Yes. They aren't Halo, because Halo is all about dat visor. But visor = peripheral vision, soooo. Yeah. It's just silly. It would be like looking through a cardboard tube all the time. Crysis 3 has concept artwork for the CELL agents that is the same thing, so hopefully they change that. Unfortunately I think it's too late to petition for non-stupid helmets, but I'm sure you'll be able to get Chief's helm, so I'll just use that. [br][/br]Edited by merge: And while it was pointy and had a thin visor, it still wrapped around so you could see out the sides. Fuuuuuuu.
What the **** happened to Hazop and tha **** sort **** was the designer on when he created Infiltrator. Liking Orbital though. If you know me, I only stuck to the EVA, Security and Pilot helmet THROUGHOUT 3 and reach, so...
Have you guys ever wondered how a video camera can show a larger image than it looks like it would? Then why are you so worried about peripheral vision on a super high tech helmet? Hell, Iron Man had narrow ass slits for his eyes yet that didn't stop him from seeing everything around him did it.
Apparently none of Master Chief's armour is gonna be available in Infinity. Haha. Suck it. I actually like the look of the new armour.
I don't remember ever trading a kill with a hammer. It's the only thing I don't remember trading a kill with (I think I traded a kill with snipers (both of us had them) once in Reach). Besides, if a tenth of a second difference in connection to the host speed is enough to determine (almost by itself) the outcome of the most common type of combat in the gametype, I would tolerate a .2 second (I think it might have to be twice as long as the latency to the host, unfortunately) kill trade window after the first person pulls their trigger. With other gametypes there are other skill factors involved, so the presence or absence of a kill trade window is less important (but I don't mind it in principle or in practice in other gametypes either). I thought about a weapon they could place on a grifball court- what about one or two frags as power weapons? A point and shoot weapon wouldn't work for grifball, even if it had low ammo, but a grenade doesn't take much time out of the rest of the gameplay. Players have 150% resistance and no shields, right? Perhaps they should be set as "fixed". [br][/br]Edited by merge: It looks like one of the designers had either played a different video game with, or seen a real life video of, a machine gun (larger than an smg, but portable) being fired and thought "cool" and decided that halo must have one, too. The AR had a relatively low rate of fire, it didn't make powerful, cool-sounding sounds, and it was weak (except in halo CE). This would also explain why they didn't bring back the H2 or H3 SMG, even though they seem to be identical to the LMG- the SMG's small size and moderate power weren't appealing enough. I can't see how they're trying to diversify the sandbox with this at all. I think that they should try to make more room for the spiker, which isn't very common in MM, and possibly give a boost to its projectile speed and flesh damage (it actually performs like a plasma rifle in Reach, good on shields but not flesh/armor), which requires quick and precise "leading" of shots and doesn't have a spread that allows imprecision, nerfs precision, and introduces a bit of randomness. I also think that it's kind of funny how they're bringing back both the BR and the DMR with spread and reduced bloom, respectively. First of all, it seems as though they're trying to go for the easiest guaranteed way to piss off as few people as possible, but they're also including the worst aspects of these guns. The BR's random spread at long ranges is all that people complain about from H3 besides its handling of latency (some say "netcode"), and reduced bloom is what bloom proponents hate most. They want a large reticle dilation and a short reset time to punish spamming. By making the DMR a bit better at long range (and thus the BR inadequate at long range), they are reducing what each player can do, which lowers the skill gap, if you think about it, just so that players can make a decision from each spawn and stick to what their weapon limits them to (which arguably requires some skill or thought- but avoiding death from distant rifles is necessary in any sandbox; the only thing that changes is whether or not you can fire back with equal power- now you're just forced to hide if you only carry a BR, unless you're much better at aiming). By splitting the utility weapon, they actually discourage use of the sandbox, especially on large maps, because you can only carry two weapons. I've mentioned before how nobody minds a rifle that is better at long range than mid range, so one that is equally good at all ranges shouldn't be a problem; therefore making long range rifles less common isn't a good reason to split the utility weapon. Hopefully this doesn't happen with any perks- slight advantages introduced by decreasing the base ability/skill gap of players. Resupply (grenades) isn't so bad though, because there were more than enough grenades.
Chief's armor in Halo 4 looks amazing compared to the rest of the "armor" they've shown. I was really disappointed to here it wasn't in the game, but hopefully there will be more classic armor available.
I don't care about the armor. It looks fine to me as default and I'm pretty happy about that. As for Hazop, I wont say more than I defiantly won't use it. Orbital looks pretty cool I must say.
@ zepp: I wasn't saying that it promoted Hammer trades (though I should have been more clear for sure), I'm 99% sure that's impossible. What I was saying that the kill trade window has the effect of messing with the decision as to who dies, making it much less reliable as a mechanic.
With an armor system as sophisticated as MJOLNIR, you dont really need any visor at all. a tiny camera could take in all of the surroundings and then it could be relayed into a HUD inside the helmet
I know that they can do that, but to me, the visor-y helmets are a staple of the Halo armor aesthetic. They have been for the last 11 or so years. Almost every helmet in a previous game had a visor bigger than any of these helmets. Certainly on the peripheral sides. The only one that I can think of that doesn't beat them is GUNGNIR, which I don't like anyway. It looked like a toaster with a camera. Hence, I consider visor-laden helmets an artistic style they adopted and used. Most of the new aesthetics in this game resemble the older versions, the BR, the FuD, the vehicles...but none of these helmets, save Mark VI, look remotely like any helmet from previous games. That's the beef I have with these helmets. It doesn't look remotely like anything I've seen, and anything I want to see in Halo. Luckily, that ODST-ish helmet was shown in multiplayer, and that JFO-ish one was visible in the weapons trailer, so they didn't kill the visors on every helmet. It's a small concern in the grand scheme of things, and I would buy the game regardless of the armor, but that doesn't mean I have to play along and like it.
I forgot why I stopped playing Reach, so I popped it in. I select Team Slayer, cause I like some good old fashioned games. Choices that come up: Slayer on Uncaged Slayer DMRS on Powerhouse Slayer on Pinnacle I naturally choose Slayer DMRs on Powerhouse because I like that map, and I like the DMR. All 7 other people chose Slayer on Uncaged, and someone on my team drops, so now I'm playing a shitty map that looks the same as all the other shitty maps, 3v4 with people jetpacking all over.
I had thought about this before, but I didn't bring it up. I agree entirely. By splitting the utility, players who would have the ability to defend themselves cannot fight to their fullest extent because their weapon has not been designed to stand a chance at all ranges anymore. Like you said, it reduces a player's ability to fight effectively, even if they are the better player. Pickups are one thing, where they are designed to offer advantages and trade-offs in effectiveness if you choose to grab them. You can monitor certain areas and have an idea as to which weapons your opponent has picked up based on location and area control. Spawning into a set range that isn't the same as other players is another thing entirely. You cannot possibly know what they have until you see them, and the weapons that you both spawned with could decide the encounter before a bullet is even fired. That's luck. That's random. I don't want luck and random.
A statement about trait zones. What would happen if we overlapped one trait zone with another? Would it add both traits or would the one you are closest to take control of your traits?
If they use the same logic that spawn zones use, it'll create some sort of overflow and (Edit: seemingly) randomly choose one zone to obey. I think being able to combine zones would make a lot of math problems for the software. My guess would be that some hierarchy will be established where Zone A overrides Zone B. Could be useful for having physics shift by degrees I guess.
I wonder if the trait zones are visible in game. since in forge mode, normally you can only select objective at a time and you can clearly see several outlined trait zones in the forge demo. If they end up being visible in game, it would make more sense because they could be functional as a new kind of control point, however, invisible in-game trait zones would get you some incredibly clean and consistent lifts (as well as potential for a spire remake).
You mean grav volumes or whatever they're called? I'm pretty sure they're a distinctly different object from the trait zones. It looks like grav volumes are colored and trait zones aren't, but that's all from forge footage.
Lovin the new sniper rifle design, the old one looked like something you'd find in Metro, not that it is a bad thing, but I don't think chunky, pieced together looking guns belong in the arsenal of a state-of-the-art ship Spoiler 5,000 post!