Gaming Halo: Reach Beta Impressions

We think Reach is Bungie's attempt to merge Halo with Modern Warfare 2. Read on to find out why

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/xbox-360/2010/04/30/halo-reach-beta-impressions/1

 

Patrick. He's not a Spartan.

Anyways, I am looking forward to jetpacking behind my mate and stabbing him in the back.

 

Well written piece, I look forward to this and hope Bungie can deliver in terms of the singleplayer too. More of the same isn't a bad thing as I still play ODST frequently with my housemates.

 

Another halo game

Haven't played it since halo 3

Bungie are outta ideas and should either make a new franchise or make halo 4

 

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2010/04/29/bungie-signs-10-year-deal-with-activision/1

 

Anyone here ever played grifball?

 

I didn't know they actually made it into a game. Awesome.

 

I think ODST was the perfect representation of a fps on console... I await to be proven wrong

 

What about the new engine....does that offer any noticable improvements.
I don't know if they are running out of ideas but there is only so much that you can do, it's only because it is part of a series that this critisism is being used against it, you wouldn't say the same of a new game that wasn't part of a series that used standard fare multiplayer modes.
My favourite mp mode was seen in cod3, it was called "war"...you had to sequentially capture control points...it was linear in that you didn't have to defend previous points as they could not be recaptured out of sequence....it really gave a focused less chaotic game play experience....great shame I haven't seen it's like since.

 

TFC?

 

what are the new available classes of spartan like?
do they add enough variation for individuality of players?

 

Does that mean Team Fortress classic?....haven't played that....if that has that "war" style of mp mode I'll have to give that a go.

 

I've got my doubts about the head hunter mode where you pick up the skulls from your kill, how are you going to do that if youve sniped someone from across the other side of the map, someone else will just get there first and pick them up or you'll get killed as you hike across to get them.

 

The new engine felt exactly like the old engine, though maybe with a few extra lighting effects. I honestly couldn't tell the difference at the time and only found out after I played it.

Incidentally, there is a that can be done with FPS games and I can - and do - level these same criticisms at other games when it is relevant. Just look at Dead to Rights, The Passing, M+B: Warband to name a few. Or C&C4 to see the opposite.

 

might be that only you can pick them up. Or you have a pick-up speed advantage
(e.g. like the mw2 care package system)

 

Interesting to see that the criticisms of stale gameplay were not levelled against MW2 in its review. At least bungie have bothered to add a couple of new mechanics

 

They are exactly as you'd expect. Pretty much everyone I saw went with the jetpack or improved armour. They don't really add individuality (because everyone has them and everyone ends up using them in the same way) but they do provide a tactical option should you want it - though a very short-lived and occasional one.

There's no real depth to it as there is in, say, Just Cause 2's grapplehook or parachute - it's just "Oh, I have a jetpack so I can get up to that bridge quick and get the rocket launcher." or "Oh, I have the active camo, so I'll stay here and snipe people."

That's not to say it's not good - the game is still fun - but it is to say that it isn't groundbreaking, imaginative, or particularly worthy of the level of praise that Bungie seems to expect and receive.

At the end of the day, while Halo: Reach is still going to be fun for a lot of people, I honestly question whether it's fun enough to really justify spending £30 - £45 on, especially for those who already own the other games and therefore have access to a nearly identical experience in many ways.

 

Only because people like Joe Martin keep saying it is.

The first Halo game could better have been subtitled "Combat not evolved at all - in fact, combat precisely the same as every other first person shooter, in every single respect". Lacking in pithiness, I grant you, but considerably more accurate.

Bloody "phenomenon", I ask you...

 

Just out of interest how mayn games did you get? And were the people you were palying against playing for the first time as well? If it was juts a few games and the others were new, then that may explain it (who won't choose jetpacks the first tim ethey play ), if it was a while that is a bit dissappointing. Had hoped that they would add variety

 

Jesus, I wish people would give it a rest with that talk.

Modern Warfare 2 wasn't just the same. It had new features and content, new modes, weapons, structure and rewards. On top of all that it took the combat, pace and design of MW1 and honed them incredibly. Do people still have a beef with the servers? Do people cheat or break the system with exploits? Yes, but the former doesn't impact on my above point and the latter happens with all games that get a big following. The fault there is inherent to the audience, not the game.

Halo meanwhile has already honed the multiplayer component and it did it a fair few games ago. Since then it's stayed still and that fact is now becoming noticeable - as well as relevant because of the expectations and popularity built around the series.

Also, if you really want to get into the subjectivity of it all, I didn't write the multiplayer component of the Modern Warfare 2 review.