{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/28/2012 6:34:13 AM
43
The campaign sucks
The only playable level is Delta Halo but even that one sucks compared to Halo: CE and Halo 3's levels.
Halo 2's levels are mostly dark and full of flood. And you have to play as the enemy 50% of the time which makes it even worse.
-
your [url=http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=71849666]opinion[/url] sucks this shall be my only reply, don't want another flame war
-
Stop posting this everywhere, if you don't like it, GTFO the Halo 2 board.
-
Son, no, just no.
-
dude... your -blam!- retarted
-
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMMotw3wRY4]...[/url]
-
*Attempting to process opinion* *Attempt failed, opinion invalid* Seriously OP you obviously have no appreciation for a good storyline if you hate Halo 2 and your description is exaggerated, plus how is playing as the enemy a bad thing?
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b]Seriously OP you obviously have no appreciation for a good storyline[/quote] Are you being funny now? Halo 2 is known for it's multiplayer. Halo: CE and Halo 3 have a much better storyline. Bungie has said that as well.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShepherdFox Halo: CE and Halo 3 have a much better storyline. Bungie has said that as well.[/quote]So you like how the cutscenes in H3 deprive the player of so much interaction (i.e. the pleasure of observing Installation 04 II on The Covenant, descending down into High Charity on Cortana, exploring the Shadow of Intent on Floodgate, dealing with Gravemind's tentacle on The Covenant, escaping Installation 04 II's control room on Halo)? And you liked Cortana and Gravemind moments? I'll take a sloppy storyline (but not as bad as Reach's. Those long unskippable cinematics, TotS opening tease, not having the opportunity to take down a Scarab, and first person cutscenes...) than a storyline that deprives me of a potentially enjoyable experience.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sliding Ghost [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShepherdFox Halo: CE and Halo 3 have a much better storyline. Bungie has said that as well.[/quote]So you like how the cutscenes in H3 deprive the player of so much interaction (i.e. the pleasure of observing Installation 04 II on The Covenant, descending down into High Charity on Cortana, exploring the Shadow of Intent on Floodgate, dealing with Gravemind's tentacle on The Covenant, escaping Installation 04 II's control room on Halo)? And you liked Cortana and Gravemind moments? I'll take a sloppy storyline (but not as bad as Reach's. Those long unskippable cinematics, TotS opening tease, not having the opportunity to take down a Scarab, and first person cutscenes...) than a storyline that deprives me of a potentially enjoyable experience.[/quote] I agree with you ghost , they had an opportunity with reach to give us a much better campaign ,but missed it . If those parts were made part of the campaign instead of cut scenes ,the game would have felt more of a journey ,instead of what just felt like different levels just stuck together. Oh and showing us scarabs we could not do battle with , 2 at the start of pillar and then the cut scene , that was just wrong.
-
I don't even care if the OP processes any slightly good thoughts on this matter at all, not saying he did, but he needs to be banned. Right. Now.
-
I'd rather play ODST or Reach than that trash known as Halo 3. [Edited on 04.28.2012 9:43 AM PDT]
-
Its just your opinion, thank you for sharing with us. We still enjoy the campaign, especially changing between the Arbiter and the Chief. That made for one hell of a storyline, seeing the conflict unfold from two different viewpoints. Its not halo without the flood, they make the game whole.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] JB 199 Its not halo without the flood, they make the game whole. [/quote]Not necessarily. Flood in H3 are a joke. Inconsistencies like meleeing them repeatedly only to find they can withstand several melees (they usually break after 1 or 2 melees) are annoying. Shooting them directly doesn't do much damage. You have to shoot at their "heads" or limbs to be able to render them harmless. And of course, their numbers are smaller. I liked gunning down Flood, not beating them down (I only whacked them in CE to stop them from meleeing me). [Edited on 04.28.2012 11:23 AM PDT]
-
I have no faith in modern gaming because of this post. Go play Cod kid we dont want you here
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShepherdFox [quote][b]Posted by:[/b]Seriously OP you obviously have no appreciation for a good storyline[/quote] Are you being funny now? Halo 2 is known for it's multiplayer. Halo: CE and Halo 3 have a much better storyline. Bungie has said that as well.[/quote] Oh, you are a funny one! What difference does it make if Halo 2 is known for its multilayer? If anything, the storyline is notoriously undervalued because it's infinitely deeper and has a much more competent structure in terms of symbolism and other literary devices which fly right over the average gamer's head. Halo 3's storyline is riddled with inconsistencies, relatively dull moments and in the end offers absolutely no closure at all. You don't "finish the fight", you only temporarily stop it to make way for the bigger picture.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ajw34307 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShepherdFox [quote][b]Posted by:[/b]Seriously OP you obviously have no appreciation for a good storyline[/quote] Are you being funny now? Halo 2 is known for it's multiplayer. Halo: CE and Halo 3 have a much better storyline. Bungie has said that as well.[/quote] Oh, you are a funny one! What difference does it make if Halo 2 is known for its multilayer? If anything, the storyline is notoriously undervalued because it's infinitely deeper and has a much more competent structure in terms of symbolism and other literary devices which fly right over the average gamer's head. Halo 3's storyline is riddled with inconsistencies, relatively dull moments and in the end offers absolutely no closure at all. You don't "finish the fight", you only temporarily stop it to make way for the bigger picture.[/quote] ^this guy right here^ Halo 2 has the best plot of the entire series. The storytelling is amazing, the different POVS all telling two sides to the plot are good, and the Covenant civil war during thr last four missions make the story and storytellng amazing. IMO Halo CEs story is pish, and Halo 3s story could have been better
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ajw34307 in the end offers absolutely no closure at all.[/quote]I don't think you can count that as a negative when comparing it to Halo 2. Halo 3 [i]definitely[/i] has more closure than Halo 2 did... [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=k2diJm7U55U#t=105s]This is by no means "closure"[/url]. Halo 3 [i]did[/i] finish the fight against the Covenant (In its full power) but now we're going to be getting into another fight apparently. [Edited on 04.28.2012 7:38 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShepherdFox And you have to play as the enemy 50% of the time which makes it even worse. [/quote] ENEMY!? heretic traitor. :p
-
You know, I laugh to myself every time I see a thread like this pop up. 99% percent of the time they are created by green members who have been spoiled rotten by modern, garbage story telling and game play that caters to the casual. It's not completely their fault, they just don't have an appreciation for games of high quality and effort. I guess not every game and game [i]Almost falling off an edge[/i] and [i]Explosions that make you screen blur for epic [b]EPIC?!?![/b] effect[/i].
-
I disagree. Halo 2 was my favorite game (campain wise). Please stop trolling.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Dr Syx [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ajw34307 in the end offers absolutely no closure at all.[/quote]I don't think you can count that as a negative when comparing it to Halo 2. Halo 3 [i]definitely[/i] has more closure than Halo 2 did... [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=k2diJm7U55U#t=105s]This is by no means "closure"[/url]. Halo 3 [i]did[/i] finish the fight against the Covenant (In its full power) but now we're going to be getting into another fight apparently.[/quote] Halo 2 wasn't supposed to provide closure, it's the bridge to Halo 3 - its primary job is to raise the questions/plot points that need answering.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ajw34307 Halo 2 wasn't supposed to provide closure, it's the bridge to Halo 3 - its primary job is to raise the questions/plot points that need answering.[/quote]It was originally supposed to provide closure and you still can't count it as being a positive for Halo 2 over Halo 3. People were extremely upset over the ending to Halo 2 because of this. Hell, I didn't even feel like Master Chief progressed much in the story at all and I'm not alone in that. I had an absolutely hollow feeling at the end of Halo 2. It didn't leave me excited; it left me pissed off. Halo 2 wasn't designed to do this. It wasn't a grand scheme in Bungie's design for the trilogy. It was a screw up. They didn't have enough time to finish it so they gave us all they had completed and began work on Halo 3. You can't use closure as a negative on Halo 3 when Halo 2 didn't have it. Definitely when it was [i]meant[/i] to have it. [Edited on 04.29.2012 8:14 AM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Dr Syx [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ajw34307 Halo 2 wasn't supposed to provide closure, it's the bridge to Halo 3 - its primary job is to raise the questions/plot points that need answering.[/quote]It was originally supposed to provide closure and you still can't count it as being a positive for Halo 2 over Halo 3. People were extremely upset over the ending to Halo 2 because of this. Hell, I didn't even feel like Master Chief progressed much in the story at all and I'm not alone in that. I had an absolutely hollow feeling at the end of Halo 2. It didn't leave me excited; it left me pissed off. Halo 2 wasn't designed to do this. It wasn't a grand scheme in Bungie's design for the trilogy. It was a screw up. They didn't have enough time to finish it so they gave us all they had completed and began work on Halo 3. You can't use closure as a negative on Halo 3 when Halo 2 didn't have it. Definitely when it was [i]meant[/i] to have it.[/quote] To me, It felt like the ending to Halo Two was basically saying "To be continued"....Except fading to black without actually ever saying "To be continued".
-
Halo 3's campaign sucked.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] kosen13 To me, It felt like the ending to Halo Two was basically saying "To be continued"....Except fading to black without actually ever saying "To be continued".[/quote]It was. They had to do that because they didn't have the time to complete it. Absolutely everyone that knows the story of Halo 2's development knows for a fact that Halo 2/3's campaigns were originally meant to be one but due to time restraints they had to leave Halo 2 with a cliffhanger ending. You could even tell it was rushed. Halo 3's ending at least felt paced. The normal ending left the story at a point where it could easily pick back up again or just die off. It did bring some closure to the Covenant war and that specific conflict. The legendary ending however left you knowing there was definitely something on the horizon for Master Chief to face but it wasn't the same challenge as before. It was the end of one story then a teaser to another.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Dr Syx [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ajw34307 in the end offers absolutely no closure at all.[/quote]I don't think you can count that as a negative when comparing it to Halo 2. Halo 3 [i]definitely[/i] has more closure than Halo 2 did... [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=k2diJm7U55U#t=105s]This is by no means "closure"[/url]. Halo 3 [i]did[/i] finish the fight against the Covenant (In its full power) but now we're going to be getting into another fight apparently.[/quote] ^This. Halo 2 fanboys are blind
