Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: I really enjoyed the ViDoc, but the last part made me certain...
  • Subject: I really enjoyed the ViDoc, but the last part made me certain...
Subject: I really enjoyed the ViDoc, but the last part made me certain...

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

If you're interested in Halo's music, check this out.

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Speaking of chuckles, let's all lol at IonicPaul, who makes friends with bugs to make up for his lack of human contact.

Posted by: ev1l tr1t0n
Addressing the population arguments: Halo is Halo. Halo is supposed to top the charts - that's just how damn good it is. Like the first two games, Halo 3 was amazing. In its effective lifetime, it managed to 'survive' the latest three Call of Duty games. Reach? Reach 'survived' none. I don't think it's a coincidence that Reach is worse than the previous three games and didn't perform nearly as well on the charts.

Another ignorant argument. It's a fact that nothing lasts forever. At least, nothing lasts as it was in its prime forever. Look at Nintendo. They brought a bunch of games to the fore that appealed to so many people. They're still a multimillion (billion) dollar company, but they're just reselling the same games that they made almost thirty years ago. And they're not nearly as popular.

The same, I'm afraid, will happen to Halo. In another decade, we'll have a new Halo trilogy, not to mention all the side projects. Despite best wishes, Halo will be exploited. Similarly, it was inevitable that Halo was going to be topped as top FPS. Whether you like it or not is another matter. I don't like it, but I can't take a naive view and think that it should have never happened.

On a similar note, it's inevitable that Call of Duty is going to be topped as the dominant FPS. I'm hearing more and more grumbling about how tired the formula is getting, and it's not even five years after Call of Duty 4's then-groundbreaking formula was introduced.

Halo had a good run. I'm looking forward to the next big thing.

  • 08.06.2011 3:35 PM PDT

QP

i totally agree with this! and he is NOT hating. 343 has been working on halo 4 for 2 years now. and they say theyre pushing the xbox 360 capacity to its limits. so halo 4 is going to be awesome!

  • 08.06.2011 3:44 PM PDT

It has just dawned on me fully, The Tiger, bungies next universe and game, will be a First Person Shooter Open World, like they wanted halo CE to be!

That could really change every aspect of how Fps is played.

  • 08.06.2011 4:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Agreed.

  • 08.06.2011 4:14 PM PDT


Posted by: KranBe
It has just dawned on me fully, The Tiger, bungies next universe and game, will be a First Person Shooter Open World, like they wanted halo CE to be!

That could really change every aspect of how Fps is played.


And how did you come about that?

  • 08.06.2011 5:10 PM PDT

I am a Gamer by nature, but an anime lover by heart


Posted by: Razorback WPS

Posted by: ev1l tr1t0n
...that it's a really good thing Bungie is no longer developing Halo games. Don't get me wrong, I love Bungie, I can't wait for their next game and on paper Reach is the ultimate Halo game. In practice, however, it is not.

I'm not going to delve into it since countless people have already beat the problems to death in the Reach and Optimatch forums, but these issues with several of the core elements of the game kept it from being the ultimate Halo game it was on paper. And... in the ViDoc, it seemed like Bungie completely ignored that. All they did was repeatedly praise Reach like it was a last sales pitch. No admission of failure, which seems odd considering the admission of failure with Halo 2 (which could hardly be called a failure).

It bothers me that Bungie is so blind to Reach's faults, so that's why I'm happy Bungie is no longer working on Halo. A fresh set of developers is exactly what Halo needed. Thank you, Bungie, for creating such an amazing universe that I have invested thousands of hours into, both in game and out and thank you for handing it off to a team of Halo fans.
I agree with everything you have said. They must believe Reach is perfect. Or they are just too stubborn to admit otherwise.


while I don't believe that Reach is perfect, no game is but I do believe that Reach is extremely close to perfect, it's with out a doubt the best Halo game so far it beats the -blam out of CE in my opinion CE ain't got nothing on Reach except nostalgia and that is why CE will remain my favorite Halo game, but for now I think that Reach is the best Halo game

  • 08.06.2011 5:23 PM PDT

DO THE IMPOSSIBLE.

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Posted by: KranBe
It has just dawned on me fully, The Tiger, bungies next universe and game, will be a First Person Shooter Open World, like they wanted halo CE to be!

That could really change every aspect of how Fps is played.

And how did you come about that?

From the sounds of it, BUNGiE reeeeeally should be working for Valve.

  • 08.06.2011 5:26 PM PDT


Posted by: ShieldyPoo
Amount of players = popularity.

If no one is playing it, or not as many are playing it as there used to/should be, then the game is bad. People aren't playing it because it's bad.

Halo 3 had 250,000 people online at any given time all the way up until 2010. By January 2011 Halo Reach was already down to 150k at a time. Now I think it is at like 125k at a time.

Reach failed, fact.

lol @ you saying I'd fall for peer pressure because I called Reach a bad game. Guess what, I've played it. It's terrible, and it's not even Halo. They should have just called it Fall of Reach, or something dumb like that.


The amount of players does not equal something's popularity at all, that is a facet of it sure, but that is not the sole deciding factor. And it certainly does not indicate whether it is good or not. Making such a claim is the utmost foolishness and is in fact utter bull-blam!-!

Reach failed=your incredibly misinformed and utterly wrong opinion. I don't care whether you like the game or not, but it most definitely did not fail!

*faceInfectionForm* *sigh*
You sir, are a complete and total ignoramus -.-
You think Reach is terrible, sure whatever, that's your opinion which I don't agree with at all, but your opinion Is. Not. Fact! And it would do you well to not act like it is.
And who are you to decide what is or isn't Halo? If it's set in the same universe as Master Chief, the UNSC, the Covenant, or any of the other iconic objects/characters people identify with Halo, then it is Halo!

  • 08.06.2011 5:35 PM PDT


Posted by: IonicPaul

Another ignorant argument. It's a fact that nothing lasts forever. At least, nothing lasts as it was in its prime forever.


No, but there's no law of the universe that states that Halo had only this much time to it's prime.

Look at Nintendo, they've certainly had a good few systems under their belt and even if marred by a Virtual Boy or two they've still had a successful run, especially of these last few years.

If they had taken the same argument you're trying to forward, they'd have simply stopped at the Gamecube accepting that their time had come and the golden era of the NES was never to be seen again. They didn't, accepting that despite losses there can still be growth, and to everyone's benefit they made the Wii and showed the world that despite their aging protfolio they can still make a succesful system (regardless of how little support it's getting at the end of it's life.)

[Edited on 08.06.2011 7:17 PM PDT]

  • 08.06.2011 7:16 PM PDT


Posted by: OrderedComa
The amount of players does not equal something's popularity at all, that is a facet of it sure, but that is not the sole deciding factor.


Popularity: a measure of how many people like a particular thing.

Assumption: the more people that like a game, (IE. the more popular it is) the more people will play it. Ergo, popularity can be inferred from an online population.

It may not be the only indicator, but it's certainly one you can use here.


Reach failed=your incredibly misinformed and utterly wrong opinion. I don't care whether you like the game or not, but it most definitely did not fail!


An entertainment product that fails to actually entertain the user is, by definition, a failure. And I can say that in an objective sense because I'm damn well sure that whatever you're getting out of Reach, it's not fun, joy, or any other positive emotional response that could satisfy the above criteria of "entertainment." Schadenfreude or the junky's rush, perhaps, but nothing relevant to the discussion here.


*faceInfectionForm* *sigh*
You sir, are a complete and total ignoramus -.-
You think Reach is terrible, sure whatever, that's your opinion which I don't agree with at all, but your opinion Is. Not. Fact! And it would do you well to not act like it is.


An opinion is not necessarily fact but that is not to say that it can't be fact. It was Darwin's opinion that the biodiversity of life was in part a product of natural selection, and despite his subjective perspective he hit upon the truth there to describe fact.

And in the same way, with the powers of observation and reason anyone here may be striking truth with their "foolish" opinions so please don't act like a jackass and discount anyone for not being omniscient.

[Edited on 08.06.2011 7:29 PM PDT]

  • 08.06.2011 7:25 PM PDT

An entertainment product that fails to actually entertain the user is, by definition, a failure. And I can say that in an objective sense because I'm damn well sure that whatever you're getting out of Reach, it's not fun, joy, or any other positive emotional response that could satisfy the above criteria of "entertainment." Schadenfreude or the junky's rush, perhaps, but nothing relevant to the discussion here.


Might I ask when you became the sole decider of what me, or Coma, or ANYBODY besides yourself considers fun? About what they get from something.

  • 08.06.2011 10:49 PM PDT


Posted by: ev1l tr1t0n
...that it's a really good thing Bungie is no longer developing Halo games. Don't get me wrong, I love Bungie, I can't wait for their next game and on paper Reach is the ultimate Halo game. In practice, however, it is not.

I'm not going to delve into it since countless people have already beat the problems to death in the Reach and Optimatch forums, but these issues with several of the core elements of the game kept it from being the ultimate Halo game it was on paper. And... in the ViDoc, it seemed like Bungie completely ignored that. All they did was repeatedly praise Reach like it was a last sales pitch. No admission of failure, which seems odd considering the admission of failure with Halo 2 (which could hardly be called a failure).

It bothers me that Bungie is so blind to Reach's faults, so that's why I'm happy Bungie is no longer working on Halo. A fresh set of developers is exactly what Halo needed. Thank you, Bungie, for creating such an amazing universe that I have invested thousands of hours into, both in game and out and thank you for handing it off to a team of Halo fans.


I agree in a sense, and there's a few points that one can kinda explain some of it, not all mind you.

1.) Staten says with ODST and with Reach, in ways they have yet to reveal the learned from those games. This is basically the closest admission to "failure" (subjective no matter how you see it, such as how they likely saw H2 as a possible failure due to multiple things going on within the company and the pressure of topping HCE.)

2.) With H2 they had time to reflect on all the things that had happened during that time and how it felt with each and everyone of them in their own aftermaths to add to this ViDoc, they were also disappointed about how much how they had to cut of the ending, which was another aspect to how they say themselves failing. Heck, given maybe more then less of a year they could have reflected a bit more on Reach.

  • 08.06.2011 11:03 PM PDT

i got reach (and the xbox 360 for that matter) for forge. still lovin' it. :P still want even more control... i bet their next game has it.. uhnnn can't wait!

i've always missed the explorational freedom of the first two, though. searching all over for crazy secret stuff. reach's much smoother game-play and graphics easily top all of the previous titles, though campaign-wise, i prefer 3 or odst. i've got no complaints about reach, really. although i don't play much multi-player as a large majority of the people in there seem just plain miserable. :/

  • 08.06.2011 11:57 PM PDT

well anything you create, a forge map a painting, a cake your always going to be proud of it and thinks its the most awsome thing because you made somthing from scratch and its good
and i dont think reach is bad game bungie just made the standards for higher for every halo, so reach was a let down for people because they thought it would be twice as good as the last game.
or i could be totally wrong i dont even remember what i typed ive been up all night

  • 08.07.2011 3:22 AM PDT

Want to see advanced Halo stats not offered by other Halo stat websites? Check out MetaHalo.com, the stats website I am working on. Reach stats currently in development.

Like BTB? Check out bigteambattle.net!


Posted by: graver0679667
and thinks its the most awsome thing because you made somthing from scratch and its good


As a programmer I can definitely say this is false.

  • 08.07.2011 5:22 AM PDT

Yes I make Minecraft texture packs.

Like they said many a time in the ViDoc, they made the games for them. And to them Reach was the best Halo game.



You can't really say they were wrong because it looked like they were just talking about their opinion on it. (Although I do agree they overdid the praising)

  • 08.07.2011 5:30 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Member of Bungie.net for nearly three years, still continuing!

Enjoy what you have and live on.

My gamertag is Elder Bias

OP, I agree. That is why I don't think that Halo: Reach was a good game, more like mediocre at best. Why, I decided to post my own thoughts about Halo: Reach.

I'll give both pros and cons for you and everybody. Before I start, I would remind to everybody, most of players who brought Reach and liked it because its their own opinion and liking however, should recommended to play Halo CE, 2 and 3 and look at comparison of those games to Reach.

Now on pros and cons:

PROS:
---------------
*Improvement on the Graphics system, despite using heavily modified Halo 3 engine (A.K.A) Reach engine. It has huge improvements such as facial mapping, fluid movement, improved detailed decals/meshes for each texture maps (characters, etc), facial movement such as brows, mouths, even seeing wrinkles as they show the emotions. Also, there is improved environment meshes and animations (physics) as well, such as well detailed explosions, allowing sparks to bounce off the solid objects. I can say that there is probably overall improved visualization in the Reach game.

*Improvement on Forge, theaters and some multiplayer aspects. Forge, was much improved from Halo 3's Forge mode due to new innovations such as rotation snapping, using improved mapping, new objects to use for various maps, a large forgeworld that is designed to usable for very large forged maps or small, very fun maps. Also, there is noticeable increase in budget and objects limit which it allowed Forgers to make creative map as they wished. Theater is improved as well, it allows us to take screenshots during cut-scene (correct me if I'm wrong) and also allow us to take screenshots slightly more effective for fun, crazy screenshots. Multiplayer aspect is slightly improved as well, it has slightly better net code, improved usage of preferences for match making and shorter period of time for waiting to get a match.

*Small new innovations that were welcomed in the Halo such as Armor Abilites like Sprint, etc. However there is very large flaws in it, as I will explain in the cons. Also, game mechanics are more interesting due to seeing large numbers of A.Is in the singe player and allowed us to play in actual battlefield in some sort of way.

*Armor customization and making your own custom games. It seems to be improved as well, it allows us to customize our armor in much deeper depth such as specific parts of armor: attachments, chest, etc. Custom games is possibly improved as well, it allows us to play with friends and make our own rules, etc.

CONS:
-------------

*Storyline wasn't truly best, and I don't think that Bungie ever have put their heart in it, as seeing that they are probably busy with their own new game as it started as it got independence from Microsoft. Characters and its death roles are best, at stale. I didn't feel so much emotional to see those characters died. Also, their attitudes is odd for a SPARTAN, as if they're depressed and slightly cocky against Covenant forces. I didn't feel that Carter was truly leader like John-117, more like watered down lieutenant. Now, on kat, well. She had a average personality but terrible driver as well, and kinda glad to see that she died. Emilie was best, at cocky and probably a moron due to not checking its motion radar after killing a Zealot at PoA scene. Jun and Jorge was a special character for me, actually. Jorge died to save the Reach, in some sense as he thought it would save but it made his death more like waste of resources. As seeing that a SPARTAN-II is more valuable investment to UNSC than a SPARTAN-III that is made to be killed in the combat cheaply. Jun, I'm curious what happened to him so I'm hoping to see what happened. Also, I have a slight problem with storyline's stance with canon such as supercarrier being at reach without detected, PoA being on ground despite Keyes said its not rated for atmosphere, bad timeline and SPARTAN-IIIs on Reach, I suppose it is small errors so far I have encountered but I would like to see it to be fixed for our sakes.

*Game Mechanics with AA. I think that AA didn't do so well with flowing with game mechanics, because it was more or less not balanced, and also it is responsible for slowing the kill times down. Sprint is fine with me also Evade too. However, Armor Lock, Camo and Jetpack needs to be re balanced to be better. Several problems with those AL, Camo and JetPack as I will explain:

-Armor Lock: It has 360 degree views which it gives players advantage to know whats going in view of 360 degree. Also it had major problems in using Armor Lock is: It causes plasma grenade shedding, frosting effect and be complete invincible to anything, straining kill times to be even longer and extending your life by six seconds is waste of time. if you get killed, its your fault. Armor Lock aren't supposed to protect him from them to admitting their fault.

-Only a problem with camo is that radar jamming, making camo virtually useless.

-Jet Pack destroys map control in the any maps, making any motivation/fighting over a special weapons useless. Also, jet pack's recharge is too fast and it is based on fuel, its not supposed to recharge. Once you use all it up, you can't jet pack any more.

Bloom with DMR does not compute very well because it rewards spammers due to luckiness and randomness instead of rewarding well paced shooters. I'm not suggesting that bloom to be removed but it needs to be fixed to balance it again. Also, damage output from DMR is too great against Vehicles, making competition for vehicles to have map control virtually useless and prevents players to go across half of map due to DMR's bloom and damage outputs. Literally, it destroys map control as well.

*Ranking/Trueskill system is broken because that ranking is entirely based on gathering credits (investing your time instead of getting rewards for winning or high kills) and unfairly exploiting the game because of that description of investing your time to gather credits. Any people will commit AFKING in any game to get credits. Trueskill does not place you with good players that have similar stats as you do, instead it puts you in random players, various stats. Although it can be countered by using preferences.

So far, I have implemented my views on the Reach and I am saying is that Reach is not good Halo game, but mediocre and playable (although barely playable).

Sure, you can call me a troll or something because you don't agree or don't like my opinion. I am just implementing my opinion that does not make it fact. I am pointing its flaws in the Reach out and can be fixed to have amazing potential.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Halo: Reach wasn't quite popular, based on player counts. (yes, player counted does determine how it is popular.) and Halo 3 had more players online everyday from 2007 to 2009, beating Cod4 and WaW and being equal to MW2. Halo: Reach had only like, 1/8th of players count and it is ranked third in the entire xbox live.

And, Halo: Reach was a failed experiment with new gimmicks, even Bungie and 343i knows it. You guys may use argument that Bungie and 343i said that they thought it was perfect and best FPS game ever which it is obvious lie...

Anybody took any business classes or economics classes would know this obvious statement. It is called business move where a business lies about its produce by saying: "Oh yeah, this is best product or whatever." That is what it designed to keep its popularity up or keep people to buying it. It's all of making profit in the business world.

TL:DR- It's not difficult to read the paragraphs. Anybody with fifth grade education level or above are absolutely capable to read more than two paragraphs. So, please read my posts.



[Edited on 08.07.2011 5:56 AM PDT]

  • 08.07.2011 5:55 AM PDT

Been a Bungie fan since the days of Myth TFL.

Re: Bungie's heapings of praise in the vidoc... you'd do the same if you were a newly minted business striking out on your own. You're proud of your work and you show it, because that's what confident businesses do.

Even Apple hasn't admitted to their flonqup of final cut x, and that was by every account an unmitigated disaster. So give 'em some slack, you'd be doing the exact same thing if you had a balance sheet to manage as you build up your next big thing.

  • 08.07.2011 6:00 AM PDT

"Wake me...when you need me."

So far Reach has been the best Halo.

Reach is not flawed.

  • 08.07.2011 6:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Member of Bungie.net for nearly three years, still continuing!

Enjoy what you have and live on.

My gamertag is Elder Bias


Posted by: Swamptik
So far Reach has been the best Halo.

Reach is not flawed.


What?

Nope, Halo: Reach was far from being best Halo.

And, Halo: Reach is flawed game. Read my lengthy posts, on cons part. You'll understand why.

However, it's your opinion and I shall respect it.

  • 08.07.2011 6:16 AM PDT

Posted by: raganok99
And, Halo: Reach is flawed game. Read my lengthy posts, on cons part. You'll understand why.
If someone doesn't understand now then they probably never will. Your simply beating a dead horse and wasting your time.

As for the OP, I completely agree. I find it funny how the simplicity of Halo 2 (due to the lack of time to implement all of the gimmicks) made it probably the best Halo game for a lot of fans.

  • 08.07.2011 6:19 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Agree completely. Bungie seem to be in their own little fantasy world.

People say Bungie are community orientated, which is true to an extent, but the fact of the matter is there has been basically zero communication between Bungie and us regarding actual issues of importance such as game mechanics. They've just stuck their head in the sand.

Posted by: no weakness
I really want to know how much pull Sage had over the design decisions.

If he did have complete oversight over the sandbox (his title is 'lead sandbox designer') that is where Bungie went wrong.

It's just not right to bring in a guy who was part of MechAssault, Crimsons Skies, and Shadowrun and put him in charge of Halo's sandbox. It makes absolutely no sense.

Maybe he's a great fit for this next project they are working on, but Reach reeks of the stench of those past games he was part of...not in a good way.
I'm pretty sure he was basically the sandbox overlord. In all the vidocs for Reach he was generally addressed and referred to as such.

Why on earth would they give someone that has never worked on a Halo game before so much control over what is meant to be the definitive Halo game? All Sage did was inject stuff from his games into Halo.

[Edited on 08.07.2011 6:36 AM PDT]

  • 08.07.2011 6:27 AM PDT

I love the entire Halo series, Halo 2 being my favorite of the games. I think that the universe is compelling and the story is deep, sweeping, and powerful. The hidden layers in the Halo trilogy and rich details of the backstory in the novels are something I love to be lost in, and im greatly looking forward to the story that Halo: Reach will weave. Bungie has carefully and lovingly crafted a mythic tale that will stay etched in my mind until the end.


Posted by: cameo_cream

Posted by: qod1337
I have to disagree. I liked the new innovations, like AA's and bloom.
If you don't like them, the community is in part to blame for it, as everybody always criticizes CoD for being the same game, so they attempted to innovate.
Also, the complaint about cannon is nitpicking to be honest.


If the Reach story was awesome, some more people would have let it slide. But they didn't even try to bring in canon. And reading the book is 20X more exciting than playing the Reach campaign.


Yea, the novel Fall of Reach was far better than Reach's story. They should have brought the novel's story to life in Reach and used that as a template instead.

The tutorial for the game could be the early years when John is training, and the later levels could be engagements with the insurrectionists and the Covenant. Cutscenes would be beautifully rendered and the rich characters from the book put on-screen.
But no, instead we got Emile. And Jun. Eww.

  • 08.07.2011 6:32 AM PDT

A: Emile on mass driver thing has been discussed to death. (With very valid viewpoints on why the damn motion tracker was moot point)
B: When has John-117 EVER acted like a 'true leader' in the games? Never. He does whatever the nearest marine/sarge tells him to do.
C: Spartan III's such as Noble team are just as good as Spartan II's. I'm sorry but this viewpoint of "Spartan III's = auto-suck and built and trained to die" is annoying. Unless you wanna say Kurt WILLINGLY trained them sub-par just cause they were considered expendable by Ackerson(Not by Kurt or Mendez though!) Jorge or Six dying, either is a sacrifice of equal resources.

Personal opininon here, but the story of the ground battle in Fall of Reach was not better. It showed the UNSC ground defenses as (amusingly enough) being on par with a random small-time colony. Why were the military forces no mobilized the second the Covenant appeared? Why was the Air Force skyhawks not shooting down dropships left and right? Why did the area the UNSC would place the heaviest defenses in overrun within a VERY short period of time? I'm sorry but that shows the UNSC as tactically retarded.

  • 08.07.2011 8:04 AM PDT

He who cannot command himself should obey. And many can command themselves, but much is still lacking before they can obey themselves.
--Thus Spoke Zarathustra

I don't think Bungie is "blind" to Reach's faults, I think Bungie has their sights set on something completely different now. Halo has run its course (Reach has shown this), it's time for something new.

  • 08.07.2011 8:34 AM PDT