It is time.

 

Apparently Microsoft's conference starts at 6:30AM EST or 11:30 UKT, so if anyone reads this it begins soon, very soon. Urk said that you will need a mighty change of pants, looking at what they did with comic con... I hope they reveal the final multiplayer maps, and maybe a Campaign demo.

 

Hunting for a live stream, I bet by 12pm Bungie will load up whatever they did on Bungie.net

I hate to post twice in a row, now I'm posting 3 times but, Bungie added a new Vidoc.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs2TPo7z0sM

 

Featuring a familiar figure we have known in the Halo Universe, voiced by Jen Taylor... It isn't Cortana, but the most epic motherly figure ever.

OOoooooooh mamma....

see if they make us like become amazing friends with everybody in the team then they all die; imma get peeved.

A friend sent me these pictures.

 

 

He told me it isn't his through, but the leaks are coming in early...

The guy who made that picture already said it was fake. Also, it's pretty obvious as the midsection of the case looks awful and so does the CD. He also showed some so called 'leaked' screenshots which were bad cellphone pictures showing nothing new. He's a pretty obvious faker.

People were doing that stuff for MW2, this guy had printed out the box art and inserted it over a GoW2 box, without even taking out the GoW2 box art which you could see in the corner.

 

Ok, I've never played Halo before. Ever. So tell me

 

A. Why its so massively popular ? I hope its not relying on the kind of fanboyism that keeps MW2 up as the top XBL game. And what does this game do that Halo 3 didn't apart from these armour powers or whatever.

 

B. How does matchmaking work online ? I.E. CoD crappy connections or proper servers. And do Bungie actually fix stuff like balance issues?

 

C. How steep is the learning curve for a former CoD player ? (A pretty good one though I say it myself)

 

Cos CoD Black ops looks like it might be a fail similar to MW2 and I need a new online FPS to sink my time in, as CoD4s starting to die in terms of player numbers.

People were doing that stuff for MW2, this guy had printed out the box art and inserted it over a GoW2 box, without even taking out the GoW2 box art which you could see in the corner.

 

Ok, I've never played Halo before. Ever. So tell me

 

A. Why its so massively popular ? I hope its not relying on the kind of fanboyism that keeps MW2 up as the top XBL game. And what does this game do that Halo 3 didn't apart from these armour powers or whatever.

 

B. How does matchmaking work online ? I.E. CoD crappy connections or proper servers. And do Bungie actually fix stuff like balance issues?

 

C. How steep is the learning curve for a former CoD player ? (A pretty good one though I say it myself)

 

Cos CoD Black ops looks like it might be a fail similar to MW2 and I need a new online FPS to sink my time in, as CoD4s starting to die in terms of player numbers.

 

A. I'm not exactly sure why it happens to be so popular, probably because during the time it was different, it changed the gaming world for First Person Shooters in a way, if it didn't happen many games we know today would have never existed.

 

B. I believe it is P2P; not sure through. It doesn't have some annoying host switcher like Mw2 excluding when the current host quits, which is half as long as the COD host changer.

 

C. Depends on how good you learn, you say you are pretty good at learning so it should be easy. I've had friends which adapt immediately, while others take weeks.

 

Also I recommend to play the trilogy in order, Halo CE was amazing, Halo 2 was amazing also during its days for multiplayer, and the campaign was great too (excluding the ending) and had the best music in my opinion of the trilogy. Halo 3 was a nice wrap through not as good as I wanted.

 

Bungie has claimed Reach is their swansong, and it looks amazing.

A. Why its so massively popular ? I hope its not relying on the kind of fanboyism that keeps MW2 up as the top XBL game. And what does this game do that Halo 3 didn't apart from these armour powers or whatever.

Halo is popular because of it's sandbox. You can screw around in Forge and make the most insane gametypes but you can also choose to play on a competitive level. Reach doesn't reinvent the FPS genre in any way but it expands on everything. You've got so many options.

 

B. How does matchmaking work online ? I.E. CoD crappy connections or proper servers. And do Bungie actually fix stuff like balance issues?

Based on the Beta I'll say that Reach matchmaking is hella lot quicker than Halo 3 and still manages to find opponents that match your skill. I can't recall having a lot of laggy matches from the few hundred that I've played. Also, if a new host is picked the old host won't be kicked like in MW2. ;) Bungie is pretty good at balancing their games no Halo so far has had balancing issues (certainly not to the extend of the last few CoDs.

 

C. How steep is the learning curve for a former CoD player ? (A pretty good one though I say it myself)

You'll have to learn that one shot kills are no more (excluding some weapons). It's a lot more important to aim for the head than in CoD. Also, plasma weapons take out a shield a lot faster than human weapons but human weapons are better at headshots.

 

That's pretty much it. Halo is a lot more solid than the past few CoDs in terms of both campaign and multiplayer.

Not to mention it kicks the living [cabbage] out of CoD in terms of playing with friends. I dunno if there are any old members of SGP still around, but those mini-game nights were epic fun. It's awesome seeing what people come up with.

halo being "good" really depends if you have friends or not imo. going online with 3 other people on the same box? nothing compares.

 

the campaign is a joke. the combat is meh, but it's the online experience that sets it apart.

Hmm sounds pretty good then. I've never really considered Halo before as CoD was providing all my FPS needs, but I've played CoD4 to death and Black ops is looking as bad as MW2.

 

Also I recommend to play the trilogy in order

 

I heard Reach was a prequel though? I imagine I'd understand the references or whatever better if I had played all 3, but frankly I'm unwilling to put the money or time into doing that.

halo being "good" really depends if you have friends or not imo. going online with 3 other people on the same box? nothing compares.

 

the campaign is a joke. the combat is meh, but it's the online experience that sets it apart.

The encounters (and combat) is what makes Halo different from other shooters. Games like Medal of Honor, Battlefield and Call of Duty typically only have a type of enemy (with a very few exceptions) who all act the same way. They hide behind a wall and pop their head out every once in a while. Halo gives you a sandbox in which to play. You get a set of weapons, vehicles and enemies. The beginning of the encounter is mostly the same but they way it will play out varies a lot. Depending on your difficulty setting, the kind of weapons that you've got on you, whether or not you're in a vehicle, how many allies you've got left. These are all factors which change the way Halo battles are fought. But back on the enemy topic; Halo has very varying enemies. Grunts who are dangerous in large number and leadership but who often run away if without. Jackals are the sharpshooters who typically shoot from far away (unless they wield a shield). Elites are the keen and swift warriors who lead the latter two into battle. Brutes are rather similar but are a bit more brutal and close range. Hunters are just massive monsters who can take a hell of a punch. And you've got even more enemies in Reach. They are take a different approach. For example; Grunt are killed by a simple headshot. Elites have an energy shield which you have to drain (with preferably a plasma pistol overcharge) before you can kill it. Hunters have a weak spot on the back which you have to use to kill them. Some Jackals have energy shields on them which requires you to shoot them in the hand first before you can headshot them.

 

And let's not even get started on the vehicle combat. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b-W66LvMag

 

Does anyone know what map that is? Also the video is luls.

Zilla...i love you.

Sweet.

 

I'll be sooo doing that when I get it.

 

<3 pre-ordering.

Campaign Matchmaking :thumbup:

halo being "good" really depends if you have friends or not imo. going online with 3 other people on the same box? nothing compares.

 

the campaign is a joke. the combat is meh, but it's the online experience that sets it apart.

The encounters (and combat) is what makes Halo different from other shooters. Games like Medal of Honor, Battlefield and Call of Duty typically only have a type of enemy (with a very few exceptions) who all act the same way. They hide behind a wall and pop their head out every once in a while. Halo gives you a sandbox in which to play. You get a set of weapons, vehicles and enemies. The beginning of the encounter is mostly the same but they way it will play out varies a lot. Depending on your difficulty setting, the kind of weapons that you've got on you, whether or not you're in a vehicle, how many allies you've got left. These are all factors which change the way Halo battles are fought. But back on the enemy topic; Halo has very varying enemies. Grunts who are dangerous in large number and leadership but who often run away if without. Jackals are the sharpshooters who typically shoot from far away (unless they wield a shield). Elites are the keen and swift warriors who lead the latter two into battle. Brutes are rather similar but are a bit more brutal and close range. Hunters are just massive monsters who can take a hell of a punch. And you've got even more enemies in Reach. They are take a different approach. For example; Grunt are killed by a simple headshot. Elites have an energy shield which you have to drain (with preferably a plasma pistol overcharge) before you can kill it. Hunters have a weak spot on the back which you have to use to kill them. Some Jackals have energy shields on them which requires you to shoot them in the hand first before you can headshot them.

 

And let's not even get started on the vehicle combat. ;)

 

umm if you want encounters like that, mass effect 2 does it better (or GoW series)

 

and vehicle combat is average, nothing amazing. the controls are very basic

How complex can vehicle controls get?

What do you want in vehicle controls?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63_LHQoVyxU

 

@3:55 and just after, did anyone see how high that Skirmisher Jumped? :ohnoes:

 

EDIT: Damn, at the end when the Elite Wave came, everyone basically died in the matter of seconds. I'm glad they are the main enemy again, and they put up even more of a fight.

Edited August 19, 201015 yr by Roflzilla

The press for gaming reviews seem to suck a lot. I mean this guy doesn't look like he even played a FPS before, let alone Halo. Normally it's okay, but when you are playing a game for an article or something. :shame:

 

http://www.gamepro.c...scom-2010-demo/

 

"One of the Spartans hi-jacks a covenant ship and shoots up the crew in this Gamescom 2010 demo for Halo: Reach."

 

WAT

 

Also, at 3:37 to 4:02 is when an epic duel with a Jackal commences.

halo being "good" really depends if you have friends or not imo. going online with 3 other people on the same box? nothing compares.

 

the campaign is a joke. the combat is meh, but it's the online experience that sets it apart.

The encounters (and combat) is what makes Halo different from other shooters. Games like Medal of Honor, Battlefield and Call of Duty typically only have a type of enemy (with a very few exceptions) who all act the same way. They hide behind a wall and pop their head out every once in a while. Halo gives you a sandbox in which to play. You get a set of weapons, vehicles and enemies. The beginning of the encounter is mostly the same but they way it will play out varies a lot. Depending on your difficulty setting, the kind of weapons that you've got on you, whether or not you're in a vehicle, how many allies you've got left. These are all factors which change the way Halo battles are fought. But back on the enemy topic; Halo has very varying enemies. Grunts who are dangerous in large number and leadership but who often run away if without. Jackals are the sharpshooters who typically shoot from far away (unless they wield a shield). Elites are the keen and swift warriors who lead the latter two into battle. Brutes are rather similar but are a bit more brutal and close range. Hunters are just massive monsters who can take a hell of a punch. And you've got even more enemies in Reach. They are take a different approach. For example; Grunt are killed by a simple headshot. Elites have an energy shield which you have to drain (with preferably a plasma pistol overcharge) before you can kill it. Hunters have a weak spot on the back which you have to use to kill them. Some Jackals have energy shields on them which requires you to shoot them in the hand first before you can headshot them.

 

And let's not even get started on the vehicle combat. ;)

 

umm if you want encounters like that, mass effect 2 does it better (or GoW series)

 

and vehicle combat is average, nothing amazing. the controls are very basic

Could you explain yourself rather than saying "its better". I don't know about ME2, but in ME1 the enemies were hardly anything special. Most of the time they just blindly ran at you. And seriously GoW? (I assume you mean Gears of War and not God of War) Do you even know what I mean by sandbox? GoW has tons of scripted events when it comes to enemies. And in other parts when you're fighting humanoid enemies (the ones that are rather unimaginative and bland to fight against). These encounters are pretty much this: you hide behind a chest-high wall and pick off all the other enemies who are also hiding behind chest-high walls.

 

Now come with a reply that's a bit more... elaborating, please.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfME5KwKLfg

 

If this weekly update is like last week, expect a HD version of the cutscene uploaded.

Could you explain yourself rather than saying "its better". I don't know about ME2, but in ME1 the enemies were hardly anything special. Most of the time they just blindly ran at you. And seriously GoW? (I assume you mean Gears of War and not God of War) Do you even know what I mean by sandbox? GoW has tons of scripted events when it comes to enemies. And in other parts when you're fighting humanoid enemies (the ones that are rather unimaginative and bland to fight against). These encounters are pretty much this: you hide behind a chest-high wall and pick off all the other enemies who are also hiding behind chest-high walls.

 

Are you really defending the enemies in Halo? :-? My friend and I just had a discussion yesterday about how much they suck. In Halo 3 and ODST Legendary, I just zoomed through the enemies. (Halo 2 was different, but they just amped up their shields and made it almost impossible to get through because you just simply didn't have enough ammo to progress through, even if you never missed. In other words, they took the lazy approach to creating a "challenge".) The only enemies I actually enjoyed taking down would be Hunters and vehicles. Killing everything else was a completely tedious grind.

 

I agree about Mass Effect though. The only enemies that were an actual threat were the ones that pushed you out of cover. Even in the Insanity mode, over half of the game was just duck, shoot, duck, shoot. As for Gears, there's a lot more to that game than just taking cover.

 

PS: Gears 3 looks ten times better than Halo Reach. :-w

Are you really defending the enemies in Halo? :-? My friend and I just had a discussion yesterday about how much they suck. In Halo 3 and ODST Legendary, I just zoomed through the enemies. (Halo 2 was different, but they just amped up their shields and made it almost impossible to get through because you just simply didn't have enough ammo to progress through, even if you never missed. In other words, they took the lazy approach to creating a "challenge".) The only enemies I actually enjoyed taking down would be Hunters and vehicles. Killing everything else was a completely tedious grind.

 

I agree about Mass Effect though. The only enemies that were an actual threat were the ones that pushed you out of cover. Even in the Insanity mode, over half of the game was just duck, shoot, duck, shoot. As for Gears, there's a lot more to that game than just taking cover.

 

PS: Gears 3 looks ten times better than Halo Reach. :-w

ODST aside, you can't zoom past all enemies that easily. But really, what I like about the enemies is that they create variety. I don't really understand how you can see it as a grind. (on Legendary that is) They all take different approaches and I like that. Its better than killing the same human over and over again (i.e. CoD and Battlefield). And what you say about Halo 2 is what a lot of games do nowadays. Just make the enemies incredibly accurate and let them kill you in a single shot. This isn't the case in the other Halo games.

 

Gears never really appealed to me. (I've only played the first one) The enemies are pretty much bullet-sponges and are quite boring to fight against. Even on higher difficulty its only 'wait until they pop their head out and then shoot them'. (Except for the bosses) From what I've seen they added some nice more varying enemies in GoW3 so that looks like an improvement.

 

Also, I think Gears looks like crap. Litteraly. Its colours vary from a dark shade of brown to a slightly lighter shade of brown. Just makes the surroundings less interesting.

lol at people attempting to defend games.

 

The reason I don't take part in these anymore is exactly what's being shown here. It's not "in my opinion", it's "my opinion is better than yours because".