Log in or sign up to comment
92 Comments
  • 92 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by Jeffsekai

So what im hearing is you suck at Halo but pick Heroic for your first playthough? 
 
 

Posted by EpicSteve

The campaign totally drags for about 2 hours, but the ending is worth it. The final stage though, fuuuuuuuuck it's long. 

Posted by Ramone

I pretty much breezed through Heroic. There were a couple of spots where I would die a few times before getting it right but other than that it didn't seem too ridiculous. Protip: Fully charged plasma blasts from the plasma pistol are your friend =). Now Legendary on the other hand. In the words of Ryan Davies: 'This game is a motherfucker!'

Posted by Tofford

I found heroic challenging but not annoying. I am currently trying to play through on my own on legendary for the achievement and that is annoying.

Posted by Cube

Dude, fuck yes. The last few missions pissed me right off. I played on normal too.  
 
The very end was done well, but fuck the Package. 

Posted by MrJiggerski

I finished the campaign on legendary. It was annoying, yes, but only because of the patterns (rush this room, camp the next one, rush again). It didn't have the feel Halo3 had, the one that made you try tactics instead of chosing between the two Bungie ment you to use. Still, pretty good.

Posted by RawrIRhavocz

Well guys it seems to me your all just players of halo, but not gamers. The game was simple the campaign was extremely fun to play and endure until the end. Sure there were bits that fustrated me, but as a gamer i persisted and completed it. i got the game the thursday after it came out so 2 days late. and by sunday night. I had completed it both on Heroic and Legendary... Solo. heroic took about 9-10 hours legendary about 15 but tbh it still wasnt excruciatingly hard on legendary, halo isnt always about omg im a spartan im invicible lemme rush oh shit no i died.... its tactical as well you need to think whats awaiting you and prepare, it may seem boring but trust me in the end its much more fun than dying X amount of times. like for instance. ' PLASMA PISTOL' as a halo player you should always, ALWAYS carry one, as well high ranked elites are simple 2 shots dead i normaly carry a plasma piston DMR or needle rifle as well one over charged pistol shot then one shot to the head done elite general killed no fuss. playing halo should be fun and it is tbh its the best so far. and the way to have fun is simply to persist, practice and tbh put time into it.
Posted by WilliamRLBaker

lol try it on legendary first time through alone...*which I did* you don't know the meaning of RAGE QUIT!

Posted by TaliciaDragonsong

I enjoyed legendary, but I enjoy every shooter where you actually have to aim and not spray and get kills.
Had lots of fun battles on legendary co op but tackling it solo is just great, missions do feel very long but storywise it's perfect, it captured the setting well and the only thing I was disappointed in is Buck not getting a bigger cameo :(

Posted by Scullinator

Baaaaa Baaaaaaaa

Posted by Agent47CSim2

Is it bad that I found Heroic pretty easy?

Posted by Dauragon

Yeah that mission is the opposite of fun. I hated it the whole time. 

Posted by Woodroez
@Agent47CSim2 said:
"Is it bad that I found Heroic pretty easy? "

I can't say it was easy, but I enjoyed it for the most part. By the end, me and this game were speaking the same language;I did have to replay that endgame battle with all the brutes a few times, but I was able to plow through most of them with judicious use of the Needler and a grenade launcher. Afterwards, I begrudgingly began to play solo Legendary. I flew through the first...five levels? I just completed the night mission with Jun. Been having a blast, but I think I'm coming up on the hard stuff now.
Edited by ArtelinaRose

Shamless necropost
 
Coming back to this game with my girlfriend in tow has been an excruciatingly painful, but overall enjoyable process. We've been having a decent time with it, enjoying the good times and ruing the bad. But often times, it seems as if we're not having fun more than we are; I catch the two of us going "Wait, what the fuck? No way" more than we're going "oh hell yes that was awesome"
 
I've pinpointed the source of most of my aggravation: it's not the sheer number of enemies that ends up grating on my nerves, it's the percentage of them that have things that kill you in one hit and my inability to focus on all of them at once because... it's... fucking... everything on the screen.
 
I'm playing on Heroic and attempting to get the "Flawless Cowboy" commendation, going through Exodus at the moment. I've died at least seven times attempting to do this and it's never been because the game beat me head on; if I go back and record a clip of every one of my deaths, the few that come to mind have been a plasma grenade from off screen, multiple grav hammer brutes from the side, fuel rod grunts that fire before I'm even around the corner, getting stuck through a wall with a plasma grenade(!?), and getting sniped with a plasma pistol on the long bridge part after jetpacking with the ODSTs.
 
I don't feel like a SPARTAN. I don't feel like I'm a special individual. I feel like my armor is made of paper and my fists are bags of marbles, with all of my guns firing plastic BBs. My success in battle feels like it has less to do with my skill as a player and more to do with how the enemy AI decides to maneuver itself; if the fuel rod cannon wielding gold elite I've been shooting with my DMR decides to run towards me in the small, locked room, that's it. Time to reload my checkpoint.
 
I suppose the point of the game is to condense the scale and hopeless of the battle for Reach into a single player campaign, throwing you against what feels like impossible odds and just barely struggling through, pushing past the overwhelming amount of firepower and angry, ugly aliens that all want you dead and coming out the other side battered, but not beaten.  Only it doesn't actually feel like that, it just feels like the campaign  designers misinterpreted the words "actual difficulty in video games" for "let's take six things that all have one hit kill weapons/abilities and take eight or nine shots to the head before the player has the ability to HOPEFULLY get that last lucky headshot in between bouts of being blasted to hell by all of the bad stuff before the shields recharge, and put them into this small 10x10 room."

Posted by JohnKiller118

I just beat it last night. 
 
First half sucked. Then the rest was incredible.

Posted by Potter9156

 I beat it on Legendary. Dumbest thing I have ever done.   So many times I sat back and went "uuuughh." while shaking my head. Bungies idea of improving AI on harder difficulties is by giving them 100x the health, and x-ray vision goggles. 

Edited by big_jon

I find Heroic to be pretty easy, though in the vehicle levels it is more fun to play on.
Posted by Deadlypixels

Reach easily has the worst campaign of the series, beat Halo 3 on Legendary, hardly beat Reach on Normal, the multiplayer is way better though.

Posted by gungrave45

Have you tried sucking less?

Posted by MightyJ77

I just finished my solo Heroic playthrough this week.  While it was frustrating at points, I didn't find it any more so than playing through either of the Gears games on hardcore.

Posted by Johnnyredwine

I, personally, have hated all past Halo games. To me, the series seemed like a joke that never took itself seriously; whether it be with what the covenant or the soldiers came out with, or even the over emphasized animations - it just damn right seemed weird. 
 
However, I recently rented Halo: Reach and put it on Heroic (always played on normal), and for the first time, I genuinley really enjoyed a Halo game. I felt it had a more serious narrative, was challenging (never found it frustrating), and the covenant not speaking English - really helped.
Posted by Teran
@Artemesia:  What exactly do you consider a "bullshit death" to be?  Getting killed by a grenade?  Getting killed by guns?  Falling through the floor of the level?
 
I beat the game on Heroic and had fun.  Legendary is where the game got frustrating at times however that's kind of the point, they straight up warn you that you will die a lot when you choose the difficulty.
 
Your complaint is so generic I'm having a hard time telling if you were serious or not.  How is Halo: Reach throwing enemies at you in waves any different than getting locked in a room until you kill enough enemies in Ninja Gaiden?  Hate to break it to you, but every game I can think of that revolves things like war and combat does exactly that.
Posted by SunKing

I don't know about Heroic, but Legendary is simply an endurance test. It's not about skill. It is about having the patience of a Dalai Lama and cheesing your way through by exploiting the deficiencies in AI, check-pointing and level design. It's just shit.

Posted by Slaker117
@SunKing:  Dude, no.
 
I will agree that parts on Legendary are cheap, but for the most part it brings out the strength of the Halo games. You do need to be familiar with the AI behavior and level design, but it's still about playing well and playing smart. Each encounter is its own little sand box, and you have to strategize and adapt as it plays out. Every weapon has a role, every structure has a purpose, and enemies have real AI. While lower difficulties can be managed with simpler tactics, Legendary forces you to use everything Halo has to offer.
Edited by SunKing
@Slaker117: I think that earlier on in the campaign you're right, but towards the end where you've got Exodus and The Package I think it's too much. Especially with the way the checkpointing is laid out.
Posted by Teran
@Potter9156 said:
"  I beat it on Legendary. Dumbest thing I have ever done.   So many times I sat back and went "uuuughh." while shaking my head. Bungies idea of improving AI on harder difficulties is by giving them 100x the health, and x-ray vision goggles.  "
Uh... I'm not sure you could accidentally be this wrong so I'm going to have to assume you're a liar deliberately trying to deceive other readers... or maybe you're just on mind altering drugs and are playing some other game while thinking it's Halo: Reach. 
 
On easy weak enemies take one shot from a precision weapon to kill.  Difficult enemies take one emp shot from a plasma pistol and one shot from a precision weapon to kill. 
 
The same is true for Normal. 
The same is true for Heroic. 
The same is true for Legendary with only two exceptions.  Elite leaders with swords, and Brute Leaders with gravity hammers. 
 
This isn't a turn based strategy game.  The AI is not supposed to scale and be better based on how hard you want the game... they are telling an epic story and if you want to be a tourist through that start and play it on easy you are free to do so, if you want the game to be as difficult as the story suggests you can also do that. 
 
Quit whining.
Posted by dagas

Played it on Heroic and it was just like Halo 3 on heroic, mostly quite easy, but 2-3 spots in the game where I kept dying and dying and dying. It's frustrating as hell the few times you have to play a check point over and over, but I think it makes up for it because IMO normal is just too easy most of the time and I rather take too hard in 2-3 spots than too easy 95 % of the game. What really is messed up is legendary, I've only finished the first level in legendary and gave up after that.

Edited by Tru3_Blu3

B-b-b-b-b-but Halo Reach's campaign was Bungie's most ambitious thing!
 
Sorry, but Bungie cannot relive what Halo CE did. Halo CE's campaign was fucking amazing; the combat is still flawless, even today. The player movement speed intertwine with your enemies just nails down the flow and pacing of strafing, running, meleeing, and aiming. Halo CE feels right. Ever since Halo2, the campaigns have been sucking. The only good thing Reach fixed is weaponry that, like Halo CE, actually feels powerful. They also created a decent atmosphere that Halo2 and 3 didn't have for some reason. You actually feel that people and civilians were on Reach before the attack, unlike Halo3 where Earth didn't even have a fucking moon.
 
But Halo Reach's campaign fucking fails because of a shitty difficulty curve, a weak assault rifle, soulless enemies that show no fliching or impact towards bullets or melees, no blood, no large level designs, and no epic battles. Halo Reach is one of the worst campaigns in the franchise, and that's pretty fucking sad. You would expect better from a developer which has over 180-people to make a simple fucking shooter. And the fact that they're not supporting this game after port launch with updates and tweaks to fix the fucking game (overpowered armor lock; very small DMR crosshair bloom), shows that Bungie just wanted your money in the beginning and that the ViDocs were all scripted and acted to persuade you.
 
Conclusion: Halo3 ODSTs was the best campaign since Halo CE. It was atmospheric, it was satisfying to pop the heads of enemies with the pistol, the characters had soul and actually felt like a team, the enemies were both fun and challenging, the character transitioning was fucking great, and the soundtrack is the best in the franchise. After what ODST did, you would expect Bungie to have learned by now after Halo3. NO, THEY FUCKING DIDN'T WHAT THE FUCK FUCK FUCK?! The assault rifle is weak as balls, the melee system is absolute garbage, the enemies aren't fun to kill, the difficulty curve (while harder) is cheap as fuck, the soundtrack only has two good songs, and the story sucks total dick! I didn't care for one character! The only good moment in the campaign was the after-credits-epilogue because you felt sad, alone, and hopeless--but you kept on fighting. FUCK, where have they gone fucking wrong?!
 
Sorry, I'm really into Halo like a Sonic fan. I played Halo CE since 2003 on the PC, and it's one of the greatest games I've ever damn played. Bungie went down the shitter.

Edited by Potter9156
@Teran said:

" @Potter9156 said:

"  I beat it on Legendary. Dumbest thing I have ever done.   So many times I sat back and went "uuuughh." while shaking my head. Bungies idea of improving AI on harder difficulties is by giving them 100x the health, and x-ray vision goggles.  "
Uh... I'm not sure you could accidentally be this wrong so I'm going to have to assume you're a liar deliberately trying to deceive other readers... or maybe you're just on mind altering drugs and are playing some other game while thinking it's Halo: Reach.  On easy weak enemies take one shot from a precision weapon to kill.  Difficult enemies take one emp shot from a plasma pistol and one shot from a precision weapon to kill.  The same is true for Normal. The same is true for Heroic. The same is true for Legendary with only two exceptions.  Elite leaders with swords, and Brute Leaders with gravity hammers.  This isn't a turn based strategy game.  The AI is not supposed to scale and be better based on how hard you want the game... they are telling an epic story and if you want to be a tourist through that start and play it on easy you are free to do so, if you want the game to be as difficult as the story suggests you can also do that.  Quit whining. "
 
So you're correcting me on what is an obvious exaggeration of reality. Cool.
 

The AI is not supposed to scale and be better based on how hard you want the game.

  
Yes it is. When you're using the same strategies on Legendary as you did on Normal, that's a design flaw.  
Edited by Teran
@Potter9156 said:

Yes it is. When you're using the same strategies on Legendary as you did on Normal, that's a design flaw.   "

The only thing flawed in this discussion is your logic.
 
Please list all the games out there that cannot be beaten on the easiest difficulty setting using the same strategies you use on the hardest difficulty setting.
 
See, the way games work is the harder difficulty settings encourage you to play more effectively.  You can't run and gun on legendary like you can on easy but you can use the same strategies you use on the hardest difficulty to destroy the easiest difficulty.
 
Of course, you seem to be claiming you are the perfect gamer considering you did not experience a learning curve during the game and I assume you beat the game on legendary, solo without dying even once.  If this is the case, you are not looking at a design flaw, games are intended to be played by flawed people.  Since you're claiming to be perfect I'd suggest applying this perfection to something that will make you rich.
Posted by Potter9156
@Teran said:
" @Potter9156 said:

Yes it is. When you're using the same strategies on Legendary as you did on Normal, that's a design flaw.   "

The only thing flawed in this discussion is your logic.  Please list all the games out there that cannot be beaten on the easiest difficulty setting using the same strategies you use on the hardest difficulty setting.  See, the way games work is the harder difficulty settings encourage you to play more effectively.  You can't run and gun on legendary like you can on easy but you can use the same strategies you use on the hardest difficulty to destroy the easiest difficulty.  Of course, you seem to be claiming you are the perfect gamer considering you did not experience a learning curve during the game and I assume you beat the game on legendary, solo without dying even once.  If this is the case, you are not looking at a design flaw, games are intended to be played by flawed people.  Since you're claiming to be perfect I'd suggest applying this perfection to something that will make you rich. "
 
Just to be clear, I like Reach; played and enjoyed it on Normal. In fact, I liked it enough to replay it on a harder difficulty. The enemy encounters and set pieces are well designed and offer multiple ways to approach them, and encourage creative killing. My problem is with Legendary. The point of harder difficulties is to test your knowledge and skill of the game. Legendary in Reach doesn't. You use a plasma pistol(which is never in shortage)coupled with the regular pistol or the DMR. And that combo will beat literally everything. You have no reason to use any other weapon or tactic. Hide in cover, pop out, hit them with the plasma pistol, headshot. For the duration of the game. 
   
 
In DOOM 1 and 2 on Ultra-Violence, you have to employ and utilize every weapon you find. No cheese tactics; if you stand still for a second you will die. Ultra-Violence is a masochistic but balanced test of your skill and knowledge of that game.  
 
Call Of Duty on Veteran is all about memorization of enemy placement and split-second reactions.   
 
 
In Reach you hide behind a wall and play peek-a-boo for nine hours.  
  

 Since you're claiming to be perfect I'd suggest applying this perfection to something that will make you rich.

 
What?
Posted by Teran
 
@Potter9156 said:
The point of harder difficulties is to test your knowledge and skill of the game. Legendary in Reach doesn't. You use a plasma pistol(which is never in shortage)coupled with the regular pistol or the DMR. And that combo will beat literally everything. You have no reason to use any other weapon or tactic. Hide in cover, pop out, hit them with the plasma pistol, headshot. For the duration of the game. 
   
In DOOM 1 and 2 on Ultra-Violence, you have to employ and utilize every weapon you find. No cheese tactics; if you stand still for a second you will die. Ultra-Violence is a masochistic but balanced test of your skill and knowledge of that game.

 Call Of Duty on Veteran is all about memorization of enemy placement and split-second reactions.
 
In Reach you hide behind a wall and play peek-a-boo for nine hours.  

You might not feel that Reach tested you, but I could say Call of Duty didn't test me.  Enemy placement?  Split second reactions?  Are you kidding me?  First off, playing any fps game on a console on any difficulty does not involve split second reactions.  If we're talking keyboard and mouse on a pc you might be able to make that statement.
 
Now in any fps games there are weapons that  cater to certain play styles and certain play styles lend themselves well to beating a game on the hardest difficulty.  Pulling out Doom 1 & 2 as though they are relevant in this discussion was interesting but sadly those games were made many years ago and if they were re-released today would not be reviewed so kindly.  Your comment on the weapons in particular is uninformed as you generally have to employ and utilize every weapon you find on the easier difficulties as well because ammunition was relatively scarce.
 
Halo provides a variety of weapons that are useful in their own ways and vary by degrees.  If you only ever used two weapons that's not the game's fault.  That's basically like playing through "Ninja Gaiden" or "Street Fighter 2" and only using two combo moves... yes you can beat both games basically doing that, but just because you can doesn't mean you're forced.  Bungie didn't force those weapons into your arms and you could have found another way to do it but instead chose the easiest route.  Secondly, if you were in cover more in Halo: Reach than you were for any of the CoD games you are definitely doing it wrong.  The whole point of being a guy with a shield and power armor is that you are your own cover to a degree.  Most projectile weapon shots in Halo: Reach can be avoided *after* they have been fired with movement so I guess I can see your point if by playing "peek-a-boo" you mean "I walked out of cover and let them shoot my face off".
Posted by Potter9156
@Teran said:

"  
@Potter9156 said:

The point of harder difficulties is to test your knowledge and skill of the game. Legendary in Reach doesn't. You use a plasma pistol(which is never in shortage)coupled with the regular pistol or the DMR. And that combo will beat literally everything. You have no reason to use any other weapon or tactic. Hide in cover, pop out, hit them with the plasma pistol, headshot. For the duration of the game. 
   
In DOOM 1 and 2 on Ultra-Violence, you have to employ and utilize every weapon you find. No cheese tactics; if you stand still for a second you will die. Ultra-Violence is a masochistic but balanced test of your skill and knowledge of that game.

 Call Of Duty on Veteran is all about memorization of enemy placement and split-second reactions.
 
In Reach you hide behind a wall and play peek-a-boo for nine hours.  

You might not feel that Reach tested you, but I could say Call of Duty didn't test me.  Enemy placement?  Split second reactions?  Are you kidding me?  First off, playing any fps game on a console on any difficulty does not involve split second reactions.  If we're talking keyboard and mouse on a pc you might be able to make that statement.  Now in any fps games there are weapons that  cater to certain play styles and certain play styles lend themselves well to beating a game on the hardest difficulty.  Pulling out Doom 1 & 2 as though they are relevant in this discussion was interesting but sadly those games were made many years ago and if they were re-released today would not be reviewed so kindly.  Your comment on the weapons in particular is uninformed as you generally have to employ and utilize every weapon you find on the easier difficulties as well because ammunition was relatively scarce. Halo provides a variety of weapons that are useful in their own ways and vary by degrees.  If you only ever used two weapons that's not the game's fault.  That's basically like playing through "Ninja Gaiden" or "Street Fighter 2" and only using two combo moves... yes you can beat both games basically doing that, but just because you can doesn't mean you're forced.  Bungie didn't force those weapons into your arms and you could have found another way to do it but instead chose the easiest route.  Secondly, if you were in cover more in Halo: Reach than you were for any of the CoD games you are definitely doing it wrong.  The whole point of being a guy with a shield and power armor is that you are your own cover to a degree.  Most projectile weapon shots in Halo: Reach can be avoided *after* they have been fired with movement so I guess I can see your point if by playing "peek-a-boo" you mean "I walked out of cover and let them shoot my face off". "
 
This is going in circles. You believe Halo to be heaven on a bun, I don't. 
 

 Pulling out Doom 1 & 2 as though they are relevant in this discussion was interesting but sadly those games were made many years ago and if they were re-released today would not be reviewed so kindly.    

 
And that comment renders any argument you may have in a discussion concerning FPSs null and void. 
Posted by Teran
@Potter9156 said:

 Pulling out Doom 1 & 2 as though they are relevant in this discussion was interesting but sadly those games were made many years ago and if they were re-released today would not be reviewed so kindly.    

 And that comment renders any argument you may have in a discussion concerning FPSs null and void.  "
And that comment only proves to I and the other readers that you don't really have evidence to support your argument, or are you seriously trying to tell us that if a fps were released today that required players to backtrack constantly for colored keys, did not have locational damage (ie headshots), and lacked any story whatsoever beyond a few paragraphs of text would be rated higher than say one star out of five, or 20% out of 100%?
 
Next time you get involved with an argument, make sure you have points to stand on... generally something pertaining to current generation fps games would be nice rather than trying to impress us with your ignorance on old Doom or Wolfenstein games.
Edited by Potter9156
@Teran said:

" @Potter9156 said:


 Pulling out Doom 1 & 2 as though they are relevant in this discussion was interesting but sadly those games were made many years ago and if they were re-released today would not be reviewed so kindly.    

 And that comment renders any argument you may have in a discussion concerning FPSs null and void.  "
And that comment only proves to I and the other readers that you don't really have evidence to support your argument, or are you seriously trying to tell us that if a fps were released today that required players to backtrack constantly for colored keys, did not have locational damage (ie headshots), and lacked any story whatsoever beyond a few paragraphs of text would be rated higher than say one star out of five, or 20% out of 100%?  Next time you get involved with an argument, make sure you have points to stand on... generally something pertaining to current generation fps games would be nice rather than trying to impress us with your ignorance on old Doom or Wolfenstein games. "
  
I provided my evidence and argument and you shot them down with opinions and uneducated statements. Want me to reply directly to your assertions? Ok. 
 
 

 Halo provides a variety of weapons that are useful in their own ways and vary by degrees.  If you only ever used two weapons that's not the game's fault.  

 
So it's my fault the most powerful weapons in the game come in great abundance and will literally beat any enemy in the game? Nope. That is what you call a design oversight.  Ask anyone who played it on Legendary and they will tell you they used the plasma pistol and DMR and won by attrition. Even Brad said basically the same thing on the Bombcast.    
 
When you have zero incentive to use other weapons, that is a design oversight. 
When every enemy (even vehicles)can be defeated the same way,  that is a design oversight.  
When AI isn't intelligent enough to flank you, that is a design flaw. 
  
 

  That's basically like playing through "Ninja Gaiden" or "Street Fighter 2" and only using two combo moves... yes you can beat both games basically doing that, but just because you can doesn't mean you're forced. 

 
Not at all the same thing, but yes. If those two combos are easy to use and have no limit and will beat anything, then you would be an idiot not to use them. But they don't so the argument is null.  
 
 

 Bungie didn't force those weapons into your arms and you could have found another way to do it but instead chose the easiest route.    

  
But they didn't incentivise the use of other weapons. If you're purposely making hard mode harder, you're either an idiot or doing it just for fun.  
 
  

  required players to backtrack constantly for colored keys, did not have locational damage (ie headshots), and lacked any story whatsoever beyond a few paragraphs of text would be rated higher than say one star out of five, or 20% out of 100%? 


You're faulting the game purely on technical limitations and not taking into consideration the balance, and level design. Which both will still rival or overcome any modern FPS. Have you ever played DOOM?
 
 
So far your argument has consisted of " Buh buh buh there are other guns", "You're wrong because I'm right. Here read my opinions to see why I'm right. Neener.", and "But old games are old and bad.".  Thus far you have failed to provide an argument proving or claiming any other weapon can compete with PP/DMR. 
 
So here, tell me why I shouldn't use the PP/DMR and what combos are better for Legendary.
Posted by Teran
@Potter9156 said:  
The most powerful weapons?  That's quite a stretch considering how personal preference never forces you to use these weapons.

It's not Bungie's job to cater to your specific tastes.  If you have zero incentive to use sniper rifles, spartan lasers, rocket launchers, various other plasma weapons, that's just you being perfectly content using weapons you consider to be over powered.  I personally had plenty of incentive to use other weapons and had a lot of fun doing so.

I suppose I could ask what others who have played the game on Legendary thing, but I'm not in the habbit of asking scrubs how they attrition their way through the game.  On legendary solo there were only two points in the game where it truly began to feel like attrition.  Not all of us are content to bang our head against a wall until we get lucky... I know it's not the norm for fps games, but on occasion you actually have to think your way through a tough spot.

It sounds like you're reading off of someone elses list of complaints before having even played the game.  Enemies flank, enemies use grenades intelligently, enemies know to press an attack if you duck into cover with low health to try and finish you off before you get a recharge... vehicles know to back off if you're running at them looking like you're going to board them... the ai doesn't make the right call in every situation, but seeing a grunt on occasion stick a plasma grenade to the back of an elite (and other instances of friendly fire) make the enemy far more believable than the perfection you seem to want.


You're faulting the game purely on technical limitations and not taking into consideration the balance, and level design. Which both will still rival or overcome any modern FPS.  

 So here, tell me why I shouldn't use the PP/DMR and what combos are better for Legendary. "

 None of the faults I listed mentioned graphics or any part of the game that was limited by technology.  I mentioned a flawed story and boring / tedious level design.  I suppose the lack of headshots could be seen as a technical limitation but I think it had more to do with neglect given everything else they were working on.  Of course applying your standard to Doom, the enemies didn't flank you either or show any particular regard for self preservation or the preservation of their allies.  
 
Why shouldn't you use the PP/DMR for Legendary?  Well the obvious answer is you're not having fun.  Maybe you should give up Reach all together and go back to chasing color key cards in a maze.
Posted by HistoryInRust

Heroic just isn't the way to roll through this game, despite what Bungie says. I found Normal to be a really enjoyable experience. Probably the best Halo campaign experience. But you're right, Heroic and Legendary are just punishing. 

Posted by Oldirtybearon

If you think starting on Heroic is bad? I did my first playthrough on Legendary. 
 
 Solo.

Posted by csl316
@Artemesia said:
 Arguably the worst weapon in the game, and limited resources for inaccurate weapons that take forever to do anything to the friends of their previous owners.
I don't know why this old thread got pumped, but for reference: overcharged plasma pistols against elites is one of the best ways to play Halo.  I basically run through these games with a plasma pistol and some sort of headshot weapon (formerly a pistol, battle rifle, and now the DMR) so I could two-shot elites and shoot everything else in the face.  Occasionally I'll get something more powerful for a hunter or something, but I honestly don't feel safe unless I have my combo in hand.
 
It'll help on Legendary and bring you to the top of your Firefight scoreboard nearly every time.  Unless you're doing Rocketfight, boo
Posted by Rockdalf

Recently beat the Reach campaign again on Legendary.  My run went something like Plasma Pistol and DMR everything that has shields, or just flat out DMR if it doesn't.  If there are hunters, look for a shotgun.  If you didn't find the shotgun, look again.  If you still can't find the shotgun, restart the mission, because you've missed the damn shotgun.  There were a few times I had to get creative, but overall when I felt behind, I just looked harder for that sniper rifle Bungie left me hidden amongst the rubble or the rocket launcher on top of the cliff I didn't realize I could walk up.  It wasn't the best single player experience I've had in an FPS, but there were a few moments that made me feel the purchase was worth it.  Overall, it was worth the hours to S-Rank and I'll probably keep buying map packs and upkeeping my S-Rank with them.

Posted by Potter9156
@Teran said:
"It's not Bungie's job to cater to your specific tastes.  If you have zero incentive to use sniper rifles, spartan lasers, rocket launchers, various other plasma weapons, that's just you being perfectly content using weapons you consider to be over powered.  I personally had plenty of incentive to use other weapons and had a lot of fun doing so.

I suppose I could ask what others who have played the game on Legendary thing, but I'm not in the habbit of asking scrubs how they attrition their way through the game.  On legendary solo there were only two points in the game where it truly began to feel like attrition.  Not all of us are content to bang our head against a wall until we get lucky... I know it's not the norm for fps games, but on occasion you actually have to think your way through a tough spot.

It sounds like you're reading off of someone elses list of complaints before having even played the game.  Enemies flank, enemies use grenades intelligently, enemies know to press an attack if you duck into cover with low health to try and finish you off before you get a recharge... vehicles know to back off if you're running at them looking like you're going to board them... the ai doesn't make the right call in every situation, but seeing a grunt on occasion stick a plasma grenade to the back of an elite (and other instances of friendly fire) make the enemy far more believable than the perfection you seem to want. "
 
 
On paper those guns are better, based solely on stats of course. Take into consideration availability and ammo and they aren't. The PP/DMR is the wrench and electric shock of Halo. Occasionally you might pick up a rocket and fire it into a pack of enemies. But like the wrench and electric shock, you will be using the PP/DMR 95% of the time. If not, you are doing it wrong. On other difficulties and multiplayer, that isn't the case as they are balanced differently. What Legendary needs are a couple enemies that don't have shields and can't be headshotted, and less aimbotty AI.  
 
 
For me, the AI never flanked or pressed an attack. Me backing into cover would send them into a loop of strafing left and right while occasionally shooting at the wall. They never attempted to flank or rush me. Maybe I'm just unlucky, but I never saw anything like that.
 
 

 

None of the faults I listed mentioned graphics or any part of the game that was limited by technology.  I mentioned a flawed story and boring / tedious level design.  I suppose the lack of headshots could be seen as a technical limitation but I think it had more to do with neglect given everything else they were working on.  Of course applying your standard to Doom, the enemies didn't flank you either or show any particular regard for self preservation or the preservation of their allies.     

 
What.
Posted by DrMadHatten

Not to mention over ten "Defend this Area" places that artificially lengthen the game that much more. You've got multiplayer locations and firefight scenarios as connect the dots for a terrible campaign