{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/6/2013 7:23:41 AM
24
-
Aside from Armor Lock, bloom, and bland campaign, I thought Reach was the greatest of all. Everything wrong with multiplayer could be fixed in Customs with the zero bloom game type. The Forge, Customs, Firefight, and Campaign MM created more replay value than any Halo game to date, as far as I can see. I played it from launch to the release of H4 and back again. I guess the actual MM itself made most people leave Reach before the updates.
-
What I hated most was that the campaign broke canon, which is completely inexcusable.
-
So... 3fail3 eviscerating the canon in Halol 4 doesn't phase you a bit then? Interesting hypocrisy is interesting.
-
No, because they didn't. Thanks for admitting you don't know what hypocrisy means.
-
But, they did. Effectively, the first six books (used to flesh out what was said in the games) mean nothing now that Halol 4 and Traviss's abortion of the literary art have come along? Because what she and Bear wrote flipped many of those books on their heads to the point that all the canon we had before is pretty much invalid. So, you have a problem with Reach distorting canon in only minor ways (which a small retcon easily fixed). Compare that to Traviss's dumb-ass flipping everything off and destroying all that was known before. And you're ok with it?
-
I've read all of the books, the canon has only been broken by Bungie with Reach and a few silly things Nylund did which were corrected after. Adjusting things here and there are OK for practicality, not making an entire game that contradicts an entire book you assured was canon which Bungie did. It's inexcusable. You are extremely confused.
-
If revived means in bed with a coma then yes. Population has never been lower.
-
For their first game the population is amazing, especially when they had to deal with Bungie teat suckers and those that had a sour taste from Reach.
-
An average daily high from 300k to 40k is good? Good for a first game is establishing a fanbase not destroying it.
-
Overtime of course, especially with the amount of consoles and games that are out. Bungie did that with Reach, which 343 also had to fix for them.
-
Well, 343 certainly did a terrible job "fixing" Halo. Halo 4 is the worst Halo game I have ever played. It's really not even a Halo game. At least Reach didn't have personal loadouts, perks, personal ordnance, etc.
-
No, they didn't. There's nothing wrong with personal loadouts, perks and ordinances when they're done right like Halo did. I think you just liked Reach because it rewarded unskilled behavior and that's the only way you can get kills.
-
300k is the over time number. In fact more time than Halo 4's time out. Guess what, all the popular shooters were out then too. Are you so naive that you can't see the community shrinking in 343's care at an alarming rate?!
-
It's called getting old, it happens to every game. Guess what? It's still the 11th most played game on the Xbox 360. The one naive is yourself, as the community is still there waiting for Halo 5. It shrank alarmingly because of Reach.
-
CoD refuses your logic as it has existed just about as long and has a high population just on the Xbox. Halo 4's population is 40k dude. 40k!! Just a year before its launch Reach was doing almost 10x that and it's Reach's fault? Tell me the logic in that.
-
" Just a year before its launch Reach was doing almost 10x that" BS. And yes, it is Reach's fault for putting a sour taste in people's mouths about Halo so they never gave it a real chance. It has tainted the name Halo because it's an abomination that had huge population problems. Again, for 343's first game it's doing fantastic.
-
Gonna jump into this conversation again... HOW can you hate Reach and not hate Halo 4? Halo 4 is far worse, deviating even more from the Halo core than Reach did. After Reach, everyone was hoping Halo 4 would be the one that made Halo great again. When everyone saw that Halo 4 was even worse, they left. THAT is why barely anyone plays Halo 4 anymore.
-
Because Reach was an abomination that was unbalanced and broke canon, Halo 4 was fantastic. Halo 4 did make Halo great again. Everyone left because of Reach.
-
Those who hated Reach left it with around 300k people during its busiest times. Reach isn't responsible for Halo 4's fail. You're exercising Double Talk. First you claim there isn't a problem and praise Halo 4 then blame Reach for the degradation in population. In a word: [b]Hypocrite[/b]
-
Halo 4 isn't a failure. You only prove you don't know what hypocrite means, I have said Halo 4 is a fantastic success DESPITE Reach's abominable reputation. I'm not sure how you are confused.
-
Confused? How H4 under performs Reach and you tell me it's better lets start there. Facts are on my side. All you have is blind faith. In our illustrious community we call that person a fanboy. [url=http://www.examiner.com/slideshow/halo-4-lagging-behind#slide=1]Chart[/url] [url=http://www.examiner.com/article/gameinformer-halo-4-player-base-down-significantly-from-reach]Article[/url] [url=http://www.google.com/search?q=middle+finger&client=chrome-mobile&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=1HNRUp2-O8m2yAG6sICwBA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAA&biw=1214&bih=713&dpr=1]Personal thoughts[/url]
-
Halo 4 does not under-perform Reach at all. Reach was completely broken and the campaign was a disgrace to Halo. Facts and common sense are on my side, considering 343 had to fix Reach. The only one blind here is yourself. The only fanboy here appears to be you. That graph backs me, considering there were many more games and consoles plus previous games yet it still did just as well as Reach in those circumstances even when having to combat with it's scrutiny and bias before the game even released. For a Halo not made by Bungie alone that is a milestone. You just proved yourself wrong and made this far too easy for me.
-
[quote]it appears those aren't helping to buoy a population that is hovering at 100,000 players at peak hours -- significantly lower than "Reach" was during the same period.[/quote] And that was June. Halo 4 IS under performing and denying it just makes you look foolish. The chart easily shows this yet you comprehend not. I can't continue arguing with a moronic tard.
-
And? That's irrelevant to the points I made. No, it's not. There's nothing to deny. It's been fantastic and still is. Period. Since this is 343's first game you literally have nothing to compare it to, but many first game from companies don't do nearly as well as Halo 4. Your chart only helps my argument, and it's hysterically sad that you can't comprehend this fact. The only "moronic tard" is you.
