There have been a lot of complaints of the lack of any real chaotic battles that make you feel that you're in a war for Halo: Reach, and how the game's battles don't match the advertisements that it was hyped for. I guess people expected something like a COD from Halo: Reach, but "Grand Scale" war battles just don't work for Halo's mechanics. Halo revolves around a sandbox and heavily A.I. driven combat, it's all about adapting to the combat situations to use the best strategy to get through combat effectively, and there are multiple ways to approach situations based on those ideas. It just wouldn't work on a grand scale, because it would be impossible for the player alone to go up against fifty or a hundred enemies on screen at once.
Call of Duty allows for such chaotic battles, because it's heavily scripted and there's barely any A.I. for your enemies. You're basically just restricted to just pop and shoot at the available moments. Halo isn't going to work that way, if it's trying to have battles that on the scale of COD. I still prefer Halo's ideas over CODs, because every battle feels different each time you play them and there are multiple ways to approach them. Still, the battles in Reach are bigger to that of previous games in the series. So I think thats why there's a lack of real EPIC sized battles, it just doesn't work for Halo's A.I. driven combat. My main beef with the game is the lack of the awesome Scarab battles from Halo 3 and ODST, I don't know why they didn't include that in Reach. If it worked in 3 & ODST, why wouldn't it work for Reach?
So, do you disagree? What do you think? Do you think that it would be possible for a game to allow such battles enemies that have actual A.I. in some shape or form?
I agree wholeheartedly. Halo's lack of large scale battles is completely based on its style of play. Halo only catches so much grief for this is that this A.I. based style of first-person shooter has gone out of fashion since COD 4. Spectacle of events has replaced the substance of core combat mechanics and A.I. (Don't get me wrong, the spectacle of the COD/MW games is what makes them great, but the mechanics are nothing special whatsoever.) However, a lack of sense of scale is not excusable, even for A.I. driven combat. What Halo Reach does very well though, is presenting the illusion of a larger scale war going on, while you are engaged in smaller firefights. Halo 3 didn't do this, and the quality of the campaign suffered for it. The battles felt even smaller and less important. But like I said, Halo Reach had those extra details that made the game's events seem epic, regardless of their actual size.
There is definately a lacking of huge battles in the game, but I kind of like it.
Throughout the game, you return to the same places you had once been in (like Sword Base) and they change every time, so you get the feel of war. Also, there is always a massive battle with covenant and UNSC cruisers going on, so the size scale is there.
I dont care that I didnt get to take part in one, but it would have been nice to see something in a cut-scene or in the background as your playing. I mean, the planet was supposed to be glassed, and I can only remember a very brief scene of seeing a capital ship firing on the surface of the planet. It was just really anti-climactic imo.
" The framerate in Reach is not very good and thus would not be able to handle large scale battles "
That is probably due to your 360's hardware. I kept hearing about framerate issues for Halo: Reach, and I've only experienced minor hiccups on rare occasions in the single-player. The game ran at a fine 30 frames per second most of the time for me. The COD games have ran at a 60 frames per second, due to how scripted it is. I'm not bashing the COD series in any way, I'm actually a fan (Except for Modern Warfare 2 and 3). I like each series for different reasons. Call of Duty actually makes me feel that I'm part of a real battlefield.
" The framerate in Reach is not very good and thus would not be able to handle large scale battles "
That is probably due to your 360's hardware. I kept hearing about framerate issues for Halo: Reach, and I've only experienced minor hiccups on rare occasions in the single-player. The game ran at a fine 30 frames per second most of the time for me. "
Jeff said there were framerate drops. So unless his 360 is messed up too, the game's framerate is kinda messy.
@natetodamax: I think the game just had random hiccups, but they're such severe hiccups (Like, run at single digit frames bad) that they're worth mentioning
" The framerate in Reach is not very good and thus would not be able to handle large scale battles "
That is probably due to your 360's hardware. I kept hearing about framerate issues for Halo: Reach, and I've only experienced minor hiccups on rare occasions in the single-player. The game ran at a fine 30 frames per second most of the time for me. "
Jeff said there were framerate drops. So unless his 360 is messed up too, the game's framerate is kinda messy. "
I'm not entirely sure to be quite honest. Like I said before, I've only experienced minor framerate hiccups and drops at a few occasions. Even though I never experienced a single drop or hiccup in the framerate for Halo 3. I find that to be surprising to me at least because Marcus Lehto (the creative director for Reach) said that the game would run better in the first vidoc. The game actually ran just he same as prior games but with a few spotty drops here and there. Maybe the due to the insane amount of content Bungie packed in Halo: Reach, it would be pretty damn hard to program, even if it was using a heavily modified engine of Halo 3.
" @natetodamax: I think the game just had random hiccups, but they're such severe hiccups (Like, run at single digit frames bad) that they're worth mentioning "
Every time the drop ships arrive on Outpost (the name of the Firefight map, also in "Winter Contingency") the framerate gets pretty terrible for me, but only when I'm looking towards them. Never happens during multiplayer, mind you. Mostly when there's a lot of movement in a big area like that.
And it's definitely not my 360, because I've never had framerate issues randomly occur for no reason that didn't happen for anyone else.
" The framerate in Reach is not very good and thus would not be able to handle large scale battles "
That is probably due to your 360's hardware. I kept hearing about framerate issues for Halo: Reach, and I've only experienced minor hiccups on rare occasions in the single-player. The game ran at a fine 30 frames per second most of the time for me. The COD games have ran at a 60 frames per second, due to how scripted it is. I'm not bashing the COD series in any way, I'm actually a fan (Except for Modern Warfare 2 and 3). I like each series for different reasons. Call of Duty actually makes me feel that I'm part of a real battlefield. "
Shiiiiiiiiiiiit.... There's an MW3? Where the hell have i been?
" The framerate in Reach is not very good and thus would not be able to handle large scale battles "
That is probably due to your 360's hardware. I kept hearing about framerate issues for Halo: Reach, and I've only experienced minor hiccups on rare occasions in the single-player. The game ran at a fine 30 frames per second most of the time for me. The COD games have ran at a 60 frames per second, due to how scripted it is. I'm not bashing the COD series in any way, I'm actually a fan (Except for Modern Warfare 2 and 3). I like each series for different reasons. Call of Duty actually makes me feel that I'm part of a real battlefield. "
Shiiiiiiiiiiiit.... There's an MW3? Where the hell have i been? "
I assumed people thought you would have larger battles than the normal stuff simply due to having 4 squad mates. That increase in ally count should be able to balance out larger numbers and keep the A.I great.
" I assumed people thought you would have larger battles than the normal stuff simply due to having 4 squad mates. That increase in ally count should be able to balance out larger numbers and keep the A.I great. "
Very few (and I really mean a very few) games include above average friendly A.I. The friendly A.I. for Reach (Including for Halo 3) were quite poor, the Spartan A.I. on the other hand, were average. As Yahtzee has stated before: friendly A.I. is hard to program. It would be amazing if Bungie could've pulled off war scale battles with good friendly A.I., while maintaining the same cunning enemy A.I. the series has been known for.
I didn't notice any real framerate issues during the campaign but there was definitely framerate drops during the cutscenes and that's the only time I noticed that problem. I'm playing on the new 360 slim.
@Spikester: I see where you are coming from, because two things could happen. On one hand you could have the A.I being pretty poor and the large numbers being simply overwhelming for the player. On the other hand the A.I could be too good and simply make the game a cake walk. Balancing would be pretty difficulty, but bungie should have been able to pull it off IMO.
" @Spikester: I see where you are coming from, because two things could happen. On one hand you could have the A.I being pretty poor and the large numbers being simply overwhelming for the player. On the other hand the A.I could be too good and simply make the game a cake walk. Balancing would be pretty difficulty, but bungie should have been able to pull it off IMO. "
Yeah, I think Bungie would be able to pull off balance. Afterall, balance is their key philosophy when it comes to game design. Even the least balanced game in the series, Halo 2, was more balanced than 90% of shooters at the time.
" @natetodamax: I think the game just had random hiccups, but they're such severe hiccups (Like, run at single digit frames bad) that they're worth mentioning "
Every time the drop ships arrive on Outpost (the name of the Firefight map, also in "Winter Contingency") the framerate gets pretty terrible for me, but only when I'm looking towards them. Never happens during multiplayer, mind you. Mostly when there's a lot of movement in a big area like that. And it's definitely not my 360, because I've never had framerate issues randomly occur for no reason that didn't happen for anyone else. "
Well that's never happened to me, I had a slight chug in the Noble Actual cutscene but that's about it.
OT: In Tip of the Spear, look at the background there's a huge battle going on there.@Junkerman said:
" I dont care that I didnt get to take part in one, but it would have been nice to see something in a cut-scene or in the background as your playing. I mean, the planet was supposed to be glassed, and I can only remember a very brief scene of seeing a capital ship firing on the surface of the planet. It was just really anti-climactic imo. "
Well in New Alexandria, you actually see several Covenant ships glassing stuff really close to you, and it's pretty awesome as well.
" The framerate in Reach is not very good and thus would not be able to handle large scale battles "
That is probably due to your 360's hardware. I kept hearing about framerate issues for Halo: Reach, and I've only experienced minor hiccups on rare occasions in the single-player. The game ran at a fine 30 frames per second most of the time for me. "
Jeff said there were framerate drops. So unless his 360 is messed up too, the game's framerate is kinda messy. "
It happens on everyones 360. There are framerate drops in many sections of Reach and even in multiplayer. Ever tried zooming the sniper down the long walkway after picking it up on Asylum? Yeah...
I thought the battles were decently sized. I mean sure there was no MASSIVE WAR! levels, but most of the levels had a lot of stuff going on around you (in the skybox I guess) so it felt like you were immersed near a large battle, if not in it. It was enough for me.
@Agent47CSim2: Apparently it wasn't awesome enough to stick out in my mind after playing through the game twice. I just felt that the story in reach seemed really disconnected from the main events actually happening all over the planet. In the closing chapters of the game we were delivering Cortana, which was a very limiting direction to take the story imo. We've already seen Cortana and Master Chief, I think they should have taken this opportunity (with such a rich fiction too) to tell a completely different story on the planet that wasn't in any way related to the Master Chief Storyline. I wanted to see the devastation, not just hear about it or snag a quick peak in the background while focusing on other objectives.
Examples I thought they did well on, where the couple quiet scenes throughout the game were Six is standing somberly and overlooking a vista. I can only find one on the web, but I remember there being a couple.
" The framerate in Reach is not very good and thus would not be able to handle large scale battles "
That is probably due to your 360's hardware. I kept hearing about framerate issues for Halo: Reach, and I've only experienced minor hiccups on rare occasions in the single-player. The game ran at a fine 30 frames per second most of the time for me. "
Jeff said there were framerate drops. So unless his 360 is messed up too, the game's framerate is kinda messy. "
It happens on everyones 360. There are framerate drops in many sections of Reach and even in multiplayer. Ever tried zooming the sniper down the long walkway after picking it up on Asylum? Yeah... "
I did, and I didn't experiance a framerate drop.
@Junkerman said:
" @Agent47CSim2: Apparently it wasn't awesome enough to stick out in my mind after playing through the game twice. I just felt that the story in reach seemed really disconnected from the main events actually happening all over the planet. In the closing chapters of the game we were delivering Cortana, which was a very limiting direction to take the story imo. We've already seen Cortana and Master Chief, I think they should have taken this opportunity (with such a rich fiction too) to tell a completely different story on the planet that wasn't in any way related to the Master Chief Storyline. I wanted to see the devastation, not just hear about it or snag a quick peak in the background while focusing on other objectives.
Examples I thought they did well on, where the couple quiet scenes throughout the game were Six is standing somberly and overlooking a vista. I can only find one on the web, but I remember there being a couple.
"
The story of Halo: Reach is somewhat one of the game's weakest points, because it didn't convey any sense of emotion for the player at all. I'm supposed to be shaken by the devastation of the destruction of Reach, but I never depressed or disturbed by the events. The game didn't invest any time in it's characters, planet, or the UNSC. It felt most of the events were just excuses to go from checkpoint to checkpoint. However, I did like how the story was going with in the missione: The Package. It gave a sense of meaning to Noble team's story, and help tie in well with the game's story arc. It help make it feel that it wasn't just useless side story, like ODST (Even if it had more empathetic and developed characters). The ending was fantastic however, not only the best ending of the series, but one of the best endings in gaming I've experianced.
I would say Reach's story is fine by FPS standards. As many first-person shooters have showed us, it's difficult for gameplay-driven first-person shooters to tell a intimate character driven story, or a heavily plot driven story. Reach certainly has one of the best stories in the series, but that isn't saying much. I still didn't find it as engaging or compelling as Halo: Combat Evolved or even Halo 3: ODST. However, it was certainly better than Halo 2's abominable story, and Halo 3's fine if forgettable narrative. I don't play the games for the story, I mainly play them for the gameplay. Halo's story best succeeds in the novels (Except for The Flood and Cole Protocol), as they help create a terrific backdrop the story of the Halo series. As the series writer Joseph Staten said, it's the gameplay that makes the series great, not the story. If I wanted to play first-person shooters with great storytelling, I'd play Half-Life 2 or BioShock.
Log in to comment