Thanks for becoming completely off topic Peg. You ignore anything i say, step to the side, then attack me with something new. I made my point, I've backed it up, if you want to go on arguing about other things, cool, do it with someone else. I really didn't care for anything you had to say, you targeted me, I targeted the thread. get your facts straight.
I think it's kind of one sided. I have an opinion and Pegasi holds any and all words I say accountable and will used against me in the court of law.
Holy hell, people actually use the ignore feature? That's hilarious! Also, since when is being driven by making money a bad thing? Does it really surprise people that developers are hungry for people's cash? Everything that most developers do, whether or not it comes at a price, is an act of business, because keeping angry fanboys at bay by getting their **** together ultimately rakes in more money when they release stuff that does cost money. Unless 343 is square-peg-round-hole retarded, they know that they need as many fans on their side as possible to actually benefit from making games. They don't deserve blind praise as if they only did this because they were feeling extremely charitable and didn't need to do this in the first place; they did this because their game isn't as popular as it could/should be and they'll go nowhere if they act stubborn and ignorant. Alternatively, they don't deserve to be looked at like a bunch of corporate fat-cats trying to milk what's left of a franchise, who is sucking money straight out of every consumer's ****, since most people were still asking for more.
...any and all words you as well as what anyone says are held accountable. All anyone has to judge on how you perceive the world and different topics therein on the internet is in what you type. If you can't explain yourself clearly that isn't a fault of lack of comprehension of those around you that's a problem with you. You had an opinion (while also generalizing other people's opinions to suit your overall narrative), and so did Pegasi. His opinion was that just once could a positive mention go out toward 343i without others coming in and shitting on the parade. We get it, they've made mistakes. This thread isn't about praising the update and 343i nor is it about listing their faults. It was just to point out that an update has been made and fixed a problem. No one is forcing you to express your lack of shits given regarding the news nor is hearing about it particularly interesting to others. Personally, I don't know why Pegasi keeps bringing up your forge projects as that seems irrelevant to what you were saying and forging something 3 weeks ago is hardly showing much enthusiasm, which was your point. Regardless to people acting like their 5, I hope 343i continues to patch stuff and show that they're listening to the community at least on some level. As an aside/mini rant (not directly specifically at you fenix but anyone who does this). I hate when people post in a topic that they don't care about whatever the topic is about. It's such a hypocritical, **** thing to do. First off, the very act of spending the time to say you don't care implies a certain level of caring. You know what really shows you don't care. Not saying a damn thing, ignoring the topic altogether. Telling people you don't care is effort, effort better spent doing anything else if you truly don't care. Secondly, while it might be someone's opinion that they don't hold much of a stake in whatever the thread is about, expressing that to others who clearly do if they're having a conversation about the thread's topic is basically a metaphorical **** you to those people. Others do care and to take the time to belittle their opinions by saying you don't wastes everyone's time because it adds nothing to the discussion. /end mini-rant
...right because saying something is off topic is the definition of being "on topic". Seriously, it's like talking with a five year old. How much of "the topic" do you think is required in a post to make it "on topic"? Seeing as I directly talked about the point of the thread here, "Regardless to people acting like their 5, I hope 343i continues to patch stuff and show that they're listening to the community at least on some level." and also talked about your argument with pegasi which is directly related to what this thread is talking about. Fenix, you don't have to constantly stir up crap. Just let it go, you won't get Pegasi to say he's sorry to your massive intellect nor will you get me to stop treating you like an adolescent asshat if you keep acting as one. And yes, this post was "off topic" whoopyfuckingdo, infract me.
I'm going to infract all of you noobs. Not really. Really appreciate the thread, Peg. Can't wait til the next TU
Sigh. Guys, there was a good discussion happening in this thread. Please don't kill it, again, with pointless bickering and "I'm smarter than you" posturing. Show some respect for each other and just try to make your point and get out cleanly; you don't have to always imply that the person you're replying to is a complete moron. And yeah, infractions, etc. You know the drill. I don't really want to go down that road. I really just want this forum to be a pleasant place to talk about Halo.
I appreciate what 343i is doing and I want the game to get as good as possible for people that enjoy it, I don't think Halo 4 will ever be up to my standard though I hope they learn from Halo 4 and make 5 better because of it. Thing that worry's me most about that is if they listen to the large majority of casual players with the loudest voice to design 5 around. Could end up less buggy and more intuitive and better features but just as uncompetitive.
Yeah fair enough, and I to an extent I feel the same way, in that I hold out more hope for Halo 5 than I do for real redemption in Halo 4. This is, in large part, why I'm looking at their attitude in handling Halo 4 post release in itself and not just at how Halo 4 ends up as a result, because I think that's somewhat indicative of what we can expect in their second try with Halo 5. See I feel conflicted on this. I think if we're talking about a majority of casual Halo fans, rather than just transient players, I actually want them to listen to this crowd a lot. I want Halo to be successful on a wide scale, because that does so much to help the competitive scene in itself as long as the two can coexist to some extent (see: Halo 3 and it's massive success at MLG despite questionable mechanics that even MLG settings couldn't escape). I don't think pandering to transient types is worthwhile in any sense because it compromises competitive value (which I obviously value a lot) without enhancing the viability of the game in a wider sense. I want a bigger commitment to options, and I hope things like Sprint toggles exist within that commitment. Would I prefer to have a whole game without Sprint personally? Definitely. But if it helps with wider game bring in a wider, committed audience, thus a wider talent pool, then I'd prefer we can simply turn it off in some cases.
Agreed wholeheartedly. I switched to it a month or so before they announced the rebalancing update, just because I started finding the BR much more satisfying to use than the DMR. I was really happy when I heard they'd be making it a fully viable choice in its own right.
Yea the process is worth noting but the actually improvements are good but meh until they do something that makes the game better instead of just "catching up/fixing things" Personally I would prefer competitive game mechanics over a popular game but I'm fine with it been aimed at mass audience of casuals, Problem is when there is no options I love options the more options the better. It pissed me off we couldn't turn turrets off in previous halo's(there was a option just didn't work) and Halo 4 there is hardly any options and ones there is half them don't even work(last time i checked idk if they patched it by now) If there is enough options and the game mechanics are sound and server quality is up to par people will find a way to make any game competitive.
Would you consider the upcoming primary weapon overhaul to be something significant or progressive, rather than just a fix?
It's somewhat significant. Shows that after 6 months of their forum complaining about the DMR, they finally made it so the DMR ISN'T unbalanced. I'm still disappointed it took them this long. Had their been a beta, the DMR would never have been this unbalanced. It's progress, but only mild. The fact that they still don't have Classic gametypes or competitive FFA has really turned me away from the game though. Frankly, I've only stuck around this long for forge, and I haven't made anything good in forge for months... It'd be helpful to my creativity if the testers guild would actually test my damn map, but as that's not happening any time soon I've pretty much given up on forging.
Yes, I agree. Even if we accept that A) you have to give time for balance aspects to be truly and extensively tested, rather than just reacting to strong voices right away, and B) the changes in the TU necessary for per-gametype re balancing have to be pushed through the regular patch vetting process for XBL, 6 months is still a long time. I wish they'd added the per-gametype balancing options in the first TU, as that was realistically the first opportunity to do so and it was already apparent that the primaries needed re balancing. I guess the flipside of this is: the more we talk about having hope for Halo 5, the more we have to accept that development for Halo 5 is going to mean fewer resources (people, time etc.) to maintain Halo 4 in the most timely manner. Either they pour as much as possible in to maintaining Halo 4, and risk (read: almost guarantee) making similar mistakes with Halo 5, ie. lack of polish, or Halo 4 maintenance isn't as timely as we'd like simply because proper resources are being put towards development of the next title.
But, I want to emphasize again, a standard amount of time for this industry, and even this particular game series. See my previous post about Halo 2 and Halo 3, which both got their first major TU almost exactly six months after release. At some point it needs to be acknowledged that this delay is probably not "laziness" or "not listening to the fans" as much as it is a reality of the industry that we can't comprehend fully, because we don't work in it. But I can tell you I work for a software company - a far smaller one, with a far smaller install-base - and it takes us at least three months between major patches, simply to write the code for everything we want to fix, test it all, and then tweak it in response to testing. I can well imagine that Bungie/343's task has many more hurdles in front of it, including the point that they've often mentioned that ANY title update requires independent vetting by Microsoft, a process that may require weeks on its own.
Agreed. I think laziness or intransigence are unfair calls in any sense. I guess my point is that, with two TUs before the standard time (for which I commend them), it would have been nice to have the update allowing easy weapon changes in one of them, rather than a fair amount of time after the third (and this minor 4th one). As you point out, even this current timing is well without the bounds of reason, but considering there were two previous TUs I would have liked to see it as included in one of them, as I'm personally of the mind that weapon balancing should have been a priority from early on. It became apparent very quickly that the DMR totally ruled the roost. That said, the initial TU was much more of a fix than an actual update, so the earliest reasonable point would have been the second TU in February, alongside the Boltshot nerf. I think part of the issue with that is that the testing for weapon updates demonstrably takes a while, so whilst the TU itself came at the end of March, the weapon update itself doesn't arrive until June. That is longer than the wait for either Halo 2 or 3's TUs by a couple of months. Whilst this is, as I said, reasonable for a variety of reasons (chief among which being that it's more significant than any change we saw in Halo 2 or 3, thus takes longer to refine), it's a little sad to see because I think it really has stretched or exceeded the patience of quite a few players. If this backend tuning had been enabled in February, we could have arguably had the weapon update by now which would have helped at least a little imo. But then again, that doesn't account for how much of a driving force Bravo was behind this re balance (since he really seems to be taking the lead on it), and how late in the day he was hired and could get started. In short, I agree that calling it an unreasonably long amount of time is a stretch, even though June is later than Halo 2 or 3's updates, but imo 343 would have gotten more mileage out of a weapon update applied a little sooner.