It must be because he was able to use fewer pieces to accomplish the same task, because we know the budget is the same, and the costs are all the same as they were in Reach as well. We know the budget is still 10,000, and the objects that were shown in the videos cost the same as they did in Reach. The buildings all cost $150, and the building blocks all cost $10. The category limits seem the same as they were before as well.
After watching Gamespot’s coverage of Forge mode in Halo 4, I’m pretty disappointed. In my opinion, the biggest problem with Reach’s map editor (besides frame rate slowdown) was the monotony of consistently gray maps. Sure we had a great skybox and a vibrant green landscape, but the best maps (most of which are featured on this site) almost exclusively used forge pieces for everything: the floor, ceiling, walls, etc. Obviously this allows the most freedom in creating a map, as the user is not constrained by Forge World’s original design. Now unless there are large areas of perfectly flat terrain on Halo 4’s maps (which would be awesome), the consistently dull gray nature of Reach’s custom maps looks likely to be replaced with consistently dull white scenery in Halo 4, with most of the same exact items to boot. How could 343 have not foreseen this as a potential problem? If re-texturing objects is not feasible, why not allow users to at least significantly change the object’s color? I’ve seen no evidence of this, so it’s probably unlikely as well, but I think that would go a long way, especially down the road when everyone is sick and tired of the same white pieces. And just so everyone doesn’t think I’m being entirely cynical, I do really appreciate the 3 diverse environments at our disposal, and the gorgeous skyboxes that come with them.
I have to agree with you gravitas. I'm sure the guys responsible for forge, aren't really into forge. I had that feeling back in Halo 3, in reach, and now in Halo 4. Just look at the premade maps or even at the horrible maps in matchmaking. Halo 4 forge is a lazy half assed update to Halo Reachs forge, not even the most beautiful skybox could fix that.
Idk, I thought they did the best they could with what they had in both time constraints and knowledge in Halo 3 and Reach. Halo 3 was basically meant as a accessory editor, with slight undertones of map editor(specially in DLC), Though the glitch in 3 that allowed advanced map creation was incorporated in reach as best as possible (had to learn how to code it or whatever they had to do from scratch in time for release) with a map "Forge world". In 4 however i pretty much agree its pretty lack luster basically 3 skyboxes with different pallets. Non of the maps look especially interesting to forge on. I'm curious how it will effect file share/downloads and if certain maps are looked down upon as "Oh this map was made on "impact" not downloading this" or things like that.
I don't quite agree. The forge mode itself in Halo 3 was originally just intended as a way to move weapons and spawns around to your liking, and drop a few crates and whatnot in. People immediately explored the fringe possibilities by trying to make actual new map experiences, and Bungie responded accordingly with DLC that gave us something approximating a real editor. It was still very limited and difficult to use (if you had ambition, that is - if you were just dropping objects in and not merging them, it was easy). But considering the original intent of forge, Foundry and then Sandbox were enormous leaps forward. Reach's forge was a similarly dramatic step up in almost every respect except framerate. Phased physics alone would be enough to justify its existence, but there's a lot more to it than that: giant objects (esp. coliseum walls, large flat blocks, and the biggest platforms), the vastness and flexibility of Forge World, and the core increased capability of forge thanks to higher budgets and more objects - though due to framerate lag, that capability ended up being partially theoretical. Yes, the on-disc forge variants were half-assed and the forged maps chosen for matchmaking were about 70% junk, but that doesn't take away from the mode itself. Here is where we agree. I'd be nicer about it, but yes, they did some superficial things (a few beautiful backdrops, a few ease-of-use upgrades, much better lighting) while keeping the meat of the mode exactly the same. Which indicates pretty strongly that they aren't too interested in satisfying communities like ours that exist solely based around forge. When this comes out and people start seeing how much like Reach it is, I think there's going to be some serious disgruntlement, even from people who right now are trying to be optimistic.
Even though its somewhat of a letdown, I'm holding out to see what the framerate is like before I pass judgement. If I can build what I want without problems, I'll be happy as a clam. To put a more positive spin on this thread, which map do you see yourself forging on the most? I think I'll be working on Erosion the most. Especially trying to incorporate that radioactive looking water at the bottom.
Same is true for me. I really do feel like fixing framerate in Reach's forge would almost be enough for me to be happy even if everything else stayed exactly the same with no upgrades whatsoever. But since 343 isn't talking about that at all, we can't really talk about it either; and everything else they've shown has been rather underwhelming. I have no idea yet, but I'll surely end up building on all of them. Probably Ravine will be my least-used initially, since it looks the most like Forge World.
you guys complain sooo much. seriously. Even though we found out that there was FR lag in reach, we still forged. even though we got tired of the textures in forgeworld, we still made maps. EVEN though we only had 1 type of pallete, we still forged with it. regardless of how many things there were in reach's forge that we didnt like, WE STILL USED IT, and will continue to up until the release of Halo 4. What do you want out of Halo 4s forge that they haven't given us? Weather? none of their maps have it why do you expect it in forge? Time of day? we havent seen the FX yet, you never know how good they are. Mass copy/paste? yes that would be great for symmetrical and relocating maps, but people would still complain, "O you guys are making it too easy for noobs to forge" More unique object? yes i would love that too, but we dont know what all of the objects are yet. but since they gave us a ton of similar objects (That we already know how to use) we can create awesome maps sooner and easier than when Reach was first released Even though they haven't given us that stuff.. were still going to forge a **** ton in Halo 4, because we love to forge and it is better than it was in Reach.
I think they should and could have done a better job. Plain and simple, forge is a major part of Halo now, and they need to go all out with improving it, and making it look good if they want to tell the world they care about the quality of work they put out. Maybe they think they did a good job with forge? I don't know..I'm just not even slightly excited for forge in H4..
I agree. They could have done better. But we're still going to use it, simply because it is stll better than it was in Reach. Hopefully they will be able to fulfill most of our desires with DLC or halo 5
@Marcass: framerate lag is a huge deal. It ruined Reach's forge. All other problems can be overcome with some amount of creativity, but framerate literally put a cap on what was possible. That's why everything was the same. It was an actual defect with their product. Now what if Ford put out a car model that had an oil leak? They'd do a recall yes but obviously forge couldn't be recalled. However, the next edition of that model would definitely have that oil leak fixed. They wouldn't just leave it in and tell people to deal "just put oil in more often guys". It is NOT acceptable for framerate lag to not be fixed. Everything else is stylistic, or a design choice. We can complain but we can't expect anything to change. However, we can expect flaws to be fixed. My biggest problem with Halo 4 is I feel that they just threw **** at the wall and are waiting to see what sticks. Need more forge variety... Uh three maps? Are perks a good idea... let's just remove some features and make them perks maybe? Armor abilities didn't work in Reach very well... add a couple new ones and bring back a couple problem ones? I love the customization, but I feel like it wouldn't need to be there if they had of been a little more conscience in their choices.
Yes, we will still use it, but what does that make us think of their efforts in improving forge? I don't think anyone is going to think highly of them when they can't fulfill our desires and instead just satisfy us. Like I said, maybe they think they did a good job, but I won't push it out of the way until I actually try it out.
EDIT: OK, mammoth post deleted because it all really comes down to this: So you agree that it could be better, and you even agree with many points about how it could be better. So what exactly is the problem with people expressing this opinion? Does it really bum you out that much to see people not feigning optimism? If so, callous as this may sound: deal with it. @ bolded: that's not really a point. Of course we're still going to use it. If people say they're not going to use it, either in protest or out of disappointment, then they get called melodramatic. We really can't win here. As for hoping that Halo 5 addresses these issues, do you really not see the problem with this attitude? Why would any developer suddenly change their attitude to forge when we demonstrate with our wallets that what they've done here is enough for us to buy the game? They have no reason to question their approach to Halo 4 when making Halo 5, because we voted with our money and told them "this is OK." But ultimately it's your money. If you want to keep giving it to developers for products that even you concede are disappointing, in the hope that they'll "fix it next time," even though you're sending the exact opposite of the message needed to get them to think like that, be my guest. I'm not saying that I won't buy it, I will, and I'm sure I'll really enjoy it it, both in gameplay and even forging terms (although to a lesser extent in the case of the latter). But the whole "keep giving them money and hope they fix it next time" attitude is genuinely harming the gaming scene, and keeping unscrupulous developers (which, let me be clear, I'm NOT saying 343 are) laughing all the way to the bank.
@christphrbrnnn I know FR lag is a huge issue. I'm hoping that it's a lot harder to encounter it in Halo 4.. @pegasi. I'm going off of memory on your comment but, Like I said, people want time of day settings, but we haven't seen the FX, so we can't say we wont be able to have that. I'm not justifying there choice not to add mass copy/paste because there would be retards saying they were making it too easy, I was simply stating that there would be idiots that say that. I'll use your exact words to address all of the people that only focus on the things they aren't satisfied with, "deal with it" As for the I hope they fix it in halo 5 comment, I honestly think the only thing they need to fix is FR lag. Hopefully they have made it near impossible to encounter it
chrs: EVERYTHING comes down to Warsoup. If it ever gets released.... So where is the part where you actually justify calling out "complaining"? I seem to have missed it. The FX setting thing seems to be the only point you've stuck by, and I agree it could well turn out great, but at this stage we have no reason to believe it'll fill the Time of Day niche. Don't you think that's the kind of thing they'd want to show us? Not only would it be great for hardcore designers, it's shiny and new and keeps the press happy. As for the idiots. There will be idiots complaining about everything. Ever. That means everything ever is a bad idea, and supporting it somehow equates to complaining. I'm not disagreeing that some people would complain, but in terms of supporting your actual argument, it's an utterly meaningless point. Oh, so your real problem is that people don't add caveats to every suggestion, like "but X and Y are cool." 1) Plenty of people are doing this, but you don't recognise that, do you? 2) Why? What purpose does that serve? Why does it make you feel better to see people being happy about this game? Please realise that your reaction to "dissent" is solely your problem. Expressing negative opinions does no harm, other than to people who need to validate their own opinions by seeing others echo them. I'll leave you with two final questions: Why do you ACTUALLY care if people complain? What harm does it do?
I've not actually seen any pieces I could genuinely use to make a map so far. They're all too specific pieces for very restrictive purposes. Like all of those tunnels on that UNSC skinned map for example. Other than a tunnel, or maybe a partial wall, what else can you use that piece for? and the massive jump room piece, or the large open tunnel piece? The map that has the Forge World bits on, that's just the same. It's the same restrictive pieces I didn't want. Give me lego blocks, I'll build whatever you want... give me half a tower already built... I'll build the other half of the tower? Pointless so far... I'm feeling pretty let down again.