Halo reach is the best fps shooter.

It is certainly the best Halo, and the best shooter I've played since Crysis. The ending was terrific.donalbane

Don't even get me started on crysis. So many problems with that games SP.

I don't think I can identify a "best" FPS, but Halo: Reach is up there. I love it!

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

You are a hermit for bringing a 10 year old YAWWWNN repetitive game into this. Man I realy feel like spewing after thinking of the repetitiveness of counterstrike....

roflcopter317

Alot of people are still playing halo 1 and still halo 2. Even after reach, halo 3 still has around 700,000 players each day.

CS wasn't that great. It's addictive, but it's limited by content and design. It has no matchmaking or ranking or customization or unlockables.

There are no community tools to show player stats.

There are maybe 2-3 game types.

Weapon balance is questionable at best, as it uses the same "benefit-the-winners" philosophy that makes gamers upset at MW2.

There's no campaign and very limited sound design.

Oh an not to mention that the learning curve is ridiculous since there's no tutorial and, in my experience, the community are elitists who laugh away noobs.

Frankly I don't really know why anyone brought it up anyway. The design philosophy is almost completely different from Reach.

I don't think I can identify a "best" FPS, but Halo: Reach is up there. I love it!

MathMattS

I agree. Nothing can realy be classified as 'best', it is all subjective. Some people like hardcore/realistic military games, some people like epic space opera games.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="campzor"] no a hermit worships the pc and everything it has to offer... i am merely sharing my view that cs an eleven year old game has a far better lasting appeal probably due to it being so good and all the mods and user made stuff the community has created... i doubt ppl will be playing reach in 10 years time.campzor

Alot of people are still playing halo 1 and still halo 2. Even after reach, halo 3 still has around 700,000 players each day.

Nup it is still going, with heaps of mods too. Exept for halo 2 on xbox live... That was shut down with a couple of thousand still playing right till the end. Halo 2 on pc is still alive. I can go on halo 1 right now and find loads of games with low ping, on the other hand UT 2004 is dead. Can't even find one server below 400 ping.

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

Alot of people are still playing halo 1 and still halo 2. Even after reach, halo 3 still has around 700,000 players each day.

roflcopter317

Nup it is still going, with heaps of mods too. Exept for halo 2 on xbox live... That was shut down with a couple of thousand still playing right till the end. Halo 2 on pc is still alive. I can go on halo 1 right now and find loads of games with low ping, on the other hand UT 2004 is dead. Can't even find one server below 400 ping.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="campzor"] i really find it hard to believe ppl are still playing halo1 + 2 online. Didnt the servers get shutdown or something from what i heard..campzor

Nup it is still going, with heaps of mods too. Exept for halo 2 on xbox live... That was shut down with a couple of thousand still playing right till the end. Halo 2 on pc is still alive. I can go on halo 1 right now and find loads of games with low ping, on the other hand UT 2004 is dead. Can't even find one server below 400 ping.

Didn't you read what I said on the other page? CS gets so repetitive... Even other people here are agreeing with me. And with only 3 gamemodes for a multiplayer game? That is just pathetic realy.

[QUOTE="sillaris"]

if anyone who plays that arcade shooter Halo, went to CSS would get owned so bad. Sorry CS takes skills and aiming. No shields to protect you from 50bullets

roflcopter317

I am a long time pc gamer ever since the first CS, which I own and demolish whole teams. And I can argue that Reach takes MORE skill. Your 'shields' argument is actualy going to work against you here. The shields mean you have to shoot your opponent several times with accurate head shots to get the kill. Also in CSS you can still spam the trigger and get lucky kills most of the time. The shields also mean you can't get cheap shotted from behind. You have not played Reach or Halo 3 much and do not understand how the game works, so don't try and argue with someone that knows more abou the game then you. You will just get owned.

I can see why you like casual shooters.

I prefer games like ARMA, GRAW, socom, CSS, BF2,

i can't believe hermits are bringing up a repetitive and redundant FPS(which has no single-player)called counter strike and are comparing it to reach:lol:

gamedude234

Preference.

I lol'd at the hermits bringing CS into the argument.

roflcopter317

Preference.

----------

OT: It's a great FPS, though I dunno if i'd call it the best.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="sillaris"]

if anyone who plays that arcade shooter Halo, went to CSS would get owned so bad. Sorry CS takes skills and aiming. No shields to protect you from 50bullets

sillaris

I am a long time pc gamer ever since the first CS, which I own and demolish whole teams. And I can argue that Reach takes MORE skill. Your 'shields' argument is actualy going to work against you here. The shields mean you have to shoot your opponent several times with accurate head shots to get the kill. Also in CSS you can still spam the trigger and get lucky kills most of the time. The shields also mean you can't get cheap shotted from behind. You have not played Reach or Halo 3 much and do not understand how the game works, so don't try and argue with someone that knows more abou the game then you. You will just get owned.

I can see why you like casual shooters.

I prefer games like ARMA, GRAW, socom, CSS, BF2,

I like only casual games? Lol. Who said halo was casual? I enjoy(ed) CSS, BF2 and enjoy GRAW and COD if you would call them all 'hardcore'. So according to you, the person has to die pretty much instantly in a game to be hardcore? There is a gamemode called 'swat' in halo BTW.

Be mindful of the OP's sig, folks.

[QUOTE="sillaris"]

if anyone who plays that arcade shooter Halo, went to CSS would get owned so bad. Sorry CS takes skills and aiming. No shields to protect you from 50bullets

roflcopter317

I am a long time pc gamer ever since the first CS, which I own and demolish whole teams. And I can argue that Reach takes MORE skill. Your 'shields' argument is actualy going to work against you here. The shields mean you have to shoot your opponent several times with accurate head shots to get the kill. Also in CSS you can still spam the trigger and get lucky kills most of the time. The shields also mean you can't get cheap shotted from behind. You have not played Reach or Halo 3 much and do not understand how the game works, so don't try and argue with someone that knows more abou the game then you. You will just get owned.

Completely agree... having shields means camping is a no go.... soon as you shoot them once they will turn around and light you up if you dont start moving. Having players harder to kill means more emphasis on aiming and evading rather than just who shot first. In reach you have to be constantly dodging bullets while still lining up your shots if you want to be good. Reach gameplay is alot like quake... which takes a steaming dump all over counter strike in terms of skill.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="sillaris"]

if anyone who plays that arcade shooter Halo, went to CSS would get owned so bad. Sorry CS takes skills and aiming. No shields to protect you from 50bullets

markinthedark

I am a long time pc gamer ever since the first CS, which I own and demolish whole teams. And I can argue that Reach takes MORE skill. Your 'shields' argument is actualy going to work against you here. The shields mean you have to shoot your opponent several times with accurate head shots to get the kill. Also in CSS you can still spam the trigger and get lucky kills most of the time. The shields also mean you can't get cheap shotted from behind. You have not played Reach or Halo 3 much and do not understand how the game works, so don't try and argue with someone that knows more abou the game then you. You will just get owned.

Completely agree... having shields means camping is a no go.... soon as you shoot them once they will turn around and light you up if you dont start moving. Having players harder to kill means more emphasis on aiming and evading rather than just who shot first. In reach you have to be constantly dodging bullets while still lining up your shots if you want to be good. Reach gameplay is alot like quake... which takes a steaming dump all over counter strike in terms of skill.

Yep. But about the camping thing, if someone has an energy sword they can camp around a corner. But this was only a problem in halo 3, in reach the level design has changed so camping is pretty much pointless. You could also see the light comming from the sword from around a corner, this also helped. My job has been done. I mopped up all the hermits in this thread.

dont know if I would call it the best, but I am having a great time with the sp and firefight

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

I am a long time pc gamer ever since the first CS, which I own and demolish whole teams. And I can argue that Reach takes MORE skill. Your 'shields' argument is actualy going to work against you here. The shields mean you have to shoot your opponent several times with accurate head shots to get the kill. Also in CSS you can still spam the trigger and get lucky kills most of the time. The shields also mean you can't get cheap shotted from behind. You have not played Reach or Halo 3 much and do not understand how the game works, so don't try and argue with someone that knows more abou the game then you. You will just get owned.

roflcopter317

Completely agree... having shields means camping is a no go.... soon as you shoot them once they will turn around and light you up if you dont start moving. Having players harder to kill means more emphasis on aiming and evading rather than just who shot first. In reach you have to be constantly dodging bullets while still lining up your shots if you want to be good. Reach gameplay is alot like quake... which takes a steaming dump all over counter strike in terms of skill.

Yep. But about the camping thing, if someone has an energy sword they can camp around a corner. But this was only a problem in halo 3, in reach the level design has changed so camping is pretty much pointless. You could also see the light comming from the sword from around a corner, this also helped. My job has been done. I mopped up all the hermits in this thread.

i think in reach you can also parry sword attacks with melee attacks. At least thats what i read.... i havent had done it yett, as i usually forget to try it when i am face to face with a plasma sword. In theory if you get real good with timing you could be invulnerable to swords.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

Completely agree... having shields means camping is a no go.... soon as you shoot them once they will turn around and light you up if you dont start moving. Having players harder to kill means more emphasis on aiming and evading rather than just who shot first. In reach you have to be constantly dodging bullets while still lining up your shots if you want to be good. Reach gameplay is alot like quake... which takes a steaming dump all over counter strike in terms of skill.

markinthedark

Yep. But about the camping thing, if someone has an energy sword they can camp around a corner. But this was only a problem in halo 3, in reach the level design has changed so camping is pretty much pointless. You could also see the light comming from the sword from around a corner, this also helped. My job has been done. I mopped up all the hermits in this thread.

i think in reach you can also parry sword attacks with melee attacks. At least thats what i read.... i havent had done it yett, as i usually forget to try it when i am face to face with a plasma sword. In theory if you get real good with timing you could be invulnerable to swords.

Actualy, if you block a sword it will take down your shields but wont kill you. I am not 100% sure how much damage the attacker gets. In the reach beta it was rediculously easy to sword block, all you had to do was melee when the person was lunging you. The window of opportunity has been reduced by a small margin since then. Once I actualy accidently blocked a sword XD

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

Nup it is still going, with heaps of mods too. Exept for halo 2 on xbox live... That was shut down with a couple of thousand still playing right till the end. Halo 2 on pc is still alive. I can go on halo 1 right now and find loads of games with low ping, on the other hand UT 2004 is dead. Can't even find one server below 400 ping.

roflcopter317

Didn't you read what I said on the other page? CS gets so repetitive... Even other people here are agreeing with me. And with only 3 gamemodes for a multiplayer game? That is just pathetic realy.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="campzor"]fair enough. i still stand by saying cs is better though :Pcampzor

Didn't you read what I said on the other page? CS gets so repetitive... Even other people here are agreeing with me. And with only 3 gamemodes for a multiplayer game? That is just pathetic realy.

Yes with mods. And can you make vehicles the hill in King OTH in cs without years of programming expirience? Oh that is right, cs doesn't have them. All of them modes are in reach plus more. You didn't rip my response apart at all. All you did was prove cs can have less then the same ammount of gamemodes as reach with modding. Still, the stand alone game only has 3 modes. I played loads of the cs zombie mod, it kind of blows that the zombies have like 10000000 hp.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

Yep. But about the camping thing, if someone has an energy sword they can camp around a corner. But this was only a problem in halo 3, in reach the level design has changed so camping is pretty much pointless. You could also see the light comming from the sword from around a corner, this also helped. My job has been done. I mopped up all the hermits in this thread.

roflcopter317

i think in reach you can also parry sword attacks with melee attacks. At least thats what i read.... i havent had done it yett, as i usually forget to try it when i am face to face with a plasma sword. In theory if you get real good with timing you could be invulnerable to swords.

Actualy, if you block a sword it will take down your shields but wont kill you. I am not 100% sure how much damage the attacker gets.

ahh ok... well not as good then.

the funny thing is you guys will be debating the NEXT halo game vs. CS

it just goes to show you the staying power that a game like CS has

these new typical shooters come out and everyone thinks its the greatest thing since sliced bread

meanwhile games like CS dont need constant re-releases and are still going strong

...

also its quite hilarious saying that halo takes more skill than CS or CSS, that statement is just wrong in so many ways

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

Didn't you read what I said on the other page? CS gets so repetitive... Even other people here are agreeing with me. And with only 3 gamemodes for a multiplayer game? That is just pathetic realy.

roflcopter317

Yes with mods. And can you make vehicles the hill in King OTH in cs without years of programming expirience? Oh that is right, cs doesn't have them. All of them modes are in reach plus more. You didn't rip my response apart at all. All you did was prove cs can have less then the same ammount of gamemodes as reach with modding. Still, the stand alone game only has 3 modes. I played loads of the cs zombie mod, it kind of blows that the zombies have like 10000000 hp.

I got bored of it after 2 days, but meh. Its all preferenceIantheone

Honestly, it's exactly the same as Halo 3 except with a little more strategy involved because of the armor abilities.

Invasion mode kind of sucks(Spartans seem to always have a clear advantage because their weapons are better), Headhunter is meh, Team deathmatch is still team deathmatch...

Match making still sucks. Instead of 1 choice, you get 2 or 3 choices or veto and then you get another 2 or 3 choices for what you can play. And it still sometimes gives you only crappy maps with only crappy modes to choose from.

the funny thing is you guys will be debating the NEXT halo game vs. CS

it just goes to show you the staying power that a game like CS has

these new typical shooters come out and everyone thinks its the greatest thing since sliced bread

meanwhile games like CS dont need constant re-releases and are still going strong

...

also its quite hilarious saying that halo takes more skill than CS or CSS, that statement is just wrong in so many ways

Noverech

yea next halo will be compared to CS... because PC gamers think CS is some sort of godly online FPS and thats all they ever talk about.

and in terms of skill, its not even the best on PC.. quake is infinitely more difficult... because quake has alot of the same elements as halo.

[QUOTE="Noverech"]

the funny thing is you guys will be debating the NEXT halo game vs. CS

it just goes to show you the staying power that a game like CS has

these new typical shooters come out and everyone thinks its the greatest thing since sliced bread

meanwhile games like CS dont need constant re-releases and are still going strong

...

also its quite hilarious saying that halo takes more skill than CS or CSS, that statement is just wrong in so many ways

markinthedark

yea next halo will be compared to CS... because PC gamers think CS is some sort of godly online FPS and thats all they ever talk about.

and in terms of skill, its not even the best on PC.. quake is infinitely more difficult... because quake has alot of the same elements as halo.

counter strike is way better then any halo and thats 11 years old.campzor

[QUOTE="longtonguecat"]

First Person Shooter Shooter? :?

slipknot0129

Its not even close to being the best

Its not even close to being the best

toast_burner

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

Its not even close to being the best

JetB1ackNewYear

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

Its not even close to being the best

JetB1ackNewYear

[QUOTE="JetB1ackNewYear"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]

Its not even close to being the best

toast_burner

[QUOTE="SwagSurf"]

[QUOTE="LiftedHeadshot"]CSS, TF2, and Reach are all incredible and on par with each other.Sandvichman

CSS itself is better then reach.

Yeah, yea you meant. CSS is better

[QUOTE="slipknot0129"]

[QUOTE="longtonguecat"]

First Person Shooter Shooter? :?

Merex760

That's because there is no TF3...

Halo:CE is still going strong on PC, as there was no actual successor (don't give me Halo 2, that was a horrible port)...

[QUOTE="JetB1ackNewYear"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]

Its not even close to being the best

toast_burner

Deus Ex is considered to be an action RPG, actually.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="Noverech"]

the funny thing is you guys will be debating the NEXT halo game vs. CS

it just goes to show you the staying power that a game like CS has

these new typical shooters come out and everyone thinks its the greatest thing since sliced bread

meanwhile games like CS dont need constant re-releases and are still going strong

...

also its quite hilarious saying that halo takes more skill than CS or CSS, that statement is just wrong in so many ways

campzor

yea next halo will be compared to CS... because PC gamers think CS is some sort of godly online FPS and thats all they ever talk about.

and in terms of skill, its not even the best on PC.. quake is infinitely more difficult... because quake has alot of the same elements as halo.

Both require aiming and dodging simultaneously... both require more hits to earn a kill meaning a noob cant kill an experienced player just because he managed to get the drop on them... and both require controlling and timing powerup respawns.

counterstrike... you point your gun at a corner and wait for someone to walk around.... very much like modern warfare 2.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"][QUOTE="JetB1ackNewYear"] what would you consider then? i agree its one of the best possibly the bestwaltefmoney

Deus Ex is considered to be an action RPG, actually.

[QUOTE="campzor"]counter strike is way better then any halo and thats 11 years old.djsifer01

How much is Microsoft paying you.

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="markinthedark"]

yea next halo will be compared to CS... because PC gamers think CS is some sort of godly online FPS and thats all they ever talk about.

and in terms of skill, its not even the best on PC.. quake is infinitely more difficult... because quake has alot of the same elements as halo.

markinthedark

Both require aiming and dodging simultaneously... both require more hits to earn a kill meaning a noob cant kill an experienced player just because he managed to get the drop on them... and both require controlling and timing powerup respawns.

counterstrike... you point your gun at a corner and wait for someone to walk around.... very much like modern warfare 2.

Ya... CS is a little more than that. I might agree with Quake and UT taking more skill but CS takes more skill than Halo. That's for sure.

[QUOTE="Merex760"]

[QUOTE="slipknot0129"]First person scifi shooter.

siddhu33

That's because there is no TF3...

Halo:CE is still going strong on PC, as there was no actual successor (don't give me Halo 2, that was a horrible port)...

[QUOTE="djsifer01"][QUOTE="campzor"]counter strike is way better then any halo and thats 11 years old.Eggimannd

How much is Microsoft paying you.

Microsoft pays people to hate CS? I must contact them at once!

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="campzor"]..oh do tellEggimannd

Both require aiming and dodging simultaneously... both require more hits to earn a kill meaning a noob cant kill an experienced player just because he managed to get the drop on them... and both require controlling and timing powerup respawns.

counterstrike... you point your gun at a corner and wait for someone to walk around.... very much like modern warfare 2.

Ya... CS is a little more than that. I might agree with Quake and UT taking more skill but CS takes more skill than Halo. That's for sure.

I'd like to see a vid of you "pointing your gun at a corner and waiting for someone" and see how long that lasts.

You've obviously never played CS.

[QUOTE="djsifer01"][QUOTE="campzor"]counter strike is way better then any halo and thats 11 years old.Eggimannd

How much is Microsoft paying you.

Dude, i just have to stop you here....

This guy doesn't like Microsoft! if you saw his posting history, you would know that...

[QUOTE="Eggimannd"]

[QUOTE="djsifer01"]Counter strike is the worst game i have ever played. Reach is among Gods compared to CS.siddhu33

How much is Microsoft paying you.

Dude, i just have to stop you here....

This guy doesn't like Microsoft! if you saw his posting history, you would know that...

Sorry I don't look at everyone's posting history before quoting them :(