Jump to content

Joe Tea

Member
  • Content Count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I hope so, I realize you play on the test servers too. I'm not trying to be super negative, but I just miss the old Halo trilogy and I haven't seen anything that has trended in that direction since maybe NBNS Reach.
  2. I've got nothing against Neighbor and I don't think it's necessarily his fault or anything but come on, it will almost be a full 1.5 years since this game launched and aside from switching up the weapons on maps and removing double storms I think, they have virtually done nothing to address the autos problem. We still spawn with ARs (which are overpowered and have too much range/finishing ability), there are smgs and/or storms on every map, and there is still radar to enhance crouching / radar watching with these autos. Yes I think it is easy to no scope in this game, but I don't think it was an issue that needed to be addressed. I'm not trying to be overly pessimistic or talk shit to/on Neighbor here either, but does he even play Halo 5 anymore? I remember matching him first season of ranked, but how often does Neighbor or Ghost really play? I'm sure Neighbor has good intentions, and I'm sure other "factors" may be holding his decision making back, regarding autos and such, but it was a genuine question...does Neighbor really even play Halo 5, does he actually enjoy this game or think it is good, and how much is he playing it. Edit: Neighbor is a champ 96 in Arena this season so I can say I am partially wrong here. He has 2400 ish games played on his account....in comparison to myself, someone who literally quit from last Feb. to this Feb., a year essentially, I have 3035 Arena games...he only has 56 warzone games though compared to ~1100. I'm sure he has alts too or whatever.
  3. LOL Out of all the things they could fix with this game they choose to nerf no-scoping with the sniper rifle? So this benefits someone with an AR or another auto trying to kill a sniper at mid-close range more than anything else basically. Am I taking crazy pills?
  4. It was, Epilogue at least...in Doubles and I believe regular Slayer (plus socials)
  5. Just to make counterpoints: - Gamebattles/MLG doubles in Halo 3 was up to 50 kills and it didn't feel like it took forever. I've played Halo 1 on MCC, which might be the problem, against varying levels of competition...even former pro/semi pro level players (NKM Nakamura, Utah Noobs I believe...) and it often feels like it takes forever for the game to end. Maybe more so on maps like Hang em High and Damnation than Prisoner/Derelict. - I'm well aware of crouching under melees, I usually run with a guy who is very good at Halo 2, his name is Andyyx, he was in the 40s highly ranked in that champion ffa thing H2 had going on, up there with pros and he actually made it to the main stage during Halo 3 for the bic flex FFA in Anaheim I believe...Str8 Sick was up there of course. Also I'd point out that I'm better than him at Halo 3 and he is better than me at Halo 2 but on MCC the gap is not that wide really, but he's definitely better at H2 even without it's "true form". - I don't think the Reach DMR is better than the H3 BR at all, I still won't alter my stance here. I think most people would disagree with your statement that Reach's maps were only marginally worse than H3's maps. Reach's maps were terrible, and the maps you listed were almost all forged and mostly remakes as well...I don't know how that can be rewarded. - I mean the game is literally shallow, yes, if we focus on the competitive mode only. Even Halo 1 is, despite it's intricacies of random spawns, nadeing weapons, etc. Each game only had a 4-5 map rotation for competitive play on average, maybe 5-6 at most, and it's literally repetitions of the same modes on the same maps, so in that sense it is shallow. But then CSGO is shallow as well. But they are not actually shallow from my viewpoint because they offer unrivaled replayability, enjoyment, and fulfill the desire for competition. We are also selectively omitting the rest of the games substance...Invasion in Reach was fun, BtB was good in Reach, Halo 3 introduced a lot of new game modes and social and casual ranked was fun, campaigns in each game, custom games... Forge! which Halo 3 introduced, you're welcome Halo Reach for saving your entire game because the dev maps were awful.
  6. That's blatantly not true, most pros played on 3-4 sens, I'd say most on 4 sens...but the vast majority played 3 or 4. I think Roy played 3 but he may have played 2? Naded moved from 5 sens to 2 sens to who knows because he is a psychopath. Very few pros played on 2 sens.
  7. Because game knowledge is so integral to Halo 1 and let's be honest here not many people played Halo 1 competitively, there was no xbox live, time lapse etc. Who were the top CE players who remained on top for years? Tsquared, Walshy, Ogre 2...? Other than those players who from CE was on top? Even with those players, at the end of the game were any of them considered top 10 at Halo 3 individually? Maybe Ogre 2 was, but the name value probably put him top 10 honestly, maybe Tsquared was early on when Str8 Rippin was the hot team. I'm not trying to shit on any players, or Halo 1, but I just don't see any facts here. Name the best players from CE who transitioned to Halo 3 and were among the best players (top 10 overall, top 10 sniper, something). I can spot you Ogre 2 as arguably or probably top 10, but aside from him? And I know that this argument can be used for Halo 5 as well, someone can say oh Ogre 2 isn't a top 10 player individually in Halo 5, Halo X, but I think that A. much more time as passed (he is 30) and he clearly has much less interest in H2A/none for H4/ H5, B. Halo 3's core mechanics are not so drastically different like Halo 4-5 where there is a clear massive drop in skill or difference in gameplay. Sure H1 and H2 had a higher skill gap and you can kill others much faster, but it isn't like Halo 3 has a super AR/ autos, with radar, huge hitboxes etc. Halo 3 had the highest skill sniper and BRing was skillful as well....Walshy's BR wasn't on the level of Pistola/Snipedown/Roy/many others, it's mechanical skill.
  8. I don't take any offense man, it's cool. I know I am being passionate in debating/arguing this as well so I don't mean to offend you or anyone else either. To the shallow point, I was not sure whether you were referring to the entire game of Reach v. Halo 3 or solely the MLG variants of each, but I was focusing on the competitive modes of each I think. When focusing only on the "MLG" variants of each I don't see why Halo 3 is significantly more shallow than H1, H2 or possibly Reach to be quite honest. Sure it didn't expand on much after Halo 2, and it did remove button glitches, but other than that I don't know why it would be considerably more shallow. Compared to Reach I do not see how Halo 3 could be more shallow in any regard unless you consider using sprint/bloom/evade-other abilities in the earlier iterations of the game. Halo 2: Midship, Lockout, Sanctuary, Beaver Creek, Warlock. 5 maps Halo 3: Narrows, Guardian, Pit, Construct, Heretic, Amplified, Onslaught. 7 maps, but two were forged and one is a remake...but good. Reach: Countdown, Zealot, Sanctuary, Pit, Nexus, Oasis?. 6 maps...I think, I don't quite remember if the last two forge maps were in rotation, Admittedly played Reach far less than H2/H3 and stop playing intermittently. I was around for NBNS but I don't remember v7 rotation. Either way, Reach has 4 maps that are forged, two being remakes...one being an H3 map. Most matches were played on Sanctuary and Pit from what I remember. Just from a map rotation stand point I don't see how Halo 3 is shallow, and how Halo Reach is not very shallow. Halo 3's maps played very well generally, The Pit is one of the best maps in Halo easily, Guardian is iconic, Narrows/Construct/Guardian are all original quality maps. Heretic was a remake done right, much better than Truth in H5 or the loose remake Zealot. Amp and Onslaught have flaws, registration-wise, aesthetically, but they played relatively well...better than Nexus and Oasis I am pretty sure. Reach relied on remaking two maps with forge as their best maps. Reach is battling Halo 4 for the worst launch/dev maps out of every Halo title, what is better Haven or Countdown/Zealot? Just from a map rotation standpoint Reach has to be considered extremely shallow, and the game play of v7 isn't more innovative than what Halo 3 did in anyway. I just have a problem with the word shallow here. You can really call anything shallow. CSGO is shallow then, but it's highly re-playable just like Halo 3 was/is.
  9. Okay, let me first address that I am not trying to argue the skill gap of Halo 1 and I have already conceded multiple times that Halo 1 has the highest skill gap, though I do think it is overstated in comparison to H2/H3 but that is not the point here. I was simply responding to a statement in Teapot's post where he said every H1 player was not worse at H3, who played competitively. That is simply not true imo and I think it is objectively not true. Sure, you can say Halo 1 puts more emphasis on individual skill, and of course that would be the case in 2v2 formats....obviously, but according to that statement Ogre 1 and 2, Walshy, Legend etc. should all be considered top 10 players individually in Halo 3. That is not the case...clearly Ogre 1 and 2, and especially Walshy were worse compared to their peers individually on Halo 3 skill wise (not to say they were bad). Would anyone consider Walshy a top 5 or top 10 individually skilled player in Halo 3? No, unless they are being irrational or fanboys. Meanwhile he was a top tier player easily considered top 5-10 in Halo 1 and 2 correct? So therefore he is worse at Halo 3. And he had success at Halo 3, he had great strategy, leadership, and played objective roles well, but he did not have a top 10 sniper or a top 10 BR, he was worse in terms of mechanical skill and there were many others who were pro at h1 and h2 who competed in Halo 3 that were worse comparatively to their past skill levels, that is just a fact. You say Halo 3 limits what an individual can do...well obviously when you can 3 shot someone with a magnum across the map and control power-ups and weapons in a cascading fashion, or insta-kill someone with a button glitch, have a host or non-host sword with a huge lunge, etc. How does it limit the individual in terms of mechanical skill with the sniper? I believe sniping in Halo 3 takes the most skill out of any title, why weren't Walshy/Ogres/Carbon members/Ant/Legend even close to being considered the best at sniping? I don't think any of their BRs were considered top class either, sure they were obviously good but not among the best. Also Halo 2 emphasized team shooting as well, long range with hitscan...I'm aware Halo 3 furthered it but it's not like it wasn't present. It's only focused on because the ttk with a magnum in H1 is so small. I don't want to write blocks of text every post, but to briefly address your other points...1v1 and 2v2 are just completely different than 4v4. It doesn't necessarily equate to more individual skill, especially in recent Halo titles, and the pace of play and entertainment value would suffer. I don't think Halo 5 2v2 would be more skillful or entertaining at all to apply it to our current shitty game.
  10. Sorry I was just about to edit my post again and say that I enjoyed the rest of your post and agreed with a lot more points or...disagreed less passionately with other points. Let me read your new post before I respond, but I saw H3A and I will say that I strongly do no think that will be released.
  11. What? How have time and perspective not been kind to Halo 3? It still feels pretty good even on broken-ass MCC. It plays so much better than Halo 1 and Halo 2 do on MCC (which is not the fault of those games) so I don't see how time has not been kind? The exact same thing could be said of H1 or H2 or any older title, I really don't understand that statement. "Shallow game" Dude come on, you are saying Halo Reach is better and it disempowered the individual more than Halo 3 did and the vast majority of matches were played on two robo-cock silver forge remakes on Sanctuary and Pit, or you could play mediocre Zealot/Countdown which were scaled for sprint as someone already stated. Reach was literally the most shallow Halo title ever. As I have already said in response to something Teapot said, which is completely false, tons of Pros and top tier pros from Halo 1 and Halo 2 were worse at Halo 3 (Walshy, Strongside, Ogre 1/2, Tsquared, Shockwave, Bestman, Defy, Gandhi, Legend, Ant, etc.). Now don't get me wrong this doesn't necessarily mean anything, as players who were great at prior, more skillful titles (h1-h3-Reach even) have dropped off on the individual rankings in Halo 5. But, Halo 5 is clearly a completely different game, similar to Halo 4 and even more amplified, where as Halo 3 did not incorporate sprint/thrust/abilities/etc.etc.etc. and clearly had the most skillful sniping in the entire series, can we at least agree to that point? So it had straight up BRing, where players like Walshy for example had weak individual skill at BRing and Sniping in comparison to the prior titles. It's not like everyone is spawning with an AR, sprint, radar, thrust, slide, embarrassing ass game mechanics, in Halo 3. Clearly the skill gap was there and respectable.
  12. This has to be the most incorrect statement I have ever seen. How about almost every single one of them that I can think of? Ogre 1 and 2 were worse at Halo 3 comparatively to their individual rankings in Halo 1, Walshy, Legend wasn't even good at Halo 3 really, or at least he was not successful on a team other than the one event you mention. I don't think there is any Halo 1 pro that is better at Halo 3 other than Tsquared arguably, and he was never a top tier player in Halo 3...I'm not sure how he was regarded in Halo 1 among pros but I am pretty sure he was up there right? I mean that statement is so wrong it's crazy. Edit: Also sorry if I am coming off like I am talking shit, but I just have to vehemently disagree with you on that point. Also on the Tsquared point, he I want to amend that to...he was not someone who was a top 10 individual player in Halo 3 when all was said and done, I don't think at least.
  13. It's clear that you have a preferential bias for Reach and I have a bias towards Halo 3. I don't consider being able to scope in and cross map enemies essential to the skill gap. Also the Halo 5 pistol, despite being hitscan and the game having huge hitboxes, is not necessarily effective from the distances we are holding the H3 BR to. We definitely agree on other ideas, and I agree with a lot of things here, but I cannot see how Reach NBNS is in the same league as Halo 3 MLG settings, so that is why I say we can agree to disagree. Also you cite the rockets in Reach as a positive? They were the most overpowered rockets in the entire series, I thought they were a negative personally.
  14. No that is not the case at all, we already laid out our arguments. If someone was arguing that Halo 4 had a higher skill gap than Halo 1 what is there to argue about? Yes it was originally about starting weapons or the BR in Halo 6 hypothetically but it evolved into talking about individual games and their skill gaps. I've already conceded that Halo 1 and 2 have higher skill gaps than Halo 3, but my argument is that Halo 3's skill gap is much closer to those two than people here seem to judge or project. It's very clear to me that H1>H2>H3>Reach NBNS> ---here is where it gets murky but H5 or H2A > H4. The only argument I see is the randomness of the spread and the fact that registration is poor at long ranges (it's not hitscan). A BR fight in Halo 3 is more skilled than Reach, and it's clearly more skilled than Halo 2 when you cannot double/quad shot. Yes....that is unique to the H2 BR, but it's also a glitch that is unintentional and isn't really intrinsic to the gun itself, on top of this I am conceding H2's skill gap regardless. This happened before and I am not going to change anyone's mind and the arguments I see are not going to change my mind either. Which Halo game requires the most skill for sniping? Halo 3. Other than Halo 1, which game requires the most skill to win BR fights without button glitches? I would argue Halo 3. I'm not sure in what universe Halo Reach has a higher skill gap than Halo 3, it's baffling to me.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.