I have a love/hate relationship with Halo. Halo: CE is horrible, Halo 2 fixed all the problems that I had with CE,  Halo 3, ODST and Reach were just too much of the same to feel special. I will acknowledge that every Halo game is an improvement over the previous ones, but I think that the series has been getting steadily worse since Halo 2. The reason for this, I think is that Halo suffers from a sever identity crisis, and needs to shut it's damn face and focus on the killing.
 
This is on my mind because I played through Reach last night, and could not get over the compromises that fill that game, or perhaps how often they were unwilling to compromise. Bungee cannot decide if the story or the standard shooty gameplay are most important, and both suffer for it. I could cite several examples, but let's go straight for the ending. Yo, spoilers.

Quick recap: The ending of Halo Reach is you fighting alone (or in my case with an online buddy) against a never-ending horde. It is a "supposed-to-lose" fight that is designed to give the player the feeling that they are heroically fighting a battle that they will lose. When you take damage, cracks appear in your visor to indicate some kind of attrition. The problem is that you still have a big fancy regenerating shield and an infinite supply of bullets, so the player is destined to die from a burst of damage, not at the end of a slow siege. I love this idea for an ending, but Bungee simply would not compromise their gameplay to make it work. Even worse, they added a bunch of stuff AFTER this sequence (an animation of the the Noble 6 fighting some more and then dying, then somebody talking to the DEAD player), removing the feeling that you were living through your last moments.
 
I actually think that this was a great IDEA about how to end the game, but Bungie failed on execution by refusing to alter their gameplay for that sequence. There are other examples that I could explain in detail, but I think my point is made. Bungie really needs to either focus on the gameplay (the part of Halo that is really genuinely good) and stop clinging to this notion that they know how to tell a story through gameplay, or start designing their games to actually BE the telling of a story, instead of a series of battles with some kind of (actually ok in spots) plot that randomly interrupts the shooting.

I have a love/hate relationship with Halo. Halo: CE is horrible, Halo 2 fixed all the problems that I had with CE,  Halo 3, ODST and Reach were just too much of the same to feel special. I will acknowledge that every Halo game is an improvement over the previous ones, but I think that the series has been getting steadily worse since Halo 2. The reason for this, I think is that Halo suffers from a sever identity crisis, and needs to shut it's damn face and focus on the killing.
 
This is on my mind because I played through Reach last night, and could not get over the compromises that fill that game, or perhaps how often they were unwilling to compromise. Bungee cannot decide if the story or the standard shooty gameplay are most important, and both suffer for it. I could cite several examples, but let's go straight for the ending. Yo, spoilers.

Quick recap: The ending of Halo Reach is you fighting alone (or in my case with an online buddy) against a never-ending horde. It is a "supposed-to-lose" fight that is designed to give the player the feeling that they are heroically fighting a battle that they will lose. When you take damage, cracks appear in your visor to indicate some kind of attrition. The problem is that you still have a big fancy regenerating shield and an infinite supply of bullets, so the player is destined to die from a burst of damage, not at the end of a slow siege. I love this idea for an ending, but Bungee simply would not compromise their gameplay to make it work. Even worse, they added a bunch of stuff AFTER this sequence (an animation of the the Noble 6 fighting some more and then dying, then somebody talking to the DEAD player), removing the feeling that you were living through your last moments.
 
I actually think that this was a great IDEA about how to end the game, but Bungie failed on execution by refusing to alter their gameplay for that sequence. There are other examples that I could explain in detail, but I think my point is made. Bungie really needs to either focus on the gameplay (the part of Halo that is really genuinely good) and stop clinging to this notion that they know how to tell a story through gameplay, or start designing their games to actually BE the telling of a story, instead of a series of battles with some kind of (actually ok in spots) plot that randomly interrupts the shooting.

I completely disagree with you , I thought Halo Reach was and is the best Halo (screw Master Chief :P) and Bungie did a good job at it .... but ow what the heck to each its own I guess

@Aetheldod: From a gameplay standpoint it is the best Halo. It's just that it needs to get over itself more than the other ones.

Halo 2 is the best Halo? You so crazy!

I loved Halo: Reach, and I do enjoy the stories, but the big issue I think is the characters that they've recently been trying to include in ODST and Reach. The trilogy had a few named characters and for the most part, you cared about them and what was happening. But in Reach, and especially ODST, you pretty much know what happens. That didn't ruin it for me when it came to Reach, but the big downer was the characters. They'd introduce groups of characters in one game and then kill off a few before they've gotten through their first appearance in the game. Then Bungie would say "AWW! THAT SUCKS! THAT CHARACTER THAT YOU TOTALLY CARED ABOUT (right?) JUST DIED! DOESN'T THAT JUST MAKE YOU MAD?!?"
 
and our response would be "meh." If you're going to include some characters that can stick in the player's mind, they must have a good personality, and something beyond the default player look and feel. Master Chief was sort of able to break those rules because he had a more serious Duke Nukem attitude and after Halo: CE, he was feared by his enemies and you'd experience that in the gameplay. You feel like a god damn warrior sent by the gods. These default spartans that get sent in with you who have just a little more personality than the average red shirt marine doesn't cut it. Kat, Buck, and Jorge are not going to ever stick in my mind. Ever. Master Chief, though...

You loose me when you say Halo: CE is horrible.

I hate everything about Halo 2.

To each their own but I personally thought Reach was excellent in both gameplay and storytelling, and I liked the balance between the two.
 
Subjective of course, but I think Halo is one of the few FPSs out their that doesn't suffer from a serious identity crisis. I also have a tough time accepting the argument that "the game needs to get over itself".

Do you think it could've worked if they made the planet of Reach the actual star? So you got sad when Reach was destroyed?

It was more of a rhetorical question, but if they did try it, it would've been so hamfisted. Such as an elemental discovery to cure cancer or some BS like that.