- realdomdom
- |
- Honorable Member
Posted by: DecepticonCobra
[...] the general outside, unbiased consensus is that it plays fine.LOL
First, is it general consensus?
Second, what's not biased about that?
Posted by: DecepticonCobra
Better players will always dominate newer players no matter what even with an even playing field.So making the gap bigger is OK?
Posted by: ajw34307
Oh please, spare me this rubbish. Loadouts have become the norm in just about every FPS game - even Bioshock does it.And i assume that's a good thing?
Posted by: ajw34307
These MLG players are all saying that it plays like a Halo game.Call me a sceptic.
Posted by: Sp4rksLT
CoD is a terrible game, most of the people are just too slow to realize it, but now, enough off topic.
The music in the gameplay trailer/footage thingy WAS TERRIBLE. I know it's all personal preference, but that new guy, he didn't capture Halo feel at all. I know I haven't heard the whole soundtrack yet, but there is a reason that Halo's soundtrack is the best selling Halo soundtrack out there.
Now, if you only have played the games and not dwelled in the books Halo 3 ties up everything nicely. Flood is kinda finish, no threat to humanity. Covenant shattered, Sangheili allied with the humans and Chief. Well I really liked what Bungie did to him. He's not dead, but he's resting. That's it, that was his final battle and back in 2007 I accepted it and was completely happy with that idea. Halo 3 had a great, bittersweet ending that closed up the trilogy well.
Now remember, I'm only talking about the games. Without the books there aren't even any other SPARTANs mentioned in the games (talking about the trilogy here still). I personally have played the three Halo games, and then a few years back finally managed to get my hands on the books. They were a great addition to the canon. But then Reach.. yeah, it kinda shattered my faith in Bungie and after Legends I just had to make my own canon rules.
For now all 343 have done with the franchise seems to be instead of trying to build upon Bungie's plot (remember, most of the Bungie-era books were written by Bungie's own writer) and just completely swipe that away and say "yeah well, actually this isn't the greatest terror, THIS is the greatest terror and evil and bla bla bla". The story was taken to new heights? Are you kidding me? All they did was tie up any left over story threads from Bungie times and open completely new ones, and numerous at that. Halo may be grander than ever, but has it any quality left?
And what I've seen of Halo 4's gameplay was ridiculously scripted for that short campaign period and if the game is like that gameplay trailer, well then Halo just went full Crysis. Or CoD, or whatever you want to call it. Bungie didn't take control away unless it was a cutscene. It made the gameplay feel really good (personal preference again).You said it, bro. Except for the books again. Don't even get me started...
Posted by: ajw34307
- Mendicant Bias tells John he's sending him to the Forerunners. This alone opens up the possibility for a whole new trilogy (which has since been realised).
- Gravemind states we've only delayed his return.
- There are still 6 Halos primed and ready to fire at any time.Who cares? I certainly don't...
Posted by: the real Janaka
What is your definition of a franchise being dead or alive? (And don't answer Team Ninjas Dead or Alive :P )Super Mario for instance? A new Gears of War prequel, was that necessary? A fourth Halo game, could another book have sufficed, they're after all pumping out quite a few trilogies?I think that speaks for itself.
Posted by: the real Janaka
Halo was Halo because it looked and sounded a certain way, etc.Amen.
Posted by: the real Janaka
Try and think of some examples where you wouldn't like change, just as a thought experiment.
Of coarse, it can be hard to identify what made/makes Halo, Halo, but as I see it, that's the most important aspect of this discussion.
Personally, I became a fan of how Halo was, not cause of what it could become. The only things that have strengthened Halo-if you ask me--are tweaks, not changes.
If you want new stuff, play another game!I can't seem to break it down either, but it may be the clear contrast in design/gameplay, maybe even colours. I think simplistic may be a good word. (I might talk rubbish, but i can't find the right words. Really.)
Posted by: the real Janaka
When is too much, too much? Would you want Halo to become like Star Wars i.e an ever expanding franchise with lots of worthless products, all justified by the occasional masterpiece?In my eyes, that begins happening right now. And no, I'm not a fan.
Posted by: the real Janaka
The point--of these points--that I'm trying to make is that, for me, it has reached its tipping point. I'm trying to see what the last straw would be, for those who like where Halo is going.
When 3 was released I though the series had reached a high.* I concidered Halo as one of the few pure franchises, one without any -blam!-ups. Not anymore.
*ODST was alright, but I'm letting it slide mostly cause of the whose Halo 2 e3 revision. Strangely enough, ODST managed to coat itself with some noir and still feel Halo. Halo 4 feels like an episode of Stargåte Atlantis with Crysis 2 enemies and Call of Duty in your face moments.Yes, yes and yes.
Posted by: the real Janaka
Btw, have you noticed that they hardly use any music in the trailers, it's like they don't believe in it themselves.
Marty always kicks open the door Breaking Bad style!Not taking any chances, perhaps. Or nothing to prove apparently.
Battlefield 3 with it's fart music already turned me off, let's see how far Halo 4 goes.