- Mikelp_1
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
Ohai, I'm Loscocco (pronounced Loss-cocoa). I'm a college student (computer science major), 3D animator, and long-time Halo player.
Oh my god, this is so painful to read. You are pretty much why I can't stand most of Halo Waypoint's community. You pull extremely random theories for why things happen out of nowhere with zero evidence (I'll mark them with #) and press them off like facts without listening to anyone else's reasoning.
Posted by: Darkness TB
Halo: Reach with an M rating and darker story was made for kids, while the colorful light hearted Halo 3 was made for coffee drinking adults?
They were referring to the multiplayer aspects of Reach and there is more to a game requiring a mature audience than how obscene the environment and story is.
You, like other "competitive" crowds like to lump together games you can win at.
#
No, most of the people with a competitive standpoint aren't flawless MLG demigods. Most of their arguments have a logical reason for their distaste with the game and have nothing to do with winning or losing.
Halo 1 didn't have a utility weapon, Halo 1 had health, fall damage, health packs, powerups, methodical gameplay,
#
It had the pistol, which is as prominent of a utility weapon as the BR or DMR. Also, no one complains about the falling damage, health packs, powerups (which are in Reach, but are rarely implemented into gameplay).
Wanna know what else has most of these aspects?
Halo: Reach and ODST, the "competitive" crowd couldn't win at Halo: Reach so they hate it.
#
Oh my god, Reach has health packs and falling damage just like Halo CE! This must be why competitive players hate it!
...can I get some of what you're smoking? Correlation does not equal causation.
Their are no "competitive" modes of Halo 3: ODST.
There*
Irrelevance is irrelevant... it implements zero non-cooperative experiences so why compare it with competitive multiplayers in other games?
You cannot dual wield in Halo: Reach or Halo 3: ODST, but you can in Halo 2/3.
But you can't in Halo 1.
Completely irrelevant. No one cares about the tiny mechanics, like dual wielding, that didn't influence competitive gameplay too much. Generally speaking, the only people that complain about the lack of dual wielding in Reach are casual players, not competitive ones.
The only thing keeping Halo 1 next to 2 and 3 to MLG players is the fact they can win.
#
Once again, no. If all of the arguments about Reach boiled down to whether or not someone constantly wins, we'd see a lot more complaining.
They think Armor Lock is overpowered.
#
No they don't, they think it delays the game too much and makes Reach painfully slow-paced, which it does...
Your entire post has zero factual evidence supporting your original points and consists solely of you making either completely irrelevant facts on things that happened to the game or your bloated interpretations of events.
People don't argue over Reach because they're losing, they hate the mechanics that throw consistency out the window. You can't call a game where you're throwing dice to get kills competitive, hence why competitive players hate mechanics like bloom and armor abilities; can you really say that it is possible to be a professional rocks-paper-scissors player? No...
Finally, stop talking like you are an expert of every competitive player's mind; you've probably never/rarely played a game of MLG, yet you think you should be in charge of how it should play. You fight egocentrism with egocentric-ignorance... not exactly a good standpoint...