I'd disagree that its a good Halo, but completely agree that its a good shooter.
Halo is really the only game I play, pretty much at all. So to see such radical changes to the formula is always going to resonate louder with someone like myself.
343 Scrapped Traditional Halo: A Story About Triple-A
- Thread starter Plywood
- Start date
I'd disagree that its a good Halo, but completely agree that its a good shooter.
Halo is really the only game I play, pretty much at all. So to see such radical changes to the formula is always going to resonate louder with someone like myself.
NullPointer
Member
I can empathize with where you're coming from here, as I was also hoping 343 could advance the genre a bit rather than playing it safe.
But some things make Halo different from other games and should be retained, like even starts for players in multiplayer matches.
I'm no purist though, as I love the inclusion of jetpacks in reach and Halo 4 and think most if not all of the jetpack bitching stems from a pure aversion to change.
Not this time Frankie. I refuse to get strung along again after what your team produced with the Reach TU/DLC, and then again with Halo 4.
Vague optimism and hints won't cut it this time. Make a good Halo game, don't scrap it, and we will talk.
Yeah, despite how much I hate it.. It's definitely worth checking out.
It's not a bad game, it's just not a good halo.
I think its arguably the weakest campaign in the series, at least on par with Halo 2.
And if you haven't picked it up by this point, you obviously aren't a MP Halo purist so you'll probably like it.
les papillons sexuels
Banned
what made it worse is that they didn't listen to the community, both the core and the competitive communities, who should have been their backbone. At least valve listened to the competitive community with CS go and dota 2.
NullPointer
Member
Definitely. And if you like co-op with friends, there's the campaign and all 50(!) Spartan Ops missions just sitting there waiting to be played.
So many talk lately of developers constantly being under pressure to make something that is "highly sell-able" due to the giant budgets they invest into the games...
Really makes me wonder how much better these games could be, specially in terms of depth of gameplay and so forth, if the developers weren't constantly being pressured by these worries.
Really makes me wonder how much better these games could be, specially in terms of depth of gameplay and so forth, if the developers weren't constantly being pressured by these worries.
Are we talking about the MP or Campaign here? I'm not big on Halo's MP outside of the random sessions with some friends, so I admit that I'm not the best to judge the MP. I thought the campaign was good though, for the most part. I have my issues with some of their decisions, don't get me wrong, but I still consider it better than Halo 2 and probably on par with Halo Reach to be honest.
If you're referring to the slice of game they made and scrapped, you have no idea how the quality of that segment compares to the quality of the final game.
All the assuming people here generally do regarding game development is quite silly at times. We don't know the whole picture, so it makes sense to jump to the negative conclusion?
dragonelite
Member
Multiplayer.
I thought the campaign was really just boring, and felt tedious, and played it way too safe, but I don't really care about single player anyway.
That was more of a joke. The main point I was making was that I am off the hypetrain.
Yes I guess its' true for other industries as well. But I feel like it's something much more noticeable in video-games.
NullPointer
Member
And its still good to ask, and to answer.
Anything to help to combat the mentality that a game's success is purely a matter of how well it fits some abstract checklist of features and certain production values thresholds.
dragonelite
Member
For fans like you that like to play halo for its campaign i dont see a reason why 343 can't branch off a bit just not too much from bungie 3 pillar design. Make epic boss battles temporary suit enhancement. Go wild with stuff surrounding the multiplayer gameplay design.
So no ADS suit enhancement just say something like the librarian made the chiefs DNA compatible with forerunner tech. And because you play a generic non genetically modified spartan 4 in multiplayer they can't use those new upgrades that are found in the campaign.
Just so you can keep the multiplayer traditional. Because you have one super soldier and the ones in multiplayer are generic spartan 4.
It's not, it's just more noticeable because its something you're passionate enough to post on a forum about.
I've got a designer friend who is one of the absolute best in the business. Sought after talent, and he'll likely be someone people read about in textbooks years from now. And he operates with no idea of money and constraints...
And honestly he's the most miserable person I know. His entire life is put on hold for his work. He never sees his family, he's constantly pissing off other friends and designers and clients because he works under his own set of rules. People put up with it as long as they can tolerate it but he can never put something down and say its done. He's a complete victim of his own gift.
Deadlines and goals are important.
I agree that there was some tedious moments, like the multiple switches we had to constantly hit, but I'm not surprised they played it safe. It doesn't bother me with their first game, but I do expect them to branch out more now that they got their feet wet with the franchise.
What the fuck does that even mean? You slap another title on the box and it's still going to be a complete mess of a game with no solid direction.
Thanks for the reply everybody.
I've really enjoyed the Halo series since CE. It and KOTOR were the primary reasons I bought an Xbox, and while I don't love the series like say, Mass Effect, I've really enjoyed every single game in the series, and think they're all pretty great besides maybe Halo 2.
Now, I'm really curious because of what everyone replied with, why is it a good game but a bad Halo game? Is it just because Halo games are held to such a high mark, or because they changed thinks too much or something like that?
I've really enjoyed the Halo series since CE. It and KOTOR were the primary reasons I bought an Xbox, and while I don't love the series like say, Mass Effect, I've really enjoyed every single game in the series, and think they're all pretty great besides maybe Halo 2.
Now, I'm really curious because of what everyone replied with, why is it a good game but a bad Halo game? Is it just because Halo games are held to such a high mark, or because they changed thinks too much or something like that?
dragonelite
Member
great game is like a 7 for me Halo 4 is atleast a 7 in the range of games.
But a great halo would be like a 9 imo.
They did an alright job with the core gameplay but it was all the other systems in multiplayer they messed up.
*Power weapons are handed out randomly
*Weapon pickups are basically non-existant aside from a global drop
*People spawn with different equipment they unlock
Those things alone change the game a great deal but there are also smaller things. Like not being able to drop the flag once you pick it up for example.
They ruined balance and flow of a match (in tons of ways), which for me is a deal breaker in halo games.
Then dropped one sided objective gamemodes (my personal favorites), and then make pretty much all the maps asymmetrical. It just makes no goddamn sense when you step away from it.
There are plenty of other areas of the weapon sandbox I could nitpick, but thats no different from any halo game.
None of this stops the game from being fun in different ways, but its not the push and pull of match flow like in past halo's.
Muffdraul
Member
Ah, hater hyperbole at it's finest. Simply *mwah!*-- magnifique!
You don't post in the community thread much anymore null... Any reason?
Not really aversion to change. Change should be natural part of game development. Jetpack goes against a lot of what works in Halo. Other people have stated it far better than me on why it's never worked since it's inclusion in Reach.
For me, the loadout system is what's really wrong with the game. No longer are matches decided on the battlefield but the menu. Unnecessary perks, redundant weapons etc.
All that being said, 343 has shown they deserve another chance. The game now, is better than it was at launch. They've hired new guys like Bravo, they're seeing what's worked and what hasn't. So I'm hopeful to see what they can achieve in the next iteration with next gen hardware powering them.
OverHeat
« generous god »
This place is a hell hole.
This.
Halo 4's campaign was exactly what the series needed in my opinion. Literally can't wait to see what 343 pulls off next gen noow that they got the transitional game monkey off of their backs.
Halo 5 + Next Xbox is going to be MS biggest system seller by far when it's released two years from now.
Is this the way you tell me that you don't like me anymore?
Breakfast at Noon
Member
halo ce been the best by far since then it has degraded slowly over time, 4 been nothing more than pant by the numbers, best thing to come from it was the soundtrack and new armour design.
Twilight Gap
Member
This. It isn't a bad game, but IMO it doesn't honor Halo as much as it could have. They pretty much scrapped traditional Halo and doubled Reach's problems.
But if 343 buckles down and applies their experience with this to Halo 5 properly, I think it'll be a big game. They just need to show the community that they can do that, because I have my doubts with the way they're handling H4.
Freezasaurus
Member
So essentially what she's saying, is that they realized it was a pile of shit and sold it to people anyway?
I played through it, and didn't enjoy Halo 4 anywhere near as much as previous games in the series.
From the stuff I've heard, I'm just dissapointed they didn't make the story weirder. MP is fine and dandy; I don't need drastic changes, but I'm not against them. SP though could have been a complete change from the expected from what I remember of Halo 3's ending.
I remember at some points people thought we might see Halo transcend into Marathon. That would have been very interesting to see, as unlikely as it is. That's just one way they could have went.
Silly.Mikey
Banned
Ridiculous.
Oh please, everyone was a fan of Halo at one point, even people who didn't like it, especially when 2 was out. Its not as if they were all oblivious to whats the franchise did well for Christ sakes.
NullPointer
Member
It goes in the same cycles. I'd bring the thread up every week or so only to see the same "RIP Halo" crap each and every time. That shit was old months ago.
That and Gears Judgment came out. The campaign to that one is awesome BTW.
Yeah, I've read all the jetpack complaints before, and read em again for good measure, they still read to me as 100% aversion to change. Jetpacks change the way you design maps, move through those maps, and maintain situational awareness. Yes, thats a change, and it brings something new to the game. Its a fundamental difference.
People don't like it because it changes things and it changes how people have learned to design and play through the maps. I think those changes are for the better, and balanced, but then again I disagree with most of HaloGAF on a lot of things. ;P
The challenge for 343 is the same challenge they've always had - they need to advance the genre or go home. Copying a genre king, even copying it "In Halo-ish" ways is not the answer. Halo needs to lead the charge or forever live in the shadow of other games.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Actually, I will readily admit it. They didn't need to change a thing.
They didn't even need the fresh coat of paint.
No, I don't think that is what she said.
Twilight Gap
Member
I'll be fine with Halo CE + new weapons, maps, powerups, and vehicles every 2 years.
Why they feel the need to change the core gameplay every installation is beyond me. Halo already had a winning formula.
EDIT: Post #343. It's a sign...
Silly.Mikey
Banned
Then whats the point? Just keep releasing map packs for the old games at that point.
Randolph Freelander
Member
You lost me at new weapons, maps, powerups, and vehicles.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
The amount of theatrics to portray drama in some of these posts regarding that community thread.. Something about making mountains out of mole hills.
Anyway, I stand by what I said that Halo 4 is the most solid and most consistent base of any Halo game since Combat Evolved. One of the main problems is with the lack of customization and how tedious it is to play what we want, when we want. For example, Infinity Slayer would be SICK if it wasn't the default randomness for Matchmaking and was balanced properly with standards set in 2001.
Twilight Gap
Member
There have been great additions to the game since CE, like the Mongoose, Falcon/Hornet, Chopper (RIP), Custom Powerup, Grenade Launcher, Beam Rifle, and Elites. They can keep those and still have the game play as good as CE.
I still play Custom Edition and I still play Anniversary. An HD Halo that plays exactly like CE would be great fun, but 10 more years of that would get stale at some point.
You can add stuff to a game to keep it fresh without changing its nature. Those 4 things I listed can do just that.
Oh they can do plenty of great things to the series, like adding new gametypes and new modes like Spartan Ops. Just not anything to the core like kill streaks, perks, and random power weapons. Even Bungie got flak for that.
NullPointer
Member
Hahaha. Love it.
Honestly I'd hate to work at 343 and be given the mantle of Halo only to be told not to touch anything. I can totally appreciate your sentiment though ;P
les papillons sexuels
Banned
they should've started with an ODST title, made mistakes, learned a lot, then done a proper halo 4 to launch the durango.
or made a new halo wars, i really want a new halo wars, the singleplayer campaign from that game was SO much better then starcraft 2.
