Forums / Games / Legacy Halo

"What Happened?" **Updated**

OP Edain

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. 15
  8. ...
  9. 18
This guy speaking from the dead or something. Im sure he died back in 1948.
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Who is Gandhi and why does his opinion matter to how I enjoy Halo 4?
One of the best players in the older Halo days he now commentates for MLG. He knows Halo, and how it should be done, unlike half of the community who are happy playing a broken game
Has he had any experience developing a game? Has he developed a video game that has sold millions?
No. But he knows games that held over 200k players at 1 time over 3 years... Halo 4 dropped below that in 1 week.

You noobs to the franchise are what kills the experience. You just like the flashy lights and effects (jetpack, and all other armor abilities)... you do not care what works and doesnt work, as long as it looks nice while its failing.
Should i mention that Halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 counts the players that play in this exact moment?
No you shouldn't because unless you can prove it, you're wrong.
Well then i will mention that halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 not.
Quote:
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
Quote:
What communities have been screwed over by this game?

Forge (Not badly, but why take a step back and not forwards?)
Customs
Firefighters
Elite (sangheilli) players
Competitive players
Screenshotters
Machinima Makers
and finally, infection players.

Now, tell me that that is not a lot of people who have had their fun (do note, I am not speaking for all of them, but many of them have had their gametype take a step back from the previous installment, or disapear altoghether.) pretty severly drawn back in this game.

Thats not fair to us. You want to know why Halo 3 did as well as it did in my opinion?

Ranked and Social segregation. Noone always wants to play competitively, and noone always wants to pay social.

Take LoL for example. It's probably a lot of fun (i've never played it) but it's always competitive. You never stop being judged, so a lot of people refuse to play it simply because they don't want to have to worry all the time (meaning competitive players).

Now take a look at Halo 4. Halo 4 is about the opposite. It's all social, so noone has to worry about anything. Noone has any sort of drive to win at all, because it doesn't matter (at least, in slayer gametypes.) Nothing gets affected by this.

The problem? No ranked and social segregation. If we had ranked playlists (none of this arena stuff) not only would it keep people coming back like "Oh, I wanna get my 50 in [insert playlist here] today." but it would give people a drive to win.

... thats just my opinion on the ranks and lack of competitive play on Halo 4.
I posted this on the previous page.

I suggest you take a look. In all truth, ghandi is very correct. You say 'Oh, the only reason anyone thinks the game is better is because of nostalgia' and frankly, I find that stupid.

Halo 4 looks better, is smoother, and plays better (when set to Halo 2 settings) than Halo 2 did, but it's online experience is severely malformed and diminished, in the fact that it is ONLY, social.

Now I direct you to read the above quote from the previous page.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Who is Gandhi and why does his opinion matter to how I enjoy Halo 4?
get out..just revoke your halo card and move on.

next you will ask who's final boss, who's carbon, who's instinct.
who's ghost, who's walshy, who are the ogre twins....

people that pretend to know the halo verse and it's standings.
So being part of the "Halo verse" requires you to know MLG people?
all the new kids claiming to be omgharcorzerz. yes, you need to know all of halos history and how it came to be back to the mac days and mlg forward.
But MLG has nothing to do with Halo, Halo is just a game played in MLG.
"Pros" complaining how this game cant be played with the "Pros" has the most minimal effect in the whole Halo Community. Does the game need some changing? Sure. Does it need changing to a version the "Pros" would like? No it doesnt.

Halo doesnt need the "Pros" the "Pros" need Halo, and this is why they are complaining. Because they arent getting notoriety on the level they were back in the day, and probably the cash too. So now there is this big flip out about it.

The reasons they want the game change doesnt affect most, if not all, of the people playing so their points are basically meaningless. Is basically like rich people complaining to the poor.

MLG was one of the reasons Halo was so successful.

Competitive players are the ones who make Halo successful.

Halo GOT into MLG because it was a successful game, MLG doesnt randomly pick games to play in their league.

Did MLG bring a few people in? Maybe, but not in any significant numbers that they made an impact. If it was such a big number then you bet the people making Halo would adjust.

You're kidding right?

Competitive players are the ones who keep playing Halo when the new CoD, AC, and Battlefield come out.

They are the reason Halo has done so well because it is Xbox Lives best FPS shooter in regards to skill.

Quote:
If it was such a big number then you bet the people making Halo would adjust.
Hmm why has Halo 4 dropped more than half of it's population?
I dont really understand what you are trying to say here.
When you say 'Competitive players' are you talking about 'Pros'? Cause 'Pros' is what i have been discussing and if this is what you mean then, no, 'Pros' are not the only ones that kept playing.

And 'Pros' do not make a majority of the population by a tremendous margin. And PEOPLE, normal players, are the ones that are leaving and NOT 'Pros.' I mean, there are more "I quit" threads here than there are Halo'Pros' in the MLG.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Who is Gandhi and why does his opinion matter to how I enjoy Halo 4?
One of the best players in the older Halo days he now commentates for MLG. He knows Halo, and how it should be done, unlike half of the community who are happy playing a broken game
Has he had any experience developing a game? Has he developed a video game that has sold millions?
No. But he knows games that held over 200k players at 1 time over 3 years... Halo 4 dropped below that in 1 week.

You noobs to the franchise are what kills the experience. You just like the flashy lights and effects (jetpack, and all other armor abilities)... you do not care what works and doesnt work, as long as it looks nice while its failing.
Should i mention that Halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 counts the players that play in this exact moment?
No you shouldn't because unless you can prove it, you're wrong.
Well then i will mention that halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 not.
Yep Halo Reach and Halo 4 is real time. Halo 3 was how many players in the last 24 hours
Quote:
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
It's funny how people believe players who want Halo 4 to be similar to past Halo's are just blind from nostalgia. That's very dismissive. It sounds like you say that to yourselves to justify the game.

A sequel should in fact be very similar to the prequel other wise it's not a good prequel.

You can't make a new game that plays completely different from previous games of the same franchise and expect fans to be pleased with it.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Who is Gandhi and why does his opinion matter to how I enjoy Halo 4?
One of the best players in the older Halo days he now commentates for MLG. He knows Halo, and how it should be done, unlike half of the community who are happy playing a broken game
Has he had any experience developing a game? Has he developed a video game that has sold millions?
No. But he knows games that held over 200k players at 1 time over 3 years... Halo 4 dropped below that in 1 week.

You noobs to the franchise are what kills the experience. You just like the flashy lights and effects (jetpack, and all other armor abilities)... you do not care what works and doesnt work, as long as it looks nice while its failing.
Should i mention that Halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 counts the players that play in this exact moment?
No you shouldn't because unless you can prove it, you're wrong.
Well then i will mention that halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 not.
Yep Halo Reach and Halo 4 is real time. Halo 3 was how many players in the last 24 hours
And both Halo Reach and 3 had a greater population than 4.

Just today Halo Reach had a better population than 4.

It's really starting to sound like people will say anything to defend Halo 4.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
It's funny how people believe players who want Halo 4 to be similar to past Halo's are just blind from nostalgia. That's very dismissive. It sounds like you say that to yourselves to justify the game.

A sequel should in fact be very similar to the prequel other wise it's not a good prequel.

You can't make a new game that plays completely different from previous games of the same franchise and expect fans to be pleased with it.
Im a fan, been one since Halo CE, collect merchandise, read the books, play the games, get all the chevos.

I'm a fan, i enjoy all the games and Halo 4.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Who is Gandhi and why does his opinion matter to how I enjoy Halo 4?
One of the best players in the older Halo days he now commentates for MLG. He knows Halo, and how it should be done, unlike half of the community who are happy playing a broken game
Has he had any experience developing a game? Has he developed a video game that has sold millions?
No. But he knows games that held over 200k players at 1 time over 3 years... Halo 4 dropped below that in 1 week.

You noobs to the franchise are what kills the experience. You just like the flashy lights and effects (jetpack, and all other armor abilities)... you do not care what works and doesnt work, as long as it looks nice while its failing.
Should i mention that Halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 counts the players that play in this exact moment?
No you shouldn't because unless you can prove it, you're wrong.
Well then i will mention that halo 3 counted all the players in a 24h period while 4 not.
Yep Halo Reach and Halo 4 is real time. Halo 3 was how many players in the last 24 hours
And both Halo Reach and 3 had a greater population than 4.

Just today Halo Reach had a better population than 4.

It's really starting to sound like people will say anything to defend Halo 4.


And people will say anything because they dislike it.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
It's funny how people believe players who want Halo 4 to be similar to past Halo's are just blind from nostalgia. That's very dismissive. It sounds like you say that to yourselves to justify the game.

A sequel should in fact be very similar to the prequel other wise it's not a good prequel.

You can't make a new game that plays completely different from previous games of the same franchise and expect fans to be pleased with it.
Im a fan, been one since Halo CE, collect merchandise, read the books, play the games, get all the chevos.

I'm a fan, i enjoy all the games and Halo 4.
I wouldn't call you a fan but I know others would call you a fan boy which means:
Someone who enjoys anything and everything as long as it has Halo on it regardless of the contents.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
It's funny how people believe players who want Halo 4 to be similar to past Halo's are just blind from nostalgia. That's very dismissive. It sounds like you say that to yourselves to justify the game.

A sequel should in fact be very similar to the prequel other wise it's not a good prequel.

You can't make a new game that plays completely different from previous games of the same franchise and expect fans to be pleased with it.
But when you compare H2 to CE... What is the rule and what is the exception?
H2 has dualing, no fall damage, fully regenerating health, boarding, lock-on rockets, and increased magnetism on both bullets and the sticky reticle with large amounts of swipe scan to compensate for the then internet .
H3 was like a refined H2.
Reach is a return to the roots of CE in core mechanics but the added layer of H3's equipment on full-time.
H4 is the culmination of all the works, learned from, sans dualing because that is the biggest game changer Halo has ever had.

Halo has only once "not changed," and that Halo barely held its population above CoD:MW and kept track of only the 24hr population where multiple accounts for both selling and playlist manipulation was quite influential.
casuals will outweigh the halo fan anymore, just how cod started out as a good series then captured the casual market, reach started the semi casualing , halo 4 was the 95 percent step, 5 and 6 are just the frosting for the diabetic who knows when to stop but doesn't.
Quote:
Being able to play a game well enough to make a profession out of it is completely different from knowing how to create and develop a game.
Being very good at a game almost always means you understand how the game works, how the game plays. You understand how the design of the map affects the flow of the gameplay, how the weapons affect gameplay, the effect of various mechanics in the game. Just because a very good player doesn't have the skills to sit down and actually implement changes in the game doesn't mean that they don't have a far better understanding of how the game plays than somebody who has the skills to create games but is an average player.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
It's funny how people believe players who want Halo 4 to be similar to past Halo's are just blind from nostalgia. That's very dismissive. It sounds like you say that to yourselves to justify the game.

A sequel should in fact be very similar to the prequel other wise it's not a good prequel.

You can't make a new game that plays completely different from previous games of the same franchise and expect fans to be pleased with it.
But when you compare H2 to CE... What is the rule and what is the exception?
H2 has dualing, no fall damage, fully regenerating health, boarding, lock-on rockets, and increased magnetism on both bullets and the sticky reticle with large amounts of swipe scan to compensate for the then internet .
H3 was like a refined H2.
Reach is a return to the roots of CE in core mechanics but the added layer of H3's equipment on full-time.
H4 is the culmination of all the works, learned from, sans dualing because that is the biggest game changer Halo has ever had.

Halo has only once "not changed," and that Halo barely held its population above CoD:MW and kept track of only the 24hr population where multiple accounts for both selling and playlist manipulation was quite influential.
From CE - Reach, they have all had the core Halo game play aside from AA's in Reach.

From CE to 2:
The Halo franchise was new, Bungie wanted to experiment and had to make a lot of changes for Live.

As for Reach, Bungie wanted Halo to die with Halo 3 but were forced to make Reach and ODST because of their contract.

As for Halo 4:

Doesn't play like any other Halo.
You can't make drastic changes to a franchise that is already 10 years old with die hard fans. I can spend weeks writing about Halo 4 so I'll just leave it at this.
Quote:
Quote:
Being able to play a game well enough to make a profession out of it is completely different from knowing how to create and develop a game.
Being very good at a game almost always means you understand how the game works, how the game plays. You understand how the design of the map affects the flow of the gameplay, how the weapons affect gameplay, the effect of various mechanics in the game. Just because a very good player doesn't have the skills to sit down and actually implement changes in the game doesn't mean that they don't have a far better understanding of how the game plays than somebody who has the skills to create games but is an average player.
This has nothing to do with catering to those that watch the sport/game or play the sports/games below the level where technical skill is the deciding factor. LoL and SCII are not MLG's most popular games because they're the most technical skilled requiring games, nor are the most fast paced games. They are games that players can watch and play. And I mean players, I don't mean the players of SCII or the players of LoL, I mean gamers who just play games.

You want money? You want viewers? You want fame? Well you don't tell me what I want in a game, I tell you what I want in a game. And we keep tweaking the game from both sides until we find a happy medium that maintains a health dose of flare with the skill required to perform that flare.

I honestly think this is what Ghandi is actually talking about, but I cannot tell what side of the arguement he is argueing for. He flops back and forth on the subject on what he observes and what he believes should happen.
Halo 2 was different from HaloCE.

-Yoink-! you added 1 thing!
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nostalgia = blinkers
This

Plus sense of self importance and entitlement:
"As a loyal fan, I feel they owe it to me."
It's funny how people believe players who want Halo 4 to be similar to past Halo's are just blind from nostalgia. That's very dismissive. It sounds like you say that to yourselves to justify the game.

A sequel should in fact be very similar to the prequel other wise it's not a good prequel.

You can't make a new game that plays completely different from previous games of the same franchise and expect fans to be pleased with it.
But when you compare H2 to CE... What is the rule and what is the exception?
H2 has dualing, no fall damage, fully regenerating health, boarding, lock-on rockets, and increased magnetism on both bullets and the sticky reticle with large amounts of swipe scan to compensate for the then internet .
H3 was like a refined H2.
Reach is a return to the roots of CE in core mechanics but the added layer of H3's equipment on full-time.
WHAT?!!!

Reach was nothing like CE in core mechanics. List of differences:

-Halo CE had no hitscan, you had to lead your shots quite precisely with the pistol, very skilful. Halo Reach/4 have hitscan, a lot less skilful as precise aim is not required to land shots.

-Sniper rifle. Loads of aim assist in halo reach/4 plus hitscan, not the incredibly skilful weapon it once was in Halo CE and 3. There is even aim assist for no-scoping now for gods sake!

-Slow movement speed.

-Reticle bloom resulting in lots of lucky kills in reach.

-Minute DMR skill gap.

Reach couldn't be much more different or less skilful.

Quote:
H4 is the culmination of all the works, learned from, sans dualing because that is the biggest game changer Halo has ever had.
Dual wielding was the biggest change to halo? How about AA's? Or personal ordinance? Or random map ordnance? Or sprint? Or map design in Reach? These are all much more significant changes than dual wielding.

Quote:
Halo has only once "not changed," and that Halo barely held its population above CoD:MW and kept track of only the 24hr population where multiple accounts for both selling and playlist manipulation was quite influential.
When Halo changed the least (Halo 3) it was much more popular in relative terms than when it changed the most (Halo Reach and already Halo 4). It was changed negatively, made worse, less skilful. Halo never needed significant changes, Halo CE still has much more actual depth to gameplay than say COD BLOPS 2. COD just has better graphics now, lots of weapons, various little gimmicks but in real terms the core gameplay is much simpler than Halo 1.
The best way to put this whole thing is this; games used to be made by people passionate about gaming for gamers. Now, the major decisions are made by suits worried about stock prices, day 1 sales figures, dlc and capturing "market share."
See the evolution there?

It's sad really. Gone are the days when a game is made out of passion for gaming and delivering a game that gamers want to play. The days of games that appeal to the largest amount of consumers is in. That means games have "something" for "everyone". In short, a good many games that were niche, or highly competitive have become "Jacks of all trades, masters of none."
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Being able to play a game well enough to make a profession out of it is completely different from knowing how to create and develop a game.
Being very good at a game almost always means you understand how the game works, how the game plays. You understand how the design of the map affects the flow of the gameplay, how the weapons affect gameplay, the effect of various mechanics in the game. Just because a very good player doesn't have the skills to sit down and actually implement changes in the game doesn't mean that they don't have a far better understanding of how the game plays than somebody who has the skills to create games but is an average player.
This has nothing to do with catering to those that watch the sport/game or play the sports/games below the level where technical skill is the deciding factor. LoL and SCII are not MLG's most popular games because they're the most technical skilled requiring games, nor are the most fast paced games. They are games that players can watch and play. And I mean players, I don't mean the players of SCII or the players of LoL, I mean gamers who just play games.

You want money? You want viewers? You want fame? Well you don't tell me what I want in a game, I tell you what I want in a game. And we keep tweaking the game from both sides until we find a happy medium that maintains a health dose of flare with the skill required to perform that flare.

I honestly think this is what Ghandi is actually talking about, but I cannot tell what side of the arguement he is argueing for. He flops back and forth on the subject on what he observes and what he believes should happen.
I agree with you, I would love games that can be left unchnaged and played competitively and watched by anyone.

The problem is that recent halo games (reach / 4) have so many cheap gimmicks added that it would be a joke to try and play them competitively without making significant changes. I wish they were more like Halo 3 in terms of the skill gap. I believe MLG unnecessarily stripped down Halo 3, it could have still been very competitive with a lot more elements left in.

You just cant play a serious competitive game in Halo 4 with personal ordnance, random map ordnance, most AA's, slow movement speed. There is a narrow skill gap and way too much luck involved. Its unfortunate, but it is true.

Let me just state I'm not an MLG purist, I just like games to be fair, take skill and to have a learning curve. I find that enjoyable. Thats what made Halo such an awesome game. I actually preferred regular settings to MLG in Halo 3 as I thought the MLG playlist was too focussed on teamwork to be fun unless you had a good team to play with. I did like the increased movement speed and increased damage to make the BR more consistent though as well as the exclusion of some weapons.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. 15
  8. ...
  9. 18