Halo: Reach Discussion

Except when you finally play it, you'll have the feel of all the game mechanics working at once. Experience. Otherwise you're just thinking how you want to think and otherwise possibly overlooking or forgetting some aspects. Also, Bungie likes to keep some things behind the curtain until release...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcap

You still don't understand my concerns, so shut up. I'm thinking about logical outcomes of games. I said I wasn't entirely scared of classes as much as their decisions to let you change mid-game.

I don't need to experience something to understand how it will play out.

I'm not afraid of change - I'm just afraid of change done stupid...and Bungie has a looooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggggggggg gggggggggggggggg history of that.

---

The way I see it, any change from Halo 3 is a good change. I'm sure others will share this opinion.

Halo 3 would have been perfect if they removed melee lunge and dual wielding. Reach looks gay.

you look gay :saddowns:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Good_Apollo

Reach looks gay.

---

The reasons you provided are just SO true, I think you may be on to something :ohdear:


:nsmug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Good_Apollo

Reach looks gay.

---

Reach looks okay to me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Good_Apollo

Halo 3 would have been perfect if they removed melee lunge and dual wielding. Reach looks gay.

---

I'm assuming the roman numeral in your title is your IQ, right? It would only be fair to somehow publicly warn us of your idiocy before we actually get around to reading your posts.

Please refrain from posting any more ideas, opinions, or even anything at all in the future, you'll save us a lot of satirical remarks.

You know, for a bunch of gaming enthusiasts and, for the most part, people dealing with on going projects and what-not, you're all really obstinate. I honestly feel like I'm on a forum with Henry Ford and his cronies, standing around a ball room with knee high socks and floor touching dresses on their wives talking about the good 'ol days of slave labor and plantations (those of you educated enough to understand that remark, +rep and <3).

im with atty on this one. FFs, the "selectable loadout" doesn't seem anywhere near a class based system. You're taking the scarce information at hand and making bold assertions in strict conservative format

Besides, if it does suck royally, its not like its going to be far out of the ballpark.

The way I see it, the loadouts are a great way to stop people from complaining about "AR starts" and "BR starts". This way, everybody gets what they want without changing any of the gameplay since it just saves us the few seconds it takes to go find a BR (DMR) or an AR (I know that has been mentioned a few times before in this thread) Also, it adds a new level of strategy to the game, because a single strategy will never work twice due to the fact that your team won't always start with the same weapons, and neither will the other team. So, the way I see it, they don't unbalance the game in the least bit, since none of the starting weapons are power weapons, and are all good and bad in their own areas.

In short : Loadouts sound like a good idea to make the game more interesting, and they get my seal of approval, since it doesn't seem to be unbalanced.

Also, they're not a mandatory part of the playlist. They can easily have "classic" SWAT where all you get to have are DMRs and Magnums. They're just adding an additional layer of customization. Something to keep the game from becoming so stale over time. Bungie Aerospace needs revenue to build that thar Giant Slingshot after all :downs: