Support NeoGAF

[Einbroch]

How did you getfrom my post that people should only praise games in topics about them. I'm saying that if you do not like a game, which he said himself, why keep posting in threads about it?

Because you want the next game to be good? If you spent the money on a game and didn't like it, your voice still counts.

Maybe you're missing something. Maybe it's not clicking for some reason. Maybe you need some nudging or convincing another way.

I played Demon's Souls on three separate occasions, giving the game hours of time. I bitched and moaned in the OT how the game was bad, and listed my reasons. People argued with me, and eventually I let their mentality seep into mine. Then I tried again, and had a great time. Same with Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Hated it, then people told me why it was good, gave it another chance, loved it.

Is that the case here? Who knows. But you don't have to like a game to post in a thread, as long as you aren't trolling. Ignore him if you want.

 

[danwarb]

And enemies aren't just huge damage sponges in Halo unless things have changed in 4. The game encourages you to try different weapon combinations for different encounters. Empty a couple of clips into an Elite, or one hit from an overcharged plasma gun and a quick pop to the head. Even the flood enemies in Halo 3 who shoot spikes out of their arses and cling to the ceiling, one brute shot to knock down and then melee to finish. Spinning Hunters to hit them in the guts. All elements like this would be lost if enemies could be despatched with a few hits from the assault rifle though iron sights, rather than "1.5" clips.

 

[RiccochetJ]

Eh, I can understand how if you go to that alternate control scheme that if that gun doesn't have a scope and you go to binoculars instead could be jarring.

Why couldn't they go to the "iron sights" but instead of slowing down the speed/precision etc, it just pops the gun up and gets rid of the circle reticle?

No snap to target, no slow down. It acts just like you're aiming through a scope in previous Halo games without the extra precision and slowdown that are hallmarks of the COD games.

 

[Red_Man]

People were "bent out of shape" about your "iron sights" comment because it demonstrated a basic ignorance of the different shooting mechanics in Call of Duty and Halo--an ignorance that someone who reviews video games for a living shouldn't have. But, none of us are perfect, and some of these things may slip by someone who only casually plays the games (and at that point I would blame the editor for the poor decision of assigning such a person to review such a game).

The Aim-Down Sights (ADS) mechanic in Call of Duty isn't unique to the series, but it factors heavily into its gameplay. ADS grants greater precision, at the trade-off of lesser movement speed. It is worth noting that you can get a headshot in Call of Duty with just about any of the guns.

The Zoom mechanic in Halo is almost exclusively a feature of the headshot-capable weapons (although some other weapons may have it...Rockets come to mind, and in Halo 4, some headshot-capable weapons don't have it, such as the Promethean Pistol). This is because the other weapons trade precision for some other quality, like the close-range devastation of the Shotgun or Energy Sword, or the close to mid-range high rate-of-fire domination of the Assault Rifle.

Zooming in Halo does not restrict movement speed. There is an entirely different set of rules, carefully planned out to ensure balance between the various distinct kinds of weaponry. And they are VERY distinct. The weapons in Call of Duty have far less variation, and are built around the ADS mechanic--this is a crucial point. ADS is not an objective evolution in game design, but rather a tool used to craft a certain TYPE of game.

The Fishstick control scheme was built to make the game more accessible to Call of Duty players who are more accustomed to that button layout. I don't play Call of Duty very often, but I did finish the campaigns in Modern Warfare 1 & 2 on Veteran, and I bet I could switch from my Recon configuration to Fishstick without skipping a beat, just as it is when I jump between playing Halo and Call of Duty.

You didn't make some brave step in journalism, nor did you stir some designer at 343 Industries to wake from his traditional Halo slumber. It's not even about our bias towards Halo games. Halo 4 could very well suck, and takes many, MANY cues from CoD that gives the average fan pause, to say the least. What you did was make a huge leap in logic by assuming that because Call of Duty is most popular, it is an objectively better design. Here's hoping you learn from this experience.

Well put. The day Halo gets iron sights is the day I, and many others stop playing.

 

[Barrow Roll]

I would hire that noob

Until you realize he prefers vanilla Reach to TU. Good post though.

 

[Tashi]

Well put. The day Halo gets iron sights is the day I, and many others stop playing.

Yoink!

Awesome Ether definition pic

 

[Monocle]

People were "bent out of shape" about your "iron sights" comment because it demonstrated a basic ignorance of the different shooting mechanics in Call of Duty and Halo--an ignorance that someone who reviews video games for a living shouldn't have. But, none of us are perfect, and some of these things may slip by someone who only casually plays the games (and at that point I would blame the editor for the poor decision of assigning such a person to review such a game).

The Aim-Down Sights (ADS) mechanic in Call of Duty isn't unique to the series, but it factors heavily into its gameplay. ADS grants greater precision, at the trade-off of lesser movement speed. It is worth noting that you can get a headshot in Call of Duty with just about any of the guns.

The Zoom mechanic in Halo is almost exclusively a feature of the headshot-capable weapons (although some other weapons may have it...Rockets come to mind, and in Halo 4, some headshot-capable weapons don't have it, such as the Promethean Pistol). This is because the other weapons trade precision for some other quality, like the close-range devastation of the Shotgun or Energy Sword, or the close to mid-range high rate-of-fire domination of the Assault Rifle.

Zooming in Halo does not restrict movement speed. There is an entirely different set of rules, carefully planned out to ensure balance between the various distinct kinds of weaponry. And they are VERY distinct. The weapons in Call of Duty have far less variation, and are built around the ADS mechanic--this is a crucial point. ADS is not an objective evolution in game design, but rather a tool used to craft a certain TYPE of game.

The Fishstick control scheme was built to make the game more accessible to Call of Duty players who are more accustomed to that button layout. I don't play Call of Duty very often, but I did finish the campaigns in Modern Warfare 1 & 2 on Veteran, and I bet I could switch from my Recon configuration to Fishstick without skipping a beat, just as it is when I jump between playing Halo and Call of Duty.

You didn't make some brave step in journalism, nor did you stir some designer at 343 Industries to wake from his traditional Halo slumber. It's not even about our bias towards Halo games. Halo 4 could very well suck, and takes many, MANY cues from CoD that gives the average fan pause, to say the least. What you did was make a huge leap in logic by assuming that because Call of Duty is most popular, it is an objectively better design. Here's hoping you learn from this experience.

Perfection.

 

[NobleGundam]

Yeah, people see "iron sights" and go batshit. On an up note, I know how to start a riot at a Halo LAN Party.

The only opinion of yours about Halo 4 that I can agree on is the first mission. The rest of the majority complaints like ex. "Iron-sights" wouldn't help as an addition or a replacing feature in Halo. It would only benefit for the player that may want it as their own personal preference, but would easily slow the player(s) down and reduce map flow, when using it. Why have that feature if it has hardly any to no purpose in Halo games?

 

[Gummb]

Hey Guys, I just finished the campaign, and I'm pretty disappointed.

I gotta run through it again to make sure it's as mediocre as I'm feeling right now. UGH

[edit] /thread

 

[thetrin]

I'm not sure how a person can not understand how ADS would completely change the flow of the game and move away from why people play Halo in the first place. It exposes a general lack of understanding in what Halo does so well, and what COD specializes in.

 

[RiccochetJ]

I'm not sure how a person can not understand how ADS would completely change the flow of the game and move away from why people play Halo in the first place. It exposes a general lack of understanding in what Halo does so well, and what COD specializes in.

Because you're assuming that the ADS would act the same as COD. I'm pretty sure it's easy enough to not slow down the player nor improve their aim when they do that.

It should act exactly the same. Just a different visual on their end.

 

[Lunchbox]

I'm not sure how a person can not understand how ADS would completely change the flow of the game and move away from why people play Halo in the first place. It exposes a general lack of understanding in what Halo does so well, and what COD specializes in.

probably because the persons first shooter was black ops

 

[Rickenslacker]

Because you're assuming that the ADS would act the same as COD. I'm pretty sure it's easy enough to not slow down the player nor improve their aim when they do that.

It should act exactly the same. Just a different visual on their end.

Then what's the point? If you're not getting more accuracy, you're not slowing down, you're just getting the same hipfire but now with gun model tunnel vision and DOF blur.

 

[sp3000]

Hey Guys, I just finished the campaign, and I'm pretty disappointed.

I gotta run through it again to make sure it's as mediocre as I'm feeling right now. UGH

[edit] /thread

Would you be able to share some more details. I've been a bit wary of the campaign as well since it's a new team making it.

 

[segarr]

Lmao whatever man. you seriously expect me to take you seriously after checking your post history?

90% of your post's consist of halo and xbox. and your calling me the fanboy? give me a break.

who are you to insult my intelligence? you know nothing about me buddy, just because I don't share the same opinion as you doesn't make me an idiot. we all have opinions, end of the day everything is subjective.

I fucking put money if EGM gave this a 10 you guys would be praising the site to no end. this is fact, don't deny it.

im out of this thread. Love halo, respect the series, but the fanbase are the most obnoxious and pretentious morons I have ever dealt with. and I deal with a lot of morons on a daily basis..believe me. but they take the cake.

What an obnoxious poster, and I don't mean his opinions on the game. He just comes off as a condescending prick and then plays the persecution card when people challenge him.

 

[RiccochetJ]

Then what's the point? If you're not getting more accuracy, you're not slowing down, you're just getting the same hipfire but now with gun model tunnel vision and DOF blur.

There isn't. It's just an alternative. Is that so bad?

 

[Rickenslacker]

There isn't? It's just an alternative. Is that so bad?

An alternative to what, having perfect vision and reducing button presses? It not only seems pointless, but a detriment to someone coming in fresh and trying to understand the systems.

 

[RiccochetJ]

An alternative to what, having perfect vision and reducing button presses? It not only seems pointless, but a detriment to someone coming in fresh and trying to understand the systems.

What if the person enjoys the game more that way?

 

[Rickenslacker]

What if the person enjoys the game more that way?

They can play the bevy of games that cater to that playstyle.

 

[RiccochetJ]

They can play the bevy of games that cater to that playstyle.

So you're taking the position that people shouldn't buy this game if they don't like how the control scheme behaves on screen.

 

[Rickenslacker]

So you're taking the position that people shouldn't buy this game if they don't like how the control scheme behaves on screen.

More that they shouldn't convolute the control scheme with things that serve no function. But if it's that important that it would be a make or break feature, then they should look elsewhere.

 

[danwarb]

Would anyone enjoy being able to reduce their field of view on the fly with a extra button press for no advantage at all? No doubt getting killed more often while they're at it.

 

[patapuf]

There isn't. It's just an alternative. Is that so bad?

It wouldn't be bad but it would trick newcomers into thinking iron sights actually worked as they expect them to - that only leads to frustration and it will not help newcomers at all.

It's okay for a game to have different mechanics/controlls and to expect new players to learn those.

If one is absolutely unwilling to accept that different games may work differently that isn't a flaw of the game. Especially if those different mechanics work well.

 

[Ramirez]

HiredNoobs posting something that HaloGAF agrees on, what is this?

 

[RiccochetJ]

More that they shouldn't convolute the control scheme with things that serve no function. But if it's that important that it would be a make or break feature, then they should look elsewhere.

How does it serve no function? Some want to pull the left trigger expect to have the gun pull up. Not binoculars.

If it doesn't affect how the game plays and you go with the normal way of playing the game... What issue do you have with them providing people with an alternate control scheme and some extra animations that are involved?

 

[Rickenslacker]

How does it serve no function? Some want to pull the left trigger expect to have the gun pull up. Not binoculars.

If it doesn't affect how the game plays and you go with the normal way of playing the game... What issue do you have with them providing people with an alternate control scheme and some extra animations that are involved?

It serves no function because you're not actually modifying how anything behaves, you're moving at the same speed, you retain the same accuracy, you keep the same level of zoom. It only serves to confuse anyone coming into it, as ADS in every single game that's ever used it has actual gameplay ramifications tied to it. You're suggesting to actually blur up and block more of the screen to no benefit other than to placate the type of person who can't possibly imagine playing an FPS without ADS.

 

[RiccochetJ]

It wouldn't be bad but it would trick newcomers into thinking iron sights actually worked as they expect them to - that only leads to frustration and it will not help newcomers at all.

It's okay for a game to have different mechanics/controlls and to expect new players to learn those.

If one is absolutely unwilling to accept that different games may work differently that isn't a flaw of the game. Especially if those different mechanics work well.

I suppose it depends on on how you view control schemes. A/X is jump in a third person game on Xbox or Playstation. It just is.

Now with EA and Activision doing their thing (among others) for some years, this is getting close to that. If it's not already there.

 

[dmg04]

I wonder if the game rating system will ever change for the better...

 

[RiccochetJ]

It serves no function because you're not actually modifying how anything behaves, you're moving at the same speed, you retain the same accuracy, you keep the same level of zoom. It only serves to confuse anyone coming into it, as ADS in every single game that's ever used it has actual gameplay ramifications tied to it. You're suggesting to actually blur up and block more of the screen to no benefit other than to placate the type of person who can't possibly imagine playing an FPS without ADS.

You're focusing on functionality. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that some people are used to aiming that way regardless? Halo 4 provides them with that in the settings.

It's not wrong.

Teach them it's wrong for Halo.

 

[Ken]

Why is it so difficult for you to accept that some people are used to aiming that way regardless?.

Why not just, I don't know, have them get used to Halo (again).

 

[RiccochetJ]

Why not just, I don't know, have them get used to Halo (again).

Why do they have to be forced?

I think I provided an alternative that should work for a lot of people.

 

[Rickenslacker]

You're focusing on functionality. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that some people are used to aiming that way regardless? Halo 4 provides them with that in the settings.

It's not wrong.

Teach them it's wrong for Halo.

Of course I'm focusing on functionality, some tangible benefit would be preferable if it's going to take away something that actually does something like the binocular zoom. I can accept that some people are used to that style of aiming, that's not a problem. What I don't accept is trying to cram in something to cater solely to people who are so psychologically tuned that in such a way that they can't play an FPS without a blurred out gun model blocking off half their screen. You're advocating including a button that has no purpose other than to hinder visibility and that is insane.

 

[RiccochetJ]

Of course I'm focusing on functionality, some tangible benefit would be preferable if it's going to take away something that actually does something like the binocular zoom. I can accept that some people are used to that style of aiming, that's not a problem. What I don't accept is trying to cram in something to cater solely to people who are so psychologically tuned that in such a way that they can't play an FPS without a blurred out gun model blocking off half their screen. You're advocating including a button that has no purpose other than to hinder visibility and that is insane.

In what way? What will it hinder? There is nothing in your arguments except functionality. I just see "You're not playing it right!"

In what way will a gun raising up to that persons vision detract from Halo 4? If they don't blur, if they don't slow them down, if it does not in any way affect their aim... Does it affect you?

It acts exactly the same as if you just turned and your circle reticle stops on that person.

In what way does that other person's experience affect you?

 

[Rickenslacker]

In what way? What will it hinder? There is nothing in your arguments except functionality. I just see "You're not playing it right!"

In what way will a gun raising up to that persons vision detract from Halo 4? If they don't blur, if they don't slow them down, if it does not in any way affect their aim... Does it affect you?

It acts exactly the same as if you just turned and your circle reticle stops on that person.

In what way does that other person's experience affect you?

I think it's getting too late for me to deal with this if you don't see why functionality should be the only factor in a control scheme.

Let me flip this around and say that you are not providing a convincing argument for why it should be included. Why is it necessary to include this option solely to satisfy this hypothetical crazy person who physically couldn't play an FPS without ADS, even if it actually did nothing? What if I really wanted everything to be tinted blue before I shot instead? Why can't they add that mode to make it better for people like me? Basically they should get over it, Halo 4's not gonna have that, they should get used to it.

 

[RiccochetJ]

I think it's getting too late for me to deal with this if you don't see why functionality should be the only factor in a control scheme.

Let me flip this around and say that you are not providing a convincing argument for why it should be included. Why is it necessary to include this option solely to satisfy this hypothetical crazy person who physically couldn't play an FPS without ADS, even if it actually did nothing? What if I really wanted everything to be tinted blue before I shot instead? Why can't they add that mode to make it better for people like me? Basically they should get over it, Halo 4's not gonna have that, they should get used to it.

You didn't really flip it. I was always going off of being supportive of an alternative control scheme. I said that from the beginning.

Love your dismissive and condescending argument about people wanting to look down sights even though they know that it provides no benefit whatsoever.

It's even better when I'm proposing this with the idea that it would be implemented in an alternate scheme.

 

[NBtoaster]

Metacritic now 89. Hope MS don't do metabonuses.

I've preordered, some things in reviews had me a bit concerned but then I remembered how much better my experiences are when I stop paying attention to other impressions.

 

[Krappadizzle]

You didn't really flip it. I was always going off of being supportive of an alternative control scheme. I said that from the beginning.

Love your dismissive and condescending argument about people wanting to look down sights even though they know that it provides no benefit whatsoever.

It's even better when I'm proposing this with the idea that it would be implemented in an alternate scheme.

I don't see a problem of it has no ramifications on gameplay from others perspectives. If someone wants to ADS while and slowly try and peg away at my health while I'm doing drastically more damage by not ADS, I see no problem with it. If its a purely cosmetic change, I'd be for it. But Halo traditionally hasn't been that way, and Halo revolutionized console fps.


What happened to the days of twitch reaction shooting? If you weren't good at it, you either practiced or moved on to something else. People want instant gratification which they feel they get from ADS and if a game is designed around that, awesome, if not it shouldn't be the games fault. How many games this gen. must cater to every specific convention for people to be happy?

 

[Chittagong]

How is the MP? I loved Halo 2 and 3, but burned out because of quitters come ODST and Reach.

 

[Card Boy]

How is the MP? I loved Halo 2 and 3, but burned out because of quitters come ODST and Reach.

Game has a late join system now, so you don't have to fear of quitters anymore.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

and I deal with a lot of morons on a daily basis..believe me.

Oh, I have little trouble believing that.

Regarding the complaint about the repetition of moving to the next button to push or object to blow up in the campaign, can't that be said for any Halo game?

Of course, it was all over the original Halo.

IMO the replayability of Halo's campaigns have everything to do with the co-op and dynamic nature of the AI, not the prime objective. The fact that I can play a firefight 3 times and it plays differently every time is why I replay Halo games.

Spot on again. I've only played the first two games so far (playing Halo 3 at the moment), and if I were to attempt to rate their campaigns as objectively as possible, they would both get nice 8 of of 10s. But they're still among my favorite games of all time, and those 8s are stronger then most 9s precisely because of the reactive nature of Halo's firefights.

 

[Deleted member 30609]

The OP seems out of date. Can we get a complete listing there?

 

[Rickenslacker]

You didn't really flip it. I was always going off of being supportive of an alternative control scheme. I said that from the beginning.

Love your dismissive and condescending argument about people wanting to look down sights even though they know that it provides no benefit whatsoever.

It's even better when I'm proposing this with the idea that it would be implemented in an alternate scheme.

I'm kidding around, not trying to be condescending. You're just not telling me why this is a necessity. Why should people who want to see ADS be specifically catered to in a game where that is not a gameplay mechanic? Why does this sole preference need to be dealt with?

 

[RiccochetJ]

How is the MP? I loved Halo 2 and 3, but burned out because of quitters come ODST and Reach.

You must have been really good. I walked away for a year and I heard people talking about leveling down as they destroyed us and then died many times before the match ended.

As someone who was just getting back into this shit?

It never changed. Just the tricks.

 

[Shadders]

I'm not sure how a person can not understand how ADS would completely change the flow of the game and move away from why people play Halo in the first place. It exposes a general lack of understanding in what Halo does so well, and what COD specializes in.

ADS would irreparably damage Halo's key strength, it's gunplay. People seem to think you can just throw in mechanics without any sort of ramifications, but Reach is a perfect example of how slight changes to the sandbox can have a massive impact on how the game plays (bleedthrough, bloom, AL etc). And now in Halo 4, a small change such as not being able to pick up grenades makes a huge difference.

If Halo had ADS, it wouldn't be Halo any more.

Game has a late join system now, so you don't have to fear of quitters anymore.

Except in Domnion. If you're a man short in Dominion you will be annihilated.

 

[RiccochetJ]

I'm kidding around, not trying to be condescending. You're just not telling me why this is a necessity. Why should people who want to see ADS be specifically catered to in a game where that is not a gameplay mechanic? Why does this sole preference need to be dealt with?

It isn't a necessity. It's an option. Why is this so hard to understand? If it has no impact on the nuts and bolts of how the game plays. Then why is there a problem?

If anything you experts will beat the living shit out of them.

 

[FyreWulff]

It isn't a necessity. It's an option. Why is this so hard to understand? If it has no impact on the nuts and bolts of how the game plays. Then why is there a problem?

If anything you experts will beat the living shit out of them.

Because ADS is expected to behave a certain way in that Halo's zoom function does not. And even if it was just a 'skin' on the function, now they have to justify ironsights on every single gun's design.

It's like when developers forced a two-gun system into their games from Halo, not understanding WHY Bungie did that, and not re-reckoning the game to deal with it. Or re-using Halo's health system without designing the encounters around it.

If you just throw the "skin" of ADS on then players WILL notice it and how janky it is.

 

[The Tofunator]

It isn't a necessity. It's an option. Why is this so hard to understand? If it has no impact on the nuts and bolts of how the game plays. Then why is there a problem?

If anything you experts will beat the living shit out of them.

It will have an effect on how people perceive the game. Having an cosmetic ADS option would confuse people used to modern military shooters, and instead of recognizing that the game is not meant to be played like that, they would complain about how the game is broken (due to getting killed by people who don't use it) or that the aiming system is useless (due to the ADS having no actual gameplay functionality).

 

[RiccochetJ]

Because ADS is expected to behave a certain way in that Halo's zoom function does not. And even if it was just a 'skin' on the function, now they have to justify ironsights on every single gun's design.

It's like when developers forced a two-gun system into their games from Halo, not understanding WHY Bungie did that, and not re-reckoning the game to deal with it. Or re-using Halo's health system without designing the encounters around it.

So? Why should you expect ADS to behave the same way? How did you get to the point that ADS should behave that way? I want to know why you think it's not allowed to change from where it is.

Why should 2 guns be the norm?

 

[sonicmj1]

In what way? What will it hinder? There is nothing in your arguments except functionality. I just see "You're not playing it right!"

In what way will a gun raising up to that persons vision detract from Halo 4? If they don't blur, if they don't slow them down, if it does not in any way affect their aim... Does it affect you?

It acts exactly the same as if you just turned and your circle reticle stops on that person.

In what way does that other person's experience affect you?

If it provides no control or zoom changes, then the people who want ADS will complain that Halo's sights are shitty and broken, and that the game has bad controls. They'll expect the sights to work, and they'll get nothing.

A half-step like what you suggest doesn't actually help anyone.

 

[Rickenslacker]

It isn't a necessity. It's an option. Why is this so hard to understand? If it has no impact on the nuts and bolts of how the game plays. Then why is there a problem?

If anything you experts will beat the living shit out of them.

I think what this boils down to is that it's nice to want options, there are a lot of options that people want from Halo 4 that they're not going to get. I'd like the option to have a centered crosshair, some people from HaloGAF want the option to remove the centered white text that appears on screen every time you get a kill. In just pitching that concept of wanting more options, sure, add every option for every kind of person; that'd be awesome if possible.

What I take umbrage to I guess is that the game has already taken a lot of concessions from competing popular shooter that may be holistically detrimental to me once I dig my teeth into it. So even given this hypothetical scenario where cosmetic ADS is the only thing added to Halo 4 as we now know it I still say fuck it. I've got things I'll just have to deal with and adjust to, this is no different.