 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Halo: Reach. Not terrible? by mark 11/21/2011, 7:03am PST | ||||
 |
 |
|||
| So this came with my XBox. I decided to finish it before digging too deep into Skyrim (I'm still in the starter town).
Isn't this series supposed to be awful? I legitimately enjoyed the first 70% of the single-player campaign. It had all the things that one expects in a tactical FPS: varied locations, fights that seemed impossible until I came up with a different strategy, almost zero back-tracking. All seemed pretty good to me. The scripting seemed at times totally broken, and the usual Halo zany-ness applies (shoot someone 31 times: they die, shoot someone 30 times and wait 30 seconds: they have taken zero damage), but I thought this was pretty fun. The last few levels lose focus and seem to include a bunch of random shit I guess they though they needed to include before the game ended, like driving a tank around. Does this mean I'm actually a frat boy? |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
Halo: Reach. Not terrible? by 11/21/2011, 7:03am PST  Awful: No. Overrated: Yes. Just like Goldeneye. NT by 11/21/2011, 9:01am PST Timeline of games for 12yo AOL kiddies: Doom > Quake > Halo > Call of Duty by 11/21/2011, 9:37am PST Try playing it with three of your friends. NT by 11/21/2011, 10:48am PST And then it gets bad? NT by 11/21/2011, 11:59am PST It becomes amazing. NT by 11/21/2011, 12:05pm PST Any 4-player game played on a dorm futon becomes amazing. See: Mario Kart. NT by 11/21/2011, 4:50pm PST FSBT wrote about this as well by 11/21/2011, 6:26pm PST Mario Kart is fucking fun though by 11/22/2011, 10:06pm PST No. by 11/22/2011, 10:48pm PST SKILL! by 11/23/2011, 11:52am PST I was amazed they torpedoed the story by 11/21/2011, 3:12pm PST reach is indeed a big step up from all the other halo games NT by 11/21/2011, 6:16pm PST |
