Halo Reach

Since 7048 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

I tend to think that 90% of the time I read gaming sites. It especially annoys me when someone makes a statement that's out of touch with the reality or history of the industry. That's a bigger deal to me, or at least as big of a deal to me, as their ability to communicate properly. An example: Kotaku claiming that Alien Versus Predator was ripping off Gears of War's "horde" mode when the original AVP featured a survival mode.

I agree. A lot of commercial games writing is poorly researched, mostly because of the timescale it has to be produced in and well, you get what you pay for.

I'm quite disappointed in these Reach previews because nearly everything I knew already. Granted, I've been following Bungie's output pretty closely and I know a bit about Halo. Perhaps I'm just not the target audience, to be fair.

Almost none of them have mentioned the fact that Headhunter was a mode dropped from Halo 2. An interesting question to Bungie would be, what is/has been done differently, that makes the mode work now? Nobody asks it.

I quite liked Ars take on it mind as it didn't completely devolve into paragraph long descriptions of modes and changes we already knew about.

GhaelonEB's NeoGAF post is pretty darn awesome and a lot more accurate and factual than most of the previews.

In reply to

[quote=GriftGFX]I tend to think that 90% of the time I read gaming sites. It especially annoys me when someone makes a statement that's out of touch with the reality or history of the industry. That's a bigger deal to me, or at least as big of a deal to me, as their ability to communicate properly. An example: Kotaku claiming that Alien Versus Predator was ripping off Gears of War's "horde" mode when the original AVP featured a survival mode.[/quote]

I agree. A lot of commercial games writing is poorly researched, mostly because of the timescale it has to be produced in and well, you get what you pay for.

I'm quite disappointed in these Reach previews because nearly everything I knew already. Granted, I've been following Bungie's output pretty closely and I know a bit about Halo. Perhaps I'm just not the target audience, to be fair.

Almost none of them have mentioned the fact that Headhunter was a mode dropped from Halo 2. An interesting question to Bungie would be, what is/has been done differently, that makes the mode work now? Nobody asks it.

I quite liked Ars take on it mind as it didn't completely devolve into paragraph long descriptions of modes and changes we already knew about.

GhaelonEB's NeoGAF post is pretty darn awesome and a lot more accurate and factual than most of the previews.

http://twitter.com/deftangel

deftangel

Since 7048 Days

A new vidoc whilst we're at it! :)

http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topne...

In reply to

http://twitter.com/deftangel

Viginti_Tres

Since 6682 Days

That's sooo awesome. Best Vidoc, yet.

In reply to

dcdelgado

Since 7040 Days

Damn being at work!!

In reply to

** Yes We CAN!! **

BLackHawkodst

Since 6067 Days

Posted by deftangel

A new vidoc whilst we're at it! :)

http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topne...

Holy crap that looked awesome.

In reply to

Prepare To Drop!!

KORNdog

Since 6584 Days

really tempted by the leg edition, but not by the game...ARGH!

In reply to

Jin187

Since 6924 Days

Man, it really does look incredible!

In reply to

icemanufc

Since 5846 Days

Posted by deftangel

A new vidoc whilst we're at it! :)

http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topne...

Just EPIC!

In reply to

Tomarru

Since 6252 Days

Goddamn, the game is looking fucking beautiful and this is only the multiplayer. The models are so cool, and everything looks sooooo fluid.
That is how multiplayer should be done, tons of game modes, tons of features, able to filter the players you come in contact with, being ranked separately for skill level.

Did i mention that it looks beautiful?

In reply to

Optimusv2

Since 7072 Days

The game does look amazing. I can only imagine what the Single will look like.

The death animations are spectacular.

In reply to

Halo Reach using 360 tesselation unit extensively.

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

Seeing it in motion on your HDTV, will blow your mind!!

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of th

Viginti_Tres

Since 6682 Days

You set yourself up for disappointment if you think SP will look better. All maps are pulled from the SP, technically speaking there shouldn't be a difference.

In reply to

Optimusv2

Since 7072 Days

Posted by Viginti_Tres

You set yourself up for disappointment if you think SP will look better. All maps are pulled from the SP, technically speaking there shouldn't be a difference.

First, Halo SP always looks better.

Second, that's incorrect, all maps are not pulled from the SP. They are designed first and foremost as MP maps and are then passed off to the Campaign team to be incorporated into larger existing campaign spaces.

There is only one map that is taken directly from SP, Overlook, which looks noticeably superior to the other MP maps. It's the one being used for their experimental generator defense multiplayer 3v3 mode.

In reply to

Halo Reach using 360 tesselation unit extensively.

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

Seeing it in motion on your HDTV, will blow your mind!!

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of th

Viginti_Tres

Since 6682 Days

I stand corrected on the second point. However, I still think all we'll see is an artistic improvement, it won't look like a whole other game suddenly. The maps in the previous games lacked environmental detail. It shouldn't be a problem this time since their engine seems to scale very well and the maps are indeed in the SP. I should have worded it better: The same locations in both modes will look the same apart from artistic changes.

What makes Halo a good looking game are the beautiful vistas and cut scenes.

In reply to

dcdelgado

Since 7040 Days

It will look better technically also thats a given, no one saying it will look like a whole new game, but it will look better than the beta we get to play in a few weeks. and the beta is looking great.

In reply to

** Yes We CAN!! **

Nietzsche

Since 6533 Days

Posted by deftangel

A new vidoc whilst we're at it! :)

http://www.bungie.net/News/content.aspx?type=topne...

I highly recommend getting this vid off XBL as it looks absolutely fantastic on an HDTV and really put to rest my doubts about the game looking like crap, but since when has Halo really needed great graphics to be an amazing game anyhow? It's just icing on the cake really. It's the gameplay that I'm so curious and anxious about. I really hope bungie finally pulls off Combat Evolved part 2.

In reply to

Optimusv2

Since 7072 Days

Posted by dcdelgado

It will look better technically also thats a given, no one saying it will look like a whole new game, but it will look better than the beta we get to play in a few weeks. and the beta is looking great.

Yep, this is dead on. It won't look like some entirely new game, but the greater artistic attention, plus the technical improvements thanks to it being SP, as opposed to MP, will also aide in the overall look.

For one, the shadow that reflects onto the gun in SP, doesn't appear to be present for multi, and that's just to be expected. With that said, however, the MP is looking truly remarkable.

In reply to

Halo Reach using 360 tesselation unit extensively.

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

Seeing it in motion on your HDTV, will blow your mind!!

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of th

blmbox

Since 6511 Days

Posted by Viginti_Tres

You set yourself up for disappointment if you think SP will look better.

What? I've never seen a case of the SP failing to look better than the MP.

In reply to

Optimusv2

Since 7072 Days

Another thing to keep in mind for future Halo MP footage, or more specifically more advanced in development Halo MP or Halo Reach footage, is that some Ambient Occlusioin Bungie has been touting, as stated in weekly updaet, didn't make it into the multiplayer beta, but should be there for retail, and I expect to be in the SP.

Check out the debris at the tail end of the explosion, good god :D

In reply to

Halo Reach using 360 tesselation unit extensively.

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

Seeing it in motion on your HDTV, will blow your mind!!

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of th

blmbox

Since 6511 Days

That'll make a huge difference as well. Well, if AO is what I think it is. And I'm pretty sure I do.

In reply to

Acert93

Since 7151 Days

I got a couple PMs about my Ars post, so here it is... all you "Acert93 hates Halo and doesn't know anything about the series" should sit down before you faint...

Most FPS aren't revolutionary but instead evolutionary. And not every new/unique feature is well deployed the first go around (see the evolution of cover mechanics). So regardless of the fact PC FPS have been doing many things for a long time is irrelevant. I would ask: How many PC FPS have a good ranged gun combat design, melee, and nades (the Halo "trifecta" which is quite good BTW) in additional to vehicular combat? Not many, if any. And yet Halo 1 did a lot of things right in one package (e.g. drawing together limited guns, instant nade access, powerful mele, and ranged guns with significant range advantages), while adding vehicles in a balanced manner, and the rebounding shields really took over the industry. The entire FPS industry has followed Bungie in that regards.

Halo 3 is a more deliberate "Quake" style FPS in terms of maps: map mastery and control are important, knowing where field spawning power ups are, and utilizing them accordingly is what counts. Bungie passively forces successful players to work as a team (2v1 almost always favors the 2 as you can take down the shields and score the kill before even 1 of you has your shields down meaning you could take on a LONG stream of lonewolfs without losing; compare to MW1/MW2 where flanking a group of 4 or 5 players can result in as many kills before they even knew you were there).

Anyhow, I don't think people are saying Halo is (a) the first or (b) the only game to offer certain features or design choices. It certainly isn't. But it really rises above the fold in regards to balance and how refined the gameplay is. It also has a robust package; Halo 3 had a basic map editor, full "theater" editor, 4 player Coop, split screen campaign, and a massive MP component in addition to a 7-10 hour SP experience. And none of it feels tacked on. So Bungie deserves credit where credit is due. It isn't the "first" but it certainly knows how to make a compelling product.

One area where Bungie does kick other games in the rear is Matchmaking. When I first started off it was great getting to play other 5-10 ranked people of similar skill. It made the games a LOT more enjoyable. Likewise now I tend to play gamers in the 25-40 range. Allowing a broader range of FPS gamers to enjoy and succeed online is a good thing. I enjoy MW2 but nearly a 2:1 KDR I am in the top 5% and do feel many other unfortunate gamers have an experience that pretty much revolves around being cannon fodder. I would have hoped IW added true match making so that people can play against similarly skilled gamers. Because while it is fun for me going 32-3 on a good round I don't think others enjoy it. Halo 3's matchmaking made this a much rarer event--going 20-5 against 40 ranked players ment I had an AWESOME game. Going 12-10 was more typical and felt more rewarding as the other guys actually felt dangerous. And I remember being a 10 rank struggling to break 1:1, but the game rewarded you and it never felt lopsided--you always had a chance in ranked games. In MW2 most people stand no chance against me, which doesn't make them better gamers.

In reply to

I got a couple PMs about my Ars post, so here it is... all you "Acert93 hates Halo and doesn't know anything about the series" should sit down before you faint...

Most FPS aren't revolutionary but instead evolutionary. And not every new/unique feature is well deployed the first go around (see the evolution of cover mechanics). So regardless of the fact PC FPS have been doing many things for a long time is irrelevant. I would ask: How many PC FPS have a good ranged gun combat design, melee, and nades (the Halo "trifecta" which is quite good BTW) in additional to vehicular combat? Not many, if any. And yet Halo 1 did a lot of things right in one package (e.g. drawing together limited guns, instant nade access, powerful mele, and ranged guns with significant range advantages), while adding vehicles in a balanced manner, and the rebounding shields really took over the industry. The entire FPS industry has followed Bungie in that regards.

Halo 3 is a more deliberate "Quake" style FPS in terms of maps: map mastery and control are important, knowing where field spawning power ups are, and utilizing them accordingly is what counts. Bungie passively forces successful players to work as a team (2v1 almost always favors the 2 as you can take down the shields and score the kill before even 1 of you has your shields down meaning you could take on a LONG stream of lonewolfs without losing; compare to MW1/MW2 where flanking a group of 4 or 5 players can result in as many kills before they even knew you were there).

Anyhow, I don't think people are saying Halo is (a) the first or (b) the only game to offer certain features or design choices. It certainly isn't. But it really rises above the fold in regards to balance and how refined the gameplay is. It also has a robust package; Halo 3 had a basic map editor, full "theater" editor, 4 player Coop, split screen campaign, and a massive MP component in addition to a 7-10 hour SP experience. And none of it feels tacked on. So Bungie deserves credit where credit is due. It isn't the "first" but it certainly knows how to make a compelling product.

One area where Bungie does kick other games in the rear is Matchmaking. When I first started off it was great getting to play other 5-10 ranked people of similar skill. It made the games a LOT more enjoyable. Likewise now I tend to play gamers in the 25-40 range. Allowing a broader range of FPS gamers to enjoy and succeed online is a good thing. I enjoy MW2 but nearly a 2:1 KDR I am in the top 5% and do feel many other unfortunate gamers have an experience that pretty much revolves around being cannon fodder. I would have hoped IW added true match making so that people can play against similarly skilled gamers. Because while it is fun for me going 32-3 on a good round I don't think others enjoy it. Halo 3's matchmaking made this a much rarer event--going 20-5 against 40 ranked players ment I had an AWESOME game. Going 12-10 was more typical and felt more rewarding as the other guys actually felt dangerous. And I remember being a 10 rank struggling to break 1:1, but the game rewarded you and it never felt lopsided--you always had a chance in ranked games. In MW2 most people stand no chance against me, which doesn't make them better gamers.

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

Acert93

Since 7151 Days

Per MP, it could also be running on revised Halo 3 branch that is more iterative for MP and won't see all the SP polish on the renderer side.

In reply to

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

Viginti_Tres

Since 6682 Days

Posted by blmbox

What? I've never seen a case of the SP failing to look better than the MP.

Gears 1 and 2 and BC 1 and 2. That's the ones that come instantly to mind, I'm sure there is more.

When the SP doesn't look better than the MP it's not because the devs "failed" to improve it, it's entirely down to the production pipeline. A lot of studios in the past strictly split their divisions early on in development and everyone worked for them self. But quality and efficiency really suffered, sometimes the MP would look like an entirely different game. Bungie talked a lot about how they improved their production pipeline since they parted with MS and I'm sure we'll get to see a better looking MP as a result.

In reply to

dcdelgado

Since 7040 Days

Yet the reach devs have stated and continue to state the layers of technical polish continues to get added to the game, that wont make the MP beta as Ops pointed out, so in Reach case im pretty sure MP and SP will look even better come launch.

In reply to

** Yes We CAN!! **

ManThatYouFear

Since 7123 Days

Well I got my copy of ODST ready :) music is sublime, but I don't like the characters Dutch and co, very VERY unlike-able.. but its half decent worth the 10 notes I paid for it, roll on BETA :)

In reply to

I want my games room finished now :(

GriftGFX

Since 7180 Days

Posted by Optimusv2

First, Halo SP always looks better.

That is so not true. In fact, in some cases it's strictly the opposite. Look at the DLC maps for Halo 2, and try telling me that they don't smoke the SP in terms of attention to detail.

Posted by Acert93

One area where Bungie does kick other games in the rear is Matchmaking. When I first started off it was great getting to play other 5-10 ranked people of similar skill. It made the games a LOT more enjoyable. Likewise now I tend to play gamers in the 25-40 range. Allowing a broader range of FPS gamers to enjoy and succeed online is a good thing. I enjoy MW2 but nearly a 2:1 KDR I am in the top 5% and do feel many other unfortunate gamers have an experience that pretty much revolves around being cannon fodder. I would have hoped IW added true match making so that people can play against similarly skilled gamers. Because while it is fun for me going 32-3 on a good round I don't think others enjoy it. Halo 3's matchmaking made this a much rarer event--going 20-5 against 40 ranked players ment I had an AWESOME game. Going 12-10 was more typical and felt more rewarding as the other guys actually felt dangerous. And I remember being a 10 rank struggling to break 1:1, but the game rewarded you and it never felt lopsided--you always had a chance in ranked games. In MW2 most people stand no chance against me, which doesn't make them better gamers.

I think it's just a little easier to be good at MW2 though, and honestly there are people who are cannon fodder in every game. I only got to play it for around seven hours and didn't have too much trouble. Call of Duty 4 is infinitely better in this regard too, because you can just hop on a promod community server and know that you're playing against other good players 90% of the time. But you're right, Bungie does match making best, and it would probably help noobs get a start in Call of Duty without making them suffer. Match making still sucks, but Bungie does it better.

Posted by Viginti_Tres

Gears 1 and 2 and BC 1 and 2. That's the ones that come instantly to mind, I'm sure there is more.

Add Call of Duty to this list, and I'm sure there are many more.

In reply to

[quote=Optimusv2]

First, Halo SP always looks better.[/quote]

That is so not true. In fact, in some cases it's strictly the opposite. Look at the DLC maps for Halo 2, and try telling me that they don't smoke the SP in terms of attention to detail.

[quote=Acert93]One area where Bungie does kick other games in the rear is Matchmaking. When I first started off it was great getting to play other 5-10 ranked people of similar skill. It made the games a LOT more enjoyable. Likewise now I tend to play gamers in the 25-40 range. Allowing a broader range of FPS gamers to enjoy and succeed online is a good thing. I enjoy MW2 but nearly a 2:1 KDR I am in the top 5% and do feel many other unfortunate gamers have an experience that pretty much revolves around being cannon fodder. I would have hoped IW added true match making so that people can play against similarly skilled gamers. Because while it is fun for me going 32-3 on a good round I don't think others enjoy it. Halo 3's matchmaking made this a much rarer event--going 20-5 against 40 ranked players ment I had an AWESOME game. Going 12-10 was more typical and felt more rewarding as the other guys actually felt dangerous. And I remember being a 10 rank struggling to break 1:1, but the game rewarded you and it never felt lopsided--you always had a chance in ranked games. In MW2 most people stand no chance against me, which doesn't make them better gamers.[/quote]

I think it's just a little easier to be good at MW2 though, and honestly there are people who are cannon fodder in every game. I only got to play it for around seven hours and didn't have too much trouble. Call of Duty 4 is infinitely better in this regard too, because you can just hop on a promod community server and know that you're playing against other good players 90% of the time. But you're right, Bungie does match making [i]best[/i], and it would probably help noobs get a start in Call of Duty without making them suffer. Match making still sucks, but Bungie does it better.

[quote=Viginti_Tres]Gears 1 and 2 and BC 1 and 2. That's the ones that come instantly to mind, I'm sure there is more.[/quote]

Add Call of Duty to this list, and I'm sure there are [i]many[/i] more.

The Precinct

RoadCraft

Blades of Fire

Our PS5 Pro video of Spirit of the North 2

Preview gameplay of Out of Sight

We reviewed Revenge of the Savage Planet