Thank you for making this point. To define "balance" simply as all players having access to something is, to my mind, senseless. Who actually makes games like this where only some players have access to stuff? How would that even work? Would they be randomly assigned at the start of the match? Or when you register your character, perhaps? People don't build competitive shooters like that, and if they did it would be a case of fundamentally flawed game design, not simple imbalance. The closest you can really have is temporary disparity, ie. level unlocks. Surprise surprise, Halo 4 has these, and so actually is guilty of the closest thing to what you're saying. A fair look at balance, and assessment of games in light of it and in a critical sense, must account for balance within the wider sandbox otherwise it's a next to fruitless discussion. If your definition of balance is simply that all players can access something, consider a version of MW2 where all players started with a Nuke as part of their loadout. If you genuinely consider that balanced, despite the fact that it would be basically unplayable, then surely that demonstrates how utterly useless the term becomes if you define it like that.
Lots of things can be said to be "fair" but that doesn't mean they're good for the game. The other point I should have made is that even things that are balanced can be detrimental to gameplay. Just having a weapon or armor ability that everybody finds annoying can drag a game down; it doesn't have to be actually overpowered. I would argue that the vanilla (pre-title update) version of armor lock in Reach was exactly that kind of thing. Armor lock was hardly overpowered - most users of it were bad players who only succeeded in delaying their own deaths (and overall gameplay) for a few seconds a pop, and the best users of it I encountered seemed to eventually switch to using sprint or something else instead because they found greater advantage in another AA. But it was incredibly annoying. Vanilla armor lock might have been the most annoying part of the Halo sandbox in ANY Halo game, and that's saying something in a series that has given us the Reach concussion rifle, the Halo 2 sword, the gauss hog, the Halo 3 regen equipment, the CE ghost with built-in freeze ray, etc. Of course, many aspects of Halo can be frustrating one way or another. But when something is A) commonly used by many players, and B) consistently frustrating basically every time it's used, for at least one person in the game, if not several... then that thing could use some patchin'. Which, in the case of armor lock, is exactly what they did - first by title updating it in Reach, then by replacing it with the far more tolerable hardlight shield.
your wrong... of course. The number 2 thing that needs to be fixed is the online fileshare! The number 1 thing that needs to be fixed is the ingame fileshare!
when you grab a large object in halo 4, it pushes you a mile away from that object, no matter how close you are when u grab it. If they removed this, I wouldn't see any need for the zoom mode. I only ever used the zoom mode when I was too lazy to fly in and grab the object from a better POV. If you can fly super close to an object and edit, then why the need for zoom?
Zoom in and out while holding an object was always incredibly useful to me, and I miss it. It's weird that it still works with some objects but not others. Zooming in was helpful for detail work, but I was probably more likely to use it to zoom OUT - for example I would spawn or grab a kill zone or spawn zone, zoom out as far as possible, and then enlarge it to cover the area I wanted it to cover. In H4, if I grab a kill zone, I am moved to a fixed distance away from it (very close) which ensures I'll probably be inside the outer boundaries of the kill zone, and thus can't really see how big it is. Placing these zones is so much harder than it used to be for me.