Halo: Anniversary - The Halo 1 remake (fuck anyone who calls it "halo ce" remake)

Oh, realism-style Halo, so you mean Call of Halo right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kornman00

Oh, realism-style Halo, so you mean Call of Halo right?

---

He said realism, not CS:2009 realism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donut

yeah they could do that, while just making it fun. im so fucking sick of worrying about what gun i have, because some of the guns are just so much less useful than others. like in halo 1, as long as youre not playing on legendary, you could use pretty much any combination of weapons aside from maybe the needler, and be ok. in halo 3 / odst / reach its like if youre not carrying a dmr or at the very least, a pistol, youre at a huge disadvantage because grunts take so many god damned bullets to kill if it isnt a headshot. and you run out of ammo a lot faster too, so that doesnt help the situation at all.

---

Even on Legendary in Halo 1 I can get away with any gun I want. I play almost every level using nothing but the Assault Rifle and the Pistol and no, the pistol does not do all of the work; it's mainly used for thinning out Grunts and killing Hunters. I use the Needler on T&R, Halo, and AotCR sometimes. I use the Plasma Rifle on 343 GS and The Library. Sometimes I don't even pick up a shotgun when I should, because fuck snakes; I want to use a rocket launcher/plasma pistol combo. The game was just so goddamn fun.

In Reach, I squee'd when I saw "600" count for ammo on the Assault Rifle in the opening level, but I was promptly disappointed when I found that I could not actually carry that amount and that no other guns had large ammunition capacities. Fuck you Bungie, if you were doing it for sake of multiplayer balance, stop; nobody survives long enough to amass 10 magazines for their rape cannon (which they spawn with anyways) on your too-small maps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kornman00

Oh, realism-style Halo, so you mean Call of Halo right?

---

:v:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ki11a_FTW

I was just reading back on this thread and I love how some of you are already talking about a halo 2 remake already even though the first hasnt even came out yet. All I can say is that if they EVER decide to remake halo 2, they better give us What we expected from the first game without fucking up the story. Starting with outskirts, this is the first campaign we ever touched down onto earth in the halo universe, however this was presented very poorly and im sure everyone was expecting what we all saw when the E3 beta of halo 2 came out, instead we get a mainly close quarters area to start in as soon as the level starts. The map had huge potential, and couldve been the map to change the way people look at the campaign in general, as the game was meant to emphasize the covenant on earth. I could go into more detail about the other maps, but im sure you all get what im saying. The game sucked SP wise and doesnt deserve a remake, and a GOOD remake would most likely throw people off because it would require a lot of changes in some of the levels and there layouts.

Sorry for the rant, but the first game in my opinion is the only one worthy of a remake.

---

Then it wouldn't be a remake..

Halo 2 doesn't need a remake. It just needs a straight port to 360 via Arcade with modern resolution and online co-op. If only for the exploring and goofing around aspects, Halo 2 had the best Campaign of the series and I want it more than the first game tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Halo 2 doesn't need a remake. It just needs a straight port to 360 via Arcade with modern resolution and online co-op. If only for the exploring and goofing around aspects, Halo 2 had the best Campaign of the series and I want it more than the first game tbh.

---

Wat...

No, seriously...wat.

That campaign was the most linear, boring, disappointing, and enraging experience out of the entire franchise. You can't even goof off in it because the physics engine makes it unfunny to do so. You best be trollin'.

I think you have H2 confused with ODST?

(2 is by far the best game, aesthetically and story-wise)

(okay, ODST might be less linear, but the above stands)

No. Combat Evolved had a far superior story and campaign to Halo 2. There was a sense of desperation, since there were hardly friendlies and when there were, they were a fragile commodity to be guarded and preserved lest you be a lone. There was the mystery as to what exactly Halo was. Who were the Forerunners? Why did they build this place? The Covenant had purpose, they had drive, they had menace. Then let's not even forget one of the most memorable moments in video game history: the introduction of the Flood. The Flood were scary as shit in that game the first time you played it, and they were far scarier to fight before they had a stupid, slimy flower start talking for them.

Halo 2 was herping and derping all over the place; once you started playing the Arbiter, it started getting progressively worse. The levels themselves were garbage, as were the gunplay mechanics. Then there's the AI hacks, the bullocks that was the lack of an Earth-centric story, and the retarded damage sponge they called "Brutes." Brutes were in no way fun to fight in Halo 2, Halo 3, ODST, or Reach. As for the story, the whole Covenant Civil War was paper thin and not executed very well. Prophets getting butthurt that the Elites couldn't stop a super-soldier with nothing to lose causes them to betray their oldest allies? A Gravemind (how the fuck did he not get toasted by thousands of sentinels?). The revelation in Halo 3 that Truth was an innocently ignorant religious sociopath destroys the Covenant as an interesting faction in Halo 2. And the worst atrocity of the entire thing: Elites speaking English. Yay space lizardmen.

Can you tell how upset I am with Halo 2?

I have to agree with Warsaw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

No. Combat Evolved had a far superior story and campaign to Halo 2. There was a sense of desperation, since there were hardly friendlies and when there were, they were a fragile commodity to be guarded and preserved lest you be a lone. There was the mystery as to what exactly Halo was. Who were the Forerunners? Why did they build this place? The Covenant had purpose, they had drive, they had menace. Then let's not even forget one of the most memorable moments in video game history: the introduction of the Flood. The Flood were scary as shit in that game the first time you played it, and they were far scarier to fight before they had a stupid, slimy flower start talking for them.

Halo 2 was herping and derping all over the place; once you started playing the Arbiter, it started getting progressively worse. The levels themselves were garbage, as were the gunplay mechanics. Then there's the AI hacks, the bullocks that was the lack of an Earth-centric story, and the retarded damage sponge they called "Brutes." Brutes were in no way fun to fight in Halo 2, Halo 3, ODST, or Reach. As for the story, the whole Covenant Civil War was paper thin and not executed very well. Prophets getting butthurt that the Elites couldn't stop a super-soldier with nothing to lose causes them to betray their oldest allies? A Gravemind (how the fuck did he not get toasted by thousands of sentinels?). The revelation in Halo 3 that Truth was an innocently ignorant religious sociopath destroys the Covenant as an interesting faction in Halo 2. And the worst atrocity of the entire thing: Elites speaking English. Yay space lizardmen.

Can you tell how upset I am with Halo 2?

---

Well, it's pretty obvious that I'm not going to convince you to repent with words so I'm not going to bother.

An Earth-centric story would have been shit(see ODST), and the Arbiter levels and accompanying cutscenes are the best in the series. Your views are unforgivable.

As intresting as the aribters aspect of the story is in halo 2 (and its only intresting because you kinda get to see what the covenant is all about), the game wouldve been more of a success if it followed masterchief the entire time. A lot of intresting story/plot sequences couldve been inserted IF we didnt follow the arbiter in Halo 2. The Arbiters story wouldve probably made the game more of a success if it was an add on to the game, like maybe if it was included with Halo 2's first map pack or something. Because without the arbiter on the main game, they couldve put in a lot of kickass shit following the chief, meaning that all the arbiter levels would of course be levels replaced with masterchief's, also making the game feel a lot longer.

However this is just my look on the game, A lot of you might like the arbiters side of the game, i dont know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Halo 2 was herping and derping all over the place; once you started playing the Arbiter, it started getting progressively worse. The levels themselves were garbage, as were the gunplay mechanics. Then there's the AI hacks, the bullocks that was the lack of an Earth-centric story, and the retarded damage sponge they called "Brutes." Brutes were in no way fun to fight in Halo 2, Halo 3, ODST, or Reach. As for the story, the whole Covenant Civil War was paper thin and not executed very well. Prophets getting butthurt that the Elites couldn't stop a super-soldier with nothing to lose causes them to betray their oldest allies? A Gravemind (how the fuck did he not get toasted by thousands of sentinels?). The revelation in Halo 3 that Truth was an innocently ignorant religious sociopath destroys the Covenant as an interesting faction in Halo 2. And the worst atrocity of the entire thing: Elites speaking English. Yay space lizardmen.

---

I agree about the prophets, and I find it utterly stupid that the only reason they want to destroy all life is because they didn't RTFM.
Storywise, I can't understand the demotions of the elites. In game, however, it makes perfect sense; Regret's guards are dangerous only when you aren't sitting in his chair beating him up and, even then, they are ignorable unless you don't pay attention to where you are going. That is to say that as guards of the prophets, the elites were pathetic.
I actually enjoyed playing as the Arbiter because it meant I had, in place of the broken flashlight, active camouflage. I really enjoyed being able to effectively stealth through most of the levels as the Arbiter with my invisible elite and grunt buddies, which replaced the "lol kill everything or get 1-shot sniped by jackal snipers" gameplay in the levels you play as Master Chief.
I'm not sure what you mean by the brutes being damage sponges. In Halo 2, even on legendary, a few shots with the carbine and the brute goes down. If you don't have the carbine, there's always a plethora of needlers (from grunts) and beam rifles (from crates). If you somehow managed to waste all of those, it isn't too hard to just melee them in the back or even skip them. Brutes are even easier in Halo 3 because they are using power armor, making them headshottable after an overcharge from the plasma pistol (except for the chieftains who, quite honestly, are even more ignorable than grunts). I can't speak for Reach or ODST though, but I imagine that in ODST the point is to try and sneak past them.
Also on the subject of manuals, I believe the Halo 2 manual explains why the elites/prophets/brutes speak English. While the reason is BS, I imagine the game would be somehow worse if you had subtitles during half the game just to explain what the elites said.

In response to an earlier post, I'm not sure why someone would even use ammo to kill grunts. Use it on the bigger enemies and the grunts will temporarily scare, allowing you to come in and melee most of them to death before they rally (or just let your marine/elite buddies to help you out, although in the case of the elites, they'd probably just run up and melee them anyway).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cagerrin

An Earth-centric story would have been shit(see ODST)

---

...I loved ODST :saddowns:

I did enjoy the Arbiter's storyline and cutscenes though.

@Cagerrin: I defy you to explain just how ODST was bad. It wasn't the best, but it was more enjoyable than Halo 2 was. Also, unless you can explain how an Earth-focused campaign would be shit, you have no argument.

As for the cutscenes, that's not part of what I was ragging about. The cinematography and voice acting were great, but good cutscenes don't make up for mediocre game-play. The best levels of Halo 2 were Cairo Station, Delta Halo, Regret, and Uprising. Only one of those is an Arbiter level. Why? Because all of his levels tend to be the worst-playing ones, especially his debut set. *His* story was cool, but it didn't belong. They also cheated us players out of what we were looking forward to most when we learned we would be playing as an Elite: slaughtering humans wholesale just like Elites do when we're playing as the Chief. I get to be an Elite!? Sweet, now I get to take out my stress on Stacker over ther--wait, I'm fighting more Elites and Grunts? FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF-


Also, you remember all those complaints everybody makes (and are still making) about Halo 3 and Reach? 90% of those issues were birthed by Halo 2. That includes: DMR spam, two-hit melee, melee lunge, retarded-ass grenades, terrible map layouts, every non-DMR weapon being close to useless, and every remotely useful weapon being relegated to what might as well count for "power weapon" status. Oh, and let's not forget the MLG dick-sucking. I fail to see how people who complain about Halo 3's multiplayer praise Halo 2's multiplayer, which is almost exactly the same save for a few weapon additions and tweaks. Even Reach plays 85% the same as Halo 2, it's just that Armour Abilities and less player agility change it just enough to be different. Everybody whining about cross-hair bloom is complaining because they can't get their three kills per magazine a la Halo 2 BR55 because they can't time their shots properly and they get killed as a result.

So no, the only game deserving a remake is the first one. It has a distinctly unique feel compared to ALL of its successors, and everything about that game was better. Yes, even the multiplayer settings were better.

@IGMBiti: The Brutes are damage sponges UNLESS you place headshots. But that goes back to all subsequent Halo iterations following Nr. 1 requiring you to have a DMR on you unless you want to get absolutely fucked. Needlers were a good substitute, but they chewed through ammo faster than you could blink and I had a hard time finding them on the harder difficulties and on levels not on High Charity. Beam rifles were actually only truly good against Elites and lesser Covenant in Halo 2; it was too precise to thin out a pack of Brutes charging at you down that large indoor ramp. Better to place shots with a carbine as fast as you can, and again that goes back to the DMR requirement. As for Halo 3 and ODST and Reach: they are just retarded enemies who are only able to inflict damage on you because they are in large numbers (quantity over quality, eh?) and because certain members have hacks...invulnerability hacks. Never in a shooter should a regular enemy have invulnerability at any point, especially if it can be activated on point of death to evade said death.

omg cant wait for halo 3 remake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ki11a_FTW

omg cant wait for halo 3 remake

---

:allears:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cagerrin

An Earth-centric story would have been shit(see ODST). Your views are unforgivable.

---

You must be a part of the all action, no substance gang. ODST had some of the best moments in Halo with the investigation by the Rookie and some of the flashback sequences like Uplift Reserve, ONI Alpha Site, and Coastal Highway. I found the cutscenes in ODST some of my favourites in the entire series.

Atmosphere in Tayari Plaza is damn hard to beat, to say nothing of the Streets segments.

The problem with Earth-based campaigns is that they end up being incredibly generic sci-fi in aesthetic, and the stories simply lack scope. I'm not going to comment on gameplay because I couldn't care less how they play in terms of irritants(EVERYONE seems to blow jackal snipers out of proportion in retrospect).

Characters in ODST are fine, it's just that the environments are boring on the level of Grasswatchers Anonymous.

(also I'm probably the only one, but if H3 had been a full-on Arbiter campaign, I would have bought a 360 for it)

A full-on Arbiter game would be cool, actually. Working around Halo 2, start during Halo 1 era and work through to Halo 2. Awesome in the making right there. Then the sequel would pick up post-Halo 2 and follow the Arbiter's escapades in Halo 3, because he wasn't always there. Better yet, make a Halo game with two parallel campaigns. A lot of games used to do this sort of thing (<3 Battlezone), but it's rare these days.

As for ODST, it was not at all generic. Generic would be us getting our asses handed to us by aliens and then turning it around last minute because some badass motherfucker just killed the queen. Hoorah. What ODST has is a mystery, and you are losing the whole way through. Only thing that would have spiced it up even more is if a character or two had died (Mickey dying would have been great for shock-value). Now, Reach tried to do that, but it failed because none of the characters was endearing at all. That, and we knew we were going to lose from the outset, and we knew we were all going to die. Certain death = no shock value.

As for the boringness of the levels, weather would have fixed that. Bungie wanted to do much more dramatic weather, but the engine limitations wouldn't let them. Streets was supposed to have heavy rain and thunder, but instead we have billowing clouds of smoke and a sprinkle here and there. I don't think the human architecture is boring, either. They varied it up nicely. Reach did an even better job with varying human architecture.

Note that I said "generic sci-fi in aesthetic". I don't [i]mind[i] the plot, I'm just not hugely interested in the Halo-verse Earth setting or the human aesthetic(with the sole exception of Sword Base, for easily-guessed reasons).

The environments were boring? How the fuck can you get anymore varied than Urban city streets, a desert wildlife reserve, an island base, building rooftops, an underground facility, and more? All of those environments were incredibly detailed and the atmosphere definitely benefited from it.

How can you say these look boring?:

Because after a pair of ringworlds, a quarantine lab dangled into a gas giant, a hollow space-city, and a ringworld forge/planetoid miner, they are?

I second that post^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cagerrin

Because after a pair of ringworlds, a quarantine lab dangled into a gas giant, a hollow space-city, and a ringworld forge/planetoid miner, they are?

---

Maybe. But you are thinking from game to game rather than taking the universe series a whole. The same tired Forerunner angles over and over get just as boring as skyscrapers, and guess which we see more of in the franchise. Maybe the background story is less exciting, but you don't get to play with the background story anyways.

It's debatable.

I love Forerunner stuff, but Bungie/Microsoft killed the appeal of the Forerunner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cagerrin

Because after a pair of ringworlds, a quarantine lab dangled into a gas giant, a hollow space-city, and a ringworld forge/planetoid miner, they are?

---

Too much of a good thing, etc etc.
For a game set in a really small area of Earth, it was really varied. ODST is so under-rated by most of the Halo Community, it was way better than H3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n00b1n8R

ODST is so under-rated by most of the Halo Community, it was way better than H3.

---

I keep coming back to ODST campaign because of its sombre mood, and its uniqueness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NullZero

I keep coming back to ODST campaign because of its sombre mood, and its uniqueness.

---

It's the only Halo game on the 360 that actually has decent storytelling AND gameplay that doesn't limit you to one gun in order to succeed. Halo 2, 3, and Reach got caught up in your playercharacter is a badass so you gotta go push a button at the end of the level. In ODST, the playercharacter simply survived and in doing so made him a badass. Most storytellers have their hero break when they get too strong by putting them in a situation where they have to fight in a weakened state. Doing so lets gameplay remain reasonably unstable while adding tension and meaning to the story. Bungie said it themselves that the chief got rediculously strong over the course of the games (and I can't imagine how bad 343i is going to make it), but they just let it happen. Mute Halo 3 from beginning to end and the only difference you'll see as the game reaches the third act is how quickly nav pointers show up.

In relation to the universe and the first game, the Master Chief did impossible shit in Halo 2 and Halo 3 that would have killed regular Spartans. Hell, why do you think most of them are dead (besides the ones that got glassed on the surface of Reach)? The Master chief jumping off that forerunner ship in the atmosphere at the end of H2/start of H3 and landing alive without jump gear? What the fuck? Spartans that jumped out of a pelican with less speed and distance to the surface than Master Chief hit Reach and died instantly. I don't believe that a simple change from Mark V to Mark VI armour allowed the Master Chief to just get up and walk away from his landing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

That campaign was the most linear, boring, disappointing, and enraging experience out of the entire franchise. You can't even goof off in it because the physics engine makes it unfunny to do so. You best be trollin'.

---

Not trolling.









Thumbs up if you think halo 2 was the best for exploring maps =D


GamesNshiet 6 months ago 99 http://s.ytimg.com/yt/img/pixel-vfl3z5WfW.gifhttp://img641.imageshack.us/img641/9...vfl3z5wfwe.gif









That's just stuff I thought of off the top of my head in 5 seconds. There's way more. Halo 2's Campaign is my favorite for co-op. The map exploration and freedom to go where you want trumps any other game in the series. Not to mention Halo 2 had so much awesome shit to find. Friends and I spent hours and hours just exploring the levels because they were so beautiful and fun to run around in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

terrible map layouts.

---

Just skimmed over the wall of text long enough to see this. Are you fucking kidding me? Halo 2 had the best map layouts of the entire series! Halo 1 had some good ones, but it was still plagued by excessive use of choke points (grenade spam) and wide open areas (herp derp pistol strafing). Halo 2 maps had flow that most of Halo 1's maps could only dream of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Everybody whining about cross-hair bloom is complaining because they can't get their three kills per magazine a la Halo 2 BR55 because they can't time their shots properly and they get killed as a result.

---

Bloom is stupid because

a. it adds an element of randomness (randomness being the opposite of skill) that allows people to get lucky kills at close range by spamming, and

b. the DMR is so RIDICULOUSLY accurate when slow fired that there's absolutely no way to avoid or escape it if you get caught in the open (read: 99% of all forgeworld maps). At least in Halo PC we had the shitty netcode and in Halo 2 and 3 the BR required leading across long distance (plus none of them were HITSCAN with almost INFINITE RANGE), which somewhat compensated for the power of those weapons.

But I've already gone into great detail about why Reach's multiplayer is shit, we don't really need to re-open that discussion here.

Only Lockout was good, to be honest. The other Halo 2 maps that were good were all remakes of Combat Evolved maps.

Now, at least 50% of my time in Halo has been spent playing co-op. When you consider the number of hours (think 7 hours a day average between 2001 and 2006), that's a lot of time. I have never, EVER had as much fun in Halo 2 screwing around as I have in Halo 1. It's. Just. Not. Amusing. Easter eggs are all fine and dandy, but that doesn't make the game better for screwing around; the physics in Combat Evolved alone were enough to make me want to screw around because of the hilarity that ensued every time. And if Halo 2 has the best campaign just because of exploring, that says to me that it's already broken; the game played normally is supposed to be fun and make you want to play again and again. Halo 2 does not do this. As a campaign, it's a massive failure. I will grant you the merit of exploration, though.

That said, I don't know why you even included that last video. Combat Evolved's opening did the same thing. Johnson always has a line in every Halo game that changes with difficulty. Halo 1 also had a "ride the pelican" moment. It has segments where you can get vehicles into places they aren't supposed to be, generally with more hilarious results. Brute pimp is just...wat. Not much funnier than Flood pets from the first game, though.

Zanzibar was awesome, Turf was intense, Burial Mounds was invigorating, and Ivory Tower was a definite favourite by most people. None of those are Halo 1 remakes.

Halo 2 was my by far, my favorite Halo game. I hate how people dis it, especially its campaign. Its campaign was brilliant, lots of very memorable levels (most notable Delta Halo and Regret), and the soundtrack was simply awe-inspiring too. Like Pooky said, it had a great co-op too, and the levels were full of replayability. There is alot to do and explore in all of them, even if its an exploit of the game or a simple easter-egg.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amit

Zanzibar was awesome, Turf was intense, Burial Mounds was invigorating, and Ivory Tower was a definite favourite by most people. None of those are Halo 1 remakes.

---

Burial Grounds was a carbine/BR wankfest.
Zanzibar was a BR wankfest, with everyone else resorting to splattering or glitching out of the map with a sniper rifle; H2CE played much better.
Ivory Tower was soiled with all of the sword whoring. Though this map was good in the sense that it was the only one that managed to take advantage of Dual Wielding...and Needlers...lots and lots of Needlers.
Turf, I can't comment on. I never really played Turf.

Now, let's look at the list of generally accepted Combat Evolved favourites (* means it has a remake):
Bloodgulch*
Battle Creek*
Sidewinder*
Hang 'Em High*
Prisoner
Timberland
Wizard*
Boarding Action
Damnation
Rat Race
Danger Canyon

Here's the list of generally disliked maps that are frequently and openly poo-poo'd:
Chiron TL34
Longest*
Derelict
Infinity
Chill Out*

What does that say about the rest of Halo 2's maps?

@Higuy: The campaign was one huge bottleneck with low replayability due to bad AI (especially on the Elites, resulting in Bungie making the hugest damage/RoF modifiers known to man to make them threatening), overly choreographed combat set-pieces, and small encounters. It's only redeeming quality is the cut-scenes, which are the best in the series. I cannot, however, play a cut-scene.

As for the music...Halo 2 was good, but to me it lacked the "Halo" tone. Halo 1 and 3 much better capture what I consider the "atmosphere" of Halo. I also really liked ODST for its unique sound out of all of the games.

I don't know, maybe I'm just overly critical of the games I play. I seem to be part of a handful of players that though Halo 2 was inferior to its predecessor. I just didn't have as much fun with that game as I did with the first. I tried, I honestly did. It just didn't happen.

You're spreading your personal opinion as though it is fact. Everything you have said so far is debatable. I'm not going to waste my time explaining why you are incorrect in many ways just for you to respond with more :words:

I'll say this, though. While you have low replayability I must have played through the H2 campaign at least 5 times. It's fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

@Higuy: The campaign was one huge bottleneck with low replayability due to bad AI (especially on the Elites, resulting in Bungie making the hugest damage/RoF modifiers known to man to make them threatening), overly choreographed combat set-pieces, and small encounters. It's only redeeming quality is the cut-scenes, which are the best in the series. I cannot, however, play a cut-scene.

As for the music...Halo 2 was good, but to me it lacked the "Halo" tone. Halo 1 and 3 much better capture what I consider the "atmosphere" of Halo. I also really liked ODST for its unique sound out of all of the games.

I don't know, maybe I'm just overly critical of the games I play. I seem to be part of a handful of players that though Halo 2 was inferior to its predecessor. I just didn't have as much fun with that game as I did with the first. I tried, I honestly did. It just didn't happen.

---

How could you not love levels like Quarantine Zone (wasteland), Old Mombasa, Delta Halo, Uprising?!!?!?!? The game had some of the most inspiration levels ever in my opinion. The only thing I didn't like was the whole Chief switching to Arbiter thing, then again, it is vital to the universe and the story being told.

And alot of its Multiplayer levels were remade. Sanctuary, Relic (sorta), Zanzibar... To be honest, Halo 2 was what souly made me get xbox live and and a xbox as a whole. It really was just a great game from what I played and experienced.

Halo 1 and 3 too were both great too, especially 1. Halo 2 had a far deeper story though, and some more interesting level design. Halo 1's encounters were good in the iconic encounters - alot of other ones were fairly linear in some cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Bloom is stupid because

a. it adds an element of randomness (randomness being the opposite of skill) that allows people to get lucky kills at close range by spamming, and

b. the DMR is so RIDICULOUSLY accurate when slow fired that there's absolutely no way to avoid or escape it if you get caught in the open (read: 99% of all forgeworld maps). At least in Halo PC we had the shitty netcode and in Halo 2 and 3 the BR required leading across long distance (plus none of them were HITSCAN with almost INFINITE RANGE), which somewhat compensated for the power of those weapons.

---

how does b make bloom bad? if youre slow firing, then bloom doesnt really effect anything, and if youre slow firing, the other guy has a better chance to get away.

E: also, halo 2's sp was fun, dont get me wrong, there was plenty of awesome shit in there. im just saying that the city levels didnt have the level of epic i was expecting from the E3 trailer. running through the field hospital set up, seeing all the marines holding that high ground trying to take out the stationary gun, the witty dialog about the coast being clear ("you tell me"), and then gunning on the back of a gauss hog through a city with what seemed to be multiple roads you could take, all of which i assume were full of covenant. to an extent i assume this didnt happen because of technical limitations, but thats the sort of thing i was expecting. we got a similar feeling with the scarab battle and the bridge scorpion tank rape, but it just didnt seem as robust as the E3 trailer made it seem.

my issue mainly lies in the weapons though. i feel like i have to micro manage so much more in halo 2 and on then i do in halo 1. like i said before, no headshot weapon = problem, whereas in halo 1, assault rifle and shotgun was a perfectly viable strategy. really, bringing back the halo 1 shotgun would fix quite a bit of my griping, but at this point they wont because they have 2 other close range weapons now (sword and hammer).

E2: halo 2's music was fucking awesome, and fit just fine, idfk what youre talking about warlord. parts of halo 2's sound track were redone for halo 3, and if im not mistaken, "re-interpreted" so to speak for reach. songs that come to mind are the battle theme for the gondolas, that theme that plays when youre at the top of the water fall in this jungle-ey area sniping covenant, and the theme from outskirts and newmombasa.
and the battle theme from the gondolas was an interpretation of the "upon a pale horse" or whatever from halo 1.

Halo 2 has fantastic music, captivating environments, creative encounters, fun exploration,varied enemies, an extensive sandbox of weapons and vehicles, and god-awful gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Only Lockout was good, to be honest. The other Halo 2 maps that were good were all remakes of Combat Evolved maps.

Now, at least 50% of my time in Halo has been spent playing co-op. When you consider the number of hours (think 7 hours a day average between 2001 and 2006), that's a lot of time. I have never, EVER had as much fun in Halo 2 screwing around as I have in Halo 1. It's. Just. Not. Amusing. Easter eggs are all fine and dandy, but that doesn't make the game better for screwing around; the physics in Combat Evolved alone were enough to make me want to screw around because of the hilarity that ensued every time. And if Halo 2 has the best campaign just because of exploring, that says to me that it's already broken; the game played normally is supposed to be fun and make you want to play again and again. Halo 2 does not do this. As a campaign, it's a massive failure. I will grant you the merit of exploration, though.

---

You don't seem to be understanding at all that what I posted is my opinion and what you posted is your opinion and no opinion can ever be right or wrong. I enjoy co-op on Halo 2 more than Halo 1. You don't. Fine. That doesn't make my opinion wrong.

Also though it's not really relevant to the discussion, I should add that any time someone uses 'linear' as a gameplay criticism, their opinion instantly loses all credibility.

There's nothing wrong with linear gameplay. For that matter, non linear gameplay has been the source of some of my most boring and frustrating experiences in gaming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donut

how does b make bloom bad? if youre slow firing, then bloom doesnt really effect anything, and if youre slow firing, the other guy has a better chance to get away.

---

It's the fact that before mid range weapons had bloom, they all had consistent accuracy that was never too good and never too bad. That meant that neither random close range spraying nor retardedly long range spamming would work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Here's the list of generally disliked maps that are frequently and openly poo-poo'd:
Chiron TL34
Longest*
Derelict
Infinity
Chill Out*

---

I don't know anybody who hates or ridicules those maps. Chillout is awesome. The only one on there I could maybe agree with is Longest, but even that map is fun under the right circumstances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

---

^In my top ten fav vids of all time. Swear I posted that in youtube thread in March or April too.

i have to say, im completely agree with the "where do i fucking go" argument. metroid is a culprit, most certainly, and iv gotten lost at least once in almost every halo iv played, particularly 1 and 2. (even more particularly, flood based levels)

ill also agree with halo 2 being the best for exploring. i watched one of those videos, and especially new mombasa and outskirts had TONS of shit to run around and see. there was a lot of that in halo 2. its actually almost a little disturbing, because it seems like bungie had so much more planned for the level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

You don't seem to be understanding at all that what I posted is my opinion and what you posted is your opinion and no opinion can ever be right or wrong. I enjoy co-op on Halo 2 more than Halo 1. You don't. Fine. That doesn't make my opinion wrong.
Doesn't make it wrong, but it does make the facts you are using to support it wrong. That's the difference between debating with me and a fanboy; I haven't seen any real evidence to support your opinion, and nothing you have said detracts from the opinion that Combat Evolved has the better campaign. I'm not covering my ears going "blah blah blah," the Halo 2 is best people just haven't said anything compelling. The point of the debate is, at any rate, that Halo 2 does not deserve a remake. Only the game that started it all should be remade right now. If they want to redo the entire series at some point down the line, say 10 years from now, then that would be cool. As it stands, Halo 2 is too fresh and it introduced so much shit into the series that they are STILL actively trying to get over. They need to relearn how to make fun, engaging, non-MLG-biased entertainment first.

Also though it's not really relevant to the discussion, I should add that any time someone uses 'linear' as a gameplay criticism, their opinion instantly loses all credibility.

There's nothing wrong with linear gameplay. For that matter, non linear gameplay has been the source of some of my most boring and frustrating experiences in gaming.
When I say linear, I mean the type of linear where it's almost like being on rails, except you have the power to decide when to move on. Halo 2 has that type of linear. I don't get to choose how I approach their set-piece, I have to go in and hope I get all my timing exactly correct or I'll get killed. I also need to have the exact gun for that segment. Halo 3 and Halo: Reach were much the same way. ODST was not. Half-Life didn't kill you straight up for approaching something with a different gun, and it had a lot of back doors to use. The only credibility lost is in being unable to infer the connotation of "linear gameplay" based on the direction of the conversation, especially when all games in consideration right now are technically linear.


It's the fact that before mid range weapons had bloom, they all had consistent accuracy that was never too good and never too bad. That meant that neither random close range spraying nor retardedly long range spamming would work.
Say that to everybody who did the short/long range spamming on Coagulation, Ascension, Valhalla, Ivory Tower, etc.


I don't know anybody who hates or ridicules those maps. Chillout is awesome. The only one on there I could maybe agree with is Longest, but even that map is fun under the right circumstances.
I don't hate it either. Most of the people I have played with didn't really like them, though, and a lot of people I have played with online also would have rather played the maps in the "favourite" category. I even like Chiron quite a bit. Point is, the only truly bad map in Halo 1 was Infinity (way too big for even 16 players). I hear almost nothing but complaining about the maps in all subsequent Halo games, and it's not even me doing the bitching; I hardly played Halo 2 multiplayer because it was too different from the first and, therefore, not fun for me.

---

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Doesn't make it wrong, but it does make the facts you are using to support it wrong. That's the difference between debating with me and a fanboy; I haven't seen any real evidence to support your opinion, and nothing you have said detracts from the opinion that Combat Evolved has the better campaign. I'm not covering my ears going "blah blah blah," the Halo 2 is best people just haven't said anything compelling.

---

Facts and evidence... to support an opinion... yeah that makes sense. Apparently I need facts and evidence to prefer one game's campaign for co-op (only (since you apparently missed that part)) over another's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

The point of the debate is, at any rate, that Halo 2 does not deserve a remake. Only the game that started it all should be remade right now. If they want to redo the entire series at some point down the line, say 10 years from now, then that would be cool. As it stands, Halo 2 is too fresh and it introduced so much shit into the series that they are STILL actively trying to get over. They need to relearn how to make fun, engaging, non-MLG-biased entertainment first.

---

Hang on I missed the part where I said remake. Let me go back and check...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Halo 2 doesn't need a remake. It just needs a straight port to 360 via Arcade with modern resolution and online co-op. If only for the exploring and goofing around aspects, Halo 2 had the best Campaign of the series and I want it more than the first game tbh.

---

Oh wait, I never said that.

Not gonna lie Warsaw, you're acting like a total fanboy right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Facts and evidence... to support an opinion... yeah that makes sense. Apparently I need facts and evidence to prefer one game's campaign for co-op (only (since you apparently missed that part)) over another's.

You yourself missed the part where I am talking about the campaign as a WHOLE, not just co-op. I already stated earlier that maybe for exploring, it was great, but as a campaign it was miserable.

I'm not necessarily bashing your opinion as much as I am trying to understand it. They can come off as appearing the same because the only way to gain an understanding is to ask for evidence. You had to formulate your opinion based on something. So far, I've seen two items which are both in the same level, so that's only one level out of 13 listed. The skulls are the only puzzles to solve in Halo 2. The enemies aren't a puzzle to be solved, they are a roll of the dice, with a modifier in your favour if you have the gun that Bungie intended you to have at that part. The levels require zero thought to accomplish, just plow on through. You can't even be stealthy with sleeping grunts! Like I said, I haven't seen anything that would compel me to agree with you (and Cagerrin, as it were) that Halo 2's campaign was the best apart from great cut-scenes.

Hang on I missed the part where I said remake. Let me go back and check...
Arcade port. I know, not a remake, but it's not even worth that. You and the rest of the world have already done the exploring by now anyways, so what's the point? Even I don't go exploring anymore, I screw around with the physics, AI, and triggers.


Oh wait, I never said that.

Not gonna lie Warsaw, you're acting like a total fanboy right now.
To be fair, you haven't the room to talk if you take a look at the Reach thread, though I supported your sentiments there. We're all fanboys of something here, else the forum wouldn't exist. I'm a fanboy of good games, the category of which Halo 2, 3, and Reach have missed in their stupid attempts to become more "accessible", along with other over-hyped titles like Mass Effect, Dawn of War II, C&C, Starcraft 2, Fallout 3, Oblivion, Team Fortress 2, Call of Duty 4/5/MW2, and Assassin's Creed (1 and 2). The category that Halo 1, ODST, Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Battlezone I/II, Dark Reign, KotOR, Battlefield 2/BC2, Borderlands, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., and Red Orchestra are a part of. In my case, it's a rather exclusive club. I know a steaming pile of nickel-diming, cost-cutting, casual-catering shit when I see it.

So yes, I am a fanboy. But let's face it, is there a reason not to be? The best of Halo took place during the time of the first game. The modding, the multiplayer, the good maps, the mysterious Forerunner, the "oshit" moments, and the epic 4-way XBOX LANs. 2001 through 2004 were the best years, and ever since Halo 2 came out, Halo has become something of a laughing stock, especially in the Xbox Live community.

---

I'm getting déja vu from this.

The part you still seem to be extremely unclear on is that I'm not and never was saying that Halo 2 was the best Campaign. I said that in my opinion, it's the best for goofing around on co-op. It's not perfect but I can still have a lot of fun with it. The videos I posted are just a short list of things that sort of highlight the reasons I enjoyed it.

I wouldn't call anything I posted back in the Reach thread 'fanboyism' because I wasn't asserting one thing to be the best above all others. I was just posting my rage at what a terrible and disappointing multiplayer experience I was having.

im sorry but halo 1 co-op on legendary on the maw is the greatest thing of all existence??!?

Halo Anniversary Behind-the-Scenes: Multiplayer

Wait, did I mishear that ViDoc or did they say they returned the magnum to a 3sk in the title update?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

The part you still seem to be extremely unclear on is that I'm not and never was saying that Halo 2 was the best Campaign. I said that in my opinion, it's the best for goofing around on co-op. It's not perfect but I can still have a lot of fun with it. The videos I posted are just a short list of things that sort of highlight the reasons I enjoyed it.

I wouldn't call anything I posted back in the Reach thread 'fanboyism' because I wasn't asserting one thing to be the best above all others. I was just posting my rage at what a terrible and disappointing multiplayer experience I was having.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Halo 2 doesn't need a remake. It just needs a straight port to 360 via Arcade with modern resolution and online co-op. If only for the exploring and goofing around aspects, Halo 2 had the best Campaign of the series and I want it more than the first game tbh.

---

Seems the only one confused is you. And no, you can't just change your tune to "best campaign for co-op" after that. Sorry.

You didn't assert it directly in the Reach thread, but you did it indirectly to the confusion of the rest of the forum until I came in and said exactly what it was you were implying (while agreeing with it). Go read it. That's basically how it played out. I also remember you getting called a fanboy in there, too. There's nothing wrong with being a fanboy as long as you aren't throwing insults at people for disagreeing with your opinion. No insults have been thrown around in here, so...

@Necr0matic: YUSSSSSSSSS. Reach to Anniversary options for the win. Also, I wholly did not expect a remake of Timberland. That is a much welcome addition.

I just jizzed in my pants...twice...

DAMN IT.

Holy shit, Prisoner.

Yeah, I'm surprised. Prisoner+Damnation makes this the best set of maps(release for PC goddammit, 343).

Buuuut I might as well run unshackled.skp through a file shredder right now

That's all well and good, but where's my Halo PC "hit" sound effect? Surely, that was more worthy of a resurrection than Timberland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Seems the only one confused is you. And no, you can't just change your tune to "best campaign for co-op" after that. Sorry.

You didn't assert it directly in the Reach thread, but you did it indirectly to the confusion of the rest of the forum until I came in and said exactly what it was you were implying (while agreeing with it). Go read it. That's basically how it played out. I also remember you getting called a fanboy in there, too. There's nothing wrong with being a fanboy as long as you aren't throwing insults at people for disagreeing with your opinion. No insults have been thrown around in here, so...

@Necr0matic: YUSSSSSSSSS. Reach to Anniversary options for the win. Also, I wholly did not expect a remake of Timberland. That is a much welcome addition.

---

pwned

Has anyone else seen the Installation 04 Firefight map?

http://www.1up.com/previews/pax-halo-anniversary-edition-proves-memory-liar

:O Chad Armstrong is in 343i!

Man, I know it's early to call this but I don't think they're going to disappoint in the future with Halo...even if nothing is on PC yet.

I'm actually really impressed with all of 343's Forerunner structures in the backgrounds of the maps. The Forerunner city is my favorite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ODX

...even if nothing is on PC yet.

---

Yet? 343 is never going to release anything on PC.

Needs moar Danger Canyon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

You didn't assert it directly in the Reach thread, but you did it indirectly to the confusion of the rest of the forum until I came in and said exactly what it was you were implying (while agreeing with it). Go read it. That's basically how it played out. I also remember you getting called a fanboy in there, too. There's nothing wrong with being a fanboy as long as you aren't throwing insults at people for disagreeing with your opinion.

---

What exactly did I assert? That Reach is shit? Being a 'fanboy' demands being a 'fan' of something. Comparing the game unfavorably to Halo 1 doesn't mean I'll automatically bash people for liking Reach better. I will bash people for calling Reach a serious competitive platform, which it most definitely is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Halo 2 doesn't need a remake. It just needs a straight port to 360 via Arcade with modern resolution and online co-op. If only for the exploring and goofing around aspects, Halo 2 had the best Campaign of the series and I want it more than the first game tbh.

---

Okay, so I could have worded my post a little better. Let me try again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Halo 2 had in my opinion the best Campaign for exploring and goofing around, particularly on cooperative.

---

If that's really the source of this whole retarded 'debate', can we end it now and just agree to disagree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

No insults have been thrown around in here, so...

---

No they haven't, and I sincerely applaud you for your maturity.

Relevant.

ffs, Pooky and Warsaw, no one cares if you two are fan boys and are pointless arguing who is the bigger fan boy. Go argue somewhere else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necr0matic

Halo Anniversary Behind-the-Scenes: Multiplayer

---

God damnit 343i, everything in this is wonderful!

Headlong confirmed : http://uk.ign.com/videos/2011/08/26/...rthog-violence

EDIT : Alright, when you click on the link it doesn't work... I'm sure you guys can all find it though.

EDIT 2.0 : Got a new link that works.

So..

1) Prisoner
2) Timberland
3) Headlong
4) Beaver Creek
5) Damnation
6) Installation 04 (FF)
7) Hang Em High


I'm okay with that list, although I really wish there were some other maps chosen.

The only complaint I have about the maps is that there isn't enough Sidewinder or Danger Canyon. The Firefight map is gonna be amazing though.

The Rock slide area of that mission would have been a good firefight too, there were a lot of good encounters in the Halo Campaign that would have been great.

Yeah, although Danger Canyon was never my favorite map it would have been a good vehicle map to add into the mix. That list doesn't really include any vehicle maps besides Headlong... which was never much of one anyway.

Timberland is a nice vehicle map though.

Any body read the Title Update? It's 3 melees to kill now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Yeah, although Danger Canyon was never my favorite map it would have been a good vehicle map to add into the mix. That list doesn't really include any vehicle maps besides Headlong... which wa-s never much of one anyway.

---

Timberland wasn't a vehicle map?

Also, what's a title update? is it just a balance patch?

But is that going to be across all gametypes or just the anniversary ones? Because they also said armor lock is being nerfed to where sticky grenades still kill you, and any damage you take affects your energy level (that im assuming is a permanent change). The bloom amount is an option now too.

These are interesting developments. I may have to pop Reach back in and play....

Update looks great! So do the maps. Although I don't see how THAT area would work for firefight (in before halo custom edition recreation :realsmug:).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n00b1n8R

Timberland wasn't a vehicle map?

Also, what's a title update? is it just a balance patch?

---

Forgot about that one. Still, you gotta admit that's a bit sparse.

They actually made the new Timberland 20% smaller, which should help it play better.

Timberland? Called it :D

Glad to see Reach is getting some more love, and I love the plugin-ablity of the new title update. I have no issues with bloom, infact to me it seems more Halo 1, which is why I love it. So I'm glad I can choose not to have it turned off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n00b1n8R

Also, what's a title update? is it just a balance patch?

---

lol what kind of nerd quotes themselves

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjVOYkuyA5g

The title update's supposed to get rid of reticle bloom on a few precision weapons, make armor lock less cheap by making so if your stuck before going into armor lock you still die, plus they're switching the melee system to 3 instead of the usual 2. Can't remember what other changes were made.

Wait it will take 3 hits now? Oh my god I might actually stay in Reach now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Limited

Timberland? Called it :D

Glad to see Reach is getting some more love, and I love the plugin-ablity of the new title update. I have no issues with bloom, infact to me it seems more Halo 1, which is why I love it. So I'm glad I can choose not to have it turned off.

---

Wait, why? I know the Pistol actually had bloom if you held down the trigger while firing it, but nobody did that so it hardly seems relevant.

Didn't guns in the first game do variable melee damage? i.e. some guns did more per hit than others, or am I imagining things? Either way, the three-hit melee change is a step in the right direction.

No, only Halo 2 had variable melee damage. It also had damage that varied depending on whether you were moving or falling, like Marathon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dark navi

-snip-

---

That's already been posted. That c10 video had that in it.

3-hit melees, you say? Here's hoping that they actually made vehicles, Invasion, and BTB fun.

Actually melee damage in Halo 1 does vary. I believe it changes with how fast you're moving.

What he said!

i dont ever recall seeing that in halo 1's tags, unless its a biped / actor_variant modifier. that melee damage tags just had a straight value.

i never played halo 2 mp enough to know from experience, but i do recall reading a bit about player velocity being calculated with melee. also i think the brute shot's melee was ridiculously high compared to other guns because of the blade, but that might have just been halo 3.

Halo 3's Melee damage was consistent across all weapons, dealing 70 points damage. (Out of 115. 70 shield, 45 health) The only exceptions were the spiker and the brute shot, which did 72 points damage.

Attachment 2218

I watched a multiplayer video and I am dissapoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flyingmonkey3

Actually melee damage in Halo 1 does vary. I believe it changes with how fast you're moving.

---

Uh, no it doesn't. Halo 2 does that. And it's the only one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Didn't guns in the first game do variable melee damage? i.e. some guns did more per hit than others, or am I imagining things? Either way, the three-hit melee change is a step in the right direction.

---

The game could do it but all weapons had the same melee strength, obviously we took advantage of that functionality for things like our spiker and BS in the CMT mod, as well as the SPV1 AR melee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHalo003

Has anyone else seen the Installation 04 Firefight map?

---

Played it, along with the rest of the new maps at PAX. Had fun. The ODST (or maybe they're just marines) are an interesting touch. I was expecting more when they said that this was going to be an insane FF map. Guess they could still have some tricks up their sleeves though.

Title Update will basically fix some bugs and add some more power to game variants. They said at one of the panels that they can actually control the bloom amount. From full, to half, etc, to all the way off. The only variant I've seen using these new tweakable settings (remember, it's based on the game variant settings, not the TU; settings which only 343 can tweak...for now ;)) is their "No Bloom Slayer"...which had bloom off for everything except for the SR. Also, I swear the hammer wasn't being as-effective...not sure if that was due to the new tweaks, or b/c I haven't played the game since basically last March.

Oh, and MS had a survey going on. I answered Halo Wars as my fav Halo game :3. I would go troll the Halo Wars console they have at the Fest, but there is usually someone playing it actually, so there's no need!

Not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but HA10 will support 3D TVs. I'm gong to try and catch a demo of 343GS in 3D tomorrow (missed it today)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooky

Uh, no it doesn't. Halo 2 does that. And it's the only one.

---

Yes it does. Look at my post with the picture of Kornman's Guerilla.

E: I can happily make a video showing how much damage is done by melee if you still don't believe.

It is easier to just edit the all around melee damage but It is also very easy to make the melee more powerful or less powerful for any weapon standalone. I currently use eschaton since my halo CE gave me too many issues so I beleive its just harder for CE. I don't remember it being that complicated though...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flyingmonkey3

Yes it does. Look at my post with the picture of Kornman's Guerilla.

E: I can happily make a video showing how much damage is done by melee if you still don't believe.

---

I've never seen anything in gameplay to indicate that it does, so even if it does it clearly has no real impact on anything.

The damage in HCE varies on how FAR you are from them;
If you're right in their face, boom, 70 points of damage. If you're just in melee range, 40 points. That's what the min/max in the damage tag means...