Less? You're less excited for more content? You wanted them to not take up a super amount of time, but still be good. That's what we're getting. And I said they wouldn't be campaign length, but apparently they'll have narrative and tie in with the campaign, they won't be backless firefight missions or something. Or at least that's how it sounds, this is all completely open to interpretation. I thought it was 30, considering the absolute party Infinity Ward threw when they bragged about MW3 running at 60fps...lol. Yeah I'm sure Reach ran at thirty, and if it did and 4 is using the same, but Engine with higher resolution, then 4 wont be more than 30. 60 FPS is an absolute waste of resources anyway.
Well, I guess I'm making some unfair assumptions. I dont like the idea of short yet numerous missions. It just kinda gives off a cheap feeling. I'd much rather have one weekly, almost campaign like mission. Again, just my preference
That. Anyway, enough of falling over the same thing for now. We can do that nearer to launch after 343 announces kill cams and a change to the name calling it call of halo 5, and then after that "saddeningly milked generic sci fi casual shooter title" and announcing halo 7-40. You doubt me now, when it happens ill be all like LOOK AT THIS QUOTE :O and you will be all leik :O Halo has always been at 30 fps. From what I know I think that upping a game to 60fps requires less detailed graphical textures. I think halo ahs been 30 for the sake of the art. Probably wrong there mind. Either that or 60 fps technology was not feasable in 2001. I remember having a computerised encyclopedia in 2000 and asking my parents why I couldn't use the internet bit of it. And I was all excited when they said in a few years, and I was all like "I CANT WAIT" True story. I think spartan ops will die faster than firefight. Firefight had its replayability. Mind you, firefight just wasn't a very core part of the experience. It never was. It's interesting how gameinformer says "dedicated" firefight mode. Perhaps it is returning in some shape or form, just not as a standalone option. I'm guessing something campaign like. Also, what about the spartan making the poiting movement with his fingers (I guess in spartan ops mode) Perhaps we may get something like operation flashpoint. Commandable squad. Ring in the middle with several pre-set actions. That would be DAMNED cool.
Where are people getting the idea that Microsoft is the bad guy behind all of these new ideas? When has anyone made that clear? Why would Microsoft have any part in the decision to keep AAs or any of the other stuff?
All the missions are linked under one narrative described by the CG that's released with them. They're probably split into 5 missions for convenience sakes, so that the games are about the length of multiplayer matches instead of campaign missions, so that players don't need to be as dedicated because they'll be short. If that's the case, it isn't cheap, it's perfect. It could play like one large campaign mission if you played all 5 missions one after the other, perhaps. I don't understand the complaint, but whatever.
microsoft is a crazy guy. Oh yes. I don't think 343 aqquired this for some reason. I advise you to translate it. And if it is related to multiplayer, at least we know stosh has nerfed it. BUT DEAR GOD!
Microsoft are the publishers. The developer gets paid by the publisher to make the game. Microsoft get to say what stays and what goes in the game. The developer is basically in simple terms the publishers *****. They get the final say as to what the game will be like. And don't try and prove otherwise, they've been teaching us this since day 1 at university on my games programming course.
I lol'd. People are blaming Microsoft because people want someone to blame apart from the Dev's, there's little else to it.
People are in denial that this is a COD rip off, but why wouldn't it be. Activision is making this game with 343i, so of course they're going to have an influence.
Why would Microsoft waste millions of dollars paying devs to make a game when they just make it themselves? wat
Because microsoft aren't a developer. They're like Activision, a publisher (the ones with all the money basically). They have the money to give to developers to make games for them. They give 343 the funds to go and make this game and 343 make what they're told. They get to come up with their own ideas but if microsoft dont like it, the idea is thrown out.
Sure, maybe Microsoft said that a better progression system was needed to keep the casual player base interested. That's extremely viable. What sounds stupid is saying that Microsoft said to include Random weapon drops and to leave AA's in.
Casual Gaming is a bigger market than competitive these days, so I can see why. Still, if they introduced a fixed version of true-skill again I'd be happy. Now, we can all stop blaming poor old 343 and start having a go at the real bad guys, Microsoft.
You guys are dumbasses. Not saying his opinion is right, but SecretSchnitzel is voicing his opinion. They could take ****, put it in a box and put halo 4 on a box and we'd buy it. Therefore it is our responsibility to voice our opinions. If everyone said they hated it and they weren't going to buy it, 343 would change it to suit our needs. We, the community, shape the game. So stop getting all "I am more mature then you, because I stand by while 343 drives the series into the ground" on us. Consider our opinions, how WE feel, how one of our most beloved gaming franchises is taking tips from a franchise who doesn't care about the gamer, and just follows the same formula to milk cash. Why do you think Robert Bowling quit? These changes COULD be for the better. But how are we to know? There is no beta, and we don't get info until the last second. So tell me, if we couldn't voice our opinions on gaming forums, or play the beta and post feedback, how are we to stop the series from going into the ground? We can't. Halo Reach changed many things, many for the better. Though many changes to the same recipe gives more chance of failure. I respect Bungie. I respect 343. But next time, remember, look what happened to Reach. Look what's happening to Halo 4. I just don't want to lose Halo.
"Not saying his opinion is right": It's an opinion, there's no right or wrong. I posted this in the lolbox with Pac this morning, but I might as well post it here. Some people seem to think that I've been jumping on Schnitz because he doesn't like the changes, or something to a similar effect. I don't like the changes either. I haven't responded to Peg, Nut or anyone else who expressed a negative opinion. I even expressed a negative opinion. He's not giving his opinion anymore. He's repeating himself. And not only is he repeating himself, but he's doing it more and more idiotically. And when someone tries to be a little bit optimistic, because hey, a thread filled with pessimistic whining is depressing as ****, the common response is "YOU AINT NO TRUE FAN, YO, YOU'RE A STUPID ****". Instead of discussing the game, it's a few people arguing over shite. My final words on this: If your reason for complaining to the stage where it is ****ING WHINING (REMEMBER THAT I SHARE YOUR VIEW) is that you want **** to change, there's an official forum for that. Yeah, they aren't handling it over there very well, but whatever. There's no point repeating this over and over here, it's a small enough community and the majority of us have already read your complaint, you don't need to repeat it and insult everyone at the same time. Anyway, this is where I drop it. I argued like this to stop the thread turning into something similar to any thread on Bungie.net, but it seems that it's going to **** because of it. Schnitz, tell everyone to kill themselves all you want, bro. Quoting for hilarity. Edit: I'm dropping this, thanks to a couple of people (RST more than anyone), I've realised that I'm being an idiot. Apologies and whatnot.
But in a community, the ones voicing their opinions aren't really representative of the entire consumer base. If people appreciate changes, they're more likely to keep their praises silent and continue doing whatever. But if someone doesn't like something, they're probably going to go out of their way to complain about it. I do it all the time. 343 and Microsoft both know this. Every company knows this. It's in everyone's best interest to stop the hateful posts until you actually have something to complain about (i.e the physical game or a gameplay video) because no one wants to read paragraphs of complaints on their gaming forum.
People are going to say negative things. People are going to say positive things. Can we please, as an intelligent race, move past throwing insults at each other? Everyone is complaining about people "saying the same thing over and over again", while ironically repeating that post after post. It's ridiculous. Discussion? Cool. Telling Schnitzel to stop being pessimistic, Pac monster to shut up because he just went full retard, or anything else like that isn't the point of this thread. In short, people have opinions, deal with it. That's life. Anyway, I realize you can post it in this thread, but can someone PM me a link to the full article scan? I can only find bits and pieces.