I would slap someone across the face is they said Halo 2, Halo 3 or ODST was better than Reach. There's nostalgia for CE, and I can see why someone would feel that way... but the others. No Chance. :PStevo_the_gamer
Be sure to hit both of my cheeks. *Waits to b slapped*
Rofl, Halo 2 and Halo 3 are such complete garbage compared to Reach and CE, dual wielding sucks, the story just goes to complete crap in the second one.
Reach had a very forgettable SP, the story was the worst in the series and the missions/levels were nothing special.
The MP had pretty bad maps and like everything else in the game its in desperate need of improvement (its not 2001 anymore)
toast_burner
hahahaha, really? you think halo 2 had a better story than reach? which part? the stupid giant spaghetti monster? or the forgettable "omg covvies fighting covies OMG!" crap?
Reach has an epic single player, so much better than 2 or 3 its rerally not even funny.
Rofl, Halo 2 and Halo 3 are such complete garbage compared to Reach and CE, dual wielding sucks, the story just goes to complete crap in the second one.
warmaster670
Its story was crap but it was still much better than Reach's story. Overall Reach is still a better game.
The two most interesting and different games in both series are my favourite. New characters, and a more deep story than their predecessor...and people cry and cry and tout them as the worst.
I would slap someone across the face is they said Halo 2, Halo 3 or ODST was better than Reach. There's nostalgia for CE, and I can see why someone would feel that way... but the others. No Chance. :PStevo_the_gamer
I would have ranked Reach above 3 if it had better maps. Reach has some pretty lame maps, especially compared to Halo 3's maps (which were mostly all fantastic).
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Its story was crap but it was still much better than Reach's story. Overall Reach is still a better game. Reach's story was fine, the problem was with the storytelling itself,
I remember when I got Halo 2 I was wondering where that level was:cry: That level back in 2003 looked so amazing, honestly with a few graphical and physics upgrades it still looks fun to play.
I remember when I got Halo 2 I was wondering where that level was:cry: That level back in 2003 looked so amazing, honestly with a few graphical and physics upgrades it still looks fun to play.
except its full of scripted events.
none of the halo campaign are scripted like that level, which is a plus.
[QUOTE="walkingdream"][QUOTE="Rougehunter"]I remember when I got Halo 2 I was wondering where that level was:cry:
alfredooo
That level back in 2003 looked so amazing, honestly with a few graphical and physics upgrades it still looks fun to play.
except its full of scripted events.
none of the halo campaign are scripted like that level, which is a plus.
But it atleast looked like your allies could drive! :cry:
Makes me think of that moment in the Halo 2 level where the warthog pulls up to you and the marine says "Could use you on the gun Chief!" I always made him give me the driving seat and he went to the Gauss turret. However, Marines fire a Gauss round every four-five seconds in Halo 2, where I could fire it every one second. Damn you Bungie!
Single Player Combat Evolved> Reach=3=ODST(all 3 are average)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Halo 2 Multiplayer Halo CE PC>Halo Reach=2(reach plays better, but 2 has godlier maps. It's like unfair how much more fun that game was because of it at times)>>>>>>>>>3>>>>>>>>Firefight is meh now.
[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]I would slap someone across the face is they said Halo 2, Halo 3 or ODST was better than Reach. There's nostalgia for CE, and I can see why someone would feel that way... but the others. No Chance. :PGuppy507
I would have ranked Reach above 3 if it had better maps. Reach has some pretty lame maps, especially compared to Halo 3's maps (which were mostly all fantastic). True story. Reach's maps are terrible.
Log in to comment