Constantly

People did get owned in Halo 2 and 3. That is a fact. Now, If I got owned all the time in Halo 2 and 3 but still loved Halo, I would want something to change to level out the playing field. And that's exactly what I would have got. I'm not being any harder on people who like Reach than they are on people who don't like it.

It would be really cute if you guys could just post all day agreeing with eachother. But there are people who are scared that 343i is going to further destroy Halo. You guys have the luxury of feeling like they made changes for the best. (Because you got owned a lot in Halo 2 and 3.)

I agree with the OP. It's astounding to hear people's arguments defending Reach. Halo 2 and 3 were perfect for the competitive / skilled gamer. If people did leave Halo because of Halo 3 it was because the game was too hard and they were tired of getting owned all the time, not because it was too much like Halo 2. Use common sense here. Games are more fun when you win. How can they make it to where baddies win? How about a BLOOM?! Armor abilities and a non-competitve ranking system to keep people from getting frustrated. Why does ZB playlists have so few people? Because they don't want to get f*cking owned. People like Reach and it's changes because they are bad.

Are you like claw-gripping? Or doing a burst, aim, burst, aim type thing?

Ya. It sucks when someone blatently betrays you. But that's just the kind of stuff you get when you play with so many different people. People will teabag, people will betray, people will just repeatedly jump off the map, and people will quit early. 343i won't be able to fix stupid, unfortunately.

Betrayers are gonna betray. It really doesn't happen enough to warrant a change to the game. Plus, If me and a buddy are betraying eachother because there is only one person left on the other team and is crouched in a small nook somewhere, I don't want to get BANNED for it.

I wonder if they'd be able to make it easier on Bumper Jumper people. I'll admit that half the reason I don't like Jet Packs is because I can't use them efficiently. But what if they made the Jet Pack button the same as your jump button? That way you could jump and hold it to fly away. The problem this causes is that people playing with the default setting would be just as gimped as bumper jumper people were before. I'd personally rather not see jet packs in Halo 4, but if there are, I'd like to be able to use them to my advantage as well. inb4 - I'm not going to switch my settings because I can't use jet packs in Reach. BUT, I probably would switch if it's the same case with Halo 4. At that point it would seem worth it.

Morgan Freeman

This would really suck for the guy sniping who's teammate runs directly in front of him as he fires. Now his teammate dies, he dies, and then he gets booted. Friendly fire is the result of a bad decision and usually results in a kill for the other team. I think that's penalty enough. Plus, some incidental betrayals are absolutely hilarious.

I think that's a pretty good point. And a point that bungie should have made before throwing the whole idea out the window. As for little things to customize your character, in a different post people touched on the idea of starting with a plasma grenade instead of a backup weapon. Or a pistol instead of an AR. I would prefer starting with a BR and a plasma instead of having an AR as a backup. I don't think I'm getting an advantage as anyone could pick up a plasma the same as I could pick up an AR. I just prefer to throw stickies than spray people with AR's. But the guy who chose the AR should be able to kill me at close quarters as that's what I gave up for that sticky. Can't blame the game for that one, it was your choice. I think that's a pretty good idea for adding a little change without taking away from the gameplay.

Distance. Sprint adds unnecessary steps. He sprints, now I have to. I sprint, now they have to. It doesn't really affect the gameplay much, it's just adding an element that the community seems pretty indifferent about. No one is like "PLEASE KEEP SPRINT, OMG ME AND MY FRIENDS JUST SPRINT AROUND ALL THE TIME AND IT'S SO FUN!" Then again, that would be if Sprint was in Halo 3. 343 may implement Sprint beautifuly making it flow perfectly with their maps and improve the overall gameplay.

I guarantee that wouldn't be the case.

People running around a corner will happen whether there is sprint or not. I'm just saying that with sprint, you wouldn't be able to put as many shots on that person, as they would SPRINT around the corner. Again, I'm being picky here. I just don't see the need for sprint. Make maps smaller.

Why?

Brilliant

Agreed. Why keep playing this garbage game?

I want the guy who is better than me at Halo to kick my ass.

I think that's why CoD is so popular. It doesn't need to change, it needs to expand on it's popular gameplay. If you want a different game, go buy a different game. imo Remember how frustrating it was in H3 to have someone 1 shot and not being able to finish them off before they escape around a corner? Add sprint and you're getting one, maybe two shots on that guy now. Assuming he was out of position, he doesn't get penalized for that. And it's prolonging the game. Add the guy sprinting around with sword. When he comes out of hiding anywhere near you, you're going to die. Oh, and what is it called that everyone does now where they make no attempt to shoot but just sprint up, melee, and then try to get the head shot? Is it, "I don't have what it takes to kill someone simply by shooting them because I get out played so this way I may get lucky and catch someone off guard or somehow manage to get a headshot first?" Now you sprint around a corner and get two shotted by their sniper because your weapon wasn't drawn. In H3 you would probably have time to fire on him, maybe making him miss his second shot. I'm just a fan of having my reticule up and ready to fire without being hindered by speed. I'll bet campers like sprint because they can get that first shot off. All the maps in H3 seemed designed around the fact that you ran so fast, and jumped so high. IMO they were perfect. Now they'll have to figure out how to make sprint feel seamless without jumping into walls and junk. I don't have that big of a problem with sprint. It's the lesser of the AA evils. I got pretty picky there, but it's how I feel sprint takes away from gameplay. A lot of people always ask what is wrong with Sprint. So let me ask, Why is Sprint good for the game? Can anyone answer that in terms of gameplay? In fact, I haven't heard any argument as to why sprint is good other than it changes the game. Being able to fly a kite in Halo would change it, would you like that to? As for the flop, I was referring to it's fanbase/popularity. I should have been more clear.

The gameplay. It doesn't matter if you've added in brutes or forge or not. That isn't changing the gameplay. Sprint along with other AA does. Halo 1, 2, and 3 expanded on it's gameplay. That's why they were hits. Reach changed the gameplay, that's why it flopped.

I didn't read the whole post so I hope I'm not copying what someone else said but, anyway. I think the lack of players in Halo 3 is do to the fact that they've changed games and haven't looked back. Probably CoD. Why not? CoD is consistant, they stick to their bread and butter. It's hugely popular and they can trust CoD not to revamp and destroy the game. Halo 3 went to Reach where a lot of people probably felt a slap in the face. The game that they love had changed so much it was barely considered to be Halo. Regardless of what it says on the box. IMO IMO IMO

Double kill, TRIPLE KILL, reload and wait at a considerable distance, then finish them off. I think active camoers do expect you to look for them and should always get the jump on someone. There is no counter to a player using active camo across the map with snipe. Except for feeding them as quick as possible so they run out of ammo.

I think accuracy depends on the player and the player with the most accuracy should be rewarded. Therefore, no bloom. Decreased damage or fire rate would be understandable. Assuming there are no AA that prolong the game. If there is no way around them not implementing them, I would agree. Same as #2. I don't know what this means. Agreed.

I would probably side with the OP if I thought he was being serious. But he also seems like the guy I'd be teabagging in Halo 3.

As for single shot weapons, yes, I was Including the sniper. (I may be wrong but I think you were adding the BR to the single shot weapons. Because it shoots three bullets at a time, I didn't put that in the same category.) Why take out the BR to put in another one shot weapon? More of the same and it made the gameplay stale pretty quickly. It was nice to be able to swipe across a player's head that was one shot and move on. I really don't think you can compare the bloom in Reach to other Halos. I understand a lot of stuff that is in Reach was in Halo CE. These are things I felt they improved upon in Halo 2 and 3 and had no idea why they would want to revert back to that. They took two steps forward and one step back, imo. Luck is of course involved. If you lead a player with a sticky grenade (like a quarterback and wide receiver), yes, he can stop. Now he can stop AND sprint. PLUS what is that player more likely to do? Run then just randomly stop? Or, something like sprint, run, sprint? So to stick that player now, is going to take even more luck. Someone had a good reply in another post about how adding elements like that, reduces skill needed and adds in randomness and luck. I think that's a great point. How many long distance grenade sticks have you guys had in Reach compared to Halo 3? I'm just not a fan of the assassinations, that's all I have on that subject. I really don't care about medals. But my argument would be: I found it fun to see how many medals I would end up with in Halo 3. They've added in so many in Reach that it seems watered-down. You can get a medal for almost anything, so they don't seem as valuable. People used to quit all kinds of games. It seemed that in Halo 3 people would usually just quit when they were getting stomped. In Reach people just quit all the time, at any stage of the game, for whatever reason. I don't know why but it adds to my dislike of Reach. I love the grenade launcher. That is the one thing I think 343i should take from Reach. It's not my intent to make anyone mad about what I write. This is the first time I've ever discussed Reach with anyone that actually likes it, let alone thinks it's the best of the series. I genuinly enjoy discussing it and trying to understand why people do like it.

Oh there are a lot more than one aspect of the game that I don't like. Blooms, 4 guns that are single shot, jump height, falling damage, health packs, sword blocking, making it easier to dome someone with the sniper, grenade damage, sooo many maps made from forge with the same stupid color, assassination animations, the number or worthless medals they've come up with, the fact that a game rarely goes by without people quitting, the ranking system, and so on. There are a lot of things I like about it to: the grenade launcher..... I never said it was trash, but yes, that's a good word for it. Pink Lemonade has the right idea.