Well well, the first screenshots have leaked, and despite their poor quality, the game looks different and more "heavy duty" than other halo's. Like I said, the weapon designs and stuff look a little more heavy duty... ya'll have any thoughts?

[www.neogaf.com]

[www.mlgpro.com]

[kotaku.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/05/2009 05:11PM by dolemite.

The pictures certainly look legitimate...and yeah, the weapons, etc. do look heavier, which is pretty cool. That whole description of the campaign reminds me of a similar thing just before Halo 3 was released though...this guy claimed to describe the missions and the story, but it turned out it was all bull. Here we have the screenshots though... I just hope we get some official stuff soon. Looking forward to the beta!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/06/2009 01:56PM by Jaxx.

I will give you my honest opinion. Reach SEEMS like a cool idea. When I put in Halo 1 the other day, I noticed the General mentions Reach at the very beginning of the trilogy. But I'll tell you what. Why the fuck make a game that is a PREQUEL when you are going to INTRODUCE new weapons, characters, races, ammunition, [most importantly weapons] to a series? I mean, REALLY? It's like making a new Jurassic Park movie and titling it a prequel, then introducing new dinosaurs that have been since excavated, oh and throw in the H3 for their transport vehicles. GUESS WHAT? The H3 wasn't out when the original Jurassic Park was filmed. GUESS WHAT? The new mid-range weapon that is supposedly a perfect mixture of battlerifle whatever the fuck gun they made for Reach, WASN'T IN Halo 1. Wasn't in 2 or 3 either. So why make the game a prequel?

They're following the franchise storyline, which is probably why I think Reach might really be cool (is the plot) but other than that it seems like the shit they're 'introducing' and so 'excited' for us to see is all a bunch of new things that they're just throwing in to make more money off of their FRANCHISE. Does it seem this way to ANNYYYY bodyyyyy else???? lol... I mean, I'm not bashing on Reach, as I said, it doesn't look that bad. But I watched a reveal trailer on my Xbox and everything the makers of the game were saying sounded 'new and exciting' and thats fine, but if its a prequel, aren't we gonna see some cool exciting shit that was from the PAST of the game? Not just something that somebody is creating or concepting for a new game?

I don't know.

^^no, but if the weapons and everything were actually written in before the game was made, I'll probably like Reach a lot more than if they are were not..

I'll try the beta.

dolemite posted:

I really miss equipment. That was one of the funnest parts of Halo 3.

I disagree. I think it's better just as is.

posted:

Also, I think using the B button for changing grenade types is stupid.

Start > Controller > Button Layout

"Recon" was basically the Halo 3 set up, fyi

posted:

...graphics look kinda crappy during gameplay, course I was playing split screen. This is still beta though...so maybe it will improve.

This must be a just you thing, the graphics are perfect and awesome on my tv.

identityunknown posted:

One, it's a video game franchise. They hve to keep adding stuff so each new game isn't a re-hash of the same shit over and over again.

good point. Thats why I think lots of sequels aren't as good as lots of originals. Some are much better though, so its an equal trade I guess.

identityunknown posted:

ChaseNine:
so because several Spartans that weren't Master Chief had some different weapons, you think that he should also have had them?
...it's not like American cops all carry AK-47s... Different people use different weapons. Deal with it.

Uh, yes I do, to an extent. Why have a band of soldiers with all similarities and give one of them special weapons, etc? But Master Chief is probably a commander to the rest of the spartans, right..

Herein lies my point [and that of my last post above..] - Reach really might have an incredible storyline and maybe Master Chief is a higher ranking Spartan. Different from the rest, including weapons. Thus, I don't disagree with you completely. Maybe he was issued things (missions, weapons) specifically.
I don't know. I'm not huge into halo like the rest of the world... I just really liked the story and hope they can keep it as intense as the original stuff, but not kill it with making Master Chief the supersaiyan of the series... he already had spotlight.

And yeah, truthillusion your right. Never read the novels/comics. I still want to... maybe I shouldn't post here until I do so? I just don't like that Reach is a prequel with 'all new' this and 'all new' that. But as I've said: it may prove to be a better game than anything previous because of that 'all new' aspect, so I'm not complaining.
I am just curious.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2010 06:17PM by ChaseNine.

identityunknown posted:

But Master Chief is probably a commander to the rest of the spartans, right..

Wrong.

identityunknown posted:

Herein lies my point [and that of my last post above..] - Reach really might have an incredible storyline and maybe Master Chief is a higher ranking Spartan. Different from the rest, including weapons. Thus, I don't disagree with you completely. Maybe he was issued things (missions, weapons) specifically.
I don't know. I'm not huge into halo like the rest of the world... I just really liked the story and hope they can keep it as intense as the original stuff, but not kill it with making Master Chief the supersaiyan of the series... he already had spotlight.

And yeah, truthillusion your right. Never read the novels/comics. I still want to... maybe I shouldn't post here until I do so? I just don't like that Reach is a prequel with 'all new' this and 'all new' that. But as I've said: it may prove to be a better game than anything previous because of that 'all new' aspect, so I'm not complaining.
I am just curious.

Your whole thing is that Master Chief is ISSUED weapons. Halo is almost always a fight for survival. The only time you're issued weapons is the first level, normally. The first Halo, Master Chief was lost on an unknown alien ring planet. He had ti use whatever weapons that survived the initial crash landing. In the second one, Master Chief is in a similar situation followed by being on the enemy's capital planet, so he had to use what he could scrounge. Halo 3 is a long 'bout across everything previously mentioned, so he again scrounges weaponry. ODST takes place in a ruined city or is a memory of fighting enemies off.

Honestly, the lack of certain weaponry makes PERFECT sense. Not every team takes a shotgun, a sniper rifle, a rocket launcher, and billions of different machine guns. Teams are built, typically, towards a strength (stealth/brute/etc) and thus would have different arms for each team. So, from the get-go, the differences in weapons makes sense.

Also, for another example, the Reach beta doesn't have any Brute weapons that appeared from Halo 2 through ODST. Why? Because the Brutes, according to every story told, never went to the planet of Reach.

You really are over thinking it all.

truthillusion posted:

identityunknown posted:

But Master Chief is probably a commander to the rest of the spartans, right..

Wrong.

identityunknown posted:

Herein lies my point [and that of my last post above..] - Reach really might have an incredible storyline and maybe Master Chief is a higher ranking Spartan. Different from the rest, including weapons. Thus, I don't disagree with you completely. Maybe he was issued things (missions, weapons) specifically.
I don't know. I'm not huge into halo like the rest of the world... I just really liked the story and hope they can keep it as intense as the original stuff, but not kill it with making Master Chief the supersaiyan of the series... he already had spotlight.

And yeah, truthillusion your right. Never read the novels/comics. I still want to... maybe I shouldn't post here until I do so? I just don't like that Reach is a prequel with 'all new' this and 'all new' that. But as I've said: it may prove to be a better game than anything previous because of that 'all new' aspect, so I'm not complaining.
I am just curious.

Your whole thing is that Master Chief is ISSUED weapons. Halo is almost always a fight for survival. The only time you're issued weapons is the first level, normally. The first Halo, Master Chief was lost on an unknown alien ring planet. He had ti use whatever weapons that survived the initial crash landing. In the second one, Master Chief is in a similar situation followed by being on the enemy's capital planet, so he had to use what he could scrounge. Halo 3 is a long 'bout across everything previously mentioned, so he again scrounges weaponry. ODST takes place in a ruined city or is a memory of fighting enemies off.

Honestly, the lack of certain weaponry makes PERFECT sense. Not every team takes a shotgun, a sniper rifle, a rocket launcher, and billions of different machine guns. Teams are built, typically, towards a strength (stealth/brute/etc) and thus would have different arms for each team. So, from the get-go, the differences in weapons makes sense.

Also, for another example, the Reach beta doesn't have any Brute weapons that appeared from Halo 2 through ODST. Why? Because the Brutes, according to every story told, never went to the planet of Reach.

You really are over thinking it all.

You are right. Really good valid points you make, and I submit.

I played the beta, and let me say I think it's awesome. I thought Halo3 was good - the beta is better. The story, (which I plan on finding and reading the book Reach) is probably going to be amazing as well, and I'm positive that everything will be explained, as you have helped me to understand. I just needed to stop judging this book by its cover.

ChaseNine posted:

You are right. Really good valid points you make, and I submit.

I played the beta, and let me say I think it's awesome. I thought Halo3 was good - the beta is better. The story, (which I plan on finding and reading the book Reach) is probably going to be amazing as well, and I'm positive that everything will be explained, as you have helped me to understand. I just needed to stop judging this book by its cover.

I'm happy to hear such.

I honestly don't understand the hate that any of the Halos gets, but I think Reach will be the one to shut people up since they're finally updating the online and since they're doing one of the many stories of Reach, it should have a great campaign. Reach is the planet where the Covenant first made contact with humans. Infact, Johnson (that famous black guy) is the first human to meet the Covenant, and is also the first one to kill one of them. There's a lot of story line that occurs on Reach, and whatever story this game has, it'll probably be one of the best ones of the Halo collection.

Honestly, Reach taught me how to be better at Halo in general. I went back to Halo3 now that the beta is over, but I realize now that I learned more of watching where players are and how to react in situations, etc. which I think I gained from the small things Reach has to offer, like being able to run (if you choose that class anyway) and having a wider view [which is soooo nice]... but. Yeah. I will buy this when its out.

15 days!

fr05t posted:

i could never get into the Halo games realy, i found the singleplayer for me was just one play through.
i tried the multiplayer and found it was like allmost playing Quake III Team Arena but not as fun

i allways wanted the weapon sound fx to be louder and more meaty. lovely graphics though

I can hugely agree on weapons, they definitely could have been so much more epic. I didn't like Quake though, not at all. The Quakes always felt too messy and random, but I did like the weapons and sounds in Quake..

Not necessarily.

Gears of War < Gears of War 2 - this game was the same thing, all they added that was any better was Horde, and a little bit of a graphics upgrade. Nothing too impressive, but hell let's say it was a good sequel.

Bioshock < Bioshock 2 - The second game was the same as the first! Add a shitton more puzzles (which are, you guessed it, STILL tedious and annoying!) and some plot improvements. But really, it's the same game with a 2 at the end.

Halo 3 > Reach - Halo 3's multiplayer did NOT, I repeat, DID NOT look half as good as the graphics on Reach, not to mention they got rid of lots of stupid shit like Regen/Degen powerups. The Jetpack ability, albeit it being fun, is kind of dumb, I'll admit it. But the other abilities, example; being able to sprint for a short distance, or the armor lock (personal shield), are incredibly useful and change the whole gameplay of Halo. But, your right. The game is essentially the same - you have shields, you need to strategize your movements. For those players who can't do this, yeah don't play Halo. This is NOT Modern Warfare 2 where you can shoot someone that moves from any distance and still get a kill.

Yeah, your right, Reach is a game that came long after the third, and should be better. But it is. It's the one and only Halo game that everybody who is interested should really give a chance to, after the original Halo that is. But for a multiplayer experience... boy does Reach offer a lot. Anybody would be happy to argue this value. H3 was fun, Reach is better. And (sadly)* it's the only reason I really turn on my Xbox every day. The other games I have on Xbox are fun, but if I really want a great story/gameplay experience I will fire up my PS2. Every time.

*With the exception of The Orange Box. That game just blows competition away..

Anyone playing this anymore? I hop on when I can.