Yep, same. I don't want a giant mass of everything in multiplayer that will look similar to the Halo Wiki page two weeks after release, but...a video or two of a full match, on a recent build, on a forge map with a new/updated objective gametype would be really neat. Not even all the weapons or anything...just recent footage of anything, really. Preferably Forge-related, like you said. Like that Assault game on The Cage we got around this time 2 years back. And Mazdak, I've come to accept that while this is going to be a good game, I can't see it as a real Halo successor. It completely changes the game. I liked the Arena Shooter hybrid Halo, a lot. I'm not getting that, no matter how balanced or cool these perky things may be. Halo 4 might be a great game. I hope it is. But even if it is the sequel to Halo 3, it isn't the replacement for Halo 3. Not so much as Halo 3 was for 2, or 2 was for CE. They were all different games, but with the same core mechanics and the same kind of meta and gameplay. Halo 4 is going to play too differently to be a replacement for even starts, simple Halo arena games. All you have to see are the unlocks, ordinance and AAs (in ANY form) to identify this. It won't play like Halo 3, or 2, or CE. When Halo 2 went down, Halo 3 offered a similar experience to players. It was close enough. When Halo 3 goes down, there won't be a game like it online. One or two playlists isn't the same, you can understand. Those playlists might be fun, but they aren't a place to stay. I wanted the replacement for Halo 3. Its age is starting to show. Oh well, ya get what ya get. Look at Starcraft 1, and Starcraft 2 vids. Look at Super Mario Bros and Super Mario World. Ocarina and Wind Waker. Battlefront 1 and 2. Halo CE and 3. I can clearly tell that these games are in the same series, and play similarly. Even with the graphics/art style changes, and more than a decade in-between some pairs. These games change a lot of things...but you can see how they fit together easily. Now when I watch Halo CE and Halo 4 (Hell, even Halo 2 or 3 and then 4), they look as if they are played almost completely differently to me. I think Nexuiz looks more like Halo CE than 4 does. To make an analogy, I think Halo CE is to Halo 4 as Pokemon Red is to Pokemon Stadium. All look like good games. The successors are in the same series, but they only play remotely similar to the ones before them. Once again, that doesn't mean it's bad. It just means, that I have to find a new game that plays like those Halo games to fill the void. This one won't do the trick. (Probably. I won't know for sure until release.) Also, I didn't count Reach because IMO, Reach started down that path. Reach doesn't feel completely different...but it feels distant. I accidentally hit post before I tidied this up, so I'm editing a bunch of stuff in and out. Apologies for any errors you might find. :/
i feel like youre exaggerated just a bit. halo 4 doesnt seem that different. yeah, they made some changes, but the gameplay looks pretty much the same. no, its not pokemon fire red and pokemon red (the exact game re-skinned), but neither is it stadium and red (completely different genres of games). id say it's more pokemon black/white and pokemon red. the same gameplay, just some new features added. no, its not the pseudo arena-type game that CE was, but that genre is dying. like point-and-click adventure games, its just outdated and doesnt really fit in today's gaming.
nope, there's you problem. you would realize that slower killtimes in reach made for more dynamic gameplay where getting the drop on someone could be turned around more easily which made for some more balanced gameplay because getting the drop on someone wasn't everything -this made the game more dynamic Halo 4, on the other hand, has faster everything which makes for faster and more exciting gameplay -this makes the game more action-ey and fast paced. all you have to do is mold yourself and change up a little every 3 years. if you wanted a re skinned CE, go buy Anniversary
Ya reach is not the best of the halo games(although fun especially for forge.)but that whole comment seemed rather random and IMO pointless because from what I saw of the last while nobody was saying much bad about the game(or even saying much about the game for that matter)
I don't believe this, because the arena type games have always been the most fair and competitive to all. [br][/br]Edited by merge: My "There's your problem" was intended as a joke, in case you didn't know. I try to keep it lighthearted haha. I don't think it made dynamic gameplay at all, because I used to turn fights around in H2 and H3 all the time, it's just monumentally easier in Reach. But again, this is my opinion. Also, I own Anniversary. And every other Halo game
I probably exaggerated... But with the Sprint and AAs and loadouts...honestly, if you made it look generic Sci-Fi and not like Halo and showed me gameplay, I would probably never bring up that it looks similar to Halo 3, or any other game in the series. Maybe Reach. AAs and Loadouts especially are going to change how you play and move about. BTB is going to become class oriented (designated snipers with the unscope protection, drivers with vehicle regen) and movement in 4v4 is completely up for debate. Who knows how much starting Sprint, personal Ordinance and regular Ordinance, as well as perks and weapon selection will change how you move around and control the map? I can't play Halo 4 how I played Halo 3 and do well. I can play Pokemon White/Black like I do Red, and do well enough. I think the changes being made have a serious affect on gameplay. I don't want a reskinned CE. I want a successor that stays in the same sub-genre. I want changes, but not to the mechanics that separate it from almost every console shooter on the market...change anything else! Add double jump, add climbing, add more platforming, add rocket jumps...I wouldn't mind that, as long as everyone gets it without any unlocks or superfluous stuff like that. And I refuse to let the Arena Shooter die. No one makes them because Devs think (probably because of the rise of CoD) that you need player progression/unlocks for people to play a shooter. It's a risk to do something different. The idea that arena shooters are outdated is bullshit. Fair, simple and balanced gameplay is never outdated.
on a lighter note, did anyone notice that you can remove plasma grenades that are stuck to you? I think I saw it in the E3 footage but never brought it up. has anyone else noticed this because I think I might be hallucinating.
for purely competitive play, yes, a simple arena shooter is the best. but 99% of the gaming community isnt looking for purely competitive game. take gears 3 and any post MW cod (yes, theyre all basically the same, but i still have enjoyed them all) (i hardly played Reach, mostly because of the clunky gameplay, so i wont compare it). i love gears to death, i played the original a ton, and i was good at it. i know its not really an arena shooter (third person, cover based is a bit different) but its still pretty simple and balanced and competitive. however, everytime i play gears, i feel like theres something missing. something that CoD has. ive never lost time while playing gears and thought "gee, where has the time gone?" and its because of unlockables and progression. as fun and competitive gears is, its just more fun when youre working toward something. and based on sales and activity, most people would agree. the simple arena shooter, as balanced as it may be, just isnt lucrative in today's market. its dying, like it or not. now CoD is an extreme in terms of that stuff, and halo 4 doesnt look to have nearly as much customization and unlockables. it'll still take skill. even CoD, the easiest game to pick up and play and get kills for unskilled players, takes skill. you still have to be good to be good, if that makes sense. youre not gonna get some lucky kills based on what loadout you choose and carry your team to victory. good players will still be good, bad players will still be bad. loadouts arent going to make everything so unbalanced and random that youre gonna get killed by someone who just started playing every 10 seconds. for purely competitive play against other skilled competitive players, you can still play those old games. theres still counterstrike tournaments, after all. the competitive arena community isnt dead, but the industry might be. its wounded, at least. to be clear, im not rooting for it to die, i loved those old shooters. but realistically, we're probably not going to see many more of them being made.
nope, he just died before the 'nade 'sploded and it stuck to the other guy. it would have been a cool and dynamic (as well as more fair) mechanic because being stuck isn't the end of the line.
No - went digging and the closest I could find was Frankie indicating that the FanExpo build won't have much/anything new. Viewing Single Post - NeoGAF [br][/br]Edited by merge: It's feasible. You could unstick yourself in H3.
Why would being able to unstick yourself be more fair. Why would I even bother throwing the damn thing if you're just gonna magic it off yourself. There doesn't need to be a counter every little thing in the game. What's next, you can un-rocket yourself?
Nope, sorry, I DO know what I want. It sounds like YOU don't know what you want, are assuming everyone else's mind works like yours and they're just being bloodyminded about this. As others have said, the fact that you have no basis for comparison within the series and expect others to suddenly agree with your assessment is pretty odd, I don't really see how you can put any weight behind this. Not saying you're not entitled to your opinion, but you somehow make out that not having played other Halo's not only makes your opinion more valid, but even transcend being an opinion, because we're somehow "wrong" for disagreeing. How far does that go? How slow to kill times have to get before the game starts suffering? You're oversimplifying the kill time argument. CE kills were potentially shorter (ie. the minimum kill time was shorter) but it was MUCH harder to hit people due to smaller hitboxes and less bullet magnetism, and a more responsive strafe (which, unlike the first two, was also true of Halo 2) meant it was easier to throw off your opponent's shot. THIS in turn made for more dynamic play, whilst still allowing the most skilled to achieve quick kills if they displayed enough skill in the given instance. Tbh I'm not even sure what the kill times are in Halo 4 yet, they don't look vastly different from Reach by any means. So what you're saying is that we should just like whatever is thrown at us and we'll enjoy it more? Pity that liking things doesn't work like that at all... Yeah, with all that multiplayer that CEA had. OH WAIT.
I just feel like you're judging this game way too early and harshly you don't even have the game yet and you're already bashing it. did anyone actually guess that there would be the sticky detonator in the game (which is the most genius gun ever), or did it come as a pleasant surprise? other things that they release should be treated the same. How can you speculate when 343 has released **** about the game. How do you know that maps with vehicles aren't very open and balance the vehicle regen, or maps with turrets are very enclosed to balance out the speed at which you carry them. You can't honestly tell me that you can calculate everything and know what's good and bad for the game, but 343 can't, even though they're testing the game every day. oh and BTW it's confirmed that killtimes are similar to that of halo 3, which is slighlty faster. and my argument that that people who complain about the fact that it's not halo anymore doesn't need me to have played past games because I'm saying that this game needs to EVOLVE. it's goddamn changing every time which is something that sets it apart from CoD. You might actually LIKE this is what I'm saying and you just don't know it because you're too stubborn to try to accept that fact that it's possible that specializations and all of the other stuff you are complaining about could actually be a GOOD element to the game. I'm not saying that's necessarily true, but you have to at least consider it before you start raging. Really, it's not like you won't get the game. [br][/br]Edited by merge: well, from what I thought I saw, you unstuck yourself by touching someone else with the sticky grenade stuck to your body, which would then transfer over to his. this would give a possible counter, but would make it very hard is some cases (especially if it was stuck to their back.)
Oh brother. The most genius gun ever might be the gun that the sticky detonator is replacing (the grenade launcher). I'd love it if we could stop having the "evolution vs. stagnation" argument. It's a non-starter. It's a strawman. Not a lot of people are actually wanting Halo 4 to be Halo 2 re-skinned. They just want the same core philosophy and mechanics. Not that I'd expect you to read this entire thread, but we've been having this conversation for months, ever since some of the particulars of H4 were first announced. When you come in with a blanket generalization like this, you are skipping over pages and pages of nuanced discussion and the people you're replying to laying out very specifically what they are worried about in this game. Not to mention plenty of people saying, "It might be good and fun, but it's not Halo" - which is a very different sentiment from "It will be bad."
*looks around Bickering? hm. Guess I'll just come back to this thread when some actual conversation arises.
still, if you look at the big picture, they're not big changes. Not staying in scope when being shot at is something that always annoyed me, and I'm glad that I have the option to disable that. As a trade-off, other people choose different things that either compliment their style or help them out in certain situations. I just think that all of the core principles are still intact, save for the fact that people start with slightly different advantages/disadvantages. And even if it wasn't halo, (which is completely hypothetical) it would still be a fun, fast-paced, and skill-based arena shooter. and there's a difference between being worried and being pissed of and in some cases threatening to not buy the game.