A rather articulate response, to be certain, but I can't say that I agree with the misleading nature of your arguments. And when you imply that my opinions are an stab at an objective argument by taking them out of context - that's just a bit irresponsible of you, isn't it?
To the contrary, this is misleading because when you use terms such as "proper implementation", that implies that one implementation (the one you suggest where all of the weapons in the Halo sandbox support ADS) is objectively superior. My response directly addressed this assertion. Talk about taking comments out of context!
For starters, I'm firmly aware of the differences between the two franchises.
Being aware of the differences is one thing. Understanding why they are different is another.
Next up is the fact that you simultaneously point out the fact that ADS mechanics aren't exclusive to Call of Duty, then call proceed to follow the lead of the internet troll brigade and assume that I have even a passing fancy for the Call of Duty series. Not the case and a biiiig assumption on your part.
I used Call of Duty as an example because it is a game that uses ADS with which I am most familiar. It was an assumption for me to say that you believe ADS to be a superior game mechanic because of Call of Duty's popularity, one that could very well be flawed insight on my part. I apologize.
I actually cited several games with ADS mechanics in my review (not just BLOPS 2) and the implication that I'm too stupid to recognize iron sights in other games is pretty weak sauce.
Not sure from where you got that.
And as much as I'd love to congratulate you on the earth-shattering observation that Fishstick is bridge between most modern FPS titles and Halo's more...shall we say...traditional methodology, again, that notion is inherent to my entire point: the option is in there, you agree that 343i recognize some folks' preference here, and my whole point is that those who like ADS mechanics are utterly under-served in Halo 4 and that bums me out.
It's just a button configuration. It's not proof of some half-assed attempt to copy game mechanics. Halo has its own mechanics. You can't cook grenades in Halo. Is it half-assed that when I hold RB in Halo 4 that my grenade is released as it should be? Fishstick is a button configuration, nothing more. I have never seen someone say that sandbox design elements should carry over to a game with completely different sandbox elements because of a button configuration option. This is quite possibly the most self-damning suggestion you've made.
I also appreciate your attempt to introduce me to the basic tenants of game balance and the trade-offs involved therein, but my guess is I know a bit more than you think I do on that front.
What I am saying is that your perception of your own depth of knowledge is flawed.
Anyways, as a fan of the genre, I'm just not a huge fan of how Halo handles the whole movement vs. accuracy side of their mechanics. Having held and shot a gun before in my life, I'd rather see more of an impact here. Just my opinion. You're obviously entitled to disagree.
Oh, and I do heartily! I too have used firearms, and they're nothing like the guns in Halo. Not even close. I believe a shaking of the head is the appropriate response here.
The while ADS mechanics slow down some games is a design decision and not a mandate, and further more, it's also relative depending a several things, including the average amount of damage a gun does. I think most FPS titles require way too many fucking bullets to eliminate an enemy, including both Halo and CoD. It's one of the reasons I don't play either for recreational purposes. Again, just my opinion on the subject.
Two big LOL moments here: CoD requires way to many fucking bullets to eliminate an enemy and that you don't play either Halo or Call of Duty for recreational purposes. The only deduction one can make from a statement like that is that you play them solely for the purposes of writing a review. You freely admit your experience with Halo is substantially limited, so is it so hard to imagine a universe in which your understanding of the sandbox is shallow, at the very least?
Moving right along, I find the assertion that CoD's guns have less depth and breadth in terms of variety and technique to be a bit ignorant. The simple fact that I don't like Fishstick's half-implemented concession vs. a more realistic sense of aiming doesn't mean that the 20+ guns in Call of Duty suddenly offer less functional variety than Halo's dozen or so options - many of which are intentional mirrors across factions (UNSC, Covenant, Forerunner). I'm 210% certain this isn't a matter of subjectivity, and if you ever want to go to bat on this one, I'm happy to dance.
210%? Are we on Maury? You are not the father of comparing Call of Duty and Halo. You don't even engage in recreation with this metaphorical child. Disgraceful!
What's more, the argument that a lack of movement restriction assures or aids balance is a equally iffy. As I'm sure you're aware, the weapons in most contemporary shooters offer several points of variation from a tuning standpoint, including stability, rate of fire, recoil, damage, payload, effective range, zoom levels, weight, and reload speed.
Weapon balance is a careful combination of many factors, including (but not restricted to) those noted above, and you're not exactly putting me in my place by assuming that your average game designer is incapable of managing two with respect to a zoom mechanic. You're just getting stuck on something you feel is critical without actually thinking it through. Plenty of other games manage to get it done, so I don't buy that it's impossible, regardless of what game we're discussing.
The weapons in shooters which use ADS are tuned around the mechanic. They must be. Surely, the designers of Halo COULD design its weapon sandbox around the mechanic, but it would be impossible for them to do so and for the weapons to work in the way that they do now. It wouldn't *be* Halo, at its core.
And I never said or even implied that CoD's popularity is even remotely related to my desire to see Halo up the ante. In fact, when you consider that Halo shipped on one platform and will likely sell 10-12 million units and CoD will ship on three and do around 25-30, it's hardly a matter or might making right, nor would I ever make a case based on such frivolous ideals. That's like saying all restaurants should be McDonalds because a lot of people eat there. If that's what you're taking away, you're making some big assumptions.
Again, you're right, I did make a big assumption, but when you use terms like "up the ante" in regards to drastically reworking most of Halo's weapon sandbox so as to produce a different type of game entirely, it leads me to question why you think ADS is important enough to completely alter the weapon sandbox--a crucial element of the franchise.
At any rate, I'm not trying to make any brave steps. Just do my job, which is play a game and express my thoughts on its merits and short-comings. I also don't think that my difference of opinion is wrong any more than I do your opinions, nor would I presume to tell any of you your opinions are "invalid." They're just different.
You're welcome to disagree, but I'd appreciate if you don't imply I'm a simpleton because we like different things.
I never suggested you were a simpleton. My entire response has been focused on a specific bit of conjecture on your part, which I believe to be very flawed. Explore this possibility.
