Forum:Halo 4: From the Beginning You Know the End: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Forum:Halo 4: From the Beginning You Know the End (view source)

Revision as of 14:06, June 7, 2019

23,005 bytes added , 4 years ago

m

Text replacement - " {{Quote|" to " {{Quote|"

Porplemontage

Bureaucrats, Developers, Administrators

22,513

edits

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 <span style="font-size:16px; font-family:Verdana;">[[User:BushWookieCamper|<span style="color:#536872;">Bush</span><span style="color:#5F9EA0;">Wookie</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:BushWookieCamper|<span style="color:#91A3B0;">Camper</span>]]</sup></span> 23:16, 9 April 2012 (EDT)
+:I'm not a multiplayer man, so I'll admit some of your points may have merit. Insta-respawn, for example. Random power weapons. Drop-in. But some of your assertions are simply laughable, which I'll deal with in paragraphs.
+:"An honourable battlefield"? My brother's played enough for me to know Halo is also a wretched hive of scum and villainy, though maybe not as much as the COD crowd. Again, I'm not a multiplayer man. As for Spartan Points, is it really that much different to the Armoury system? Rather than mindlessly grinding for character model customisation that doesn't affect gameplay, you have an incentive - the higher your level, the more you have access to. Multiplayer should work by pairing players of approximately equivalent level - a common complaint I heard during the days of Halo 3 was that people would intentionally lose levels so that they could get paired up with newer players for easy matches. If you do that under the Spartan Points system, then you lose all your sweet loot - an incentive not to cheat.
+:Who said they removed Firefight? As far as I'm concerned, it's just been renamed and revamped as Spartan Ops. Campaign enemies in a competitive setting, now linked with a metanarrative. Consider it an analogy to Mass Effect 3's Galaxy at War, a system that I love the sound of. It allows competitive play, gradually increasing difficulty, but lets you play as part of an "in-universe" strike force doing something that has an effect on the campaign. Yes, using Mass Effect as an example for Halo sounds contradictory (STAR CHILD!!!!!!) but it's a good one. And really, I never got the big deal about Firefight - if I wanted to play in campaign settings against campaign enemies competitively, why wouldn't I play campaign? Ramp up the difficulty, turn skulls on, get a group of friends? With a bit of tweaking, there's no reason why Spartan Ops can't be the new Firefight v.3. You also misunderstand how it'll work - the Spartan Ops are episodic, not weekly - it won't be like challenges, where there's a new set for each week, it means a new set will become ''available'', adding to the others. By the end, you'd have a coherent storyline that you could play through again.
+:Elites are a stylistic choice, and they've always come with controversy. In Halo 2 and 3, we complained they hunched over too much. In Halo Reach, they were too tall. I loved the aesthetic, the idea of playing the other side, but in gameplay terms it's just troublesome. I'd have loved to play as Elites, but it isn't breaking the game.
+:Forerunner Vision. Really? You take exception to this? Round a corner, shotgun to the face. Or come up to a corner, use FV to check if there's a camper around the corner, back away to fight on elsewhere, or maybe flank him. And perhaps you could counter it by using active camouflage. Anyone who thinks it's going to be TOTAL x-ray vision across the whole map is taking it to the ridiculous extreme. It would need to be short-range, limited duration, and have weaknesses - maybe it [[wikia:DC:Superman|doesn't see through lead]]? If it was that unbalanced, it wouldn't be in the game. The core of Halo isn't the level playing field, it's that everything has a counter and it's up to the player to find and use it.
+:Multiplayer having a meta-fictional excuse - sorry, who does this hurt? Answer: nobody. I actually like the explanation they came up with, and it's better than the RvB idea that it's all war-games but nobody told the participants. And I love RvB.
+:When did a multiplayer beta test become a god-given right? I loved playing them, but I hated the idea of them in the end. The Halo 3 beta was legitimately to playtest multiplayer assets to see how they would interact after release with new hardware - the fact that they looked good, and familiarised players with new equipment, didn't hurt. With Halo Wars, though, it just seemed like a bit of advertising - here's the appetiser, now go buy the main course! And with Reach, I still felt it was more to get consumers interested. Yeah, I'd like to see some actual gameplay from Halo 4, and maybe it would allay some fears among the community. But setting up and running a beta test isn't as simple as you'd think, and the data needs to be processed and responded to in the time left before the game's released, or it's just an expensive demo. Evidently, 343i decided that the benefits didn't outweigh the cost, and decided to focus on polishing what they have. But what really irritates me is that fans have come to ''expect'' a beta test. With Halo 3, I was like "oh, hey, this is a cool thing Bungie are doing, props!" But as time went on, it became more and more focussed on advertising the game rather than actually improving it. Was much changed between the beta and final copy for Halo Wars or Reach? I can't remember much changing.
+:Microsoft as the money-grubbing evil corporation: I've seen this a lot lately, and it's also something that irritates the hell out of me. Corporations are businesses, and they need to make money to stay afloat. They have a responsibility to investors, owners, etc. They do this by delivering quality products. If you don't like the product, you don't have to buy it - which means they have a responsibility to deliver quality. If you want an example of corporate greed, look at EA's utter mishandling of the otherwise brilliant Mass Effect - they forced the development team to cut out a major character to ship the game on time, forcing them to include him as DLC, enraging fans. They forced the studio to change the original ending (something about Dark Matter) after some German hackers leaked details, giving us the abominable Star Child. And I wasn't too thrilled that they were charging players for such ephemeral things as weapon packs and alternate appearances. I spent more on Mass Effect 2 DLC than I did to buy the game. With Halo, we've always got quality DLC. The fact that you use their name for us, the Halo Nation, shows that they care about community input. They know that pissing off the fans only creates negative publicity. There's an old saying: "any publicity is good publicity." Bullshit. Word-of-mouth lead to people raging at Mass Effect 3 in droves, forcing Bioware and EA to backpedal hard. What, exactly, has Microsoft done to ruin Halo besides keeping it when Bungie moved on? Bungie were moving to new things anyway. Looking back, I'm a little sceptical that I've just defended free market capitalism, being the liberal that I am, but it's true.
+:What I really take exception to, though, is the notion that Halo is something fragile that needs to be protected, that there was a perfect form that that it should stay like that for the rest of its life. If that's true, then it's already dead. The clue is in the title: "combat evolved." Every game has brought new stuff. Halo 2 brought LIVE. recharging health, and Dual Wielding. Halo 3 gave us equipment, and customised armour. Halo Wars gave us an interesting new take on a familiar universe by making it an RTS, as Bungie originally envisaged Halo being. Halo 3: ODST lost dual wielding (absolutely the right move) and gave us Firefight. Halo Reach improved equipment by turning them into armour abilities, gave players optional loadouts, and vastly expanded Halo 3's armour customisation. What are the major changes to Halo 4? respawn times, weapon spawns, and Spartan Ops. I feel old saying this, but people complained back in the day too! This isn't new! People insisted that dual wielding would ruin Halo, breaking the Golden Tripod. They said the same of equipment, and armour abilities. What people are really complaining about is that Halo is changing, and they're forgetting that Halo has ALWAYS been about change.
+:I've said it before, and I'll say it again - the level of Bungie worship we're seeing has got to stop. I love Bungie as much as the next person, but they're gone. Let them go. I'll be buying their games of course, because I'm not insane, but I am, first and foremost, a '''HALO''' fan. I loved Halo Wars, problems and all, and people were already decrying it as Microsoft whoring out the franchise. I loved Ensemble before Halo Wars, after playing the brilliant Age of Mythology. I still do. I've been impressed by how 343i have turned a shaky beginning around into a coherent vision. A fan shouldn't have this idealised notion of something, because nothing will ever come close to it. A true fan criticised and appreciates in equal measure, and loves it regardless. I also love Doctor Who, but I acknowledge and accept that it has its fair share of awful (Rose. Davies' soap-opera treatment of it. The overexposure of the Daleks. Moffat's timey-wimey stuff. And that's just the new series'.) But I love it anyway, in spite of, or perhaps because of, them. Same goes with Halo - I can see the possible problems, and I offer criticism. The shoulder pieces of the Chief's new suit are awful, even if the rest is really growing on me. I also am worried about how instant respawning and randomised power weapon drops will work out. And I'm worried at how ''little'' substantive stuff we're seeing. But these things are not and-all and be-all. We've been suckling at Bungie's food nipple for so long that we've idealised them in our minds as gaming gods. Now we're discovering that there's a pantheon, filled with names like Epic, Bioware, Blizzard, and that 343i is joining their ranks. And like the monotheists we are, we haven't taken it well.
+:And, to be completely pedantic, "codify" is a real word. [[wikipedia:Princess Bride|I do not think it means what you think it means.]] :P
+:Man, I feel old. -- [[User:Specops306|<b><font color=indigo>Specops306</font></b>]] [[halofanon:user:Specops306|<u><i><font color=blue><sup>Autocrat</sup></font></i></u>]] [[User talk:Specops306|<u><i><font color=purple><sup>Qur'a 'Morhek</sup></font></i></u>]] 02:04, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+:I typed a bunch of stuff, but an edit conflict with Specops306 really explained things more thoroughly. So, I am just going to summarize my opinions in one sentence: "I don't want Halo to be 'Call of Duty... RECYCLED IN SPACE'!"<!-- And one more thing to note: the Forerunner vision is ridiculous. 343i is allowing a newbie with sprint to go ahead and get camped by a FV veteran. --> —[[User:Spartan331|<span style="color:silver;">S331</span>]] <sub>([[User talk:Spartan331|COM]] • [[Special:Contributions/Spartan331|Mission Log]] • [[UserProfile:Spartan331|Profile]])</sub> 02:30, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+I agree with many of everyone's points. I am open to improvement, but I don't want the game to become a generic first person shooter that just happens to take place in space. If I wanted that, I'd ask for Call of Duty: Future Warfare. Anyways, the random weapon spawns will be just as confusing to new players as the timed ones will. I can see it now:
+"What? I just saw that weapon over there last game! What's going on?!"
+Which defeats the purpose of the change entirely. Instant spawn also needs to go away, escpecially since that makes exterminations impossible and multikills easy as heck. It also takes away some of the things that make the game interesting. I also disagree with the midway game quoting/joining, at least for some game modes. Co-op campaign and Spartan Ops would be the major exceptions to this belief.
+Finally, they need a way better name than Forerunner Vision, cuz that just sounds so damn lame.
+[[User:FatalSnipe117|<span style="color:green">'''pestilence'''</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/FatalSnipe117|<span style="color:green">'''Phil'''</span>]], ''[[User talk:FatalSnipe117|<span style="color:green">'''pestilence!'''</span>]]'' 16:43, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+Forum/Thread title is misleading. Was expecting something on plot/storyline. To contribute to the discussion, the gameplay of Halo (except Halo Wars gameplay... which is something different) has always been, [[Joe Staten|as a wise man once said]], ''"that 30 seconds of fun"''. I would say that this formula is preserved in future Halo titles (except for Halo Wars, see earlier note) by 343i. Just an interesting observation since Halo 3; the Halo fanbase love blowing things out of proportions when they receive early details of a title (aside from criticising genre... the horror that is Halo MMO), incomplete/limited details to that point.
+It should be reminded that the multiplayer component of Halo 4 has greater influence to canon than previous titles, according to what I heard from other commentators. I guess various explanations of the multiplayer could be made from a storyline perspective. We are told that multiplayer takes place within ''Infinity''<nowiki />'s holo-training chamber (ala X-men style, some said). I guess weapon placement being random would be quite a reasonable explanation to increase the intensity of the training environment. In another example, sprinting being default could be an indication that the S-IVs are not as fast as the S-IIs and S-IIIs (since sprinting was an inhibitor for their own safety). Potential explanations for multiplayer... and I have been quite [[Talk:Multiplayer#Halo_4_Multiplayer|spot on]]. :D
+{{Quote|I've said it before, and I'll say it again - the level of Bungie worship we're seeing has got to stop. I love Bungie as much as the next person, but they're gone.|Morhek}}
+''*pitchforks and torches*'' — <span style="font-size:16px; font-family:OrbitronMedium;">[[User:Subtank|<span style="color:#FF4F00;">subtank</span>]]</span> 16:59, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+''*Flees to a nearby mill to escape the crowd, carrying his creator.*'' -- [[User:Specops306|<b><font color=indigo>Specops306</font></b>]] [[halofanon:user:Specops306|<u><i><font color=blue><sup>Autocrat</sup></font></i></u>]] [[User talk:Specops306|<u><i><font color=purple><sup>Qur'a 'Morhek</sup></font></i></u>]] 18:51, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Horse_(film)| *The Germans find you and execute you by firing squad*]''
+I do want there to be changes to gameplay. However, with this said, I do not want it to be changed in such a way that it is not ''Halo''. I do not like change; rather, I like improvements. I hope that ''Halo 4'' acomplishes this. I read [http://www.haloite.com/343s-big-gamble/| an article] recently that decried the changes 343i is implementing. What it advocated was that gameplay never change, and that Halo turn in to CoD, the reasoning being that the fact that the games don't change at all ''leads to their popularity.'' I read another article, entitled [http://thelifeofahalofan.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/how-combat-evolved-ruined-halo/| "Halo: CE ruined Halo",] which I agreed with entierly. It entaled how a desire to return to "glory days" of CE have affected halo. This is evident in all of the changes to Reach. I entierly agreed with its assertion that Reach ought to be diffrent, that this diffrence was fine. This is what I wish for ''4'' - that it ''is'' different, but remains in the spirit of Halo. I hope this is what happenes, and that it dosn't simply become Call of Duty. - [[User talk:DefeatingLine|DefeatingLine]] 19:17, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+''*Finds Specops306's creator next morning in the mill*''
+Specops306, there is a difference between "Worshiping Bungie" and "Keeping Halo's tradition". —[[User:Spartan331|<span style="color:silver;">S331</span>]] <sub>([[User talk:Spartan331|COM]] • [[Special:Contributions/Spartan331|Mission Log]] • [[UserProfile:Spartan331|Profile]])</sub> 20:20, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+:There is a huge difference. There is a long tradition to Halo development, but what I take exception to, as I said, is the notion that ONLY Bungie can make a Halo game. People decided Ensemble, an award-winning studio with a huge fanbase on its own, of being inferior to Bungie. People are doing the same with the admittedly unproven 343i. But that's it - they are ''unproven''. How are we judging them with so little in the way of actual tangible material? I look at [these screenshots] and [pieces of concept art], and I am reassured that Halo is doing fine. It may not be my favourite Halo game, but Halo:CE is a hard act for anyone to follow, and even Bungie didn't quite manage it. -- [[User:Specops306|<b><font color=indigo>Specops306</font></b>]] [[halofanon:user:Specops306|<u><i><font color=blue><sup>Autocrat</sup></font></i></u>]] [[User talk:Specops306|<u><i><font color=purple><sup>Qur'a 'Morhek</sup></font></i></u>]] 20:50, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+::I'm looking at a lot of this angst against a "CoDization" of ''Halo'' in the same light as American views towards basic personal freedoms and the Republican notion of "hating change." I would rather see 343i crash and burn miserably for failing to deliver a great gameplay experience by trying out new features than to simply do what Bungie has been doing for 11 years. Both Halo and Call of Duty have been getting stale since 2007 and hings need to change for both franchises. And to be honest, ours more than the latter... {{User:Grizzlei/Sig}}
+::Links removed: legal biz.— <span style="font-size:16px; font-family:OrbitronMedium;">[[User:Subtank|<span style="color:#FF4F00;">subtank</span>]]</span> 08:24, 11 April 2012 (EDT)
+There are you that can accept improvements/change to Halo. I, to a degree, am one of those people. I'll start off by listing the changes that are either confirmed or speculated, and giving my past and present opinion of them.
+Spawn time: I don't, nor did I ever, find the removal of spawn times a problem, as long as it is handled correctly. It should be forced after about five seconds, but by pressing X there's no need to wait those five seconds, and you can hop into battle faster; you can gain more kills and medals and it makes the game more fast-paced. On the other hand, if re-spawning were not forced, people could easily... Troll in a sense. I'm certain that if this were the case, the people would go into Team Slayer with a party of three and kill themselves, just so they can not re-spawn and watch the remaining player squirm in a now 1 v. 4 match.
+Weapon Drops: Well... At first the only way I could picture this was it happening in a way similar to ordinance in ''Halo: Reach'' Firefight. I could just envision people charging into battle, only to be killed by an incoming drop pod. But, now that I've had time to ponder the subject, I feel that if would be less like random weapon ''drops'', and more like random weapon ''spawns''. I find this to be a completely neutral change. It will add unpredictability and excitement to matchmaking games. Though, people that are good with a sniper rifle usually wait for the sniper rifle to re-spawn. Players will have to be much more adaptive when it comes to this new style of spawn points. It will also frustrate the hell out of forgers, the way I see it.
+Sprint: What's there to complain about? If you don't feel like running, don't; if you do, then do. It makes things faster. That's all there is too it.
+Forerunner Vision: The only way I have ever envisioned this is similar to the VISR in ''ODST''. Everything will turn purple and be outlined in white. Vision will fade out fairly close to the user, and the difference between enemies and friendlies wouldn't be specified. Also, it would only last about ten seconds. Now, that's just the way I saw it, and that seems like a perfectly balanced system to me. It actually seems like fun. I see no need for complaining about this sort of Armor Ability.
+The Matchmaking Story: I'm proud to say that this was the explanation I came up with for ''Halo 3's'' matchmaking back in 2010. You can say I kind of predicted it... Anyway, to the point. I think it's great that they're trying to expand canon as much as they possibly can by even integrating it into matchmaking. It provides players like me, the ones in it for the story, an appeal to multiplayer.
+Spartan Ops: A.K.A. Even MORE campaign! I couldn't ask for anything more. I love campaign. I replay campaign for hours on end and it will entertain me like nothing else, and now there's a, quote-unquote, ''second'' campaign! My only hope is that it isn't strictly multiplayer. I would love to be able to play alone on something like Spartan Ops.
+Removal of Firefight: Honestly, I see why everyone is angry, but I see no problem in just popping in my ''ODST'' or ''Reach'' discs if I feel like playing some Firefight. Granted, I would have loved to face more enemies than just the Covenant, but I can settle with what was given to me. You all should be able to do the same. It is time to move on to another new game. And who knows, maybe Firefight will make a triumphant return in ''Halo 5'' or ''6''.
+ADS: Honestly, this is something I'm hoping will not make it into the game. It will... Just ruin the feel I get when I play Halo. That will be the beginning of the end to me.
+Armor Permutations: I find the new addition of armor permutations affecting game play to be exciting. They should only affect your player in ways that are balanced and canonically correct, though. For example, a larger chest plate might give you a bit more health but slow you down slightly. Conversely, a smaller chest plate would do the exact opposite. There could be helmets that give you an enhanced motion tracker, boots that allow you to run for a longer duration, or ammo pouches that allow you to hold extra clips or grenades. I think it would be fun to have some advantages/disadvantages to players on matchmaking. It still leaves skill conquering over all, but it puts a new twist on things that we haven't seen before.
+Now, I understand your concerns, but I think a lot of the anxiety has to do with the fact that Halo is in the hands of a stranger and we don't know how to trust them. But, in all honesty, the Halo Nation has become a cult of sorts. We worship Bungie as our hero-god that will absolve us of our sins and take us to the afterlife that is Bungie.net. We need to move on. It was hard for me to accept too, but it's true. We must move on and welcome 343i with open arms. After all, who really controls the future of Halo? Microsoft, or us? We are brothers, after all. Connected by the great franchise we have come to know and love called Halo.
+[[User:Iota Eta Pi|<span style="font-family:font; color:#B80000;">Ιι</span>]] [[User talk:Iota Eta Pi|<span style="font-family:font; color:#B80000;">Ηη</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Iota Eta Pi|<span style="font-family:font; color:#B80000;">Ππ</span>]] 21:19, 10 April 2012 (EDT)
+:Your last paragraph is ''exactly'' what I'm trying to say. Cherish their memory, follow their other work, but accept that Halo has moved on from them. -- [[User:Specops306|<b><font color=indigo>Specops306</font></b>]] [[halofanon:user:Specops306|<u><i><font color=blue><sup>Autocrat</sup></font></i></u>]] [[User talk:Specops306|<u><i><font color=purple><sup>Qur'a 'Morhek</sup></font></i></u>]] 08:57, 11 April 2012 (EDT)