Halo: Reach, Is there a point?

[bwarrior]

Of course there has been lots and lots of hype about the new halo game. But from the reviews comments always seem to stick out to me "there isn't much new content'. In fact I think there is only a single new aspect of the game. Even the idea of having the main protagonist as an average soldier was already done in the previous game (that I didn't buy btw) and apart from some new maps and story, what would I get out of this that I couldn't get out of Halo 3.
Is it actually a better game?

 

[Amnestic]

Is it actually a better game?

My trusted sources give it a resounding "Yes". My 360 is currently being repaired (E74, took a month to just get the label to post it off for repairs. Good job Microsoft!) so I won't be able to get it for another few weeks. I did ask the repair guy if he might be able to slip me a free copy of Reach, but I doubt I'll be getting that

 

[Jedoro]

I wasn't impressed by the campaign. It was good, but the voice acting killed it for me. Didn't get to try the multiplayer.

 

[RedBeta22]

Yes there is a point, Halo is Fun! What more do you want?

 

[Neverhoodian]

I think you've been slightly misinformed. The protagonist is not "an average soldier." Noble 6 is a Spartan similar to the Master Chief with comparable abilities. In fact, the new armor abilities make the character more capable than the Chief from a gameplay perspective.

I found the campaign to be one of the best in the series. It's definitely a more somber, darker tone than previous titles. Battles as a whole are larger, and missions tend to be more varied, often employing two or three different set pieces per level.

Since you haven't played ODST, you haven't tried Firefight yet. It's an awesome co-op mode where you try to survive against increasingly difficult waves of enemies. You can play it solo or with up to three friends. Unlike ODST, Firefight mode in Reach is fully customizable, allowing you complete control over weapon selection, enemy types, basic player attributes, and more. It's definitely worth a try.

Reach doesn't radically change the Halo formula, but it's taken everything that's worked from previous titles and integrated them seamlessly with a few new features to boot. If you're still on the fence, I'd recommend finding someone who has it and try it out.

 

[Amnestic]

I think you've been slightly misinformed. The protagonist is not "an average soldier." Noble 6 is a Spartan similar to the Master Chief with comparable abilities. In fact, the new armor abilities make the character more capable than the Chief from a gameplay perspective.

From what I've been told, Noble 6 is slightly less capable than the Master Chief ('lore wise', anyway) because he's a Spartan III while Chief is a Spartan II or something.

But yes, either way it's not like you're playing a basic marine.

 

[Super Toast]

I enjoyed the game.
I found it fun and I liked the story.

How long is the campaign? I'm getting a 360 soon and I'm looking for some good single player exclusives.

OT: The point is that it's fun. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Super Toast]

I enjoyed the game.
I found it fun and I liked the story.

How long is the campaign? I'm getting a 360 soon and I'm looking for some good single player exclusives.

It took me about 5-6 hours to beat in it in one sitting on normal difficulty.
Make of that what you will.

That seems reasonable. I usually play through most games two or more times.

 

[Neverhoodian]

I think you've been slightly misinformed. The protagonist is not "an average soldier." Noble 6 is a Spartan similar to the Master Chief with comparable abilities. In fact, the new armor abilities make the character more capable than the Chief from a gameplay perspective.

From what I've been told, Noble 6 is slightly less capable than the Master Chief ('lore wise', anyway) because he's a Spartan III while Chief is a Spartan II or something.

But yes, either way it's not like you're playing a basic marine.

Well yes, according to the Expanded Universe, Spartan-IIIs are not quite as good as Spartan-IIs. In the actual game however, your abilities are more or less the same. The game doesn't really follow "lore" much anyway. Indeed, it directly contradicts the earlier accounts of the Battle of Reach in the novels (I won't lie, I was disappointed by that). Of course, the original source material trumps third party interpretations for the official canon, so it's debatable now whether Spartan-IIs are actually better than Spartan-IIIs.

 

[Amnestic]

I think you've been slightly misinformed. The protagonist is not "an average soldier." Noble 6 is a Spartan similar to the Master Chief with comparable abilities. In fact, the new armor abilities make the character more capable than the Chief from a gameplay perspective.

From what I've been told, Noble 6 is slightly less capable than the Master Chief ('lore wise', anyway) because he's a Spartan III while Chief is a Spartan II or something.

But yes, either way it's not like you're playing a basic marine.

Well yes, according to the Expanded Universe, Spartan-IIIs are not quite as good as Spartan-IIs. In the actual game however, your abilities are more or less the same. The game doesn't really follow "lore" much anyway. Indeed, it directly contradicts the earlier accounts of the Battle of Reach in the novels (I won't lie, I was disappointed by that). Of course, the original source material trumps third party interpretations for the official canon, so it's debatable now whether Spartan-IIs are actually better than Spartan-IIIs.

I hear (again, not got it yet) that you get reticle bloom in Reach which you didn't get in the previous games, which implies that if nothing else, Master Chief is much better at holding his hand steady while firing his guns

 

[Buizel91]

I think you've been slightly misinformed. The protagonist is not "an average soldier." Noble 6 is a Spartan similar to the Master Chief with comparable abilities. In fact, the new armor abilities make the character more capable than the Chief from a gameplay perspective.

From what I've been told, Noble 6 is slightly less capable than the Master Chief ('lore wise', anyway) because he's a Spartan III while Chief is a Spartan II or something.

But yes, either way it's not like you're playing a basic marine.

Well yes, according to the Expanded Universe, Spartan-IIIs are not quite as good as Spartan-IIs. In the actual game however, your abilities are more or less the same. The game doesn't really follow "lore" much anyway. Indeed, it directly contradicts the earlier accounts of the Battle of Reach in the novels (I won't lie, I was disappointed by that). Of course, the original source material trumps third party interpretations for the official canon, so it's debatable now whether Spartan-IIs are actually better than Spartan-IIIs.

I have already in my mind made up a story about why the armour abilities are only in Reach...

Armour abilities were being research on reach, and were going through tests (By the Spartan IIIs), then the Covenant invaded and destroyed most of the research, and because it was a hassle to get people off world, non of the research was taken, same with the pillar of autumn, they didn't have time to get the research on board they just wanted to make sure they could get as many people off world as possible, along with military equipment such as weapons and vehicles., and because it was still under testing, the armour abilities were never shipped off world to earth, hence the chief couldn't use them =D

Not the best story ever but still, it fits.

 

[Neverhoodian]

I think you've been slightly misinformed. The protagonist is not "an average soldier." Noble 6 is a Spartan similar to the Master Chief with comparable abilities. In fact, the new armor abilities make the character more capable than the Chief from a gameplay perspective.

From what I've been told, Noble 6 is slightly less capable than the Master Chief ('lore wise', anyway) because he's a Spartan III while Chief is a Spartan II or something.

But yes, either way it's not like you're playing a basic marine.

Well yes, according to the Expanded Universe, Spartan-IIIs are not quite as good as Spartan-IIs. In the actual game however, your abilities are more or less the same. The game doesn't really follow "lore" much anyway. Indeed, it directly contradicts the earlier accounts of the Battle of Reach in the novels (I won't lie, I was disappointed by that). Of course, the original source material trumps third party interpretations for the official canon, so it's debatable now whether Spartan-IIs are actually better than Spartan-IIIs.

I hear (again, not got it yet) that you get reticle bloom in Reach which you didn't get in the previous games, which implies that if nothing else, Master Chief is much better at holding his hand steady while firing his guns

Good point. Perhaps the Chief's MJOLNIR armor has internal stabilizers that help steady his aim. Of course, the player characters in ODST didn't have reticle bloom either (except with the SMG). Acute observation, though.

 

[Baby Tea]

As someone who has enjoyed every Halo game, but hasn't been 'wowed' by any of them, I love this game so far. The single-player is the best (so far) in the series. To me, at least. The graphics have received a delicious polish, the gameplay is rock solid, and the 'matchmaking with friends' is freaking awesome. I love having my friends list right there in the main menu.

Over-all, I wasn't hyped up for this at all, and I was very pleasantly surprised.

 

[JaymesFogarty]

I think you've been slightly misinformed. The protagonist is not "an average soldier." Noble 6 is a Spartan similar to the Master Chief with comparable abilities. In fact, the new armor abilities make the character more capable than the Chief from a gameplay perspective.

From what I've been told, Noble 6 is slightly less capable than the Master Chief ('lore wise', anyway) because he's a Spartan III while Chief is a Spartan II or something.

But yes, either way it's not like you're playing a basic marine.

Well yes, according to the Expanded Universe, Spartan-IIIs are not quite as good as Spartan-IIs. In the actual game however, your abilities are more or less the same. The game doesn't really follow "lore" much anyway. Indeed, it directly contradicts the earlier accounts of the Battle of Reach in the novels (I won't lie, I was disappointed by that). Of course, the original source material trumps third party interpretations for the official canon, so it's debatable now whether Spartan-IIs are actually better than Spartan-IIIs.

I hear (again, not got it yet) that you get reticle bloom in Reach which you didn't get in the previous games, which implies that if nothing else, Master Chief is much better at holding his hand steady while firing his guns

Good point. Perhaps the Chief's MJOLNIR armor has internal stabilizers that help steady his aim. Of course, the player characters in ODST didn't have reticle bloom either (except with the SMG). Acute observation, though.

Sorry, I'm not a Halo fan, but why is a suit of armour being named after a weapon? That doesn't seem to make much sense.

 

[illas]

There are lots of small upgrades to previous versions, and no real steps backwards; a refinement, not a revolution.

Multiplayer seems a little more diverse, but at the cost of balance. Time will tell on that front.

It is worth buying? Yes. Will it rock your world? Nope.

 

[Worgen]

I enjoyed the game.
I found it fun and I liked the story.

How long is the campaign? I'm getting a 360 soon and I'm looking for some good single player exclusives.

It took me about 5-6 hours to beat in it in one sitting on normal difficulty.
Make of that what you will.

wow really? thats it, Im glad I didnt buy it
a good fps should have a 12 hour campaign, like the original halo did

 

[godofallu]

For new content you get a totally new Campaign, a firefight mode that has actually managed to draw my attention (ODST firefight was shit in comparison), and then Halo multiplayer.

If none of those things interest you then skip Reach.

 

[Flying-Emu]

Spoiler: Why Reach was made

There's also the fact that it is awesome.