A Community discussion forum for Halo Custom Edition, Halo 2 Vista, Portal and Halo Machinima

Home  Search Register  Login Member ListRecent Posts
  
 
»Forums Index »Halo Custom Edition (Bungie/Gearbox) »Halo CE General Discussion »Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery

Page 1 of 2 Go to page: · [1] · 2 · Next
Author Topic: Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery (46 messages, Page 1 of 2)
Moderators: Dennis

jackrabbit
Joined: Apr 27, 2005

Fight Against the Machine of Deth!


Posted: Dec 14, 2013 11:40 AM    Msg. 1 of 46       
Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o8Jfdv8Lx8

Weird.
Edited by jackrabbit on Dec 14, 2013 at 11:43 AM


gruntfromhalo
Joined: Nov 21, 2007

actual loli


Posted: Dec 14, 2013 03:20 PM    Msg. 2 of 46       
Why would you do that to the poor 'Stang ;_;
It's my favorite year too ;_;
I want to buy it and give it a good sanding, priming, and normal paint job.
At least the cruel son of a ... kept the rest pretty nice.
Edited by gruntfromhalo on Dec 14, 2013 at 03:26 PM


Banshee64
Joined: Dec 4, 2012

oify


Posted: Dec 14, 2013 04:15 PM    Msg. 3 of 46       
So...They took a nice car and ruined it with a bunch of 343 decals a big mural of the halo mobile game made by 343, the worst company to ever Touch halo.

great.

Quote: --- Original message by: gruntfromhalo

Why would you do that to the poor 'Stang ;_;
It's my favorite year too ;_;
I want to buy it and give it a good sanding, priming, and normal paint job.
At least the cruel son of a ... kept the rest pretty nice.
Edited by gruntfromhalo on Dec 14, 2013 at 03:26 PM


:)
Edited by Banshee64 on Dec 14, 2013 at 04:16 PM


rcghalohell
Joined: Feb 25, 2009

I can jump?Weeeee (pop!) (No1 heard from it again)


Posted: Dec 14, 2013 05:02 PM    Msg. 4 of 46       
forza 4 is way better than 343 games and forza 5


gruntfromhalo
Joined: Nov 21, 2007

actual loli


Posted: Dec 14, 2013 06:13 PM    Msg. 5 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: rcghalohell
forza 4 is way better than 343 games and forza 5
I've never played Forza 5 but looking at the car list I'm not even gonna bother. Time to switch to Gran Turismo.


jackrabbit
Joined: Apr 27, 2005

Fight Against the Machine of Deth!


Posted: Dec 14, 2013 09:27 PM    Msg. 6 of 46       
Maybe this will help you understand there logic.

The director of Halo 4 Kiki Wolfkill's brother Kim Wolfkill is on the Forza 5 team.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf94IFO0I
Edited by jackrabbit on Dec 14, 2013 at 09:31 PM


Horeb
Joined: Nov 27, 2013

bananakid


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 12:52 AM    Msg. 7 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: jackrabbit

Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o8Jfdv8Lx8

Weird.
Edited by jackrabbit on Dec 14, 2013 at 11:43 AM


horrible!


ZOBI3KING
Joined: Dec 25, 2012

Look at me, I'm the captain now.


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 02:42 AM    Msg. 8 of 46       
I'm sorry but I love the new Arbiter. It reminds me a lot of those Bionicles I played with when I was little.


gruntfromhalo
Joined: Nov 21, 2007

actual loli


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 02:55 AM    Msg. 9 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: MEGAVKNG2
I have an XBOX ONE and played Forza 5, its really mediocre. I want PGR back.

PGR's car lists aren't very good in my opinion.


Banshee64
Joined: Dec 4, 2012

oify


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 03:16 AM    Msg. 10 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: ZOBI3KING
I'm sorry but I love the new Arbiter. It reminds me a lot of those Bionicles I played with when I was little.


Likes 343 halo elements.
Likes Doge meme
Confirmed 12 year old.


ZOBI3KING
Joined: Dec 25, 2012

Look at me, I'm the captain now.


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 03:37 AM    Msg. 11 of 46       
*Cough


AllySuzumiya
Joined: Feb 27, 2013

"Kotae wa itsumo watashi no mune ni.."


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 02:30 PM    Msg. 12 of 46       
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


ZOBI3KING
Joined: Dec 25, 2012

Look at me, I'm the captain now.


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 02:38 PM    Msg. 13 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: ZOBI3KING
I'm sorry but I love the new Arbiter. It reminds me a lot of those Bionicles I played with when I was little.


Likes 343 halo elements.
Likes Doge meme
Confirmed 12 year old.

So I can't have a personal opinion without being called a 12 year old...


SOI_7
Joined: Mar 23, 2012

ZA WARUDO! TOKI WO TOMARE!


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 02:52 PM    Msg. 14 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


^This. The only reason for which most of the community thinks Halo 3 is the best is only because Halo started changing after it. Every single attempt to innovate the game has been considered a murder to the saga.
Halo Wars has been considered trash because it was an RTS.
Halo 3 ODST has been considered trash because it has an open-world like gameplay.
Halo Reach has been considered trash because it introduced AAs and starting loadouts.
Halo 4 has been considered trash because it introduced permanent sprint, customizable loadouts and perks.

And I'm pretty sure that Halo 5 will be considered trash again, unless 343i will just copy Halo 2/3 and remove all the innovations made until now. And this really pisses me off. 343i isn't killing Halo, is the community that is making Halo dying.


Horeb
Joined: Nov 27, 2013

bananakid


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 03:25 PM    Msg. 15 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: jackrabbit

Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o8Jfdv8Lx8

Weird.
Edited by jackrabbit on Dec 14, 2013 at 11:43 AM

they destroyed this car


Banshee64
Joined: Dec 4, 2012

oify


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 04:21 PM    Msg. 16 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


Oh my god, you can't be serious. It's every post with you that you have to say something completely asinine. It's not the change that's terrible about the new Halo, it's the major continuity problems that are made by the change in art style, dialogue, story, forerunner bs, and things like that. It pretty much makes everything that the first trilogy's campaign established null. As for the multiplayer again it's not the change it's what it's changed to. pretty much a venal attempt by 343 to get players from the cod community to play Halo. It plays nothing at all like a Halo game's multiplayer to the point where it's no fun to play. Weapon spawns are random, weapon stats are garbage so everyone is just going to go for the dmr, Player spawns are ridiculous, the vehicles are all weak except for the mantis which is hilariously bad, the gametypes are all horrible, there's no classic slayer gametypes, the matchmaking has no skill ranking platform so there's no motivation to play matchmaking except weapon skins (wtf), and the playerbase is lower than a single cod livestream's viewer count.

So what you're saying is Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series? (Not that I agree with you about the never changing halo thing, Just because they was under Microsoft's strict deadlines) Halo 3 is very different from 2 and Halo Reach is very different from 3, I'm not saying that their engines are different, they're pretty similar. I'm saying they were unique in art style and in gameplay acceptably. You can look at a screenshot from each of them and know what game it came from. (cod is different).

Quote:
^This. The only reason for which most of the community thinks Halo 3 is the best is only because Halo started changing after it. Every single attempt to innovate the game has been considered a murder to the saga.
Halo Wars has been considered trash because it was an RTS.
Halo 3 ODST has been considered trash because it has an open-world like gameplay.
Halo Reach has been considered trash because it introduced AAs and starting loadouts.
Halo 4 has been considered trash because it introduced permanent sprint, customizable loadouts and perks.

And I'm pretty sure that Halo 5 will be considered trash again, unless 343i will just copy Halo 2/3 and remove all the innovations made until now. And this really pisses me off. 343i isn't killing Halo, is the community that is making Halo dying.


Change doesn't automatically make something good. Halo, as a series, should have died after 3 or Reach. 343 isn't killing halo or making it better. Halo is dead and they're trying to pull as much money out of it as possible before everyone hates it and stops buying it completely.
Edited by Banshee64 on Dec 15, 2013 at 04:25 PM


AllySuzumiya
Joined: Feb 27, 2013

"Kotae wa itsumo watashi no mune ni.."


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 04:42 PM    Msg. 17 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


Oh my god, you can't be serious. It's every post with you that you have to say something completely asinine. It's not the change that's terrible about the new Halo, it's the major continuity problems that are made by the change in art style, dialogue, story, forerunner bs, and things like that. It pretty much makes everything that the first trilogy's campaign established null. As for the multiplayer again it's not the change it's what it's changed to. pretty much a venal attempt by 343 to get players from the cod community to play Halo. It plays nothing at all like a Halo game's multiplayer to the point where it's no fun to play. Weapon spawns are random, weapon stats are garbage so everyone is just going to go for the dmr, Player spawns are ridiculous, the vehicles are all weak except for the mantis which is hilariously bad, the gametypes are all horrible, there's no classic slayer gametypes, the matchmaking has no skill ranking platform so there's no motivation to play matchmaking except weapon skins (wtf), and the playerbase is lower than a single cod livestream's viewer count.

So what you're saying is Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series? (Not that I agree with you about the never changing halo thing, Just because they was under Microsoft's strict deadlines) Halo 3 is very different from 2 and Halo Reach is very different from 3, I'm not saying that their engines are different, they're pretty similar. I'm saying they were unique in art style and in gameplay acceptably. You can look at a screenshot from each of them and know what game it came from. (cod is different).


Banshee, I'm not even going to give you the benefit of the doubt of knowing that I'd care whether you were serious or not. I've known from the beginning that you were a troll and that I'd be an idiot for ever taking you seriously.

No, I'm not saying "Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series." If that was your attempt at a straw man, you've failed. Adding a few mechanics from another game doesn't make it that game. If you want to go by that logic, COD had Dual wielding for years. If you want to say games copied mechanics, then Halo 3 copied COD. But of course, you wont admit that. First of all, it makes sense that master chief would be able to run. It's a supersoldier. What would be the point of all those augmentations if you NEVER saw them put to use in the game? What would've been the point of mentioning how fast he could run in the books if he just speedwalked in the game.

Halo's fanbase is full of xenophobic children. That's why you fear the change. Yes, it plays nothing at all like Halo 2's multiplayer (Halo Reach was a Halo game.), but that's because the game mechanics actually changed the game. If the multiplayer were the same every year, people would get bored with it.. It needs to evolve. If you wanted Halo 2 with new weapons, play Halo 3, in fact, Halo 3 already borrowed half of Halo 2's original campaign maps.

The change of art style is result of the change in developers. Take Iron man for example.

His armour has changed entirely from the original concept due to the change in artists and artist's inspirations, changes in what was acceptable in the current age, etc. If Halo 4 had the same art style as Halo 3, the game would've looked terrible as the last game of the current gen. Saints Row 3 used the same art style as Saints Row 2 but looked WORSE when compared to it.

The playerbase is low because people are biased idiots. Half of the 'Halo 2' lovers only played Halo 2. For anything, fans could've complained about the artistic change between Halo 1 and Halo 2.

Weapon spawns should be randomized. If you knew where every gun was, you could rush them at the start (sort of like how everyone did in the previous games.)

The vehicles are as weak as the driver. I've gotten more kills with the warthog than with the mantis. In fact, I've had matches where I'd get 45 kills and 6 deaths and some 20 of those kills could've came from a mix of mongooses and warthog passenger seats.

Race is back, skill ranking was always garbage (I've destroyed high ranks in halo 3), legendary (classic) slayer is there, spawns aren't bad.

343 was making halo accessible to everyone, not just COD players. In fact, as much as you'd like to believe that COD was full of children, it was actually Halo that originally was stereotyped as being the game for kids, and COD 4 being the game for 'adults'. There's just as many "Kid crying on Halo" videos as there are for COD
The story is essentially a reboot of halo 1. New planet, 3 enemies, blow up planet, ???, Profit.
Dialogue was better than the original series and the only downside was that chief spoke a tad too much at times. We've gotten out of the time when silent protagonists were cool. Now, it's just lazy on the developer's side to say "oh, you can relate to him." No, you can't. Master chief was a sage/black brick in Halo 1. No personality whatsoever. In Halo 2 on up, you could see the way that he would respond to certain things and even hear inflection in his voice. You could see how his body would be more sluggish in some situations and more athletic in others. You could also see his stubborn side in the campaigns in Halo 3 on up. Of course, that characterization is looked down upon.. Why? Because edgy gamers these days are too busy on /r/gaming posting pictures captioning "These graphics are life-like" on a picture of Half Life 2. In fact, if I went on personalization alone, the only 2 people in the trilogy that had personalities were Miranda, Cortana and Johnson. Don't give me that "chief is you" crap. If that were true, in your case, the Chief would be a whiny teenaged child that posts edgy comments on forums for attention.


Hammad
Joined: Sep 18, 2013

Imagination is more important than knowledge


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 05:04 PM    Msg. 18 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: ZOBI3KING
It reminds me a lot of those Bionicles I played with when I was little.

Ah, the memories!

Well, looks like we got another heated debate going on. With words. Lots of 'em.


jackrabbit
Joined: Apr 27, 2005

Fight Against the Machine of Deth!


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 05:17 PM    Msg. 19 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


Oh my god, you can't be serious. It's every post with you that you have to say something completely asinine. It's not the change that's terrible about the new Halo, it's the major continuity problems that are made by the change in art style, dialogue, story, forerunner bs, and things like that. It pretty much makes everything that the first trilogy's campaign established null. As for the multiplayer again it's not the change it's what it's changed to. pretty much a venal attempt by 343 to get players from the cod community to play Halo. It plays nothing at all like a Halo game's multiplayer to the point where it's no fun to play. Weapon spawns are random, weapon stats are garbage so everyone is just going to go for the dmr, Player spawns are ridiculous, the vehicles are all weak except for the mantis which is hilariously bad, the gametypes are all horrible, there's no classic slayer gametypes, the matchmaking has no skill ranking platform so there's no motivation to play matchmaking except weapon skins (wtf), and the playerbase is lower than a single cod livestream's viewer count.

So what you're saying is Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series? (Not that I agree with you about the never changing halo thing, Just because they was under Microsoft's strict deadlines) Halo 3 is very different from 2 and Halo Reach is very different from 3, I'm not saying that their engines are different, they're pretty similar. I'm saying they were unique in art style and in gameplay acceptably. You can look at a screenshot from each of them and know what game it came from. (cod is different).


Banshee, I'm not even going to give you the benefit of the doubt of knowing that I'd care whether you were serious or not. I've known from the beginning that you were a troll and that I'd be an idiot for ever taking you seriously.

No, I'm not saying "Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series." If that was your attempt at a straw man, you've failed. Adding a few mechanics from another game doesn't make it that game. If you want to go by that logic, COD had Dual wielding for years. If you want to say games copied mechanics, then Halo 3 copied COD. But of course, you wont admit that. First of all, it makes sense that master chief would be able to run. It's a supersoldier. What would be the point of all those augmentations if you NEVER saw them put to use in the game? What would've been the point of mentioning how fast he could run in the books if he just speedwalked in the game.

Halo's fanbase is full of xenophobic children. That's why you fear the change. Yes, it plays nothing at all like Halo 2's multiplayer (Halo Reach was a Halo game.), but that's because the game mechanics actually changed the game. If the multiplayer were the same every year, people would get bored with it.. It needs to evolve. If you wanted Halo 2 with new weapons, play Halo 3, in fact, Halo 3 already borrowed half of Halo 2's original campaign maps.

The change of art style is result of the change in developers. Take Iron man for example.
http://randommization.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Iron-Man-Armor-Infographic2.jpg
His armour has changed entirely from the original concept due to the change in artists and artist's inspirations, changes in what was acceptable in the current age, etc. If Halo 4 had the same art style as Halo 3, the game would've looked terrible as the last game of the current gen. Saints Row 3 used the same art style as Saints Row 2 but looked WORSE when compared to it.

The playerbase is low because people are biased idiots. Half of the 'Halo 2' lovers only played Halo 2. For anything, fans could've complained about the artistic change between Halo 1 and Halo 2.

Weapon spawns should be randomized. If you knew where every gun was, you could rush them at the start (sort of like how everyone did in the previous games.)

The vehicles are as weak as the driver. I've gotten more kills with the warthog than with the mantis. In fact, I've had matches where I'd get 45 kills and 6 deaths and some 20 of those kills could've came from a mix of mongooses and warthog passenger seats.

Race is back, skill ranking was always garbage (I've destroyed high ranks in halo 3), legendary (classic) slayer is there, spawns aren't bad.

343 was making halo accessible to everyone, not just COD players. In fact, as much as you'd like to believe that COD was full of children, it was actually Halo that originally was stereotyped as being the game for kids, and COD 4 being the game for 'adults'. There's just as many "Kid crying on Halo" videos as there are for COD
The story is essentially a reboot of halo 1. New planet, 3 enemies, blow up planet, ???, Profit.
Dialogue was better than the original series and the only downside was that chief spoke a tad too much at times. We've gotten out of the time when silent protagonists were cool. Now, it's just lazy on the developer's side to say "oh, you can relate to him." No, you can't. Master chief was a sage/black brick in Halo 1. No personality whatsoever. In Halo 2 on up, you could see the way that he would respond to certain things and even hear inflection in his voice. You could see how his body would be more sluggish in some situations and more athletic in others. You could also see his stubborn side in the campaigns in Halo 3 on up. Of course, that characterization is looked down upon.. Why? Because edgy gamers these days are too busy on /r/gaming posting pictures captioning "These graphics are life-like" on a picture of Half Life 2. In fact, if I went on personalization alone, the only 2 people in the trilogy that had personalities were Miranda, Cortana and Johnson. Don't give me that "chief is you" crap. If that were true, in your case, the Chief would be a whiny teenaged child that posts edgy comments on forums for attention.
Nice wall of text I did not read! =S WTH does It have to do with Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery? & why are all your post filled with complaints. of halo if you don't like halo that much why don't you juts save us all and not post! all your opinions. are total malarkey get a life!


master noob
Joined: Aug 10, 2012

343Industries Advocate


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 05:19 PM    Msg. 20 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
emotionally-charged and biased opinions


learn to debate, that way you can justify sounding like an idiot.


greg079
Joined: Apr 1, 2013

channeling my inner april fool


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 05:22 PM    Msg. 21 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64

Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


Oh my god, you can't be serious. It's every post with you that you have to say something completely asinine. It's not the change that's terrible about the new Halo, it's the major continuity problems that are made by the change in art style, dialogue, story, forerunner bs, and things like that. It pretty much makes everything that the first trilogy's campaign established null. As for the multiplayer again it's not the change it's what it's changed to. pretty much a venal attempt by 343 to get players from the cod community to play Halo. It plays nothing at all like a Halo game's multiplayer to the point where it's no fun to play. Weapon spawns are random, weapon stats are garbage so everyone is just going to go for the dmr, Player spawns are ridiculous, the vehicles are all weak except for the mantis which is hilariously bad, the gametypes are all horrible, there's no classic slayer gametypes, the matchmaking has no skill ranking platform so there's no motivation to play matchmaking except weapon skins (wtf), and the playerbase is lower than a single cod livestream's viewer count.

So what you're saying is Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series? (Not that I agree with you about the never changing halo thing, Just because they was under Microsoft's strict deadlines) Halo 3 is very different from 2 and Halo Reach is very different from 3, I'm not saying that their engines are different, they're pretty similar. I'm saying they were unique in art style and in gameplay acceptably. You can look at a screenshot from each of them and know what game it came from. (cod is different).

Quote:
^This. The only reason for which most of the community thinks Halo 3 is the best is only because Halo started changing after it. Every single attempt to innovate the game has been considered a murder to the saga.
Halo Wars has been considered trash because it was an RTS.
Halo 3 ODST has been considered trash because it has an open-world like gameplay.
Halo Reach has been considered trash because it introduced AAs and starting loadouts.
Halo 4 has been considered trash because it introduced permanent sprint, customizable loadouts and perks.

And I'm pretty sure that Halo 5 will be considered trash again, unless 343i will just copy Halo 2/3 and remove all the innovations made until now. And this really pisses me off. 343i isn't killing Halo, is the community that is making Halo dying.


Change doesn't automatically make something good. Halo, as a series, should have died after 3 or Reach. 343 isn't killing halo or making it better. Halo is dead and they're trying to pull as much money out of it as possible before everyone hates it and stops buying it completely.
Edited by Banshee64 on Dec 15, 2013 at 04:25 PM

while some of u guys may think banshee is trolling, i kinda agree with him... to an extent. halo 2 was my favorite, it's where halo started for me and i absolutely loved it, but i don't want every halo game to be halo 2 with better graphics, i enjoy change, i just want it to feel like it's still part of the halo series. for me halo was always this kinda sad story about the struggle of a few of humanities greatest standing in the path of an unstoppable enemy to save the lives of those who couldn't save themselves. for me reach was almost perfect in its story, i didn't play much of odst, but i liked what it did with it's story and gameplay. h3 wasn't my favorite initially but it's grown on me, the story was ok and the campaign was fun. but halo 2 and reach where my favorites.

halo, to me was never about the graphics... i mean come on, it's for console, of course it looks bad. i did like to art direction that they took in reach to make it seem a little less modern and more futuristic though.

i personally dislike halo 4 as a halo game, it has a different theme to it for one, it went from humanities struggle against an unstoppable alien force to, "hey you remember those guys u just stopped, well we're gonna bring them back and take this forerunner hero and turn him evil, go stop them!". i mean come on, really, can't u come up with something better? then they changed the art style and went with that overused "add detail everywhere makes it look sci fi" theme. don't even start about audio, a team of dead retarded monkeys could've done better. however the weapons where actually fairly balanced in SP except that everything was a bullet sponge (not new to the series) except that they made the enemies slightly more absorbent.

i think halo 4's multiplayer was absolute garbage, they took about 2 days to make a few cramped maps, have all the guns be OP as fluff, make a bunch of armors for customization, and that was it (a bit like halo2 actually, i hated halo 2's multiplayer).

personally, halo 4 wasn't bad as a game, but halo (being my favorite series), i expected better from. comparatively halo 4 was terrible, and i don't want to see them continue like that. (also kiddies bungie put dual wielding in marathon, it's not new development.)


Banshee64
Joined: Dec 4, 2012

oify


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 05:40 PM    Msg. 22 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


Oh my god, you can't be serious. It's every post with you that you have to say something completely asinine. It's not the change that's terrible about the new Halo, it's the major continuity problems that are made by the change in art style, dialogue, story, forerunner bs, and things like that. It pretty much makes everything that the first trilogy's campaign established null. As for the multiplayer again it's not the change it's what it's changed to. pretty much a venal attempt by 343 to get players from the cod community to play Halo. It plays nothing at all like a Halo game's multiplayer to the point where it's no fun to play. Weapon spawns are random, weapon stats are garbage so everyone is just going to go for the dmr, Player spawns are ridiculous, the vehicles are all weak except for the mantis which is hilariously bad, the gametypes are all horrible, there's no classic slayer gametypes, the matchmaking has no skill ranking platform so there's no motivation to play matchmaking except weapon skins (wtf), and the playerbase is lower than a single cod livestream's viewer count.

So what you're saying is Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series? (Not that I agree with you about the never changing halo thing, Just because they was under Microsoft's strict deadlines) Halo 3 is very different from 2 and Halo Reach is very different from 3, I'm not saying that their engines are different, they're pretty similar. I'm saying they were unique in art style and in gameplay acceptably. You can look at a screenshot from each of them and know what game it came from. (cod is different).


Banshee, I'm not even going to give you the benefit of the doubt of knowing that I'd care whether you were serious or not. I've known from the beginning that you were a troll and that I'd be an idiot for ever taking you seriously.

No, I'm not saying "Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series." If that was your attempt at a straw man, you've failed. Adding a few mechanics from another game doesn't make it that game. If you want to go by that logic, COD had Dual wielding for years. If you want to say games copied mechanics, then Halo 3 copied COD. But of course, you wont admit that. First of all, it makes sense that master chief would be able to run. It's a supersoldier. What would be the point of all those augmentations if you NEVER saw them put to use in the game? What would've been the point of mentioning how fast he could run in the books if he just speedwalked in the game.

Halo's fanbase is full of xenophobic children. That's why you fear the change. Yes, it plays nothing at all like Halo 2's multiplayer (Halo Reach was a Halo game.), but that's because the game mechanics actually changed the game. If the multiplayer were the same every year, people would get bored with it.. It needs to evolve. If you wanted Halo 2 with new weapons, play Halo 3, in fact, Halo 3 already borrowed half of Halo 2's original campaign maps.

The change of art style is result of the change in developers. Take Iron man for example.
http://randommization.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Iron-Man-Armor-Infographic2.jpg
His armour has changed entirely from the original concept due to the change in artists and artist's inspirations, changes in what was acceptable in the current age, etc. If Halo 4 had the same art style as Halo 3, the game would've looked terrible as the last game of the current gen. Saints Row 3 used the same art style as Saints Row 2 but looked WORSE when compared to it.

The playerbase is low because people are biased idiots. Half of the 'Halo 2' lovers only played Halo 2. For anything, fans could've complained about the artistic change between Halo 1 and Halo 2.

Weapon spawns should be randomized. If you knew where every gun was, you could rush them at the start (sort of like how everyone did in the previous games.)

The vehicles are as weak as the driver. I've gotten more kills with the warthog than with the mantis. In fact, I've had matches where I'd get 45 kills and 6 deaths and some 20 of those kills could've came from a mix of mongooses and warthog passenger seats.

Race is back, skill ranking was always garbage (I've destroyed high ranks in halo 3), legendary (classic) slayer is there, spawns aren't bad.

343 was making halo accessible to everyone, not just COD players. In fact, as much as you'd like to believe that COD was full of children, it was actually Halo that originally was stereotyped as being the game for kids, and COD 4 being the game for 'adults'. There's just as many "Kid crying on Halo" videos as there are for COD
The story is essentially a reboot of halo 1. New planet, 3 enemies, blow up planet, ???, Profit.
Dialogue was better than the original series and the only downside was that chief spoke a tad too much at times. We've gotten out of the time when silent protagonists were cool. Now, it's just lazy on the developer's side to say "oh, you can relate to him." No, you can't. Master chief was a sage/black brick in Halo 1. No personality whatsoever. In Halo 2 on up, you could see the way that he would respond to certain things and even hear inflection in his voice. You could see how his body would be more sluggish in some situations and more athletic in others. You could also see his stubborn side in the campaigns in Halo 3 on up. Of course, that characterization is looked down upon.. Why? Because edgy gamers these days are too busy on /r/gaming posting pictures captioning "These graphics are life-like" on a picture of Half Life 2. In fact, if I went on personalization alone, the only 2 people in the trilogy that had personalities were Miranda, Cortana and Johnson. Don't give me that "chief is you" crap. If that were true, in your case, the Chief would be a whiny teenaged child that posts edgy comments on forums for attention.


You're an idiot regardless of weather or not you think I'm a troll. If you do think I'm a troll then why would you in your right mind be replying to me?

I'm just going to address each point in a list.

1. Dual wielding is one thing. Weapon skins, loadout style weapon selection, weapon unlocks, killstreaks, unlock-able emblems, on-disc dlc, day 1 dlc, joining in-party matchmaking (the list goes on) are an entirely different thing.

2. You're talking about multiplayer, not campaign. Sprinting in campaign is entirely different than it is in multiplayer. Sprinting in multiplayer is only made worse by the ability to use both sprint and armor ablilities simultaneously.

3. That's illogical. Children are the people who like Halo 4 because it caters to players who aren't good at fps games by making thing easier. Kids from the 1999- generation won't have played really any other halo games except 4 and therefor not have known how the previous halos were better. If Halo 4 had been the start of the series, it would probably be as popular as Aliens vs Predator or Duke Nukem Forever. I'm 20; I started with Halo: Combat Evolved on an original Xbox. I don't fear change, as you put it, I hate it when a story is taken over by a terrible company whose goal is to cheapen the memory of a good game and they start changing the story that has been already established.

4. You can change an art style and not break the story. It wasn't that bad in Halo CEA for example, but in Halo 4, it's like they had never seen or played the original games and just made the game after reading some summary of all the stories on some website.

5. The playerbase is low because when a company makes their game easier so more people will play it and have fun, it becomes less fun for the people who play it because they want a game that they can compete in. And that is almost impossible in Halo 4.

6. See reason 5.

7. I don't know how to argue with that because it doesn't make any sense.

8. Who the hell cares about race? Skill ranking was it's best in Halo 2 and was acceptable in the later games. There's plenty of explanations to why you beat someone who was a higher rank than you. (playlist, ffa, assists, etc) and you've got not supporting argument for why the spawns are not bad.

9. 343 was catering to players who are terrible at playing fps games.

10. You're saying the story was the same as Halo 1 and you're trying to argue that change is better for halo and that Halo 4 is good because of that. Do you not see the contradiction here?

11. The dialogue was HORRIBLE. Both multiplayer and single player had the worst dialogue I've ever heard coming from an xbox title ever. Not only were all the human characters as stereotypical as possible, but cortana became boring, and instead of being witty and clever, was awkward and confusing. The love interest bull**** was very played out and made it so when cortana died, no one really cared.

12. You're getting sources from reddit. Are you 12? nb4 a meme reply with some anime picture and a stupid caption.

What's your gamertag? I want to see if you're one of the people who praise Halo 4 because you were terrible at every other game and you're good at Halo 4.


Kozakuu
Joined: Oct 30, 2011

Only the person who was wisdom can read the most.


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 05:42 PM    Msg. 23 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Weapon spawns should be randomized. If you knew where every gun was, you could rush them at the start (sort of like how everyone did in the previous games.)

I don't want to get dragged into this conversation but I'd like to respond to this point.

Fixed weapon spawns are a central point of satisfying gameplay because they reinforce the element of map control. Weapons spawning in fixed locations gives teams with good teamwork the opportunity to be rewarded for their efforts rather than just randomly coming across a weapon they did not work for.
Let's take Valhalla for example: If my team controls top-mid then we have access to the Spartan Laser which effectively cancels out any vehicles the enemy may have. As the enemy team does not hold this position, they rightfully do not have the same capacity to destroy vehicles like we do. Holding points on a map is one of the most satisfying things to do in Halo since you know that because you have done the hard work, you reap the rewards.


AllySuzumiya
Joined: Feb 27, 2013

"Kotae wa itsumo watashi no mune ni.."


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 05:58 PM    Msg. 24 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: jackrabbit
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


Oh my god, you can't be serious. It's every post with you that you have to say something completely asinine. It's not the change that's terrible about the new Halo, it's the major continuity problems that are made by the change in art style, dialogue, story, forerunner bs, and things like that. It pretty much makes everything that the first trilogy's campaign established null. As for the multiplayer again it's not the change it's what it's changed to. pretty much a venal attempt by 343 to get players from the cod community to play Halo. It plays nothing at all like a Halo game's multiplayer to the point where it's no fun to play. Weapon spawns are random, weapon stats are garbage so everyone is just going to go for the dmr, Player spawns are ridiculous, the vehicles are all weak except for the mantis which is hilariously bad, the gametypes are all horrible, there's no classic slayer gametypes, the matchmaking has no skill ranking platform so there's no motivation to play matchmaking except weapon skins (wtf), and the playerbase is lower than a single cod livestream's viewer count.

So what you're saying is Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series? (Not that I agree with you about the never changing halo thing, Just because they was under Microsoft's strict deadlines) Halo 3 is very different from 2 and Halo Reach is very different from 3, I'm not saying that their engines are different, they're pretty similar. I'm saying they were unique in art style and in gameplay acceptably. You can look at a screenshot from each of them and know what game it came from. (cod is different).


Banshee, I'm not even going to give you the benefit of the doubt of knowing that I'd care whether you were serious or not. I've known from the beginning that you were a troll and that I'd be an idiot for ever taking you seriously.

No, I'm not saying "Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series." If that was your attempt at a straw man, you've failed. Adding a few mechanics from another game doesn't make it that game. If you want to go by that logic, COD had Dual wielding for years. If you want to say games copied mechanics, then Halo 3 copied COD. But of course, you wont admit that. First of all, it makes sense that master chief would be able to run. It's a supersoldier. What would be the point of all those augmentations if you NEVER saw them put to use in the game? What would've been the point of mentioning how fast he could run in the books if he just speedwalked in the game.

Halo's fanbase is full of xenophobic children. That's why you fear the change. Yes, it plays nothing at all like Halo 2's multiplayer (Halo Reach was a Halo game.), but that's because the game mechanics actually changed the game. If the multiplayer were the same every year, people would get bored with it.. It needs to evolve. If you wanted Halo 2 with new weapons, play Halo 3, in fact, Halo 3 already borrowed half of Halo 2's original campaign maps.

The change of art style is result of the change in developers. Take Iron man for example.
http://randommization.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Iron-Man-Armor-Infographic2.jpg
His armour has changed entirely from the original concept due to the change in artists and artist's inspirations, changes in what was acceptable in the current age, etc. If Halo 4 had the same art style as Halo 3, the game would've looked terrible as the last game of the current gen. Saints Row 3 used the same art style as Saints Row 2 but looked WORSE when compared to it.

The playerbase is low because people are biased idiots. Half of the 'Halo 2' lovers only played Halo 2. For anything, fans could've complained about the artistic change between Halo 1 and Halo 2.

Weapon spawns should be randomized. If you knew where every gun was, you could rush them at the start (sort of like how everyone did in the previous games.)

The vehicles are as weak as the driver. I've gotten more kills with the warthog than with the mantis. In fact, I've had matches where I'd get 45 kills and 6 deaths and some 20 of those kills could've came from a mix of mongooses and warthog passenger seats.

Race is back, skill ranking was always garbage (I've destroyed high ranks in halo 3), legendary (classic) slayer is there, spawns aren't bad.

343 was making halo accessible to everyone, not just COD players. In fact, as much as you'd like to believe that COD was full of children, it was actually Halo that originally was stereotyped as being the game for kids, and COD 4 being the game for 'adults'. There's just as many "Kid crying on Halo" videos as there are for COD
The story is essentially a reboot of halo 1. New planet, 3 enemies, blow up planet, ???, Profit.
Dialogue was better than the original series and the only downside was that chief spoke a tad too much at times. We've gotten out of the time when silent protagonists were cool. Now, it's just lazy on the developer's side to say "oh, you can relate to him." No, you can't. Master chief was a sage/black brick in Halo 1. No personality whatsoever. In Halo 2 on up, you could see the way that he would respond to certain things and even hear inflection in his voice. You could see how his body would be more sluggish in some situations and more athletic in others. You could also see his stubborn side in the campaigns in Halo 3 on up. Of course, that characterization is looked down upon.. Why? Because edgy gamers these days are too busy on /r/gaming posting pictures captioning "These graphics are life-like" on a picture of Half Life 2. In fact, if I went on personalization alone, the only 2 people in the trilogy that had personalities were Miranda, Cortana and Johnson. Don't give me that "chief is you" crap. If that were true, in your case, the Chief would be a whiny teenaged child that posts edgy comments on forums for attention.
Nice wall of text I did not read! =S WTH does It have to do with Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery? & why are all your post filled with complaints. of halo if you don't like halo that much why don't you juts save us all and not post! all your opinions. are total malarkey get a life!


TLDR edition - Banshee is bad.

I like Halo but i dont ascend it to God status like most other gamers. Halo has its flaws. People never recognize that. As someone who played Halo competitively, Halo casually was never a challenge to me, even when facing high ranks. In the Halo 2 era, I was at malls, playing the game competitively in the eastern MLG brackets. No, I was no T Squared or BS Angel, but I've been able to hold my own against a lot of pros. At home, i was just as good. Ive taken pictures of alot of my games and posted them on my Facebook and when i got a harddrive, i posted videos and clips. AWB Ninebreaker on xbox live if youd want to see. Granted now i'm nowhere near as good as i used to be, so it takes a few games to get some of the rust off. That aside, I have family i have friends. To be honest, the only reason i even play multiplayer now on Halo is because its one of the few games with local multiplayer. I beat all the Halos (havent played ODST) on legendary, so its not like i could go back to that. I pretty much play a game for the achievements and ditch it when its done. If a game has local multiplayer, it gives me a reason to play.

The sole argument against halo is the result of a republican born bias. You dont like change. Theres still cults of people that think goldeneye was the epitomy of fps games. Gamers hate change, rather, they fear it. Greg, like it or not: Halo 4 is a Halo game. If i have to leave for liking Halo 4 on a Halo forum, what would be your punishment for hating it?

People tend to jump on hate wagons. The majority hates Halo 4 so people join the majority. Tautology at its finest.

TLDR for the entitled; #DealWithIt

The one who 'complains' the most about Halo is the one who has the most optimistic philosophy of the series as a whole. Halo 4 is a reboot of Halo 1. Look at it that way and you'll see why I cant hate it.

Banshee, it takes absolutly nothing out of me to type on a keyboard for 5 seconds. Its not very strenuous when you have the slightest bit of dexterity. I responded to you to dash these popular opinions.

Halo 4 didnt rip off Halo 1's story. It was a love letter to the original series. A reboot with an original spin but a familiar premise.

Spartans are supersoldiers. Augmentations to both muscles and mind give them the ability to make decisions much faster than a normal human and execute them just as fast. Logically speaking, if a spartan didnt know how to do two things at once, hed be stupid. War is about multitasking. If you focus on one front, another isnt covered. If you focus on one battle, other battles are lost. Balance is giving everyone the same abilities in the same circumstance and relying on tactics to help them. Up until halo reach, the only consistant method of cover was a chest high wall ( Yahtzee could tell you that.)

Halo fans are the ones who like Halo 4. People insult children for liking COD but at least theyre consistant fans. I honestly hate edgy "trolls" online more than kids. At least kids wont post videos on youtube of their troll attempts.

If you played the original game, you'd know that the covenant and mankind WERENT allies by any means. The arbiter wasnt even a "good guy." He had a common enemy and worked to defeat them. After that he went home to quell a civil war. Since, the covenant had splintered into factions (hence, civil war). What in that contradicts the story?

The playerbase is low because of gaming circlejerks. People hate because other people hate. Its a trend.

343 was opening the playerbase to everyone. Regardless of how much skill a game needs, youll still find sucky players. Halo 2's playerbase was abysmal and Halo 3's was just as much. Dont you dare tell me you thought they were good.

The dialogue was always bad. Even johnson came off as corny at times. "I know what the ladies like." Really? Half his quotes are more ironic than iconic, seeing as his personality was ripped from stereotypical geriatic yet enthusiastic, ethnic supporting character that died a stupid death. Gravemind tried too hard to be mysterious. Cortana seemed less analytical and more just a pair of boobs for chief to have a quick up down to before going to the next room.
Edited by AllySuzumiya on Dec 15, 2013 at 06:24 PM


Banshee64
Joined: Dec 4, 2012

oify


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 06:08 PM    Msg. 25 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Quote: --- Original message by: jackrabbit
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
All aboard the 343i hate wagon.

I can't take Halo fans seriously when they hold a game in such high regards that did absolutely nothing new in gaming asides from perpetuate the stereotype that a game needs multiplayer to compensate for it's garbage story. Halo 2 had like 3 or 4 levels that were taken out of the game because it was rushed and only shipped with like 8 maps, then made you pay for the other maps in person (because microtransactions didnt really exist yet.) The story was a rip off of the first one, the ragdolls were fake (Albeit they were some good fakes, but you could still see the stock 'grunt fall' animation from time to time), framerate drops and a nauseating amount of bloom (even further nauseating in Halo 3. The only new thing in the game was Hijacking, because dual-wielding had already been done to death at that point and adding melee weapons isn't really a game changer (in fact, it made noobs that charge power weapons even more annoying.)

The idiots on this site that want Halo 5 to be like Halo 2 are annoying. For some reason, Call of Duty (A game that's stuck to the same formula without breaking a single thing) is considered stagnant and 'never-changing', yet we encourage 343i to make a game that's exactly like Halo 3. People didn't like the new master chief model, so they wanted the Halo 3 armour back. They wanted dual wielding back. They didn't like the 'plastic graphics'. They hated the music in the new game. They didnt like that the covenant were antagonists again. They didn't like halo 4's multiplayer.. So.. if you listen to fans cries on this one and take all that stuff out, what do you get? Halo 4 or Halo 3.1? Exactly.


Oh my god, you can't be serious. It's every post with you that you have to say something completely asinine. It's not the change that's terrible about the new Halo, it's the major continuity problems that are made by the change in art style, dialogue, story, forerunner bs, and things like that. It pretty much makes everything that the first trilogy's campaign established null. As for the multiplayer again it's not the change it's what it's changed to. pretty much a venal attempt by 343 to get players from the cod community to play Halo. It plays nothing at all like a Halo game's multiplayer to the point where it's no fun to play. Weapon spawns are random, weapon stats are garbage so everyone is just going to go for the dmr, Player spawns are ridiculous, the vehicles are all weak except for the mantis which is hilariously bad, the gametypes are all horrible, there's no classic slayer gametypes, the matchmaking has no skill ranking platform so there's no motivation to play matchmaking except weapon skins (wtf), and the playerbase is lower than a single cod livestream's viewer count.

So what you're saying is Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series? (Not that I agree with you about the never changing halo thing, Just because they was under Microsoft's strict deadlines) Halo 3 is very different from 2 and Halo Reach is very different from 3, I'm not saying that their engines are different, they're pretty similar. I'm saying they were unique in art style and in gameplay acceptably. You can look at a screenshot from each of them and know what game it came from. (cod is different).


Banshee, I'm not even going to give you the benefit of the doubt of knowing that I'd care whether you were serious or not. I've known from the beginning that you were a troll and that I'd be an idiot for ever taking you seriously.

No, I'm not saying "Halo 4 is good for changing from the never changing halo series but becoming a member of the cod never changing series." If that was your attempt at a straw man, you've failed. Adding a few mechanics from another game doesn't make it that game. If you want to go by that logic, COD had Dual wielding for years. If you want to say games copied mechanics, then Halo 3 copied COD. But of course, you wont admit that. First of all, it makes sense that master chief would be able to run. It's a supersoldier. What would be the point of all those augmentations if you NEVER saw them put to use in the game? What would've been the point of mentioning how fast he could run in the books if he just speedwalked in the game.

Halo's fanbase is full of xenophobic children. That's why you fear the change. Yes, it plays nothing at all like Halo 2's multiplayer (Halo Reach was a Halo game.), but that's because the game mechanics actually changed the game. If the multiplayer were the same every year, people would get bored with it.. It needs to evolve. If you wanted Halo 2 with new weapons, play Halo 3, in fact, Halo 3 already borrowed half of Halo 2's original campaign maps.

The change of art style is result of the change in developers. Take Iron man for example.
http://randommization.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Iron-Man-Armor-Infographic2.jpg
His armour has changed entirely from the original concept due to the change in artists and artist's inspirations, changes in what was acceptable in the current age, etc. If Halo 4 had the same art style as Halo 3, the game would've looked terrible as the last game of the current gen. Saints Row 3 used the same art style as Saints Row 2 but looked WORSE when compared to it.

The playerbase is low because people are biased idiots. Half of the 'Halo 2' lovers only played Halo 2. For anything, fans could've complained about the artistic change between Halo 1 and Halo 2.

Weapon spawns should be randomized. If you knew where every gun was, you could rush them at the start (sort of like how everyone did in the previous games.)

The vehicles are as weak as the driver. I've gotten more kills with the warthog than with the mantis. In fact, I've had matches where I'd get 45 kills and 6 deaths and some 20 of those kills could've came from a mix of mongooses and warthog passenger seats.

Race is back, skill ranking was always garbage (I've destroyed high ranks in halo 3), legendary (classic) slayer is there, spawns aren't bad.

343 was making halo accessible to everyone, not just COD players. In fact, as much as you'd like to believe that COD was full of children, it was actually Halo that originally was stereotyped as being the game for kids, and COD 4 being the game for 'adults'. There's just as many "Kid crying on Halo" videos as there are for COD
The story is essentially a reboot of halo 1. New planet, 3 enemies, blow up planet, ???, Profit.
Dialogue was better than the original series and the only downside was that chief spoke a tad too much at times. We've gotten out of the time when silent protagonists were cool. Now, it's just lazy on the developer's side to say "oh, you can relate to him." No, you can't. Master chief was a sage/black brick in Halo 1. No personality whatsoever. In Halo 2 on up, you could see the way that he would respond to certain things and even hear inflection in his voice. You could see how his body would be more sluggish in some situations and more athletic in others. You could also see his stubborn side in the campaigns in Halo 3 on up. Of course, that characterization is looked down upon.. Why? Because edgy gamers these days are too busy on /r/gaming posting pictures captioning "These graphics are life-like" on a picture of Half Life 2. In fact, if I went on personalization alone, the only 2 people in the trilogy that had personalities were Miranda, Cortana and Johnson. Don't give me that "chief is you" crap. If that were true, in your case, the Chief would be a whiny teenaged child that posts edgy comments on forums for attention.
Nice wall of text I did not read! =S WTH does It have to do with Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery? & why are all your post filled with complaints. of halo if you don't like halo that much why don't you juts save us all and not post! all your opinions. are total malarkey get a life!


TLDR edition - Banshee is bad.

I like Halo but i dont ascend it to God status like most other gamers. Halo has its flaws. People never recognize that. As someone who played Halo competitively, Halo casually was never a challenge to me, even when facing high ranks. In the Halo 2 era, I was at malls, playing the game competitively in the eastern MLG brackets. No, I was no T Squared or BS Angel, but I've been able to hold my own against a lot of pros. At home, i was just as good. Ive taken pictures of alot of my games and posted them on my Facebook and when i got a harddrive, i posted videos and clips. AWB Ninebreaker on xbox live if youd want to see. Granted now i'm nowhere near as good as i used to be, so it takes a few games to get some of the rust off. That aside, I have family i have friends. To be honest, the only reason i even play multiplayer now on Halo is because its one of the few games with local multiplayer. I beat all the Halos (havent played ODST) on legendary, so its not like i could go back to that. I pretty much play a game for the achievements and ditch it when its done. If a game has local multiplayer, it gives me a reason to play.

The sole argument against halo is the result of a republican born bias. You dont like change. Theres still cults of people that think goldeneye was the epitomy of fps games. Gamers hate change, rather, they fear it. Greg, like it or not: Halo 4 is a Halo game. If i have to leave for liking Halo 4 on a Halo forum, what would be your punishment for hating it?

People tend to jump on hate wagons. The majority hates Halo 4 so people join the majority. Tautology at its finest.

TLDR for the entitled; #DealWithIt

The one who 'complains' the most about Halo is the one who has the most optimistic philosophy of the series as a whole. Halo 4 is a reboot of Halo 1. Look at it that way and you'll see why I cant hate it.


Prove it.


KingNick220
Joined: Jul 14, 2008

xXx 420 n0sc0pes MLG xXx


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 06:32 PM    Msg. 26 of 46       
Halo, by definition, was a arena shooter. Halo 4, by definition, is a loadout based shooter. Therefore, Halo 4 is not a halo game. I find it hilarious that you're a "competitive halo player" and you enjoy features like RANDOM weapons and SPRINT. You would realize that sprint and random weapon spawns break map control. Halo 4 is made to be easy (no descoping, the insane amount of aim assist, the AR that is hitscan and kills in 13 bullets, perks, and minimum movement acceleration which leads to really bad strafing) so I wouldn't be surprised if kids who finally do well in halo 4 stick with it. Go to www.teambeyond.net and tell them how much you love those features, see how fast you get flamed by what's left of the competitive community.


Dumb AI
Joined: Sep 18, 2011

Dead.


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 06:55 PM    Msg. 27 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: jackrabbit
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
text wall

text wall uber
Nice wall of text I did not read! =S WTH does It have to do with Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery? & why are all your post filled with complaints. of halo if you don't like halo that much why don't you juts save us all and not post! all your opinions. are total malarkey get a life!

Wait, what did Forza and Halo Spartan Assault have to do with CE?
(lol, quote fail)
Edited by Dumb AI on Dec 15, 2013 at 06:56 PM


AllySuzumiya
Joined: Feb 27, 2013

"Kotae wa itsumo watashi no mune ni.."


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 06:55 PM    Msg. 28 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: KingNick220
Halo, by definition, was a arena shooter. Halo 4, by definition, is a loadout based shooter. Therefore, Halo 4 is not a halo game. I find it hilarious that you're a "competitive halo player" and you enjoy features like RANDOM weapons and SPRINT. You would realize that sprint and random weapon spawns break map control. Halo 4 is made to be easy (no descoping, the insane amount of aim assist, the AR that is hitscan and kills in 13 bullets, perks, and minimum movement acceleration which leads to really bad strafing) so I wouldn't be surprised if kids who finally do well in halo 4 stick with it. Go to www.teambeyond.net and tell them how much you love those features, see how fast you get flamed by what's left of the competitive community.


Actually, ive since moved on to battlefield 4. I only played Halo 4 recently to piss around and test out my HDTV. If you read what I said before, balance isnt making players bullet sponges and nerfing weapons. Its lettimg everyone use the same weapon if they chose. Map control is nonexistant. If weapons and vehicles decide who controls the map, the players clearly arent very tactical. Play Arma for 3 minutes and youd see that weapon and vehicle superiority mean nothing when you have good tactics.

Halo 3, in my opinion, was easier than halo 4. The shields were practically non existant and you could kill anyone with a shot of the assault rifle and a melee attack. Nobody said i 'loved' these features. I've stated that this doesnt break the game. If you think a game stands on multiplayer alone, you're a casual. Fair and simple. Ironically, the last bit of skill needed in Halo was in Halo 2, when the fastest kills youd get were from battle rifle headshots, not spray and melee like Halo 3. Even still, Halo 1 was the king of competitive gaming. That and Counterstrike. Both took more than a chest high wall and a power weapon to be good at.

Also, Halo, by definition is a first person shooter first, with arena being the classification. If it were an arena shooter, Sidewinder, Sandtrap, Bloodgulch, Infinity, (and arguably ever other multiplayer level of Halo 3) aren't arena maps. Arena maps are enclosed and small. Halo was always large and encouraged exploration of the map
Edited by AllySuzumiya on Dec 15, 2013 at 07:04 PM


Kozakuu
Joined: Oct 30, 2011

Only the person who was wisdom can read the most.


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 07:09 PM    Msg. 29 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
If weapons and vehicles decide who controls the map, the players clearly arent very tactical.
Edited by AllySuzumiya on Dec 15, 2013 at 07:04 PM

It is a tactic to hold one area of a map due to the weapons or vehicles there. One that usually means your team wins.


KingNick220
Joined: Jul 14, 2008

xXx 420 n0sc0pes MLG xXx


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 07:21 PM    Msg. 30 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya

Quote: --- Original message by: KingNick220
Halo, by definition, was a arena shooter. Halo 4, by definition, is a loadout based shooter. Therefore, Halo 4 is not a halo game. I find it hilarious that you're a "competitive halo player" and you enjoy features like RANDOM weapons and SPRINT. You would realize that sprint and random weapon spawns break map control. Halo 4 is made to be easy (no descoping, the insane amount of aim assist, the AR that is hitscan and kills in 13 bullets, perks, and minimum movement acceleration which leads to really bad strafing) so I wouldn't be surprised if kids who finally do well in halo 4 stick with it. Go to www.teambeyond.net and tell them how much you love those features, see how fast you get flamed by what's left of the competitive community.


Actually, ive since moved on to battlefield 4. I only played Halo 4 recently to piss around and test out my HDTV. If you read what I said before, balance isnt making players bullet sponges and nerfing weapons. Its lettimg everyone use the same weapon if they chose. Map control is nonexistant. If weapons and vehicles decide who controls the map, the players clearly arent very tactical. Play Arma for 3 minutes and youd see that weapon and vehicle superiority mean nothing when you have good tactics.

Halo 3, in my opinion, was easier than halo 4. The shields were practically non existant and you could kill anyone with a shot of the assault rifle and a melee attack. Nobody said i 'loved' these features. I've stated that this doesnt break the game. If you think a game stands on multiplayer alone, you're a casual. Fair and simple. Ironically, the last bit of skill needed in Halo was in Halo 2, when the fastest kills youd get were from battle rifle headshots, not spray and melee like Halo 3. Even still, Halo 1 was the king of competitive gaming. That and Counterstrike. Both took more than a chest high wall and a power weapon to be good at.

Also, Halo, by definition is a first person shooter first, with arena being the classification. If it were an arena shooter, Sidewinder, Sandtrap, Bloodgulch, Infinity, (and arguably ever other multiplayer level of Halo 3) aren't arena maps. Arena maps are enclosed and small. Halo was always large and encouraged exploration of the map
Edited by AllySuzumiya on Dec 15, 2013 at 07:04 PM
Arena shooters are games were everyone starts on equal footing, weapons and power ups spawn on the map, and the better players come out on top. Every halo map until Reach followed this formula, armor abilities caused this breaking of the formula. Arma 3 is a tactical simulator, Halo isn't. Comparing Arma to Halo is laughable. I honestly hate Halo 3, with its clunky movement and aiming, and it's awful hit detection and net code. Halo CE is the best halo game, with a balanced sandbox and difficult to use utility weapon. To say that Halo 2 takes no skill is pretty funny, considering halo 2 had button combos, the best movement and strafe in the series, and contained no random elements, which is something Halo 3 onward had.


jackrabbit
Joined: Apr 27, 2005

Fight Against the Machine of Deth!


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 08:35 PM    Msg. 31 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: Dumb AI

Quote: --- Original message by: jackrabbit
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
text wall

text wall uber
Nice wall of text I did not read! =S WTH does It have to do with Halo: Spartan Assault Forza Motorsport 5 Livery? & why are all your post filled with complaints. of halo if you don't like halo that much why don't you juts save us all and not post! all your opinions. are total malarkey get a life!

Wait, what did Forza and Halo Spartan Assault have to do with CE?
(lol, quote fail)
Edited by Dumb AI on Dec 15, 2013 at 06:56 PM
Pretty much everything! it's custom and halo :P

Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
when the fastest kills youd get were from battle rifle headshots
Edited by AllySuzumiya on Dec 15, 2013 at 07:04 PM

Wrong! Plazma pistol, smg combo.


Edited by jackrabbit on Dec 15, 2013 at 08:44 PM


Banshee64
Joined: Dec 4, 2012

oify


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 09:04 PM    Msg. 32 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: Banshee64
nb4 a meme reply with some anime picture and a stupid caption.

Edited by Banshee64 on Dec 15, 2013 at 09:04 PM


greg079
Joined: Apr 1, 2013

channeling my inner april fool


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 09:52 PM    Msg. 33 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
TLDR edition - Banshee is bad.

I like Halo but i dont ascend it to God status like most other gamers. Halo has its flaws. People never recognize that. As someone who played Halo competitively, Halo casually was never a challenge to me, even when facing high ranks. In the Halo 2 era, I was at malls, playing the game competitively in the eastern MLG brackets. No, I was no T Squared or BS Angel, but I've been able to hold my own against a lot of pros. At home, i was just as good. Ive taken pictures of alot of my games and posted them on my Facebook and when i got a harddrive, i posted videos and clips. AWB Ninebreaker on xbox live if youd want to see. Granted now i'm nowhere near as good as i used to be, so it takes a few games to get some of the rust off. That aside, I have family i have friends. To be honest, the only reason i even play multiplayer now on Halo is because its one of the few games with local multiplayer. I beat all the Halos (havent played ODST) on legendary, so its not like i could go back to that. I pretty much play a game for the achievements and ditch it when its done. If a game has local multiplayer, it gives me a reason to play.

The sole argument against halo is the result of a republican born bias. You dont like change. Theres still cults of people that think goldeneye was the epitomy of fps games. Gamers hate change, rather, they fear it. Greg, like it or not: Halo 4 is a Halo game. If i have to leave for liking Halo 4 on a Halo forum, what would be your punishment for hating it?

People tend to jump on hate wagons. The majority hates Halo 4 so people join the majority. Tautology at its finest.

TLDR for the entitled; #DealWithIt

The one who 'complains' the most about Halo is the one who has the most optimistic philosophy of the series as a whole. Halo 4 is a reboot of Halo 1. Look at it that way and you'll see why I cant hate it.

Banshee, it takes absolutly nothing out of me to type on a keyboard for 5 seconds. Its not very strenuous when you have the slightest bit of dexterity. I responded to you to dash these popular opinions.

Halo 4 didnt rip off Halo 1's story. It was a love letter to the original series. A reboot with an original spin but a familiar premise.

Spartans are supersoldiers. Augmentations to both muscles and mind give them the ability to make decisions much faster than a normal human and execute them just as fast. Logically speaking, if a spartan didnt know how to do two things at once, hed be stupid. War is about multitasking. If you focus on one front, another isnt covered. If you focus on one battle, other battles are lost. Balance is giving everyone the same abilities in the same circumstance and relying on tactics to help them. Up until halo reach, the only consistant method of cover was a chest high wall ( Yahtzee could tell you that.)

Halo fans are the ones who like Halo 4. People insult children for liking COD but at least theyre consistant fans. I honestly hate edgy "trolls" online more than kids. At least kids wont post videos on youtube of their troll attempts.

If you played the original game, you'd know that the covenant and mankind WERENT allies by any means. The arbiter wasnt even a "good guy." He had a common enemy and worked to defeat them. After that he went home to quell a civil war. Since, the covenant had splintered into factions (hence, civil war). What in that contradicts the story?

The playerbase is low because of gaming circlejerks. People hate because other people hate. Its a trend.

343 was opening the playerbase to everyone. Regardless of how much skill a game needs, youll still find sucky players. Halo 2's playerbase was abysmal and Halo 3's was just as much. Dont you dare tell me you thought they were good.

The dialogue was always bad. Even johnson came off as corny at times. "I know what the ladies like." Really? Half his quotes are more ironic than iconic, seeing as his personality was ripped from stereotypical geriatic yet enthusiastic, ethnic supporting character that died a stupid death. Gravemind tried too hard to be mysterious. Cortana seemed less analytical and more just a pair of boobs for chief to have a quick up down to before going to the next room.
Edited by AllySuzumiya on Dec 15, 2013 at 06:24 PM

the truck is this? so your saying i'm republican because "i fear change", nah i enjoy change, love it actually. next, if anything i could be called republican because i prefer a hands off government over socialism and liberalism, but i don't want a political debate. also i'm not trying to force people to leave or hate halo 4, i'm only saying why i didn't like it, if u enjoy halo 4 then by all means, enjoy it.

also i hate halo 4's "super soldier" interactive cutscenes, it felt like some slow handicapped fat kid stumbling around with no finesse. also balance is having weaponry that takes multiple fast well aimed shots to kill before your killed, imo (not of that rocket launcher, sniper rifle, power weapon BS).
also i never said the arbiter was a good guy, i meant the didact. he wasn't some musclebound prIke, he was warrior fighting for the safety of his people.

lastly i have disliked halo's multiplayer from the beginning because it rewards players to get "cheap kills" and doesn't require skill to pop a rocket or spam grenades. and the dialogue was always meh. (hopefully these halo 4 complaints won't be in SPv3)


xnx
Joined: Feb 12, 2013

h2 marine anims or i detonate the vest


Posted: Dec 15, 2013 10:04 PM    Msg. 34 of 46       
I don't like the new arbiter, but I think that's mainly because they hired a bad artist for the new comic book series. I mean, they gave the jackals 4 fingers which is a big no-no, but I'm not going to blame 343 for these errors.

If you're going to duke out the arbiter something along these lines would be nice.
http://dutch02.deviantart.com/art/Halo-5-Arbiter-Concept-367955597
http://dutch02.deviantart.com/art/Halo-5-Arbiter-Concept-2-368753342


AllySuzumiya
Joined: Feb 27, 2013

"Kotae wa itsumo watashi no mune ni.."


Posted: Dec 16, 2013 10:40 AM    Msg. 35 of 46       
Quote: --- Original message by: greg079
Quote: --- Original message by: AllySuzumiya
TLDR edition - Banshee is bad.

I like Halo but i dont ascend it to God status like most other gamers. Halo has its flaws. People never recognize that. As someone who played Halo competitively, Halo casually was never a challenge to me, even when facing high ranks. In the Halo 2 era, I was at malls, playing the game competitively in the eastern MLG brackets. No, I was no T Squared or BS Angel, but I've been able to hold my own against a lot of pros. At home, i was just as good. Ive taken pictures of alot of my games and posted them on my Facebook and when i got a harddrive, i posted videos and clips. AWB Ninebreaker on xbox live if youd want to see. Granted now i'm nowhere near as good as i used to be, so it takes a few games to get some of the rust off. That aside, I have family i have friends. To be honest, the only reason i even play multiplayer now on Halo is because its one of the few games with local multiplayer. I beat all the Halos (havent played ODST) on legendary, so its not like i could go back to that. I pretty much play a game for the achievements and ditch it when its done. If a game has local multiplayer, it gives me a reason to play.

The sole argument against halo is the result of a republican born bias. You dont like change. Theres still cults of people that think goldeneye was the epitomy of fps games. Gamers hate change, rather, they fear it. Greg, like it or not: Halo 4 is a Halo game. If i have to leave for liking Halo 4 on a Halo forum, what would be your punishment for hating it?

People tend to jump on hate wagons. The majority hates Halo 4 so people join the majority. Tautology at its finest.

TLDR for the entitled; #DealWithIt

The one who 'complains' the most about Halo is the one who has the most optimistic philosophy of the series as a whole. Halo 4 is a reboot of Halo 1. Look at it that way and you'll see why I cant hate it.

Banshee, it takes absolutly nothing out of me to type on a keyboard for 5 seconds. Its not very strenuous when you have the slightest bit of dexterity. I responded to you to dash these popular opinions.

Halo 4 didnt rip off Halo 1's story. It was a love letter to the original series. A reboot with an original spin but a familiar premise.

Spartans are supersoldiers. Augmentations to both muscles and mind give them the ability to make decisions much faster than a normal human and execute them just as fast. Logically speaking, if a spartan didnt know how to do two things at once, hed be stupid. War is about multitasking. If you focus on one front, another isnt covered. If you focus on one battle, other battles are lost. Balance is giving everyone the same abilities in the same circumstance and relying on tactics to help them. Up until halo reach, the only consistant method of cover was a chest high wall ( Yahtzee could tell you that.)

Halo fans are the ones who like Halo 4. People insult children for liking COD but at least theyre consistant fans. I honestly hate edgy "trolls" online more than kids. At least kids wont post videos on youtube of their troll attempts.

If you played the original game, you'd know that the covenant and mankind WERENT allies by any means. The arbiter wasnt even a "good guy." He had a common enemy and worked to defeat them. After that he went home to quell a civil war. Since, the covenant had splintered into factions (hence, civil war). What in that contradicts the story?

The playerbase is low because of gaming circlejerks. People hate because other people hate. Its a trend.

343 was opening the playerbase to everyone. Regardless of how much skill a game needs, youll still find sucky players. Halo 2's playerbase was abysmal and Halo 3's was just as much. Dont you dare tell me you thought they were good.

The dialogue was always bad. Even johnson came off as corny at times. "I know what the ladies like." Really? Half his quotes are more ironic than iconic, seeing as his personality was ripped from stereotypical geriatic yet enthusiastic, ethnic supporting character that died a stupid death. Gravemind tried too hard to be mysterious. Cortana seemed less analytical and more just a pair of boobs for chief to have a quick up down to before going to the next room.
Edited by AllySuzumiya on Dec 15, 2013 at 06:24 PM

the truck is this? so your saying i'm republican because "i fear change", nah i enjoy change, love it actually. next, if anything i could be called republican because i prefer a hands off government over socialism and liberalism, but i don't want a political debate. also i'm not trying to force people to leave or hate halo 4, i'm only saying why i didn't like it, if u enjoy halo 4 then by all means, enjoy it.

also i hate halo 4's "super soldier" interactive cutscenes, it felt like some slow handicapped fat kid stumbling around with no finesse. also balance is having weaponry that takes multiple fast well aimed shots to kill before your killed, imo (not of that rocket launcher, sniper rifle, power weapon BS).
also i never said the arbiter was a good guy, i meant the didact. he wasn't some musclebound prIke, he was warrior fighting for the safety of his people.

lastly i have disliked halo's multiplayer from the beginning because it rewards players to get "cheap kills" and doesn't require skill to pop a rocket or spam grenades. and the dialogue was always meh. (hopefully these halo 4 complaints won't be in SPv3)


Xenophobic, Republican, take your pic. In the end, both sides of politics are full of idiots but at least liberals make a conscious effort not to wipe their hands off with a cleanex wipe after shaking hands with a black person.

Halo 4's Chief was the fastest chief in the entire series. He also moved the fastest in cutscenes, too. Look at how Chief runned in Halo 2 vs Halo 4. In Halo 2, Chief was hardly making any ground. In halo 4, chief was pumping his arms realistically and actually moving. When he punched someone, it looked like he was punching them. In that cutscene before the 6th level when the sphere went up behind him and how fast chief took out his rifle and turned to face it. If you paid attention to the motions he'd make in all of these cutscenes, you'd see that he didnt move at all like a tank. In fact, he had almost crysis-level agility (like when he jumped off that ghost)

Every multiplayer shooter rewards players to get "cheap kills" if you go by that logic. Balance is allowing everyone the opportunity to use the same weapons, while at the same time, encouraging them to form their own tactics with said weapons in order to defeat their opponents. Ie: using a shotgun against an energy sword, a sniper against a rocket launcher, etc. If a game were balanced by your standards, it would be essentially two people in a room with pistols that are pre-aimed to the head so that neither can blame their deaths on good reflexes. You can't balance a game completely without balancing characters. That aside, Halo 4's actually gotten better balance now than it had, say a year ago. last year, Halo 4 was incredibly unbalanced. Now, it's just unbalanced period. 'Point is, there is no such thing as a balanced shooter when people can use different weapons.

 
Page 1 of 2 Go to page: · [1] · 2 · Next

 
Previous Older Thread    Next newer Thread







Time: Thu December 12, 2019 8:25 AM 703 ms.
A Halo Maps Website