It's not necessarily OT, Trivial. They're talking about what fundamental shifts in previous Halo games should make it into the next one. Granted, that ideal has clouded away over pages of discussion of which game was better, but the overall idea is still there. All of this talk about net code and hit scans are a little above my head in the realm of game mechanics, so all I can really ask for in the future is a level of MP map design that emulates the prowess of Halo 2 maps. Anyone can make the argument that the majority of H2's maps were designed for single gametypes in mind, but I don't care. They were still a helluva lot more fun than any of the maps I've seen in the later Halo games.
If I'm not mistaken op means operation so call of duty black operations Unless I'm wrong black operations are military missions that are supposed to be secret.
I realize it's not truly OT. But when the last ten pages or so are pretty much Halo: Reach vs Halo 3 and "hurr durr casuals," the topic i pretty much derailed. Speaking of Flood, I still want Flood firefight.
HTML: Lolol As for plot speculation, I think it would be interesting if there was internal disagreement within the unsc. Possibly all out fighting, but maybe just heated arguements among characters who should be working together. It just seems like a possibility because the covenant aren't a that serious of a problem anymore
Someone missed the point or got the point but decided to act like a **** anyway. I expected that kind of reply out of oli or SS, not you nutduster. Decided being calm and collected wasn't for you today? Perfectly fine with no more flood. Waterfallninja I think the ops people are referring to is the "Spec Ops" name. The name is short for special operations but yes, "Black Ops" or Black Operations does mean secret.
That was a bit dickish... Pac may have been a little more kurt, but he did make the same case for hindsight bias that Peg did earlier and it was received a lot better.
I think that instead of building on AAs, 343i should have been building more on equipment. It seemed to work better than AAs (in my opinion), and it felt like they were balanced. It would also be more consistent story-wise than bringing back the armor abilities. Active camo seems to work better as equipment than AA; and I hope OS and AC are still powerups (doubt it).
I don't know if it was so much about "working better" as people generally feel that AA's would have been better as pick-ups like the equipment were and not as load-outs. The only equipment I ever found useful was the lift and in the rare occasion I used it to make a vehicle fly over head (or the more common case of using it to get into an enemy base).
Here's the point I was making minus the sarcasm: you have positioned yourself on one side of an ongoing battle around here. Pegasi has been pretty careful to stay out of it - to walk a middle road, so to speak. When he says something, regardless of which side of the divide it technically falls on, he says it usually in a reasonable way, and people interpret it within the larger context of the opinions he's known to have. So when he talks about something like hindsight bias as a way of defending Reach, he's still the same guy who doesn't like armor abilities or loadouts, and doesn't like that part of the overall direction of Halo 4; but he's capable of keeping a critical distance, being polite, and still saying what he DOES like about Reach/Halo 4. You may have been making the same basic point, but when you said whatever you said, it probably fell right in line with the other dozens of eye-rolling, "no-you're-just-delusional" type responses you've given in this thread. If you're wondering why reasonable discussion failed to ensue, that was most likely why. As for what you "expect" from me, maybe you should look at the tone of your own posts and wonder why you get the kind of replies you do. On balance I've been probably more of a defender than an attacker of Reach - there are plenty of things I dislike about it, but I can point to many examples of me defending its maps, specific aspects of its gameplay, its continuity with the series as a whole, and even the right of the developers to make the game they want regardless of what I personally think about it. Yet somehow, every time I breathe a word with a negative tinge to it, you see fit to jump down my throat and condescend to me like I am an unruly child. To wit, your last response in this thread: "Cause you know, once a word has been chosen it is locked off from all future iterations of anything." Yes, nothing dickish about that. I'm fairly certain if I had the time or inclination to catalog your posts here, 90% of them would be a sarcastic, condescending reply to somebody or other - and quite a few aimed at me and Pegasi, guys who (if you were thinking clearly) you would consider to be basically on your side. Not that we agree with you across the board, but we do defend the game, and we do speak cautiously and reasonably. So I say again: maybe it's time for some self-reflection.
Equipment were more fair and, IMO, more fun. Using a power drain to block a flanking route or stop an annoying warthog, destroying a chopper with a trip mine (amazing if you could pull it off in matchmaking), throwing down a regenerator and completely locking down an area, all fun and legitimate tactics. Sure, certain equipment were usually useless in a normal game (radar jammer, deployable cover, flare), but they were still fun to use and could serve a lot of purposes in custom gametypes. AAs are not fair (seems even more so in Halo 4), and I guess whether their fun or not is up to your opinion. They break maps and gameplay. The fact that they are returning in Halo 4 is proof that 343i really doesn't care about the wants of the community. If you spend any measure of time on a dedicated Halo forum it is not difficult to realize that most people hate AAs or at least think they are a bad idea.
They said a massive plot point would be Cortana's demise that all AI's inevitably go through. She'll be acting really strange and descend into madness. She'll probably find a way to live, but that's what the story is for.
I don't want to make too much of a judgment before seeing the game and these new features in action, but I'm a bit worried about the direction this game is going in. All we've heard about so far though has been about the campaign, coop modes, and matchmaking. The only thing I really care about is custom games and forge. I hope that for custom games there are tons more options than in the past, with no options from the past left out either, as what happened in Reach. I also hope that the new "permanent" sprint can be turned off via options, otherwise certain custom games will suffer.
...if you think I've been on one side then you haven't read a thing I've said or didn't understand the context. The only difference between Pegasi and my comments earlier is that I didn't have the fine details regarding the competitive play that Pegasi quotes. My stance has, and still is, not using overly negative language (and by overly negative I don't mean, "I'd like to see" or "I'm disappointed", I mean people saying the game will be horrible, a blatant rip-off, etc. I'd also say I wouldn't like to see people being unconditionally positive but as that hasn't happened at all yet, I can't really mention it) based on an incomplete image. If that isn't being "capable of keeping a critical distance" from an issue I don't know what is. As far as "being polite" when have I not been polite? I've laid out all my views in point by point basis without passing judgement on the people giving the point. Pointing out the lack of civility in discussion at earlier points is far from being impolite, that's pointing out the lack of politeness. Not that the level of politeness is an important matter in a discussion on the internet but I've tried very hard not to offend people. My views often are against what the majority of people who post in this discussion think so therefore have been received much more harshly (with people directly insulting me instead of my views on more than one occasion, including what you did) So you think defending what you said based on what you think I said at some point with some generalized quip that was never really said in this thread is a good justification eh? I stated a view few people had, the reason why "reasonable discussion failed to ensue" is because people don't like hearing a view they don't agree with. Especially when that person tells them the reason why they don't agree with it. Brain being told why it's not perfect tends to piss the brain off more. And you would be the expert on my tone right? Again, my stance has been essentially wait to play, then judge. As far as, "eveyr time I breath a word with a negative tinge to it" when? Seriously when have I quoted you and said that? I've had conversations with SS, conversations with Oli, conversations with Chris, and in all those conversations I usually namedrop you as one of the more collected people who represent the issues at hand with a calm objectiveness. That's why the response took me so by surprise because of that fact. I think you're attributing conversations you've had with people that weren't me to me. Quite a few aimed at you or peg eh? I have 127 posts in this thread, let's go through some of them. First post in this thread was regarding people making disparaging remarks about Halo 4 based on the 20 second teaser trailer shown at E3. A bunch of my early posts were regarding CE:A or people making inaccurate remarks regarding Halo canon. An argument early on about kinect (mostly involving 4shot). Then an argument regarding the canon of the game and real life physics (again, not involving you nor pegasi). Then eventually another argument with 4shot where he was talking about how much of a failure Reach was. Then, several hundred posts in I found the first response of mine to something you said. It was regarding AA. Then another discussion regarding kinect and CE:A (which, btw, I was right about. Voice commands worked just fine and didn't ruin the game). Then more discussion regarding halo canon. Then an argument over what MC was putting on the gun at the end of the trailer. Which is the first instance of arguing with pegasi that I could find. I eventually agreed with what they were saying which is why I didn't continue arguing the point. Then an argument with security over halo canon. Then an argument regarding whether the covenant would be involved in Halo 4/future halos. Apparently I was wrong. Then a very long argument with aschur about Cortana appearing "rogue" in the trailer (I believe I argued the same thing with Oli at some point as well). Then an argument with security regarding Halofest (strange as that argument was). This was the first post of mine after a little more information came out regarding Halo 4 on page 24 that was the premise for my stance on "wait to play it before judging it". You responded with I should go to the "give 343 a reacharound" thread. I didn't respond to you but instead argued with oli who was assuming things that weren't known at the time. Then came the first real argument with pegasi. That argument essentially ended in agreement with me. That's from a response to something Textured Sun said. That was me supporting something you said. The first time I mentioned hind sight bias in an argument with security (over essentially the same, don't be overly negative with scant details point)[/url] Then came the first real argument between us regarding grenades. You made your point and I didn't continue the argument. Then another argument with oli in which he was essentially inventing things to hate in details that weren't in what was provided. Then I accidentally quoted oli instead of neo and a longer then should have been argument regarding semantics happened (to which you weren't involved and pegasi was just pointing out my mistake). Then an argument with secretschniztel/oli about the same stuff I argued earlier (only this time there was a lot more, pac suks, 343i dildo up my ass, etc involved). Then an argument with chris/legit taco over how useful bitching is in a halo 4 discussion forum on forgehub (followed by more pac suks from SS and oli). Then came the longer then it should have been argument regarding oli's judgement of an exploding grunt (it wasn't so much an argument as me responding to his point, then clarifying what I said a page later, but apparently that was thought of as an argument deeply involving me). Then the only argument really involving pegasi and you for any larger length of time then just 1 or 2 posts was the spawn timer and most of the argument was between pegasi and I. I wasn't calling you nor pegasi "willfully blind" so let's keep perspective of who's being rude to who. And all of that was just the arguments, the vast majority of my 127 posts in this thread are just normal discussion between those arguments. Most of which had nothing to do with you or pegasi. In fact I'd say my interaction with you or Pegasi in this thread has been at most 5% of my 127 posts. As far as the sarcasm thing goes, nice to meet you, I'm a sarcastic person. That "Cause you know, once a word has been chosen it is locked off from all future iterations of anything." is sarcastic, but I'm not attacking you in the slightest, merely the idea that just because a game shares the same or similar terminology as another, older, game doesn't instantly imply rip off or scam. If you have any other proof of me "breathing down your neck" for something negative you've said I'd be glad to look at it and discuss. And I say again, don't be a ****.
Quicktime sounds nice too. [br][/br]Edited by merge: This. Equipment poromoted teamwork and being careful with them. With ONE Gravity Lift you can get your whole team somewhere, with a Flare multiple teammates would be safe to complete the objective or whatever. And one Power Drain to wreck the whole enmy defences. However, to accomplish all this stuff, you have to think smart, cause you don't get a second chance. They were like extremely well balanced Power Weapons.
While I don't really like Team Epiphany I found this hilarious. 343 Industries Discuss Halo 4 Multiplayer Features ( Machinima Parody) - YouTube
I have to say I agree with Neo on this one. Please don't pass judgement on what everybody says. Sometimes people post sarcastically for a reason. Maybe they just.. I don't know, really stand by their point and feel strongly about it? So feel free to indirectly insult me and ss for having strong feelings about something, and then act like a **** yourself. That right there was quite rude sarcasm.