The possibility of an even better forge is one of the main things I'm holding out hope for in Halo 4. Reach did some amazing things but the limitations quickly revealed themselves also; I hope 343 picked up that ball and ran with it. I've already kind of resigned myself on multiplayer. I'll undoubtedly play it because when you get right down to it, I've been playing Halo regularly since the original and I just can't imagine not playing the new one at least some. So right now I'm in the zone of "I hope this is all better than it sounds" and "Even if it's not, I guess I'll deal." I mean, there are things that drive me up a wall in Reach multiplayer (in actuality and not just on paper), but it's still fun in the 95% of games that some jerk isn't abusing an exploit like a ten-dollar hooker. Especially so after the title update. I have hopes that Halo 4 will shake out to be at least on that level, perhaps after a TU of its own if need be. And hey, if not, I can always just play more than other people and buy the weapons that let me win. (/Pacbait)
Yea it's really unfortunate. With a franchise like Halo, they should have a voting system or survey of some sort that allows them to track accurate results of what the fans want and make the game accordingly. It shouldn't even have to come to this though because they know what we want... Maybe after the game comes out they'll have said system for the pre-production of H5 (if they're not already in that production stage). I highly doubt it though.
We = who, though? I hate to harp on this, but here are some points to consider: 1. Call of Duty multiplayer has more players than Halo multiplayer (both currently and for a lot of the time since Reach was released) 2. Vanilla slayer runs a consistently MUCH higher population than super slayer and zero bloom combined 3. Playlists with motion trackers and AR starts have had higher populations than MLG playlists going back to at least Halo 3 (I didn't pay any attention to this in Halo 2, but I imagine it was true then, also) Just because there's a fairly large and vocal contingent online complaining about the changes doesn't mean that these people (of whom I am occasionally one) represent the majority. Or anything close to it. Like I said before, there's a reason the games cater to casual players first and competitive players second, and that reason looks like this:
I see way you're saying but I can't say I agree. Since the release of the multiplayer info I literally haven't seen a single person say "I actually like everyone of these things and hope they keep changing the game we used to know". Sure some people (such as myself) like some of these changes, but not all. Every single comment I've ever read both here on forgehub and and waypoint forums has something bad to say about the changes. It's not that they're catering it to casuals rather that competitives, it's that they're taking a game that millions love and turning it into something different.
What you're missing, is that the vast majority of the people who just casually play video games, don't join and devote large amount of time to forums that discuss those specific games. It would be like looking for a casual checker player at a professional chess match.
I do think some of these changes are pretty damn casual/retarded, but I think they've stepped up from Reach; I think it would be more of a challenge to produce a Halo game worse than Reach. I try not to look like the apocalypse is coming since Frankie has been through the entire Halo lifecycle since Halo was in its prime and must have at least some idea of what is good and what isn't. I think that join in session is a good idea for SOCIAL playlists (which I'm betting that they're going to have with this feature exclusively) because games like BTB are filled with quitters and teamkillers. I think that for every incredibly shitty aspect of the game, they will have some alternative that avoids them similar to how CoD has its hardcore division which plays almost entirely differently. Unfortunately, I think that a good amount of these casual elements that follow in CoD's footsteps are justified and it is understandable to why 343 feels that they need to put them in. As terrible as they sound, Halo is attracting less and less people: casual players like games that don't make them train for 5 months to get good; they want to pick up the game for the first time and feel like a winner. That is why CoD is so successful: you can be the shittiest aim on the planet and still manage to get the game to call you skilled. I'm not saying that I like/want the changes (because I REALLY don't), but I can just understand why other people would, including 343.
Exactly that. The entirety of Waypoint, Forge Hub, and every other Halo-related forum you care to name all added together is just a drop in the bucket of people who play Halo. Obviously I talk to a lot of people here about Halo, but out of all the people I've known in real life who play it now, or ever played it in the past, NONE of them ever posted on forums about the game. That's zero out of probably 30-40 people. And I know for certain that at least a few of them (who are still playing Halo and I am still in contact with) think the new changes seem like they'll be "fun," which is what they want. One of those guys stopped playing Halo a while ago in favor of CoD but actually will be giving Halo 4 a shot specifically on the basis of these changes. That's the silent majority that no one on any forums wants to acknowledge or discuss. But they vote too - with their wallet, not their mouths - and they outnumber us. If the internet were in charge, Halo 4 would play like Halo 2 and Joss Whedon would be a multi-millionaire whose shows and movies were more popular than CSI and Titanic combined. But the internet's not in charge. We're just the loudest voice. We may care more than the majority, but it's not our money that pays for the games to be made.
We're not even that. The internet is the largest voice on the internet, that's just it. That's the basis of why the sample is, as you say, not that useful.
Yeh, people go for whatever's good for marketing. Forums is not the norm for most gamers I believe. The norm is the casual guy who games with his friends after school/work, and couldn't care less about netcoding and such, just as long as the game features more of what everyone else is doing and more explosions/fun because "everyone" likes it. I can't say I'm not (at least partially) apart of this crowd
i hope it turns out to be gears 3 type changes in multiplayer. it has "loadouts", but its only a choice of 3 ARs which are fairly similar and 2 shottys. gears has a learning curve 5 times as big as halo, but epic didnt cater to casual players much at all in terms of actual multiplayer gameplay, other than having a beginner playlist. and they made plenty of changes, so it wasnt just gears 2.5, but the changes felt perfect and it still played like classic gears. and it sold quite well. i feel like if children and casual players want to play a game like cod, theyll just play cod, so it doesnt really make much sense to me to make a game more like cod. but, i do feel they should add some changes, and they can definitely do that and still keep it halo.
Right, i agree with this. Plus, the full BR clip shows close to "classic" halo jump height/gravity/speed so that's a good sign.
They added the SOS, but the only problem with the SOS was that in the hands of good players it was too deadly. A noob with an SOS never bothered anyone. He'd get a kill or two and be happy but that was about it. I do worry that could happen with Halo 4 but to a great degree. Sure, they intend stuff like Forerunner vision to be for noobs only, but without a beta there is no telling what things similar to it could be overlooked and when put in the hands of good players could be devastating.
meh, ive always thought the sawed off takes no skill to use, so it doesnt seem to matter who uses it. it bothered me in the beginning because i thought it such a cheap kill, until i figured out how easy it is to counter. i almost always play with my buddy so its essentially impossible for someone with SOS/female character to run up, shoot, and roll back and run away like they usually do. the two of us can easily down him with a gnasher shot each or AR fire before he gets close. and even when i am playing by myself im aware enough that i almost never get killed by it. yeah, gears 3 would be better without the SOS, but its so perfect besides that one thing that i dont mind. if 343 makes halo 4 as tight and balanced as gears 3, then even these "noob friendly" features wont bother me.
Retake Halo 5 Can't wait to not buy it. (Figure I'd get the ball rolling on the next one if things start to cool down here)
This definitely. Gears 3 was the perfect for changing and adding things, yet maintaining gears gameplay. But the thing is, everything they announced beforehand didnt make me shudder thinking about how they'd potentially ruin the game. I thought they sounded cool. and any good player with integrity didnt touch that nooby sawed off that's all optimistic, but i really dont see the parallel between gears 3 changes and halo 4's announced changes.