Poll: Do you think Halo Reach seems just a lttle bit more" realistic" than other sci fi shooters?

[me and my dog]

To me when I first saw the new assassination ability, I thought "wow that actually looks realistic". It looked more realistic than flying across a room and commando knifing someone in mw2 at least. Also Halo Reach seems a bit more tactical in both multiplayer and single player since your not exactly just a recharging super soldier that jumps around anymore. You have to keep track of more things now, like looking for med kits or waiting for the armor abilities to recharge. For once, taking cover in a halo game instead of jumping around might not be so silly after all(unless of course they have rockets,well at least you have armor lock).

The weapon reticule expands when you fire now, so you can't just spray a sniper rifle and always expect a no scope. Spartans can sprint now, which makes sense,since you would expect a super soldier to run. Vehicles seem to blow up with more feeling. In halo 3, they would pretty much just go "poof" and fall apart,but in Reach, when a wraith blows up,it launches a big fire cloud in the sky. The elites are much more intimidating(plus they're taller). In halo 3,they looked like hunched back dinosaurs,however now,they almost look terrifying. I actually got a little scared when I was playing the beta and an elite player was charging me in invasion. For once, elites act almost like they probably would in real life if they were real.

I am not saying that Halo Reach is more realistic than games like cod,battlefield,gta 4, red dead redemption, or any other game where realism is a big part of the experience. I'm just saying that these new realistic accessories of the game are not exactly common for most sci fi shooter(let alone halo). I realize that there are sci fi games that have senses of realism(kill zone, gears of war,maybe even Crysis),and I realize Halo Reach does have "unrealistic parts" too(ex:jet pack ,armor lock and not dieing from one shot), but I never said it was completely realistic .When it comes to halo, this is something new and who knows? Maybe will like these new additions to the series. This is just my opinion so please respect it. So do you think that Halo Reach seems just a little bit more realistic than other sci fi shooters(by other sci fi shooters,an example could be the last halo games,the conduit,fear,Bioshock,Borderlands,or resistance)?

Answer and leave a comment on why you picked what you picked if you can.

 

[sharkinz]

I think categorizing it as a Sci-fi shooter eliminates realism pretty much outright.

 

[Geekosaurus]

I think 'believable' is a better word than 'realistic'.

 

[JaymesFogarty]

I think that MGS4 is the most realistic shooter I've played. A game where you have to actively regulate your psyche and stress, in relation to how hungry the character is, how hot or warm the temperature is, the level of danger, the amount of soldiers killed, etc. The reticule enlargens when you shoot as well.
That said, Halo Reach does look at least a little interesting, but I lost hope when I heard that it was a prequel. Halo didn't need a prequel at all.

 

[Benmonkey7]

Another Halo thread...*prepares flame shield*
Halo: Reach will be what the other Halo's could have been (not that I didn't enjoy them), it will be the most realistic and the most fun. So, anyway, yeah, I think it will be slightly more realistic than other shooters out there. Hopefully it will be fun too (still seems nothing compared to Portal 2 or Fallout: New Vegas though).

 

[me and my dog]

I think 'believable' is a better word than 'realistic'.

I didn't call it completely realistic. I called it a little bit realistic in the title.

 

[Geekosaurus]

I get what you mean by 'realistic', but a lot of people will go for the 'how can a sci-fi game be real?' approach.

 

[me and my dog]

I think that MGS4 is the most realistic shooter I've played. A game where you have to actively regulate your psyche and stress, in relation to how hungry the character is, how hot or warm the temperature is, the level of danger, the amount of soldiers killed, etc. The reticule enlargens when you shoot as well.
That said, Halo Reach does look at least a little interesting, but I lost hope when I heard that it was a prequel. Halo didn't need a prequel at all.

MGS4 is kinda more a stealth game than a shooter. It had shooter elements yes,but so did fallout 3 and that's not exactly classified as a shooter. Opinion.

 

[tlozoot]

I think that, due to the inevitable nature of the plot, they're having it seem a little more grim and desperate, which might be where that comes from.

 

[JaymesFogarty]

I think that MGS4 is the most realistic shooter I've played. A game where you have to actively regulate your psyche and stress, in relation to how hungry the character is, how hot or warm the temperature is, the level of danger, the amount of soldiers killed, etc. The reticule enlargens when you shoot as well.
That said, Halo Reach does look at least a little interesting, but I lost hope when I heard that it was a prequel. Halo didn't need a prequel at all.

MGS4 is kinda more a stealth game than a shooter. It had shooter elements yes,but so did fallout 3 and that's not exactly classified as a shooter. Opinion.

It can be, but MGS4 is the exception of the stealth series where you can pretty much play it however you want. Guns blazing, or floor crawling, the player decides the genre of the game. Sorry, that was more of a rant on how realistic 4 was, then what I thought about Reach.
I don't think I've played many realistic sci-fi shooters before. There's always a suspension in belief somewhere. That said, Pac-man is more realistic than some of the mechanics in Call of Duty. I think Reach would be far more balanced. (That said, I can't stand to play online!)

 

[me and my dog]

I think that MGS4 is the most realistic shooter I've played. A game where you have to actively regulate your psyche and stress, in relation to how hungry the character is, how hot or warm the temperature is, the level of danger, the amount of soldiers killed, etc. The reticule enlargens when you shoot as well.
That said, Halo Reach does look at least a little interesting, but I lost hope when I heard that it was a prequel. Halo didn't need a prequel at all.

MGS4 is kinda more a stealth game than a shooter. It had shooter elements yes,but so did fallout 3 and that's not exactly classified as a shooter. Opinion.

It can be, but MGS4 is the exception of the stealth series where you can pretty much play it however you want. Guns blazing, or floor crawling, the player decides the genre of the game. Sorry, that was more of a rant on how realistic 4 was, then what I thought about Reach.
I don't think I've played many realistic sci-fi shooters before. There's always a suspension in belief somewhere. That said, Pac-man is more realistic than some of the mechanics in Call of Duty. I think Reach would be far more balanced. (That said, I can't stand to play online!)

True. It's just every time I played mgs4, and I got into a shooter situation that could have easily worked better with a stealth situation,it just feels awkward because you'd think a veteran like snake would get through that situation without violence no problem.

 

[me and my dog]

I think categorizing it as a Sci-fi shooter eliminates realism pretty much outright.

I get what you mean by 'realistic', but a lot of people will go for the 'how can a sci-fi game be real?' approach.

This was what I was thinking when I said realism. What if the events of Halo Reach really happened and how would things realistically work in that situation?

 

[ConnorCool]

I think categorizing it as a Sci-fi shooter eliminates realism pretty much outright.

I wouldn't say so. I know it's not exactly the same but Mass Effect is very sci-fi but goes a long way to making it all seem realistic.

OT: I'm not bothered, I will only play it round friends houses anyway.

 

[lukemdizzle]

I think it is believable. more than realistic which I would expect, halo has always had d deep believable world. definitely one of the games stronger aspects. but in the end, as long as the game play works Im happy

 

[Davey Woo]

I certainly think that Halo is heading towards the "gritty realism" theme of other FPS's like Call of Duty and Medal of Honour.
I liked Halo because it was a bright, colourful game in comparison.

 

[me and my dog]

Ionno, I find it odd that the ability to roll and it using animations for assassinations is being considered "revolutionary". I'm sure there's a whole lot more to the game that's being added, but aside from new weaponry, not much seems to be getting changed from the previous games, not that this is anything new to the Halo franchise. Maybe I'm wrong, and haven't been watching it closely enough to see that there's more than battlefront ripoff, some abilities and weapons added in, but I don't see it as being as formula-changing as the original halo was.

I'm not calling it revolutionary. I'm just calling it a little minor new addition for halo.

 

[me and my dog]

I certainly think that Halo is heading towards the "gritty realism" theme of other FPS's like Call of Duty and Medal of Honour.
I liked Halo because it was a bright, colourful game in comparison.

I don't think it's like "gears of war" grim though, but it's not a happy go lucky gun fest either. I think Bungie has set up a nice thing in between.

 

[JaymesFogarty]

I think that MGS4 is the most realistic shooter I've played. A game where you have to actively regulate your psyche and stress, in relation to how hungry the character is, how hot or warm the temperature is, the level of danger, the amount of soldiers killed, etc. The reticule enlargens when you shoot as well.
That said, Halo Reach does look at least a little interesting, but I lost hope when I heard that it was a prequel. Halo didn't need a prequel at all.

MGS4 is kinda more a stealth game than a shooter. It had shooter elements yes,but so did fallout 3 and that's not exactly classified as a shooter. Opinion.

It can be, but MGS4 is the exception of the stealth series where you can pretty much play it however you want. Guns blazing, or floor crawling, the player decides the genre of the game. Sorry, that was more of a rant on how realistic 4 was, then what I thought about Reach.
I don't think I've played many realistic sci-fi shooters before. There's always a suspension in belief somewhere. That said, Pac-man is more realistic than some of the mechanics in Call of Duty. I think Reach would be far more balanced. (That said, I can't stand to play online!)

True. It's just every time I played mgs4, and I got into a shooter situation that could have easily worked better with a stealth situation,it just feels awkward because you'd think a veteran like snake would get through that situation without violence no problem.

I agree. But wasn't that feeling the same with the other games?

 

[Vrex360]

Well it certainly looks darker than other Halo games in the past and the overall theme looks much more grim. Plus the weapons presented look a lot more detailed and badass then before so they look a lot more 'real' and there is a hell of a lot more detail on the Spartan armor now to make it look a little bit more believable. That and these are mostly Spartan III models so they are closer to regular human beings.
Also apparently the Covenant are still speaking their own language so the humans in question can't understand what they are saying so I suppose that's got more of a realism element to it, at least as realistic as a sci fi shooter can believably be.