• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Who thinks Halo2 (TWO) was the funnest (word?) game ever?

F

Fardor

Senior member
I had so much fun with that game. It made you want to level up, and it was so hard to, in a perfect way. You'd win a match and be like, FUCK YEAH, lose one and think, DAMN, but you want to play again! Awesome maps, awesome interface, just freaken awesome. I could play Halo2 two years after release and still have fun (not as fun as the beginning though, which was so damn cool).

Remember big team battles on Waterworks back when people actually cared? Figuring out how to get on top of headlong, and doing other glitches? Owning in team slayer even after a couple teammates lagged out/quit... AAAGHHHH nostalgia...

Maybe if you think so you can recommend other games that are fun in the same way that Halo2 was? I haven't found anything since that comes close 🙁. Can be for any system (well, actually, I don't have access to a PS3).

Please don't call me an idiot for thinking this way. Everybody likes different things. If you think all Halo sucks, that's fine with me, but I really, really liked Halo2 multiplayer and you can't change that, even if you say HALF LIFE 2 IS BETTAR HALO IS SHALLOW GAME ONLY SINGLE PLAYER MATTARZ.
 
Meh, I still hold my opinion that Halo 1 and 2 were only considered really good because they were one of the very few console shooters with a decent multiplayer. I had fun with Halo2 for sure, but it was not even close to the funnest game I'VE played. CoD4 multiplayer rocks it sideways.
 
Originally posted by: Fardor
I had so much fun with that game. It made you want to level up, and it was so hard to, in a perfect way. You'd win a match and be like, FUCK YEAH, lose one and think, DAMN, but you want to play again! Awesome maps, awesome interface, just freaken awesome. I could play Halo2 two years after release and still have fun (not as fun as the beginning though, which was so damn cool).

Remember big team battles on Waterworks back when people actually cared? Figuring out how to get on top of headlong, and doing other glitches? Owning in team slayer even after a couple teammates lagged out/quit... AAAGHHHH nostalgia...

Maybe if you think so you can recommend other games that are fun in the same way that Halo2 was? I haven't found anything since that comes close 🙁. Can be for any system (well, actually, I don't have access to a PS3).

Please don't call me an idiot for thinking this way. Everybody likes different things. If you think all Halo sucks, that's fine with me, but I really, really liked Halo2 multiplayer and you can't change that, even if you say HALF LIFE 2 IS BETTAR HALO IS SHALLOW GAME ONLY SINGLE PLAYER MATTARZ.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I got around 2800 games played with Halo 2 before I stopped. With Halo 3, I'm barely even at 1000 and I've pretty much stopped playing.

I think part of the fact is back then Halo 2 had really no competitor on Xbox Live, if you had XBL you just HAD to have Halo 2. Now Halo has several games that are competing with it for players.

Team games were just a lot more fun to play. You had a somewhat of a chance of winning even when your team quit out, as the game relied less on teamwork than Halo 3.

Finding glitches on maps was serious fun. I can't imagine how many times I tried to get on the different buildings on Headlong with friends.

Levels actually meant something back then. Now, every other person you see is a somewhere between 40 and 50. Back then, anyone above 40 was considered really good. They even had those special icons for people above that level.

Maps in Halo 2 > Maps in Halo 3.

For example

Coagulation > Valhalla
Lockout > Guardian





 
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Levels actually meant something back then. Now, every other person you see is a somewhere between 40 and 50. Back then, anyone above 40 was considered really good. They even had those special icons for people above that level.
Click to expand...

That's because it's matching you with people near your skill level. The game has a graph that'll show you the skill distribution of a sample of players. ~15 is the most common skill rating. 50% are below 20.
 
The most fun I had with a Halo game was definitely 1. I knew enough people with Xboxen back in the day that we could get together and have 8+ player deathmatches (system link ftw). By the time Halo 2 had come out, most of those people had gone to college or somewhere else so it just didn't work out so well.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Levels actually meant something back then. Now, every other person you see is a somewhere between 40 and 50. Back then, anyone above 40 was considered really good. They even had those special icons for people above that level.
Click to expand...

That's because it's matching you with people near your skill level. The game has a graph that'll show you the skill distribution of a sample of players. ~15 is the most common skill rating. 50% are below 20.
Click to expand...

It matches people that are the same skill level as you in that playlist

For example, if my highest level was in Team Skirmish, lets say 10, I would still get matched up with a person who could be level 45 in another playlist, as long as that playlist is not Team Skirmish. The matchmaking system is flawed because of this. It doesn't look at the person highest skill level, only their skill in that playlist.

This frequently leads to extremely lopsided teams where you have some people who are really only level 10s getting matched up against people whos highest skill is 40.

So if I enter a game of lets say, Big Team Battle, where I am only a level 5, the matchmaking system doesn't work because my real skill is actually a 43.
 
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Levels actually meant something back then. Now, every other person you see is a somewhere between 40 and 50. Back then, anyone above 40 was considered really good. They even had those special icons for people above that level.
Click to expand...

That's because it's matching you with people near your skill level. The game has a graph that'll show you the skill distribution of a sample of players. ~15 is the most common skill rating. 50% are below 20.
Click to expand...

It matches people that are the same skill level as you in that playlist

For example, if my highest level was in Team Skirmish, lets say 10, I would still get matched up with a person who could be level 45 in another playlist, as long as that playlist is not Team Skirmish. The matchmaking system is flawed because of this. It doesn't look at the person highest skill level, only their skill in that playlist.

This frequently leads to extremely lopsided teams where you have some people who are really only level 10s getting matched up against people whos highest skill is 40.

So if I enter a game of lets say, Big Team Battle, where I am only a level 5, the matchmaking system doesn't work because my real skill is actually a 43.
Click to expand...

My point is that a level 40 player is not nearly as common as you seem to think.

And matching based on the skill rating on a per-playlist basis does make sense; the problem is that it can't accurately rate you if you haven't played a lot of games in a playlist. So someone who mostly plays team deathmatch and occasionally plays team tactical won't have an accurate rating in tactical. But that doesn't mean their team deathmatch skill rating would be accurate.

Lack of information with which to match will affect any game. It's not a deficiency of Halo 3.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Levels actually meant something back then. Now, every other person you see is a somewhere between 40 and 50. Back then, anyone above 40 was considered really good. They even had those special icons for people above that level.
Click to expand...

That's because it's matching you with people near your skill level. The game has a graph that'll show you the skill distribution of a sample of players. ~15 is the most common skill rating. 50% are below 20.
Click to expand...

It matches people that are the same skill level as you in that playlist

For example, if my highest level was in Team Skirmish, lets say 10, I would still get matched up with a person who could be level 45 in another playlist, as long as that playlist is not Team Skirmish. The matchmaking system is flawed because of this. It doesn't look at the person highest skill level, only their skill in that playlist.

This frequently leads to extremely lopsided teams where you have some people who are really only level 10s getting matched up against people whos highest skill is 40.

So if I enter a game of lets say, Big Team Battle, where I am only a level 5, the matchmaking system doesn't work because my real skill is actually a 43.
Click to expand...

My point is that a level 40 player is not nearly as common as you seem to think.

And matching based on the skill rating on a per-playlist basis does make sense; the problem is that it can't accurately rate you if you haven't played a lot of games in a playlist. So someone who mostly plays team deathmatch and occasionally plays team tactical won't have an accurate rating in tactical. But that doesn't mean their team deathmatch skill rating would be accurate.

Lack of information with which to match will affect any game. It's not a deficiency of Halo 3.
Click to expand...

High levels are still much more common then they were in Halo 2. Also remember that in Halo 2 there was no 'highest level ever' statistic, so once you got to a 40 it was entirely possible to drop back down to 35 or so, which made high levels even more rare.

As for per playlist matching, it leads to having an inaccurate rating in every playlist except the one where the player has the highest skill in. So if someone's highest skill is in team slayer, their ratings would be inaccurate for every other playlist.
 
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
As for per playlist matching, it leads to having an inaccurate rating in every playlist except the one where the player has the highest skill in. So if someone's highest skill is in team slayer, their ratings would be inaccurate for every other playlist.
Click to expand...

Why? If I play 1000 games of team slayer and it rates me 25, and I play 1000 games of team tactical and it rates me 15, why do you think that's inaccurate? I'm clearly worse at team tactical.

It's only inaccurate if you haven't played enough games in a playlist to get to your true skill rating for that playlist.
 
I think Halo2 was one of those games that had awesome potential that only some of the people who played it unlocked. I mean, I can play Call of Duty 4 or Halo 3, but... meh... it feels like it's just a game. There was something really special about the social characteristics of Halo2 and how they intertwined with the matchmaking and levels and glitches and everything. The game had so much charm. Games today seem to have so little charm (by charm I'm referring to that special feeling you get when you play certain games... the feeling that can make even walking around on a level feel satisfying). Controls are too smoothed out and graphics too much a focus. Halo3 not being nearly as fun to play as 2 was what made me realize that it was impossible to understand exactly what makes one game more fun than another. Rating a game by taking a look at separate categories like graphics, story, gameplay, etc, is a method that doesn't work, because all of those things go into the game's fun factor, which is the only thing that matters (besides how long that fun can last). And there is way more than just those things that can make a game fun.

The game had no saved films, but I remember many more awesome moments playing it than H3. Like that one time I shot a little bit at what I thought to be an AFK teammate and he got startled and threw a grenade at the wall in front of him and died. And when I shot at a warthog just a little bit with a plasma rifle in a Waterworks BTB and it went off the edge and I got a triple kill. Owning with the ghost because it couldn't be shot down so damn easily. Dozens of failed attempts with direct warthog assaults in Burial Mounds assault/CTF. Grabbing flags through walls before they fixed it. Getting the bomb guy to get on my banshee so we could hide the bomb on neutral when we had a lead. Getting the blue screen and hearing everyone yelling just for the sake of yelling. Having fun even when we were playing a modder by playing "Who can kill the modder?" Rushing for the sniper on Colossus, trying to bounce the flag across the bottom of Colossus, owning or getting owned on the best map ever: Lockout. Getting owned by the train on that one big map when we were jumping out of the parking building in a warthog. Hiding almost the whole round with the bomb in the cave on Coag and then rushing to the base at the end when the other team wasn't guarding it anymore and planting it JUST too late (round ended - but I had already screamed "IT WORKED!"). Playing double team with my friend and beating people who we knew were more skilled than us, because we actually attempted to communicate. Oh, and that one time me and that friend were playing slayer after two teammates had lagged out at the beginning and ending up winning by playing as assholey as possible (I got 26 kills!). I hope there's another Halo2 someday.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
As for per playlist matching, it leads to having an inaccurate rating in every playlist except the one where the player has the highest skill in. So if someone's highest skill is in team slayer, their ratings would be inaccurate for every other playlist.
Click to expand...

Why? If I play 1000 games of team slayer and it rates me 25, and I play 1000 games of team tactical and it rates me 15, why do you think that's inaccurate? I'm clearly worse at team tactical.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would really work that way.

I think one level for the main playlists, where settings were not altered, would be good. What I mean is that Slayer, Skirmish, BTB, Lone Wolves, maybe I'm forgetting something, should all be one level. Because all of these playlists are the same Halo gameplay at their core.

Then stuff like tactical or other playlists where health is altered would not be part of that level.
 
Originally posted by: Fardor
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
As for per playlist matching, it leads to having an inaccurate rating in every playlist except the one where the player has the highest skill in. So if someone's highest skill is in team slayer, their ratings would be inaccurate for every other playlist.
Click to expand...

Why? If I play 1000 games of team slayer and it rates me 25, and I play 1000 games of team tactical and it rates me 15, why do you think that's inaccurate? I'm clearly worse at team tactical.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would really work that way.

I think one level for the main playlists, where settings were not altered, would be good. What I mean is that Slayer, Skirmish, BTB, Lone Wolves, maybe I'm forgetting something, should all be one level. Because all of these playlists are the same Halo gameplay at their core.

Then stuff like tactical or other playlists where health is altered would not be part of that level.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. You think you can play a game of Lone Wolves the same way you'd play Team Slayer? If you play a game of Team Objective like you'd play Team Slayer, you'll lose. The same basic skills apply everywhere, but each playlist requires a different level and type of teamwork.

Like I've said 3 times now - if you play enough games in a playlist, it'll accurately reflect your skill in that playlist.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Like I've said 3 times now - if you play enough games in a playlist, it'll accurately reflect your skill in that playlist.
Click to expand...

Yes, but not in any of the other playlists, which is my problem with that type of matchmaking. You're assuming that people would play the same number of games in each playlists. What if I play only 5 games of Team tactical and I'm 15, is it still accurate? Am I really the same skill as the people who have played 1000 games and are level 15?

The thing is that many skills do carry over from playlist to playlist. I'm sure that a person who is a level 45 in Team Slayer who has never played Team Tactical will easily beat a person who is a level 5 in Team Tactical and a level 1 in everything else. The current system certainly allows for such a match to be made.

The game had no saved films, but I remember many more awesome moments playing it than H3. Like that one time I shot a little bit at what I thought to be an AFK teammate and he got startled and threw a grenade at the wall in front of him and died. And when I shot at a warthog just a little bit with a plasma rifle in a Waterworks BTB and it went off the edge and I got a triple kill. Owning with the ghost because it couldn't be shot down so damn easily. Dozens of failed attempts with direct warthog assaults in Burial Mounds assault/CTF. Grabbing flags through walls before they fixed it. Getting the bomb guy to get on my banshee so we could hide the bomb on neutral when we had a lead. Getting the blue screen and hearing everyone yelling just for the sake of yelling. Having fun even when we were playing a modder by playing "Who can kill the modder?" Rushing for the sniper on Colossus, trying to bounce the flag across the bottom of Colossus, owning or getting owned on the best map ever: Lockout. Getting owned by the train on that one big map when we were jumping out of the parking building in a warthog. Hiding almost the whole round with the bomb in the cave on Coag and then rushing to the base at the end when the other team wasn't guarding it anymore and planting it JUST too late (round ended - but I had already screamed "IT WORKED!"). Playing double team with my friend and beating people who we knew were more skilled than us, because we actually attempted to communicate. Oh, and that one time me and that friend were playing slayer after two teammates had lagged out at the beginning and ending up winning by playing as assholey as possible (I got 26 kills!). I hope there's another Halo2 someday.
Click to expand...

Ha. I remember a lot of those moments. Especially the blue screen one, the collossus one, and the bomb hiding. So many amazing moments on Halo 2 that I wish were on film. Those sort of moments never again happened with Halo 3.

I really like games that allow players to discover new things like this. There should be a limit of course, so it doesn't become blatant cheating. Halo 3 just restricted everything too much, which prevented player creativity.
 
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Originally posted by: mugs
Like I've said 3 times now - if you play enough games in a playlist, it'll accurately reflect your skill in that playlist.
Click to expand...

Yes, but not in any of the other playlists, which is my problem with that type of matchmaking. You're assuming that people would play the same number of games in each playlists. What if I play only 5 games of Team tactical and I'm 15, is it still accurate? Am I really the same skill as the people who have played 1000 games and are level 15?

The thing is that many skills do carry over from playlist to playlist. I'm sure that a person who is a level 45 in Team Slayer who has never played Team Tactical will easily beat a person who is a level 5 in Team Tactical and a level 1 in everything else. The current system certainly allows for such a match to be made.
Click to expand...

No. I've said over and over and over that the skill rating is only accurate if you've played a reasonable number of games in the playlist. That's the downside - it can't accurately rate someone who rarely plays in a playlist. The upside is that the ratings for the people who DO regularly play in a playlist are much more accurate. I think more accurate ratings for the majority outweighs inaccurate ratings for the minority.
 
I've always been of an opposite mentality. After playing Halo I felt it was one of the worst FPS games I'd ever played. Later after playing Halo 2, my opinion did not change of the Halo series. Now I admit, in general, that I don't think fps games on console are anywhere near as good as their counterparts on PC. But I thought Halo was on the low end of FPS's even for console.
 
ill agree that i had a lot more fun with halo 2 online than i did with halo 3, and maybe even any other game on a console. i got xbox live a few months before halo 2 came out so online console gaming was pretty new to me when it came out. but even a year after halo 2 was out i was playing that game daily. i can't really say that about any other game.

halo 2 is definitely better than halo 3. if halo 3 had decent maps it would be tons better.
 
Originally posted by: thraashman
I've always been of an opposite mentality. After playing Halo I felt it was one of the worst FPS games I'd ever played. Later after playing Halo 2, my opinion did not change of the Halo series. Now I admit, in general, that I don't think fps games on console are anywhere near as good as their counterparts on PC. But I thought Halo was on the low end of FPS's even for console.
Click to expand...

I take it you haven't played very many console FPSes.
 
Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
Halo 3 multiplayer blows Halo 2 out of the water. I tried playing Halo 2 the other day online. Barely playable.
Click to expand...

did you play halo 2 before halo 3?

if not that explains why you feel that way.

if you did, then 😕
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: thraashman
I've always been of an opposite mentality. After playing Halo I felt it was one of the worst FPS games I'd ever played. Later after playing Halo 2, my opinion did not change of the Halo series. Now I admit, in general, that I don't think fps games on console are anywhere near as good as their counterparts on PC. But I thought Halo was on the low end of FPS's even for console.
Click to expand...

I take it you haven't played very many console FPSes.
Click to expand...

I agree with mugs. Goldeneye was the best FPS on console till Halo came out IMO.

No console FPS can really touch PC FPS games, but Halo came close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top