HALO REACH SUCKS

[MoneymanX2]

why would they ever pick Reach first? garbage ass game, the numbers back me up. Should have released the trilogy first like everyone would have wanted. no one cares about chronological order

[twiggy]

thats what i was thinking too. its dumb to release reach first considering it was the last game, especially becuase now all the other halo games are going to seem lame because all the armor skills/graphics/customization,etc are gonna be worse/non existant and people are gonna complain about that too

[Peelsepuuppi]

No u.

[dylo]

this post has very low IQ

[Walker☻//︻ ---]

over 9000

[Doktor]

Cant wait for the "Halo CE is unbalanced." "Halo 2 sucks energy swords are dumb." And "Keh wooooow Battle rifle is so op." when those games release because if you think reach is bad you have never played the others despite their amazing weight the halo games are not very balanced.

[Mickey]

Reach took place before the famed flood, human, and covenant wars, by as much as five yrs before Halo CE took place. That's why it was released first. It makes sense.

[Ki11s0n3]

K bye

[Donia]

Would've preferred the original release order honestly. Reach was never too high on my Halo tier list

[KillerDuck]

Originally posted by Tack:

Reach took place before the famed flood, human, and covenant wars, by as much as five yrs before Halo CE took place. That's why it was released first. It makes sense.

reach literally ends MINUTES before Halo CE though

[MoneymanX2]

Originally posted by Doktor Ecchi:

Cant wait for the "Halo CE is unbalanced." "Halo 2 sucks energy swords are dumb." And "Keh wooooow Battle rifle is so op." when those games release because if you think reach is bad you have never played the others despite their amazing weight the halo games are not very balanced.

if you honestly think Reach is good then you shouldnt play halo no more.

[The Commendatore]

Originally posted by Tack:

Reach took place before the famed flood, human, and covenant wars, by as much as five yrs before Halo CE took place. That's why it was released first. It makes sense.

Where the hell do you get your information from? Reach doesn't take place 5 years before the Human-Covenant War and the events of Combat Evolved. You can literally look at the timestamps of the missions.

Pillar of Autumn: August 30, 2552, 16:52
Lone Wolf: August 30, 2552, 20:00
Pillar of Autumn in the credits scene: September 19, 2552, 01:20

Edit: OT: It's still better than 4 and "Halo" 5 by a long-shot.

[Corkeinator]

Originally posted by Picasso27:

Originally posted by Doktor Ecchi:

Cant wait for the "Halo CE is unbalanced." "Halo 2 sucks energy swords are dumb." And "Keh wooooow Battle rifle is so op." when those games release because if you think reach is bad you have never played the others despite their amazing weight the halo games are not very balanced.

if you honestly think Reach is good then you shouldnt play halo no more.

Has 55 hours play time, mmm ok then. If you think Reach is bad you shouldnt play Halo anymore.

[eC [3]Dee]

Originally posted by Picasso27:

Originally posted by Doktor Ecchi:

Cant wait for the "Halo CE is unbalanced." "Halo 2 sucks energy swords are dumb." And "Keh wooooow Battle rifle is so op." when those games release because if you think reach is bad you have never played the others despite their amazing weight the halo games are not very balanced.

if you honestly think Reach is good then you shouldnt play halo no more.

You're actually retarded, if you were a proper HALO fan then you wouldn't be crying. Go latch back on daddies tit lel

[Zerox]

I can think of a few reasons.
First and Foremost:

• Reach Has never been on PC

People who have never owned a console but have played the Halo games that have been released for PC will be getting a new experience. Halo CE and Halo 2 have both been released officially on PC, and Halo 3's multiplayer has essentially been released on PC via ElDewrito.
People may be less likely to buy a game they already have then a game they never have gotten to play before.
This leads into my second reason.

• Development costs money

If they had started with Halo 4, I have no doubt that the MCC would have sold far worse having started with Halo Reach. Regardless of the fact that Halo 4 also has never been on PC, Halo 4 is undeniably the weakest title in the collection.
Now, they could have started with the strongest title, Halo 3, however there are a few benefit to starting with Reach.

• Halo 3 is the only game some players want.

If we can be real about things, if they had started with Halo 3 there would be people who wouldn't buy and of the other games. Which means less money to fund the porting of the entire collection to PC. This leads to my next point

• A fool and his money are soon parted

I don't know if you have noticed this, but there have been a number of threads here where people have complained that each games individual price should add up to price of the collection.
I'd wager its the result of people not playing attention to the pricing info and purchasing Reach alone and are now upset that they will have to shell out more money then they otherwise could have is they had paid attention.
Which leads back to my second point, development costs money.

[Ki11s0n3]

Originally posted by Zerox:

I can think of a few reasons.
First and Foremost:

• Reach Has never been on PC

People who have never owned a console but have played the Halo games that have been released for PC will be getting a new experience. Halo CE and Halo 2 have both been released officially on PC, and Halo 3's multiplayer has essentially been released on PC via ElDewrito.
People may be less likely to buy a game they already have then a game they never have gotten to play before.
This leads into my second reason.

• Development costs money

If they had started with Halo 4, I have no doubt that the MCC would have sold far worse having started with Halo Reach. Regardless of the fact that Halo 4 also has never been on PC, Halo 4 is undeniably the weakest title in the collection.
Now, they could have started with the strongest title, Halo 3, however there are a few benefit to starting with Reach.

• Halo 3 is the only game some players want.

If we can be real about things, if they had started with Halo 3 there would be people who wouldn't buy and of the other games. Which means less money to fund the porting of the entire collection to PC. This leads to my next point

• A fool and his money are soon parted

I don't know if you have noticed this, but there have been a number of threads here where people have complained that each games individual price should add up to price of the collection.
I'd wager its the result of people not playing attention to the pricing info and purchasing Reach alone and are now upset that they will have to shell out more money then they otherwise could have is they had paid attention.
Which leads back to my second point, development costs money.

Not too mention it was the only game missing from MCC on Xbox so it made more sense to release it for both platforms at the same time.