it now as they are clearly hinting at some things we’ve suggested.
You people are ridiculous and ungrateful.
You request things and when they hint at it possibly coming to fruition you go crazy because it isn’t how you thought. So what if they only do this for certain playlists? How is that wrong? That means that the people who love the way the game is won’t be shoved to the side and abandoned.
You need to learn appreciation and patience. Hell, you are judging before you even know.
> The more I read over the responses of the disappointed the more I am confused. What is so bad about this? Some people love the game the way it is. This is fair and just and I’m even more excited about it now as they are clearly hinting at some things we’ve suggested.
>
> You people are ridiculous and ungrateful.
>
> You request things and when they hint at it possibly coming to fruition you go crazy because it isn’t how you thought. So what if they only do this for certain playlists? How is that wrong? That means that the people who love the way the game is won’t be shoved to the side and abandoned.
>
> You need to learn appreciation and patience. Hell, you are judging before you even know. It’s like asking a -Yoink!- whether she think -Yoink!- feels good.
It has more to do with the notion that the people who enjoy the game “as it is” right now would likely enjoy it with the changes that many are requesting.
Let me make something clear: I used to be right there with you, pitchfork in hand telling people who didn’t like bloom or Armor Lock that they were insane and that the should “adapt.” I defended the game left and right, praising Bungie’s work. I’m not saying the game is bad, I freaking love this game and it’s a lot of fun. But it would be exponentially better with the right care applied to it.
It seems pretty clear at this point that if 343i did things like fix/remove bloom, remove Armor Lock and a few other AAs, etc that more people would COME BACK than would leave. Honestly most of the people who like the game “as is” may not even really notice that much.
> > Seriously?
> >
> > The MLG forums basically unanimously agrees that Halo CE’s MP is the most balanced and most competitive Halo game by far. The reason they chose to use Reach for the MP was because Halo 1’s netcode wasn’t built for lan, and also so they wouldn’t have to split the current Halo community. Overall, from a business perspective, it was most likely the smart choice.
>
> Yes. Actually.
>
> If MLG was to jump off a bridge… you get the gist of out banter.
> Just because they ‘say’ something is balanced or unbalanced doesn’t mean it is.
>
> And as far as most of the community has said before, it was way too unbalanced compared to Halo 2 and 3. (And i never really like halo 2 multiplayer)
Have to agree that just because MLG believes it, doesn’t make it true.
Bungie themselves, including Frank (Just watched the new Vidoc) say the pistol is, and I quote, “Insanely overpowered”.
With that being said, I’m excited to get Halo: Anniversary and play the Campaign again with that overpowered hand cannon. But only for Campaign!
> > > It would just feel wierd to have high jumps and fast run speed since you’re playing as a spartan III, but as elites, I’m all in.
> >
> > Multiplayer isn’t really part of the canon anyway so it doesn’t really matter.
>
> But you don’t get bigger in campaign do you? As i said, try to play classic in MM and you will see why it’s not a good idea.
Not sure what you’re saying… please explain.
For me Halo 2’s multiplayer was easily the most enjoyable. I agree the Pistol was OP but the 4 shot BR(minus the glitches) from Halo 2 was the most fun and made the game fast paced.
> Wow, they have bloom to add realism to the game, if i wanted realism i would go play call of duty. Its actually sad when all people do is spam 5 shots, oh i forgot that does take alot of skill? ( Just voicing my opinion)
Well there is alittle realism to every game… some have more then others… You may feel you’re being honest about bloom and how you feel, but the reason I think the ‘bloom’ topic is just another thing for “WHINERS” to complain about is that everyone has the same bloom … so if you cant kill someone before they kill you then you’re just lacking the skill because everyone has to deal with the same set of ‘rules’ in each Halo game …in this case ‘bloom’ of the DMR … And if you’re not lacking the skill then you’re lacking the patience ??
What im saying is alot of people FORGET that kids ( many of us in fact ) spent HOURS practicing Battle Rifle to get good with it… practiced alot !! If people would simply say “you know this is a new challenge”… It was a challenge to master BR for many people… so people who were so good at BR forget the years of playing and practice that it took to get there… especially those who played thru all the Halo’s…So to start over with DMR might make some mad, but to some who dont mind or even ‘like’ DMR - they just saw it as another weapong to master…
I dont think anyone is ever really happy… If anyone googles Halo 2 or 3… you’ll see everyone complained about those games too… And none of the games have ever been truely balanced… I said this recently… a Pro Sniper can take out an entire team alone and sniper can kill at any distance better then any weapon… if they ever INTENDED to make weapons balanced the first thing they wouldve done back years ago was make sure Sniper can’t be used in close quarters combat… when you’re killing the shotgun guy 12 inches away while you wield the sniper rifle in your hands - thats just not balanced … im not complaining - just making a point that Halo has never been balanced… Ive always hated some elements of each game… In Halo 2 I never liked the over-use of the “Noob Combo” ( fully charged plasma pistol in one hand and any weapon in the other to those new to Halo ), they nerfed that feature in Halo 3, but now you see it more used as a combo switching from fully charged plasma to DMR in reach…
Lastly, Halo Reach was PRE - Halo, thus my thoughts are Halo 4 is after Halo 3 obviously - meaning that the Battle Rifle will be back…