. . . That Halo 2 is a better, more balanced, more polished online multiplayer experience than Halo 3? Do people favor the heavy auto-aim to the looser, more fluid aiming system? And Halo 3's ever-controversial melee system? 
 
And, if so, does this make the April deactivation of the original Xbox Live more bittersweet? 
 
Discuss the merits, people. I want merits.

Having only played Halo 2 on occcasion (and locally), I feel ill-equipped to comment.  Personally, I didn't notice any appreciable differences, and seeing as I played a lot more of (and was better at) Halo 3, I enjoy that game a lot better. 
Personally, I love the "broken" melee attacks.  It makes the game weirdly appealing, and it's fun to see on my Halo 3 stats that my most kills online have come from just bashing dudes in the face.

In my opinion, Halo 2 had much better maps. As far as the controls, all I can remember is that it felt better to play Halo 2 than it does to play Halo 3.

Halo 3 was a trip down n00b lane.

I enjoyed Halo 2 WAY more than 3

I've only played Halo 2 on the PC. But from what I've seen when Halo 2 first came out, their were a lot of people that would have cherished memories for it.

Halo 2 feels better to me control wise, you have a wider field of view...the jumping feels better, the guns feel better, the maps are actually good...I have fun when I play Halo 2 while Halo 3 feels so bland and inferior to me.

" I enjoyed Halo 2 WAY more than 3 "

Mutual beat downs are always fun.
 
 
NOT
 
I enjoyed Halo 2 more when I was playing it online. There were also FAR more exploits with Halo 2's online experience than there were with Halo 3. Mostly due to super bounces and the like. Getting sniped from a spot you didn't think it was possible to reach wasn't my idea of an entertaining experience. When nobody was exploiting the game, however.... Halo 2 was more fun.

I had more fun with Halo 3 but that might have been because I didn't do much of the competitive stuff and mostly spent hours on top of hours in forge with friends.  Even when I played in the versus modes I think I liked Halo 3 a little better, but then I'm not the kind of person who lets stupid shit like a split second difference in melee attacks bother me.

i played halo 2 on the xbox original a lot longer then halo 3, not nesseserally a judgement of quality but of my personal favourite for sure.

"

I had more fun with Halo 3 but that might have been because I didn't do much of the competitive stuff and mostly spent hours on top of hours in forge with friends.  Even when I played in the versus modes I think I liked Halo 3 a little better, but then I'm not the kind of person who lets stupid shit like a split second difference in melee attacks bother me.

"

I feel that Halo 2 is to Halo 3 what Super Smash Bros. Melee is to Super Smash Bros. Brawl.

" I feel that Halo 2 is to Halo 3 what Super Smash Bros. Melee is to Super Smash Bros. Brawl. "

No. I honestly can't believe people think this. SMG spawns are ridiculous, the BR is all powerful, double beatdowns suck (and solved by not AR/meleeing like a tool anyway),but halo 2's melee is unbelievably inconsistent, halo 2 is way more glitchy, sniping is RIDICULOUSLY easy, and the list goes on 
 
One thing it certainly had though, was original and memorable maps. I mean terminal, Turf, headlong... they were just fabulous. In halo 3 there are few non BTB maps that stand out for their excellence. 
 
Ultimately, people say halo 2 was better because it was the first halo MP experience for them, and minds were blown, bricks were shat and so on. Halo 3 is done a hell of a lot better though, having played a lot of halo 2 in recent months, you really get to see it without the rose tinted glasses, and what a mess it really was. It was just the most advanced MP game out there for much of last generation and dare i say this one as well until 2007 came.  
 
that doesn't mean it's a bad game though. Take the original gears of war - VERY broken, yet still lots of fun (too bad gears 2 had the fun removed and was STILL broken)

H3 gameplay> H2 gameplay 
H2 maps> H3 maps 
 
nuff said

I've spent more time in Halo 2 multiplayer then most other games combined.It's where I met atleast 50% of the people on my friends list. So based on nostalgia alone, Halo 2 is a sure lock.Adding the awesome maps,and hilarious glitches, makes Halo 2 one of my favorite games of all time.

I really, really didn't like Halo 2. 
 
For me, it goes: Halo 3 > Halo >>> Halo 2.

" the asymmetrical maps in 3 just aren't as balanced as are the asymmetrical maps in 2.    "

I think Halo 3 could have been much better if Bungie hadn't decided to change so many of the game's mechanics that were perfectly fine to begin with. Halo 2 had plenty of problems: weapon glitches, superbounces, a horrible default spawning weapon, excessive amounts of aim magnetism, etc. They managed to fix the glitches, they turned-down the aim magnetism, and they made the AR slightly more useful than the H2 SMG (although it's still a terrible spawning weapon), but then they went even further and ruined a bunch of features from Halo 2 that were absolutely not broken. They increased the delay between switching weapons, cut the possible amount of Frag/Plasma grenades in half to make room for two extra grenade types that are rarely used, decreased grenade strength across the board, turned the OS/Camo/Custom powerups into giant glowing energy orbs that block bullets and grenades for some reason... a bunch of small changes that are absolutely unnecessary and do nothing but diminish the skill gap.
 
Of course, the H3 melee was the single worst change that Bungie made between the two games. Halo 2's melee wasn't nearly as inconsistent as some may be remembering, and (despite the enormous lunge and the presence of melee-glitches) required much more skill and had much more depth than the H3 melee. In Halo 2 a player could inflict different amounts of melee damage on an opponent based on whether they were standing still, running, or jumping. A jumping melee did more damage than a stationary melee, and experienced players could use this to their advantage to help them win close-quarter battles against less knowledgeable players (although this advantage was eventually made obsolete by BXR and BXB). Halo 3's melee has no such depth, as every melee does the exact same amount of damage (unless the player is holding a Brute Shot or Spiker, but the difference is negligible). Further, while the Halo 2 melee lunge extended a bit farther than the Halo 3 version, the melee hitbox was much smaller in Halo 2. This meant that a player actually had to aim their melee attacks, and that a player being melee'd could crouch under their opponent's strike if they were able to time it right. In Halo 3, a player simply has to be facing their opponent (or sometimes they don't even have to do that) in order to land a melee. This diminished depth in the CQC sphere of gameplay is the worst (and most unnecessary) change that Bungie made when creating Halo 3.
 
For now, my list of best Halo games goes: H1>H2>H3; though, I'm hopeful that Reach can shake that list up a bit. I spent countless hours playing Halo 2, despite its flaws (something I can't really say for Halo 3), and will definitely be sad to see it retired in April.

"  but then they went even further and ruined a bunch of features from Halo 2 that were absolutely not broken. They increased the delay between switching weapons, cut the possible amount of Frag/Plasma grenades in half to make room for two extra grenade types that are rarely used, decreased grenade strength across the board, turned the OS/Camo/Custom powerups into giant glowing energy orbs that block bullets and grenades for some reason... a "

" In my opinion, Halo 2 had much better maps. As far as the controls, all I can remember is that it felt better to play Halo 2 than it does to play Halo 3. "

" I think Halo 3 could have been much better if Bungie hadn't decided to change so many of the game's mechanics that were perfectly fine to begin with. Halo 2 had plenty of problems: weapon glitches, superbounces, a horrible default spawning weapon, excessive amounts of aim magnetism, etc. They managed to fix the glitches, they turned-down the aim magnetism, and they made the AR slightly more useful than the H2 SMG (although it's still a terrible spawning weapon), but then they went even further and ruined a bunch of features from Halo 2 that were absolutely not broken. They increased the delay between switching weapons, cut the possible amount of Frag/Plasma grenades in half to make room for two extra grenade types that are rarely used, decreased grenade strength across the board, turned the OS/Camo/Custom powerups into giant glowing energy orbs that block bullets and grenades for some reason... a bunch of small changes that are absolutely unnecessary and do nothing but diminish the skill gap.
 
Of course, the H3 melee was the single worst change that Bungie made between the two games. Halo 2's melee wasn't nearly as inconsistent as some may be remembering, and (despite the enormous lunge and the presence of melee-glitches) required much more skill and had much more depth than the H3 melee. In Halo 2 a player could inflict different amounts of melee damage on an opponent based on whether they were standing still, running, or jumping. A jumping melee did more damage than a stationary melee, and experienced players could use this to their advantage to help them win close-quarter battles against less knowledgeable players (although this advantage was eventually made obsolete by BXR and BXB). Halo 3's melee has no such depth, as every melee does the exact same amount of damage (unless the player is holding a Brute Shot or Spiker, but the difference is negligible). Further, while the Halo 2 melee lunge extended a bit farther than the Halo 3 version, the melee hitbox was much smaller in Halo 2. This meant that a player actually had to aim their melee attacks, and that a player being melee'd could crouch under their opponent's strike if they were able to time it right. In Halo 3, a player simply has to be facing their opponent (or sometimes they don't even have to do that) in order to land a melee. This diminished depth in the CQC sphere of gameplay is the worst (and most unnecessary) change that Bungie made when creating Halo 3. "

": Forgot to mention that the H2 melee was rarely inconsistent on a quality host/LAN. The only time it was ever truly inconsistent was when a game was being played under poor network conditions (same as Halo 3). And it's not like any of the changes that Bungie made to the Halo 3 melee really did anything to solve the previous inconsistencies of the Halo 2 melee anyway. They made it "fairer" in a sense for players with poor connections, but at the cost of depth. "

I HATED Halo 2. Halo 3 is far and away a better game, but my personal favorite will always be Halo CE.

" @crunchUK:@Fosssil: Really digging your guys' conversation. Good job keeping things intelligent and civil.  Also, I had no idea about the physical properties of the Orbs in Halo 3. That does seem like a design flaw, on paper. The only reason I didn't notice it is, like you said, Fosssil, because the maps have little nooks in which the powerups are placed.  I'm big on finding out the run speed and damage counters for the two games, seeing how they compare and contrast empirically. I don't know if I believe that sort of data has a huge influence on how fluently the games play, but it's still really interesting to me. "

When they came out, halo 2 was the better game of its time.  But side by side it's not really a comparison.

I played Halo 2 local multiplayer all the time when I was in High school. It was a great experience, I fell in love with it. But I'm in college now and I barely played Halo 3 at all. Plus it seems no matter what match I get into for Halo 3, the map is always snowbound, which I really don't care for. 
meh...

" I feel that Halo 2 is to Halo 3 what Super Smash Bros. Melee is to Super Smash Bros. Brawl. "

Halo 2 had better maps and a more balanced online experience. If you were a level 20 you were legit and proud of achieving such a hard level while Halo 3 has the booster accounts and fake 50s. Its a sad day for me, spending most of my summers on Halo 2 with friends and family. It will be missed.

" In my opinion, Halo 2 had much better maps. As far as the controls, all I can remember is that it felt better to play Halo 2 than it does to play Halo 3. "

" Sure there's more things to it but at the end of the day you know precisely the outcome of a boring old halo 3 melee, and you can strategize accordingly.  At least that's how i feel. There's nothing to combat in an RTS, there's just 2 possibilities in the most basic form of combat, but precisely because of that the emphasis can be put on decision making and tactics.  At the end of the day everyone will eventually manage to learn a certain skill-based move, but strategies are ever evolving and dynamic. I guess that's why i think big team is the best way to play halo... and why i simply cannot understand what's so great about call of duty.  "

" @crunchUK said:

" Sure there's more things to it but at the end of the day you know precisely the outcome of a boring old halo 3 melee, and you can strategize accordingly.  At least that's how i feel. There's nothing to combat in an RTS, there's just 2 possibilities in the most basic form of combat, but precisely because of that the emphasis can be put on decision making and tactics.  At the end of the day everyone will eventually manage to learn a certain skill-based move, but strategies are ever evolving and dynamic. I guess that's why i think big team is the best way to play halo... and why i simply cannot understand what's so great about call of duty.  "

Making melee encounters more one-dimensional in this case accomplishes nothing in terms of improving the overall gameplay. At what point does a game become too simple, in your estimation? Affording players more inherent abilities and giving everyone access to a multitude of master-able skills is part of designing a good competitive game. I find it ironic that you take a shot at Call of Duty at the end of your post, yet with the bolded statement above you are advocating the same type of "dumbed-down" mechanics that have made that game such a casual, noob-friendly, "anyone who picks up the controller can win" style of game.     Also, I don't understand your point about simplifying core gameplay to create a focus on strategy/tactics. The two aren't inversely related like that at all -- a more dynamic and skillful core game will inevitably raise the ceiling for the development of creative and inventive new strategies. In which game would you find more strategy and tactics: Checkers or Chess? Halo 3 is Checkers, Halo 1 is Chess, Halo 2 is somewhere in the middle.  EDIT: Better analogy than the one above: Halo 1 is Chess, Halo 2 is Checkers, Halo 3 is Tic-Tac-Toe.  You enjoy BTB because it offers players a wide variety of weapons, equipment, and vehicles that players can manipulate in different ways to create an unpredictable (though strategic) match every time. All I want from Bungie is a game that achieves that same type of gameplay depth inside the actual core mechanics (The Golden Trifecta: Guns, Grenades, Melee), instead of through the addition of a laundry list of sandbox items like Bubble Shields and Banshees. They did that with Halo 1 and to some extent Halo 2, but they failed to accomplish that in Halo 3. "

" Um... no, i guess.   Halo 3 is probably the most chess-like game of them all - You have many different things, all with very different and very defined roles. You can use all these different things to the best strategic extent to win. Halo 1/2, Everything bows down to the Br/M6D. In halo 2, an SMG/plasma rifle is no better close range than a BR, the vehicles are MUCH less powerful yet with similar spawn times to halo 3, resulting in even more BR prominence, and so on.  end result, checkers. It revolves around one thing which fills all the roles.  A game becomes too simple not when outBRing someone is of no importance, but when what you choose to do with the array of tools at your disposal has no effect. Except in halo 3 it has all the more effect. If i take your queen (your sniper, laser, vehicle...you choose), it's going to have quite significant consequences for the game. In halo 2, what queen is there to take?   So there you go. What i think is going on here is the classic MLG fallacy of thinking that "skill" adds all the depth to a game. It doesn't - At the end of the day, improving your BR is pretty mindless. "

 The other aspects of the game are so easy and have such a low skill ceiling that a player's BR becomes the only deciding factor in most fights.. "

"
Halo 3 isn't Chess-like at all outside of BTB. Only in a big team environment does the H3 sandbox reach its full potential -- the focus of combat is naturally placed on the more important weapons and equipment and vehicles, and the role of melees and grenades is inherently diminished based on the scale of the maps being used. In a 2v2 or 4v4 setting, that same diverse sandbox from BTB becomes cluttered and unbalanced. The shallowness of the game's core mechanics really comes to light in small-team matches. That lack of depth severely limits the amount of possible strats and hampers creative gameplay, resulting in a stalemate-filled style of gameplay reminiscent of Tic-Tac-Toe. 
   

a strategy is useless when the player attempting it lacks the appropriate amount of skill. "

I thought Halo 2's online was far more enjoyable.  
That's not to say Halo 3's online was bad by any means, just Halo 2 felt alot more "tight". 
Also, lockout. ( or whatever it was called )

" Apart from the strategy of course. Being on top of the hill, ungrenadable with devastating sniper cover from wherever might be a deciding factor...

. There are plenty of other games out there that offer more depth of strategy than Halo;  "

The Halo 2 maps embarrass the Halo 3 maps. For me, the gameplay differences are a wash, they both have their own strengths and weaknesses, and both area lot of fun to play online. The map discrepancy is big though. 

yes. Melee was better, BR was better, Sniper was better, Maps were better, MM was better.

I find Halo 3 to be categorically better than Halo 2 in every possible way. Except for the fact that it doesn't have Blood Gulch or Hang 'Em High. I don't care if Blood Gulch is dumb. It's awesome-dumb and I want it.

" I find Halo 3 to be categorically better than Halo 2 in every possible way. Except for the fact that it doesn't have Blood Gulch or Hang 'Em High. I don't care if Blood Gulch is dumb. It's awesome-dumb and I want it. "