How many more times are we going to see this uninspired, horrendously expected joke? **** off. Every time a Halo game is coming out, everyone gets up in arms about **** they don't even have room to talk about. God forbid any dev decides to try and change anything on the 5th title of a game that has largely revolved around the same mechanics throughout each iteration. Isn't that what we talk **** about CoD for doing? Sure Halo is more polished, but just because it's not on a yearly dev cycle doesn't mean that it hasn't been doing roughly the same thing. At least CoD fans herald each new title with excitement and eager anticipation instead of trashing every announcement. We can't even get the slightest bit of news without jumping to a thousand conclusions and saying stupid **** like, "Hurr Durr, CoD: Future Warfare. Get it? Lulz." Halo 3.1 would not be more original than anything, so stfu. It would be a shitty update to Halo 3, which wasn't that great anyways. You go ahead and play that with all the other whiners who can't accept change while I enjoy me some Halo 4. The reason I think Halo 4's new features will work is because this time they are attempting to make a statement with their new game-play decisions. Halo: Reach felt weird because Bungie did not really commit either the AA or classic Halo game-play, but rather some bastardization in the middle. When making design choices in any artistic medium, you have to make a statement and go full force in whatever direction it is you've chosen. 343i appears to be doing just that and because of this, I believe they will be much more successful in their endeavors. Also, I would like to say that Reach's ZBNS game-type is, in my opinion, the best Halo experience we've had so far. Better than Halo 2 and much better than Halo 3. Suck it.
But Frozen, Spartan Ops, credits Spartan Points, instant respawns, weapon customization, AA's, can't you see that is everything Halo 4 is about and nothing else. Obviously a Call of Duty port, I mean that game has all those things and nothing else. I see no reason not to call them equivalent. [sub]This post brought to you by the word sarcasm.[/sub]
Does anyone else get the sick feeling in their stomach that there won't actually be any forge in Halo 4? My reasons, forging on the 343i made Reach maps was ****. Basically back to early H3 stuff without the space or cool movable objects that actually made those maps more fun to forge on. Just a straight up change the weapons around more or less. And the other one is there is no map editor in call of duty.
I think the GI video or whatever the last video with info in it confirmed forge. Also the maps were made by certain affinity and had the same level of forgability as 95% of the other maps in Reach. They weren't looking to create a new forge space in the maps they created. So I share none of those concerns.
Forge has been confirmed a few times, albeit vaguely.. Frankie posted on NeoGAF something to the effect of, "We'll be telling you about that soon. It's good news." Exactly like every map on the Reach disc except Forge World. And actually, people have made complete, new maps on Hang 'em High and Timberland, which is something that isn't possible on Countdown or Boardwalk.
Zero Bloom No Sprint. A.K.A Halo 2 and Halo 3. Except they both had a more useful jump height, a narrower field of view, balanced (literally) warthogs that don't flip like paper cups in the breeze, you couldn't fly around with a jetpack and break maps or their flow, no soft-kill barriers, no armour abilities, launch maps that weren't just Forge remakes or specifically for Invasion, and they both favoured skill over investment and luck. But of course, that's just my opinion.
Haha I feel lime your post has more credibility than the other one just because you didn't end it with "suck it" But something you mentioned in there, jump height and player movement, is more important to me than a lot of the others things that are being talked about. Even in the reach beta I was very frusterated that I could not pull the same jumps or move as quickly as I could in halo 3 without some stupid armor ability. If they bring back a more classic jump height and speed I might be able to look pass other changes that I don't like as much
I was actually quite happy when I heard Reach was coming out. I had fun with the Campaign and then I jumped into Multiplayer and I was dissapoint. Oh, and there's quite some infractions flying around here lol.
ZBNS is the MLG gametype, so Warthogs are irrelevant. JPs are pickup only, which (imo) adds to the game. The jump height is still a little low for my tastes as well (though it's 110, and the 120 speed makes jumping more useful as well), but I think that the increased gravity is another thing that ZBNS has over Halo 2/3. Floating around like you did in earlier Halos was a real downside to jumping, as it made you a much easier target when doing so. As for the whole AAs thing, again, do you not get the point of ZBNS? It's AA free apart from JPs on a couple of maps, which are pickups once again. Also, and I really feel this is the most important thing, if you think that the ZB DMR is the same as the BR, particularly the H3 BR, then you're really, really, monumentally missing the point. It's better than the Halo 2 BR as well imo, single shot compared to burst and less bullet magnetism. Also, what are you talking about with the launch maps? I also don't see how the FOV is an advantage for Halo 3 or 2, in fact it's yet another reason people complained post-CE. As for favouring skill, I question whether you've actually played ZBNS or are just assuming what it'll be like based on those 4 letters. Based on some of your comments, I assume it's the latter.
I don't think so. And I hate to bring the casual thing up, but I can't help but think that we will see more of this in the future
What's wrong with seeing more of it? I remember someone in H3 did the same thing on High Ground to marry him.
Because only casual players like going to prom...? Honestly confused. And don't understand what that has to do with Halo 4.
^ The argument against casual pandering on the part of Bungie/343 is that it comes at the cost of other things. The wonderful thing about adding new features (and why the existing features that Halo pioneered/introduced) is that they add to the experience without taking anything away. Would I make that picture? Not really, but I don't begrudge those who do, nor do I think the ability to do so being added in to Halo detracts from it. It's not even like it took up extra dev time, the only logical argument against extra features, as it's just a by-product of Forge + Screenshots. There's no way you can argue against how much those two features added to the game. It's sweet, pretty geeky, but still sweet, same as those stories about people who meet and get married over games like Halo.
Sorry for the reference here. I'm so sorry. HE RUINED MY WEDDING!!! Sorry, had to. So, what would we like to see in forge 3.0? in a realistic term. - At least two forging worlds (because the 1 in reach is boring) with seperate themes - More precise co-ordinate moving - Basic scripts (objectappear/dissapear)
My complaint is with the attitude of evaluating the game by an obscure gametype, and the irony that the gametype removes additions that the previous games (which he considers less enjoyable) didn't suffer from. Some people want to drive Warthogs y'know? What about the people who wanted warthogs to be useful in Reach? What if Halo 4 doesn't add the vehicle centricity I loved in Halo 3? "**** them, they can play MLG"? No thank you. Equipment pick-ups? Hello Halo 3. Which is why you shouldn't jump while being shot at. Lower gravity also added the upside of being able to travel further horizontally, which maps like Guardian and Blackout rely on. Yet still, I personally don't find them as enjoyable to use as the Bubble Shield and Power Drain Halo 3, and like I said before I'm not talking about ZBNS specifically. We're talking about the same game right, because Reach has crazy high bullet magnetism. Oh, and when did I ever mention DMR Bloom or compare it to Halo 3, 2, or talk about bullet magnetism? That there were only 6 if you exclude Invasion maps? All I can say is that I liked it. Less FOV keeps you on your toes. Sounds right. I was talking about Halo 4 there actually. Rockets randomly falling into your lap is definitely not a skill.
I agree with that, in fact it's been one of my main arguments against this whole "customisation fixes any problem you have" attitude. I don't want to have to play MLG to enjoy the game either. I was merely replying to your assessment of ZBNS in particular. Yeah, because a JP is totally like anything in Halo 3... And don't say Grav Lift, I swear. Jumping, even with more manageable gravity, still gives you a predetermined path, thus making you easier to hit in a sense. Whether to jump or not in a battle is a judgement, leaving yourself open to being shot whilst in the air vs. an unexpected dimension of movement thrown in amongst strafes. It's not necessary to have the player float around in the air to make jumping during a battle something that should be considered, and to be frank it still was in Halo 2/3. It's not like it was a death sentence in H2/3, I just happen to think that this particular aspect is an improvement. Also, I don't mean to sound trite, but Guardian and Blackout (ewww, btw) aren't in Reach. The idea of maps being tailored to mechanics that surround them is basic, and if Reach had loads of maps which inexplicably required further horizontal jump distance then I'd have more time for this argument. Also, 120 speed and 110 jump pretty much nullify this point. I realise that you are, as you say, addressing Reach mechanics as a whole, but I thought this worth pointing out with respect to ZBNS. Fair enough. I didn't really enjoy the Power Drain or Bubble Shield at all to be honest, I still remember to this day how frustrating I found them, but yours is a fair preference. However, as for your last point, the way you started your post directly comparing ZBNS to H3 and H2, then drawing a bunch of irrelevant parallels, was needlessly misleading if you just wanted to talk about Reach as a whole. Reach does have crazy high bullet magnetism, just not as crazy high as H2 was. H3 was lower, but had its own problems (net code, spread, shot-lead being implemented badly). You never mentioned bloom or magnetism specifically, I was making a point. You basically implied that ZBNS is the same as Halo 2 and 3 but worse in the ways you then listed. I was pointing out that, in terms of the functionality of the utility weapon (a key point), it knocks the socks off the both of them. It's called countering an argument. Ok, I genuinely thought you were saying there were none. A fair criticism, and Invasion maps do indeed play like **** for default gametypes. Eh, I disagree, I prefer a wider FoV because it means you have more to focus on. I feel this point is a little too subjective to argue too much around, though. So after a whole post comparing Halo 2 and 3 to ZBNS (or not, apparently, again a lack of clarification), you think that "investment and luck" is sufficient indication that you've completely switched the unfavourable point of comparison from Reach to Halo 4? Why would you even bring that up when the post you were replying to was specifically trying to argue the benefits of ZBNS Reach?
Probably should have quoted this too. If the statement is "We're making Halo a crapshoot like Call of Duty with random weapon drops, Instant Respawn and weapon modifications" then I agree. I can't wait to be on higher footing because I've played the game more, and then when I get beaten by someone because they're simply more skilled than I am, I can respawn instantly and find them before their shields completely regenerate and really stick it to them.
My post on 343's forum sums up my wishes. Other, more advanced features like time-of-day, weather, and terrain editing would be cool, but I'm iffy about how feasible they are (I mean, Far Cry did it, but that doesn't mean Halo can; it's a whole different engine).