Hasn't this been resolved....

Halo: reach adds in features PC gamers have seen since battlefield 1942 is all. It's a decent game, but pretty old hat now. I played reach, and apart from being extremely crap in the story department (not helped by the huge amount of flaws that anyone who's ever read about the fall of reach will be grinding their teeth at) it just didn't do anything NEW.

However, halo multiplayer is definitely more interesting than COD overall The pacing overall is much better and relies far more on skill (comparatively, none are even within spitting distance of counter strike). However i'm not that interested in the multiplayer, and it'll be single player that determines whether the game is good enough personally. In that respect i say crysis 2 is shaping to give halo: reach a sound ass kicking.

Multiplayer i expect to be interesting however, based on the constant ability to swap between 3 modes. As a c console gamer this may not seem amazing at all 'zomg reach had armor modes hurrr' but as someone who plays crysis and knows how to use the suit, i can tell you that the suit is a fantastic tool and makes combat 25% more awesome than any other game out there.

Also, i don't give a damn about sales, and neither should anyone else except developers. X-factor is the most watch tv programme, but that does that make it better than QI? Hell no.
I agree, QI is awesome!

If you compare Reach to C2, Crysis kills it.
But the earlier Halos were too good to be stabbed by Crytek.
Only my opinion.

If you compare Reach to C2, Crysis kills it.
But the earlier Halos were too good to be stabbed by Crytek.
Only my opinion.

How good games are matters very little to their success. I'm fairly sure there are countless indie games that are as good as, if not better than, top-selling games from big-name companies today. Equally, top-selling games are frequently horrible. MW2 was horrible on PC, Black Ops requires a monster PC to run because it's almost all done on the CPU, BC2's singleplayer is so appallingly bad I gave up after the first map.

I reckon that Halo is currently better than Crysis and that's only fair because Bungie has more experience in games than Crytek.

I reckon that Halo is currently better than Crysis and that's only fair because Bungie has more experience in games than Crytek.

It's just a matter of experience and fans thru time.

halo is kinda done though, they'll keep making map pack for reach, but the halo series is over, i dont mean that in a bad way, i loved halo, it was my first game and still one of my favorites. dont really know why you would want to kill a series in its autumn years

I'm over halo. I have all kinds of halo stuff, books, action figures, and rare 3D store advertisemants. I liked the first Halo but after that it just died slowly. Crysis has always been a good game in my eyes and the 2nd one is looking just as good and with multiplatform support so everyone can enjoy it.

I'm over halo. I have all kinds of halo stuff, books, action figures, and rare 3D store advertisemants. I liked the first Halo but after that it just died slowly. Crysis has always been a good game in my eyes and the 2nd one is looking just as good and with multiplatform support so everyone can enjoy it.

Now, that's the Crysis spirit...

Halo reach"s story is just more proof of the end of Halo.

Yeah F Uck halo

Halo CE is the greatest game ever created
although ive supported Crysis and Crysis 2 since they
released Crysis does not beat the weapons enemies level
design music characters and Ect. just cause Halo is popular
does not mean its bad i hate seeing this **** arguement
everywhere Crysis 2 is awesome but graphics are not everything
yeah i know shocking Halo surpasses Crysis in creativity and keeping
everything simple and fun its a video game not a contest guys'.

@ Wonderful-Forest

Thats your opinion.

In my opinion the Halo series and no other shooter on consoles can touch Crysis 1.

@ Wonderful-Forest

Thats your opinion.

In my opinion the Halo series and no other shooter on consoles can touch Crysis 1.

graphically = yes
story = maybe
online = hell no

Indeed halo is a fantastic online shooter (for it's time anyway). Although bad company 2 PC has preceded to kick it squarely in the balls, it'll always be the game that got me into online gaming.

Let Crysis 1/2 gamers stay put, Halo gamers play on and all other gamers be at peace.

I hope Crysis 2 will be serious mix of Halo & CoD(maybe best mix for today). After all, I'm PC gamer and I wanna new sci-fi shooter with same quality as Halo... or KillZone as minimal point to achieve. They can.

Halo is extinct...

Killzone took over and is still hitting those bloody charts all the way up.

I found killzone remarkably boring. In fact both ps3 exclusive first person shooters (killzone and resistance) make me cry with boredom. Now, uncharted 2, THAT's a good game.

The only thing killzone had going for it was that it's 'pretty', after i played it, it's been appended for 'pretty for a console'. Crysis still curb stomps it big time.

I hate to admit defeat, yet your bloody right. But killzone's graphics were the only one's I can find in par with crysis 2 for a ps3 console game..

Aye, compared to the ps3 console version of crysis 2, killzone will probably on par But none of them are going to be touching either pc version of crysis for obvious reasons

(the obvious reason being, if it needs to be explained, is that to play crysis 1 at very high at 1280x720 [console resolution for games] requires about 4 times the power sitting in the ps3, and about 12-16 times more for 1920x1080 [PC gaming resolution])

@ Comfy

Declaring 1920x1080 as the "standard" Pc gaming resolution seems a bit odd to me
It depends on your monitor`s size of course. My monitor`s native resolution for example is 1680x1050. ( i just cant go higher) A friend of mine needs at least 1920x1200, otherwise the picture is pixaleted as hell.
Thats the dilemma of having a big screen monitor or Tv.. the resolution must be very high to deliver a clear and non pixaleted picture.

By the way did you guys knew that the original Halo was intended to be a Pc exclusive at first ? Time for a "what if" scenario he he But anyway i just dont like the gameplay of console shooters. Killzone, Resistance, Halo.. they all feel like a arcade version of what i would call an Egoshooter.

well, pc gaming resolution is considered to be either 1680x1050, 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 (and the extreme end being 2560x1600 and multi monitor), all of which being equally common, but the former starting to drop off the curve in terms of 'current resolutions for gaming', i'm still on a 1680x1050 screen, but i should probably get a 1920x1200 soon (or multi monitor ).

Less than that in terms of resolution in regarded as the graphics achievable with older gpu's (which isn't bad but isn't really current pc gaming) which is why all card reviews (apart from low end) only consider the resolutions 1680x1050 and above

Also, i don't give a damn about sales, and neither should anyone else except developers. X-factor is the most watch tv programme, but that does that make it better than QI? Hell no.
Ofcourse it does matter. If you want a sequel after Crysis 2, there will have to be some commercial success also.
At this moment Halo Reach has sold about 7.4 million copies. (Cod BO 18.5 million)
Ofcourse Crysis 2 will never sell like BO but I think they do need the Halo figures to be successfull enough to develop Crysis 3.