Did he lead halo 1? I forget.

Who?

>>92880409
he did, and 2 for sure, not so sure about 3.
reach was shit.
not OP.

You can thank this guy and Alex Seropian for Halo: Combat Evolved

>>92880454
OP here. He was involved with only 1 and 2 as far as I know.

What is with faggots stepping down anyway.Grow some god damn balls and see your shit through to the end.

>>92880508

If you say that 2 was good, thank god he left when he did

>>92880454

>Reach
>Shit

Nah, he also worked on Halo 2. Which was just as bad as Halo 3, ODST and Reach.

>>92880519
wasn't it because Microsoft had the rights to Halo
and they wanted to turn it into a CoD like franchise pumping them out by the year
so bungie went fuck that made Reach and decided to work on a new IP

they seem like cool guys

But ODST and Reach were Halo 1 tier games.

>>92880350
>The Halo games went downhill because this man stepped down as Project Lead.

But he was the project lead for Halo 2, which was shit.

I don't know wtf happened, but the change between Halo:CE and 2 is fucking huge. The atmosphere, the story telling, the music, the overall design... It's as if it was made by a whole other team.

>>92880454
>3 better than Reach
laughinghalonerds.jpg

>>92880720

Halo 2 was the best game in the franchise.

>>92880638
>implying Halo was pumped out year by year
Lol'd heartily.

>>92880350
OP, you forgot to mention Alex Seropian. The combination of Jason and Alex is what made the first Halo so dam good. Alex left in 2004 after Bungie was purchased by M$ and the shit just hit the fan from that point on.

>>92880866
>Halo 2 was the best game in the franchise.

>implying that Reach and ODST weren't best in the franchise
2's singleplayer was worst of the series. Multiplayer was pretty good though.

3's singleplayer was a massive improvement (Cortana level aside). Multiplayer was about as functional as an aborted baby after the first few months.

>>92880950
OP here. You're absolutely right about this, thanks for the comment.

I dunno, maybe I'm just a fanboy but I liked all the games thus far int he franchise. I even played the RTS and enjoyed it despite all its flaws.

However, since M$ took Halo from Bungie (or however you want to word it) I'm experiencing sheer TERROR that they are going to rape the franchise with the next installment.

>halo

>He suggested Halo to be called "Red Shift".[3] He also wanted the Elites to have tails, a suggestion many others also agreed with. However, when the animations of the Elites manning vehicles were in production, the tail was removed due to obvious reasons, as stated in the Art of Halo book.

>Jason Jones
>Good
Pick one

>>92880866

Get Out

The Dragon Age games went downhill because this man stepped down as Lead Designer. Discuss.

Pic related: It's Brent Knowles

>>92880685
>>92880685
>But ODST and Reach were Halo 1 tier games.

Lol, no. I've never seen a series start of with such a grand hit and just get continually worse every game. Reach was just a glorious fuck you, glad I played my brothers copy.

>>92881126
>Why aren't the pistols the only useful weapon
>Why can't I BXR my way to victory anymore

summarized your comment for you.

2 was just a massive glitchfest

>Halo 1
Awesome new game; fucking sweet single player
>Halo 2
Not sure what the hype is abou— OH FUCK THIS IS SO MUCH FUN
>Halo 3
HYPE HYPE HYPE; best most balanaced multiplayer out of all of them; dat splazer; dat chopper; dat Valhalla; I personally enjoyed the single player and thought they ended it well
>Reach
DMR and pistol perfect in the beta, full release they reward spamming; maps suck; no more chopper; grenades bleed through shields; get bored within a month with it due to disappointment

Doubt 343 will do anything good, so I'll just pretend the Halo series is dead; same with SOCOM RIP SOCOM II

ffxii ended up wondering what gannon was up to because matsuno got sick and had to step down as director

>>92881214
Stop defending it. Look, I love(d) halo as much as anyone. But after finishing ODST I knew bungie was done for good, the reach beta cemented my opinion. And next thing you know I played reach, they didn't follow the story and the ending was just a rip on Resistance 2.

Still waiting on a New Marathon.... Or a Remake using The Reach Engine

>halo
>not casual garbage ever since it ce

>>92881423
>New Marathon

>>92881423

1 is being remade this year, dunno if its using the reach engine

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/278410/news/343-working-on-halo-1-remake-report/

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/04/halo-combat-evolved-hd/

>>92880638
But they showed the could keep the quality up, look at ODST, Halo Wars and Reach, all just about a year apart and all of them were good, ODST was a little short though but they really didn't have a big team to work with.
Having the cast of Firefly as ODSTs main cast pretty much sold the game for me.

>>92881423
They are making a completely new ip.

I'm not expecting anything good from Bungie anyway seeing as they are Activisions bitch now, well ok not really but give it a few years.

>>92881550
What else would they use?
Reach's engine is perfect and looks extremely good for a console game..
Except for the Pelican, it looked better in 3

>>92881561
>Having the cast of Firefly as ODSTs main cast pretty much sold the game for me
I thought I was the only one.

>>92881561
I'm the guy you were talking to, but I believe it's not a matter of keeping quality up as much as making good progress between games. Think of the advancement of the franchise between 2 and 3. Multiplayerwise the gap is pretty big. More weapons/vehicles/mechanics. The gap between 3 and Reach is not that large. They just added armor abilities and reworked some of the weapons. (BR burst fire rifle becomes single fire DMR to solve the "spread issue" the BR had, etc).

I think Bungie wanted more progress between games rather than just pumping out the same game with a few sprinkles on top of it.

>>92881666
I don't get it, they leave one greedy company to go to an even greedier one that is going to fuck them over in the end and now they're locked into a ten year contract.
>>92881697
We are everywhere

>>92881685


I just hope that they stick to the original game in terms gameplay and multiplayer.

and use Forge 2.0, the same form Reach, some of the custom maps created there are actually fun to play (that hemorrage map)

Halo already did its damage. It started the entire FPS faggotry trend. Now Halo passed the torch to CoD to kill gaming further.

>>92881732
But they did do a big jump, to the point where they're limited by the Xbox itself, plus it was a console jump from 2 to 3, one they could do so much more with.

>>92881831
Cry more bro.

So is the Halo CE remake confirmed? I hope They make a PC Version

>>92881915
I hope so too, i wouldn't mind some cross platform coop either.

>>92881870
Exactly bro. Reread what I wrote about the whole concept of releasing the game when there is a big change, not releasing it ASAP to make money regularly (like CoD is doing) and what you posted. It's practically the same thing.

>>92881685
>Reach's engine is perfect and looks extremely good for a console game

Except 3/ODST engine had better lighting, but that's just my opinion

>>92881988
Oh okay, but i still like how they did it.
Released two good side games while working on a high quality big jump.
It works best for all and i think that's how i think CoD should do it too.

>>92882105
Agreed

>>92882105
I agree

>>92882113
I think that big jump we're hoping for is never going to come now since Bungie has moved on and left us all behind.

>feelsbadman.jpeg

>>92880866
I wouldn't call Halo 2 the best game. CE had the best multiplayer, by far, and Halo is all about the multiplayer. But 2 certainly had the most interesting campaign.

Would enjoy seeing Halo 2's campaign remade in Reach's engine.

>>92882187
You do realize that basically half of Bungie stayed behind to form 343, right?

>>92882187
I'm not going to judge 343 yet, they haven't did a shit job yet and i liked some of the stuff they came out with like Legends and Helping with Halo Wars.

>>92882298
Some of Halo Legends was good, some was decent but not bad.

>>92882231
The machine may be the same, but the pilots of it are not which is what matters.

How can people call the Halo franchise "Casual","Babbies first FPS" or even call it a bad FPS?

How is it different than Quake and Unreal? its a Fair FPS with No Killstreaks,No Perks Just you and your Gun and Power Weapons are Spread around the map

I'm kinda worried about 343 Industries

Just look at Legends and Cryptum

>>92882394
I'll admit some were shitty but overall i liked it, the one non-canon one was funny though.

>>92882414
Because people called it that before CoD came out. Back then, aim magnetism, partially recharging health, and medium/slow paced gameplay were enough to qualify something as casual. Sadly, things got oh so much worse.

>>92882449
Give them a chance, Greg bear fucked that shit up himself, he used to be good so i can't really blame him.
Honestly i don't understand why they don't just make Eric Nylund the exclusive writer.

>>92882545
Them* not him

>>92882414
You clearly have absolutely no idea how Quake or Unreal play.

www.quakelive.com

Go give it a go

>>92882588

I do. its just that its kind of the same game-play except Faster, And Unreal has Vehicle Combat as well.

bump

>Halo: Reach
>Grenade launcher
I'm from 1983 and what is this?
Seriously it's fucking 2552 and they're using this one shot shit?

For everyone talking about Bungie getting fucked by Activision, you guys really didn't read what their contract actually pertains to. It's better for Bungie.

Bungie with Microsoft was owned by Microsoft. Microsoft had ultimate control creatively and regarding content.

The Activision contract is a publishing deal only. Bungie is an independent entity. Activision helps fund as necessary, in a very, very hands-off way. And they publish and put out the game.

Bungie has full creative control and full ownership of any new IP they make.

>>92883171
They can still take their time on games right?
Activision can't give them a deadline?

>>92882833
It really isn't. REALLY isn't.

Seriously, go play a game on duel and you'll see what I mean.

>>92883124
>Seriously it's fucking 2552 and they're using this one shot shit?

There was going to be a fast shooting grenade launcher but then they realized they couldn't use it in multiplayer because of balance.

>>92883124
One with a remote controlled EMP detonation. In that size of a package.

Honestly, other than a few oddities in the details, realistically in 500 years we will likely be using mostly the same sorts of weapons. Short some immense shift in practical power sources, the diminishing return out of most weapon systems will still be trumped by a chemical reaction propelling explosives and solid metal slugs at ones enemies.

Though, the applications of material sciences on those weapon systems could be quite influential, if only in the details and nuance of the weapons.

>>92883171

That's how it started out with Infinity Ward too.....

>>92883395
Yeah, because we're still using the same weapons now we used in the 1500s right?

>>92883357
Single player at least?
Make it anti vehicle and less effective against infantry?
>>92883395
Right now the same time i can fire one shot from a 2552 single shot and reload, i can put six 40mm rounds downfield and probably have EMP detonations too.
Which one do you think the military would take?

>>92883243
As far as I understand it, yes. Bungie has no intention on anything but their usual 3-year cycle. Reach Shipped last September, which means people in Bungie have been working on their new IP for, likely, over a year. IIRC, that's where Jason Jones disappeared to. And most of the team that worked on ODST would have been shifted to the new IP after ship, as they were mostly not needed on Reach - they were pulled from the canned Peter Jackson project when the movie deal went under.

And that included a lot of people who are old members of Bungie.

>>92883525
And not even a underslung grenade launcher for the AR

>>92883635
>>92883525
And just so you know, while i'm willing to forget about it for the sake of gameplay, i still feel i should put it out there, they did a really bad job at making the UNSC seem like a high tech future military, hell they even modeled a great deal of stuff after the US military's future force warrior program.

>>92883441
Activision started out with a portion of ownership with Infinity ward. Bungie, INC is not for sale.

>>92883485
500 years ago blades and bludgeoning weapons were common. As were bows and spears. Those weapons haven't stopped being used. The versions we use are just more refined.

However, the shift to firearms from arrows and blades is markedly different (as the individual lethality by training and cost of a firearm is at pretty much the prime ratio) than a shift to another form of slinging hot lead.

Railguns, coilguns, and directed energy weapons have some very substantial drawbacks relating to their use and application, making them niche weapons at most, and not replacing the standard chemical firearm anytime soon. Yes, even possibly 500 years in the future.

>>92883525
It is a question of application. A single, easily reloaded munitions launcher is more versatile and doesn't replace a primary weapon of the basic trooper on the ground compared to the heavier, multi-shot systems.

I'm not saying they shouldn't have a multi-shot grenade launcher, too, but that doesn't mean that the single-shot variety needs to magically disappear.

>>92883972
Weapon systems can easily be miniaturized with time, and i don't really think an extra four pounds means much to a spartan, not to mention Multi-shots are just as, if not more flexible.

>>92883972
Blades and bludgeoning weapons aren't used by the military anymore really, except for combat knifes which will always be effective, not only for fighting.

>>92883635
Lack of use in game doesn't mean a lack of existence in universe. Hell, there are 3 M6 variants (D, C/S, G) shown in games. But there are 12 that Bungie has detailed.

There isn't a reason to have that many of the same weapon in a game. We don't get an MA5K in games, but they show up in the books. Along with variable ammunition (AP rounds compared to Shredder rounds) and a variety of other toys that would just make the game feel bloated.

Original Choppers had Spike Rifles as their offensive armament, but the ones in Halo 3 had weapons that more resembled the Brute Shot.

Not that it wouldn't be awesome to be able to play with those toys, I will say they wouldn't fit in the Halo games Bungie made. Maybe a Battlefield: 2552/Battle Front: Halo or whatever sort of game it would make sense.

>>92884273
Forget MP and lets focus on the single player side.
This is what i'm focusing on, every single thing i've covered would have good use in the Halo single player without upsetting balance.

>>92884273
>Battlefield: 2552/Battlefront: Halo

>>92884364
And i mean come on, there's not even a LMG, i would have so many uses for that.
I love Halo, and it's one of my favorite series and the only reason i still have an Xbox but it's hard to look past this.

>>92884272
Tomahawks are standard kit with some armored vehicles. Kukri and machete-sized bladed weapons are trained in many modern military doctrines. Some even train baton and stick fighting. When it comes down to it, while they might not be standard issue, they still have a practical purpose.

>>92884214
It's a reloading issue. If you have your regular kit ready, and then you need some ordnance, you pull out the plunker, load the appropriate round, fire, and move on. Fire saturation is going to be less important for a direct action special forces unit than versatility. While you can do the same for a 6 round cylinder, it's not necessary as practical or space friendly. If it's only 4 lbs heavier, that's 8 more grenades, at least, you can carry at roughly the same weight.

They both have their purpose, and their existence isn't mutually exclusive.

>>92883816
Personally I thought space ships, nuclear grenades, railguns, man portable anti-tank lasers, orbital drop insertions, energy shielding, super-luminal travel, neural implants, AIs, cyborgs, and space defense platforms did a pretty good job of establishing that shit was in the FUTURE. Even the tiny thing like ammo counters and armour designs are pretty directly inspired from multiple classic sci-fi movies. When my weapon directly links to the screen of my helmet and gives me a digital zoom from the weapon's PoV as well as displays the amount of ammunition remaining, ballistics information, and a compass, on the weapon itself, not to mention said weapon is being used in zero gravity combat and punching through feet of steel at a time, I get a very different feeling than spraying down the iron sights of my m16/AK-47.

>>92884561
You've got a very good point but I'm talking about troop weaponry, obviously the stuff you mentioned is very high tech but that's mostly their navy and it seems like that's what they focused on, stuff like ammo counters and the information is very soon going to be available, it should be even more advanced than that, i believe it's known how to fire a gun in space too already.
There are things like the scorpion or the neural implants for soldiers that amaze me but not much more, it feels more like a future US military than a high tech world force that's 500 years more advanced.

>>92884364
Bungie invested their time on a uniform experience. They've been working at including as much from the campaign in multiplayer as possible, and have gotten more and more in with iterative balance changes.

And the inclusion of something in the campaign will always have people asking why it wasn't in multiplayer. So, a dodged bullet and feature parity across modes. An underbarrel launcher would be out of place due to the dedicated nature of weapons in both campaign and multiplayer balance, and adding in a second, potentially more devastating grenade launcher would compound the redundancy in weapons Bungie was looking to get away from in Reach.

Note the Focus Rifle and Needle Rifle in particular. They were created to function distinctly from their UNSC counterparts. Halo isn't designed around having your choice of sniper rifles or assault rifles. It's just not how Bungie made the games, and that's why I'd argue they didn't need to be brought in, even as campaign only.

>>92884533
What battlefield niche would an LMG fill that doesn't severely overlap with another weapon in the game or bring around other balancing issues? The turret already fills the roll, for one. The SMG didn't return in Reach because the AR and the SMG filled the same roll, even moreso with the removal of dual wielding.

>>92884917
>What battlefield niche would an LMG fill that doesn't severely overlap with another weapon in the game or bring around other balancing issues?
Once again single player, the AR in Halo runs out of ammo in a magazine extremely fast, which doesn't do great for cover fire, with an LMG you can lay down cover or suppressive when a HMG isn't available or you don't have a warthog.

>>92885041
Samefag here, the more i think about it, because of shields that doesn't really matter for cover fire, it would work well for a Halo squad shooter though.

The only Halo related things i have ever enjoyed for their original intention were Halo Wars and the books.
The books really are a good read, and i would suggest them even to people who dislike Halo.
Halo 3 was pretty fun as a party game though.
You could create your own minigames and puzzles, and explore them in first person.
Other games don't really have that feature, and the wide range of retarded and fun gametypes made it interesting.

>>92884883
500 years of expansion and advancement with many years of in-fighting and conflict. Noting events like the Rain Forest Wars and the current colonial insurrectionist movements.

It's less practical to change up the basic weapons of your ground troops if they aren't going to get something more effective out of it. Firearms are relatively easy to maintain, and easy to feed munitions. The more advanced systems are usually mounted on vehicles, where it is easier to power, have a crew to maintain, and otherwise operate more complicated or service intensive systems. Taking note of the Spartan Laser as a man-portable oddity also brings up its scarcity, limited ammunition supply and practical applications which, at the in-game engagement ranges, is a relatively minor point. As you don't have to account for atmospheric interference so much within half a click. But honestly, it's shown to be impractical as a general use weapon.

>>92885292
Maybe, they had such a large army(in the billions?)that it would be hard to upgrade them.
I don't even really need lasers or any kind of energy weapons for them to really be seen as the force i want them too, i just want them to be more advanced than what we would be in fifty years.

>>92885041
That's on the assumption that the LMG would be given to you anyway. The turret is placed by a level designer, just as an LMG would be. However, you are still building in a redundant weapon system that fills the 'effective up close, automatic' niche - that would arguably be better suited in all situations to the AR, nullifying its usefulness as a weapon, and bringing into question its inclusion in the weapon set, as balanced for any play.

Weapons that are useless are not balanced, ever.

>>92885215
Which is why I brought up the notion of a Battlefield/Battlefront-style Halo game. Something designed to be more based in the military side of everything. Where having different MA5 and M6 series weapons would make sense. Because the general lethality is kept consistent through most weapons, with a broad set of nuanced redundancy. Where you might like the handling on the MA5C better than the MA5K, so that's the one you pick. Or you prefer the suppressor that is available for the K compared to the underbarrel launcher the C might have access to.

And honestly? I'm all for a Halo game like that. So long as the general feel of Halo is there, some modern military stuff mixed in could be a nice change of pace, and something different to come from 343i's internal studio.

>>92885600
Yeah more of my ideas on how their military should be would fit better in a Halo/battlefield game.

>>92885523
Well, most of the advancements they have, such as the wide spread use of titanium in their armor, the neural implants, squad-level integration gear, and the specifics of their weapons are often a little farther than 50 years out. The basic sidearm fires a 12.7mm HEDP round. So, really, you shooting people with half-inch-wide armor piercing grenades. Out of a pistol.

It's mostly grounded in modern or near modern technology, but accounting for material sciences and some of the broader tech brought up in the books, well, I suppose you may still be left wanting more. But I think they hit around the sweet spot.

>>92885292
Moving on to DEW
Look at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LKk1bTL6fk&feature=relmfu
We're already prototyping several laser systems and they're only getting more and more advanced, by 2552 i'd expect them to be very effective, they would be much more effective on a frigate where you need accuracy that the ballistic weaponry we use now for anti boarding and anti missile.
Oh and i remember reading something about the Navy using an ineffective version of Titanium when they could use a different type that has a much higher melting point and would be much more effective for the same price.

>>92886070
hurr
where it would be much more accurate than the 50mm auto-cannons it used against fighters and boarding craft.

>>92886070
Here it is
The Titanium armored battle-plate used on UNSC warships has a melting point of 1668 degrees Centigrade, however plasma, as said in the book Halo: The Ghost of Onyx is said to be around 3,000 degrees C. If the UNSC decided to use a tungsten alloy battle plating, then their ship's chances of survival could be increased substantially, since tungsten melts at 3,448 degrees C.

>>92886070
We have plane sized chemical lasers designed to take down ballistic missiles. Those exist already. But they aren't a 'pew pew' laser. It's a stream of energy that has to be maintained on a point to do damage.

As I was saying earlier, a lot of it isn't a lack of technology, it's a lack of worth in the trade. A lot of technology that the military uses is older than what you find civilian-side, because the requirements of the military revolve around tried-and-tested technology.

Training a basic grunt to paint a target to do damage over time is a lot harder than having him put a piece of metal in someone once. It's also more cost effective, and less prone to failures on the user end. Hell, most shots fired aren't even intended to hit. That's where suppressive fire comes in. And if you have to be shot for 5 seconds to have any notable damaging effect, then there goes suppression right out the window.

You run into similar issues with microwave weaponry and other radiation based systems. And creating plasma weaponry has a whole different set of issues.

>>92886422
No i wasn't saying lasers as an infantry weapon but for ships, i don't really think lasers will be effective in the field for a long time.

>>92886514
Ahh. I guess I misunderstood. Regarding starships, the viability of point-defense lasers without massive energy bursts to make them instantly destructive is minimal, especially if you are taking volley fire, or dealing with fightercraft/munitions with countermeasures, such as heat dispersal plating.

It brings up the energy to worth ratio again. Where if something has ablative ceramic plating all over it to counteract directed energy weaponry, then they can in theory increase the time a weapon can survive your point defense system beyond what your ranges would allow you to counter.

But if you take an autocannon that can put out thousands of rounds per minute of flak ammunition, you can simply output enough explosives and shrapnel to more effectively counteract volley fire or small fighter craft.

Now, assuming they do have the means to make instantly effective lasers, the power, safety, and maintenance concerns may all be limiting factors, far beyond what is gained by having some turrets that go pew pew.

>>92887006
Well it's known that the UNSC ONI Prowlers use Lasers for point defense, and you don't even really need to destroy a dropship to cripple it's purpose in space and they're not very maneuverable like fighters so the way i'd do it is.
PDLs against dropships and Autocannons against fighters.
Seem fair?

I want Battlefield: Halo now
I always wanted a more military focused Halo game than story-emotion focused.
It would be glorious

>>92887586
I want Sangheili Commando.

Play as a Spec-Ops Elite fighting against the UNSC or some new alien nation from the Covenant's past, leading a squad of Elites Republic Commando-style.

>>92887694
mite b cool, or better yet, following the Headhunters.

>>92887266
I forgot about ONI ships. So, yeah. Though, I'd also say that a counter to low volume missile volleys PDL's could be useful. As most weapons wouldn't be designed to get by them. I just keep thinking how UNSC weapons were designed primarily to fight other humans, and with how they send out volleys of Archer missiles and such like it is going out of style, that PDL's wouldn't be particularly... efficient there. Boarding craft, drop ships, long range single-munition missiles...

So, yes. Seems fair.

>>92887586
And finally getting to gut some Innie scum.

>>92887784
Actually they used Archers as single fire against other human ships, that's why they were getting there's asses kicked in Harvest before Cole realized, hey lets just blast this fucked with everything we got.
Yeah Covenant shields are that effective.

>>92887784
Gorram Innies, you know who's coming for you.
Who would want to leave the UNSC anyways?

Well, I know he was project lead in Halo 2. I remember because his was the first name in the FUCKING CREDITS THAT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN THERE WHAT THE FUCK BUNGIE. FINISHING THE FIGHT TRY FINISHING THE FUCKING GAME.

Yes I still mad. Hey you just beat the secondary character's antagonist, now lets switch back to the main character, the guy you WANT to play as, so he can beat the main antagonist LOL JK SEE YOU IN 2 YEARS FAGGOT

>>92887888
Hmm, I don't recall that. However, it wouldn't surprise me. Though, I'd imagine that would be single ships, and not frigates and heavier. As the books always treated the MAC as the primary ship-ship weapons. Though, it's been awhile since I've read any of the books. I misplaced my copies.

>>92887743
>>92887694
Why be picky? I miss Halo 2's divergent campaign. If any story could play with that again, Spec Ops Elites and Headhunter teams would be it.

Still want a Battlefield one, personally. But Sangheili Commando we a counter-story of Headhunters... more things that would be awesome to see done. Maybe set on a world during the Schism, Allowing for a whole mess of crazy to go on. And human colonists and innies, too.

Maybe that's too much.

>>92888187
Here

Halo: Contact Harvest quotes that "A single Archer missile can disable all but the most heavily-armored UNSC ships." The UNSC fires hundreds of missiles at each Covenant ship giving testimony to the incredible defensive capabilities of their shields.

>>92887743
>following the Headhunters.
Fuck that shit. Covenant or bust.

>>92888369
How about both?

>>92888070
Some people really liked the second story arc and were disappointed in the treatment it got in Halo 3.

>>92887952
Well, by my understanding not everything was peaches and gravy. Cessation probably made sense to a lot of people at the far end of the UEG's reach, and in turn the UNSC. Your standard 'we're getting dicked because we're outer colonies' stuff you get in most Sci-Fi. But that doesn't merit the terrorism they place on the civilian populace. Personal politics are unimportant when boots need to be shoved up civilian-bombing-Innie asses.

The reason it went down hill is because they stoped making it for the master race and strted making it for faggots on ps3 and xbox, i still thing ce is fun and the best halo evar

>>92888384
How about Covenant? We've played as UNSC enough.

>>92888432
How about both?

>>92888070
>the guy you WANT to play as
No, I liked the Arbiter a lot better.

>>92888472
How about I've had enough with the Spartans, how about just the Covenant?

>>92888417
Well the UNSC did nuke a colony they had lost control of due to riots all over the planet and the admiral i guess kind of lost his shit over that, still doesn't give them the right to bomb innocent UNSC civilians

>>92888531
Well i'm not so, HOW. ABOUT. BOTH?
I can do this all day

>>92888313
Does that have a page number with it anywhere? As it seems strange in context. And not necessarily in line with the general treatment they get in the fiction. Though, that is 'disable' which could simply be very particular hit locations (bridge, engines) and not a common 'oh this one missile will take down a cruiser.'

As the Innies didn't exactly have the heaviest of ships, part of why they didn't go toe-to-toe with the UNSC.

>>92888643
How about you play one of the many Spartan games when you feel like playing as a Spartan?

>>92888717
How about you play Halo 2?
I want to play a Spartan stealth game

>>92888695
Sorry, didn't have the page number but it does say UNSC Ships and not Innie ships, covie ships are much better armored than ours anyways.

>>92888744
How about YOU play a spartan stealth game? I'm proposing a Republic Commando style game played as Spec Ops Sangheili, not a stealth game.

>>92888822
FINE, I THINK I WILL

>>92888845
Good, piss off.

>>92888877
I WILL

>>92888803
Yes. I'm just saying that most UNSC ships aren't very big, and the quote isn't a 'destroy' it's a 'disable.' So, yeah. I'm not disagreeing or anything.

>>92888920
You aren't funny.