this. It kinda makes me sad that 343i thinks that the only reason people play halo is to get new things. why else would they: -make starting players have next to nothing, thus giving them more things to "earn" -create a ridiculous amount of medals for anything and everything you might do in a game (seriously, unless you AFK the entire game, you are guaranteed to finish a game with at least 50 medals) -create an equally absurd amount of announcer dialogue for each medal and action -make it so that you level up, and get to see the new items, then you have to further progress to actually get the chance to purchase them -show you a list of things you earned every time you gain a rank
I know that I want the guilty spark emblem, anyone know how you get it? It's on the list as "other stuff" not as a rank unlock...
It's to artificially extend play time, Instead of making a game that people want to play so they play it, They use these systems to extend play time. One the reasons COD is so popular not many people max rank 10th prestige so there is always something to unlock, Doesn't work on every one but like a lot of people will play just to unlock things even if they dislike/hate the game(EX:farmvill) and even someone who likes the game might play a little bit longer for more exp or that logo they wanted. (meaning there playing when they otherwise wouldn't have because of the unlock system) But as for not including certain emblems is just anther stupid decision by 343i to be added to the long list of stupid decisions.
This is what I hate the most. My ****ing emblem is not in the damn game. **** Also, giving starting players only like 2 starting emblems is absolutely retarded.
This is the reason games are so ****ed today. They had an article in the last version of GI that games are starting to look more like work and not games. Games like COD, and I hate to say it, but Halo, are starting to let you "earn" more because the games aren't as fun. The reason Halo 3 was so popular? It was fun. There wasn't much to earn in Halo 3. Halo Reach introduced that concept and it grew drastically in Halo 4. Games are becoming less fun and more like working for that "great new G36" that is at that next rank. I'd rather get paid for a job than work for a new gun in Call of Duty.
Lucky for me, I've still got my campfire on a white rectangle background...phew... And even better, I've got it now!
I'd say if you're focusing on the 'work' of unlocking things, you're missing the entire point of the game. Unlockables are little treats, but should never be the focus of gameplay. The point of a game is to, well, play a game and have fun. Progression is all well and good and achievements are nice for bragging rights, but when it comes down to it. -shrugs- I don't really care about my emblem that much, so I never focused on it. I don't like how all the armor looks very similar though.
I would have to agree with you on that one. A game is for having fun, not having to work just so you can get some shiny armour.
I've already found a new emblem. Unlocking emblems is a bit stupid to me but it's also incredibly unimportant. As for the unlocking thing I would play the same amount of Halo I do now if I had everything from the start.
You say that now, But you may play one extra game over course of a year or just "feel" like playing halo because subconsciously you want to play something "constructive", etc. Or maybe your the one human being in the world that's immune to conditioning, Either way its still an effective strategy.
Oh for sure it's effective, but over time I've noticed things like this in games and I've just stopped caring about unlocking things unless I actually want them. It is nice still to level up, but I try anymore not to let it affect me like it used to like, for example, when I played pokemon as a kid.
That's only a new mainstream phenomenon in terms of multiplayer games. RPGs that I played when I was a kid had exactly that draw, and I'd often stay up late just trying to get one more level or get the items/money for an awesome new weapon. This is nothing new in gaming at all, nor is it inherently cheapening per se. What's interesting is how it's moved in to multiplayer games. Single player RPGs are inherently finite deals, and these levelling and item unlock/gaining systems form the fundamentals of moving things along in gameplay terms, with the story moving the game along in narrative terms. Versus multiplayer games are more akin to sports in the sense that they take the form of distinct matches rather than one long stream of narrative intertwined with gameplay. And due to the basic nature of the match as the only distinct unit they are infinite. The idea of progression isn't so fundamentally tied to them as something without inherent end. But being potentially infinite doesn't mean people play these games forever, people clearly stop playing when they become bored by the game, and move on. This brings in the idea of progression to maintain interest, previously the reserve of finite single player games, and the stark nature of this merger becomes apparent when you reach max level and realise that it's the closest you'll ever get to an end, and isn't actually an end in any real sense. Do you keep playing because you enjoy the game, or do you consider it "completed"? I guess that question is interesting, but not quite as relevant as how many keep playing up until this point who wouldn't have otherwise done so. It is, in basic terms, an enforced form of longevity, and how you feel about this largely comes down to which of the above categories you fit in to (or if you fall in to the tiny but significant other category: those in the games market itself who realise how much more viable this makes many titles).