Skip to main content

Forums / Community / General Discussion

THIS IS HALO (From the Horse's Mouth)

OP XCalamityJamesX

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 6
  4. 7
  5. 8
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. ...
  9. 15
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Quote:
No, I don't think the golden triangle is a good argument, and I'm saying that as a classic fan. There's been so many exceptions to the golden triangle in the original games alone, and as a description itself it's very open-ended and vague, it could fit several games that clearly aren't Halo. "Guns, grenades, melee." Give CSGO a melee button and suddenly it's Halo right? Melee was entirely situational in Halo Ce as well, definitely not some major part of the game.
If the golden triangle is broken, Halo is broken.
So halo was broken in halo 2, 3, reach, 4, and 5? Wow, halo really needs to fix itself. There have been 5 broken halo games, and only 2 regular ones. Man halo's in bad shape /s.
do you know how to properly use the golden triangle?
Um, yes, but I'm not really sure what you mean by that.
it was not broken in halo 2 and 3 imo. your thoughts?
Dual wielding. 'Nuff said.
That is exactly why early halo games are favored so much, because maybe 343 thinks dual wielding is all it is too. The golden triangle is much more than just dual wielding.
It the golden triangle is broken by dual wielding. You can't throw a grenade or melee while dual wielding, so it breaks the triangle.

Just to let everyone know, I'm going to bed, so don't wait up for a reply.
there is more secrets to the sacred golden triangle but i guess we can discuss later
Wait, Triangle? Secrets?
Spoiler:
Show

glad to see you drop back in. here some more goodies to discuss.

I have experienced and understand the concepts of Bungie's invention of the Golden Triangle; my understanding is not through your typical internet research but from the good old fashion way, "actually playing all the halos".
My interpretation may be different from yours so please, feel free to share your opinions.
Remember "3" is the magic number. 3 weapon options (magnum,BR,DMR) 3 range options (close,mid,long), 3 tools of destruction (melee,gun,grenade); think of "Rock Paper Scissors":
1) At close range, your magnum is highly effective on the offense with only "3" shots to the head followed by a single melee attack or vice-versa= instant kill
2) At mid range, 3 quick burst with Battle Riffle then grenade= instant kill
3) At long range, DMR's are simply deadly with 3 well placed shots to the head alone= instant kill
Other weapons such as Snipers, rocket launchers, dual wielding, covenant/promeatean/brute weapons, and shotguns are considered "power weapons" I don't really classify these weapons as part of the Golden triangle because it would be a privilege and advantage to have these weapons during standard combat. However, what actually breaks the golden triangle is special spartan abilities. Reach started with Armor Lock, this provided Noob enabling counter-measures so that can avoid the wrath of legendary players who were highly skilled at using the Golden triangle method. later in halo years we get golden triangle breaking abilities such as spartan charge and evade. Some people in this new generation think the Golden Triangle is only simply melee,gun and grenade, because maybe they saw a video that gave only a brief description? But I'm happy to inform you that it goes a little further down the rabbit hole.
I only think the triangle applies to only the guns/grenade/melee. The 3 weapons you mentioned weren't even in the same game until halo 4, and you forgot about the AR and SMG. I also don't really think of it short/mid/long range, because every shooter game has that, it's not exclusive to halo.

Dual wielding isn't a power weapon. It's an ability and it breaks the triangle. Spartan abilities do somewhat break the triangle, but to me, the triangle never had to be used at all times. You could argue that Spartan charge and ground pound are melee attacks. Sprint, slide, clamber, and thrust don't let you use the triangle while its activated, but do we really need it to be active at all times? These things just enhance the game (IMO). If halo 2/3 didn't have to make the triangle useable at all times, then halo 5 shouldn't either.
Can you better elaborate on how Halo 2/3 didn't make the triangle available at all times? ( I don't quite buy into the idea that dual wielding breaks the triangle, as your ability to shoot is never taken away from you.)

And just to add my opinion, yes, Halo is better when the Golden Triangle is available at all times.
The triangle is guns, grenade, melee. While dual wielding, you couldn't melee or throw grenades, which broke the triangle.
The triangle refers to being able to do one of these at any given time... not any combination of them simultaneously. You could never throw a grenade while shooting, or melee while shooting or any other simultaneous action. So how does this break the triangle at all?
Quote:
No, I don't think the golden triangle is a good argument, and I'm saying that as a classic fan. There's been so many exceptions to the golden triangle in the original games alone, and as a description itself it's very open-ended and vague, it could fit several games that clearly aren't Halo. "Guns, grenades, melee." Give CSGO a melee button and suddenly it's Halo right? Melee was entirely situational in Halo Ce as well, definitely not some major part of the game.
If the golden triangle is broken, Halo is broken.
So halo was broken in halo 2, 3, reach, 4, and 5? Wow, halo really needs to fix itself. There have been 5 broken halo games, and only 2 regular ones. Man halo's in bad shape /s.
do you know how to properly use the golden triangle?
Um, yes, but I'm not really sure what you mean by that.
it was not broken in halo 2 and 3 imo. your thoughts?
Dual wielding. 'Nuff said.
That is exactly why early halo games are favored so much, because maybe 343 thinks dual wielding is all it is too. The golden triangle is much more than just dual wielding.
It the golden triangle is broken by dual wielding. You can't throw a grenade or melee while dual wielding, so it breaks the triangle.

Just to let everyone know, I'm going to bed, so don't wait up for a reply.
there is more secrets to the sacred golden triangle but i guess we can discuss later
Wait, Triangle? Secrets?
Spoiler:
Show

glad to see you drop back in. here some more goodies to discuss.

I have experienced and understand the concepts of Bungie's invention of the Golden Triangle; my understanding is not through your typical internet research but from the good old fashion way, "actually playing all the halos".
My interpretation may be different from yours so please, feel free to share your opinions.
Remember "3" is the magic number. 3 weapon options (magnum,BR,DMR) 3 range options (close,mid,long), 3 tools of destruction (melee,gun,grenade); think of "Rock Paper Scissors":
1) At close range, your magnum is highly effective on the offense with only "3" shots to the head followed by a single melee attack or vice-versa= instant kill
2) At mid range, 3 quick burst with Battle Riffle then grenade= instant kill
3) At long range, DMR's are simply deadly with 3 well placed shots to the head alone= instant kill
Other weapons such as Snipers, rocket launchers, dual wielding, covenant/promeatean/brute weapons, and shotguns are considered "power weapons" I don't really classify these weapons as part of the Golden triangle because it would be a privilege and advantage to have these weapons during standard combat. However, what actually breaks the golden triangle is special spartan abilities. Reach started with Armor Lock, this provided Noob enabling counter-measures so that can avoid the wrath of legendary players who were highly skilled at using the Golden triangle method. later in halo years we get golden triangle breaking abilities such as spartan charge and evade. Some people in this new generation think the Golden Triangle is only simply melee,gun and grenade, because maybe they saw a video that gave only a brief description? But I'm happy to inform you that it goes a little further down the rabbit hole.
I only think the triangle applies to only the guns/grenade/melee. The 3 weapons you mentioned weren't even in the same game until halo 4, and you forgot about the AR and SMG. I also don't really think of it short/mid/long range, because every shooter game has that, it's not exclusive to halo.

Dual wielding isn't a power weapon. It's an ability and it breaks the triangle. Spartan abilities do somewhat break the triangle, but to me, the triangle never had to be used at all times. You could argue that Spartan charge and ground pound are melee attacks. Sprint, slide, clamber, and thrust don't let you use the triangle while its activated, but do we really need it to be active at all times? These things just enhance the game (IMO). If halo 2/3 didn't have to make the triangle useable at all times, then halo 5 shouldn't either.
I think many still have it misunderstood. Having those spartan abilities and dual wielding does not handicap the user from the Golden Triangle (GT) but instead enlightens the opponent with a countermeasure advantage. example, a dual wielding player would have an advantage against the player who is a pro at GT.

"dual wielding is not a power weapon" according to Halo5, of course its not a power weapon, but I'm using that term in a different manner, it breaks the triangle in the same manner as a rocket launcher.
Snockooz wrote:
And yet they made reach which added sprint and armor abilities... Also, New-age Fanboys? I've been playing since Halo CE and I really doubt that you ever even played Halo CE PC online. But I guess if I like Halo 5 I must be a new-age fan boy...
OP ABSOLUTELY BTFO
A real Halo veteran would be able to recall what Bungie thought of their golden triangle with their next game launch, and also recall the mental gymnastics needed to explain "Halo canon" in the story of that launch as well.

Anyway, they later admitted the golden triangle wasn't a hard-and-fast design philosophy ("15 seconds of fun" was always used as a key design philosophy more anyway). I just...oh boy. If you're dumb enough to think, "Only newb plebs like 343's Halo," then you should spend less time playing Halo and more time figuring out how to use your brain productively.
I'll just be leaving this here.
Damn, you really got me there. That's quite the response you provided. Mind, blown.
Glad I could open your eyes to how 343 Industries is essentially just creating "Baby's first Call of Halo" with the insane aim assist etc. It's so "competitive" that since MLG refused to put them on the circuit they had to create and sponsor their own "professional league" because it failed to meet MLG criteria.
Quote:
No, I don't think the golden triangle is a good argument, and I'm saying that as a classic fan. There's been so many exceptions to the golden triangle in the original games alone, and as a description itself it's very open-ended and vague, it could fit several games that clearly aren't Halo. "Guns, grenades, melee." Give CSGO a melee button and suddenly it's Halo right? Melee was entirely situational in Halo Ce as well, definitely not some major part of the game.
If the golden triangle is broken, Halo is broken.
So halo was broken in halo 2, 3, reach, 4, and 5? Wow, halo really needs to fix itself. There have been 5 broken halo games, and only 2 regular ones. Man halo's in bad shape /s.
do you know how to properly use the golden triangle?
Um, yes, but I'm not really sure what you mean by that.
it was not broken in halo 2 and 3 imo. your thoughts?
Dual wielding. 'Nuff said.
That is exactly why early halo games are favored so much, because maybe 343 thinks dual wielding is all it is too. The golden triangle is much more than just dual wielding.
It the golden triangle is broken by dual wielding. You can't throw a grenade or melee while dual wielding, so it breaks the triangle.

Just to let everyone know, I'm going to bed, so don't wait up for a reply.
there is more secrets to the sacred golden triangle but i guess we can discuss later
Wait, Triangle? Secrets?
Spoiler:
Show

glad to see you drop back in. here some more goodies to discuss.

I have experienced and understand the concepts of Bungie's invention of the Golden Triangle; my understanding is not through your typical internet research but from the good old fashion way, "actually playing all the halos".
My interpretation may be different from yours so please, feel free to share your opinions.
Remember "3" is the magic number. 3 weapon options (magnum,BR,DMR) 3 range options (close,mid,long), 3 tools of destruction (melee,gun,grenade); think of "Rock Paper Scissors":
1) At close range, your magnum is highly effective on the offense with only "3" shots to the head followed by a single melee attack or vice-versa= instant kill
2) At mid range, 3 quick burst with Battle Riffle then grenade= instant kill
3) At long range, DMR's are simply deadly with 3 well placed shots to the head alone= instant kill
Other weapons such as Snipers, rocket launchers, dual wielding, covenant/promeatean/brute weapons, and shotguns are considered "power weapons" I don't really classify these weapons as part of the Golden triangle because it would be a privilege and advantage to have these weapons during standard combat. However, what actually breaks the golden triangle is special spartan abilities. Reach started with Armor Lock, this provided Noob enabling counter-measures so that can avoid the wrath of legendary players who were highly skilled at using the Golden triangle method. later in halo years we get golden triangle breaking abilities such as spartan charge and evade. Some people in this new generation think the Golden Triangle is only simply melee,gun and grenade, because maybe they saw a video that gave only a brief description? But I'm happy to inform you that it goes a little further down the rabbit hole.
I only think the triangle applies to only the guns/grenade/melee. The 3 weapons you mentioned weren't even in the same game until halo 4, and you forgot about the AR and SMG. I also don't really think of it short/mid/long range, because every shooter game has that, it's not exclusive to halo.

Dual wielding isn't a power weapon. It's an ability and it breaks the triangle. Spartan abilities do somewhat break the triangle, but to me, the triangle never had to be used at all times. You could argue that Spartan charge and ground pound are melee attacks. Sprint, slide, clamber, and thrust don't let you use the triangle while its activated, but do we really need it to be active at all times? These things just enhance the game (IMO). If halo 2/3 didn't have to make the triangle useable at all times, then halo 5 shouldn't either.
Can you better elaborate on how Halo 2/3 didn't make the triangle available at all times? ( I don't quite buy into the idea that dual wielding breaks the triangle, as your ability to shoot is never taken away from you.)

And just to add my opinion, yes, Halo is better when the Golden Triangle is available at all times.
The triangle is guns, grenade, melee. While dual wielding, you couldn't melee or throw grenades, which broke the triangle.
But when dual wielding..... you're using guns which is part of that triangle.....
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
And notice how Bungie threw all of that out the window with Reach so do us all a favor and stop.
That's what happens when most of your employees are different people.

Sage Merrill killed halo.
slvr cobra wrote:
Aaand Reach received much less positive feedback than Halo 3.
Never said liking Halo 5 is impossible for veterans. I've been onboard since CE and yes I've even played it on PC. Still I think Halo 5 is a decent game for what it's trying to be.

I just don't see it as a true Halo game and if you don't understand that then yeah you're probably new around here.
Considering Bungie considered Reach to be a "true Halo game"...
It was more of a Halo game than 5, that's for damn sure. I love how all anybody does to counteract his argument is talk -Yoink- about Reach.

Without giving any examples to boot.
I also talked about Dual Wielding in Halo 2 & 3, because that worked so well.

If you need examples for Reach, Sprint, Jetpack, Armor Lock, DMR Bloom
Dual wielding in Halo 2 and 3 works pretty well for me and I continue to play those games today. I don't touch 4 and 5.
Dual Wielding was either too powerful for those weapons to have two of (Needlers, Noob Combo), or were normal damage, making an individual gun next to useless (SMG, Spiker). It's a complete sandbox nightmare.

I can have one Needler and be okay, and if I pick up two I'd be amazing. I would never have a reason to pick up a Spiker. Even if I was told that Dual Wielding made it better, that means I have to stick with the equivalent of a paintball gun until I can find two of them, and then I can defend myself, with the cost of never being able to throw a grenade.

I could just find and stick to the Battle Rifle (in H3) and dominate most Dual Wield combos anyway.
One gun, two guns, no guns, I don't have much trouble. Even single wielding an SMG in Halo 2 I'd get kills on dual wielders and battle rifle users by sneaking up on them, burst firing from a distance or using a grenade then finish with a few SMG bursts.

All of these weapons kill regardless of whether I dual wield them or not, I just have to adjust my tactics slightly based on what I'm carrying.
Of course every weapon will kill eventually, especially when using a grenade. Someone using the H3 Pistol can beat a great player using the BR if he sneaks up on him and gets the first couple of shots off.

I can risk my life carrying around a Spiker in hopes to get two of them, but why would I? I can just get the BR and be even safer than with 2 Spikers.

If I can reliably protect myself with one gun, why would we implement a need for two guns? That changes it from balanced to unbalanced.

If you can burst fire an SMG faster than someone can kill you with a BR from a distance (in Halo 2), then that player is trash. Really no way around it.

Dual Wielding is simply a gimmick at best.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't take away from my point.
A real Halo veteran would be able to recall what Bungie thought of their golden triangle with their next game launch, and also recall the mental gymnastics needed to explain "Halo canon" in the story of that launch as well.

Anyway, they later admitted the golden triangle wasn't a hard-and-fast design philosophy ("15 seconds of fun" was always used as a key design philosophy more anyway). I just...oh boy. If you're dumb enough to think, "Only newb plebs like 343's Halo," then you should spend less time playing Halo and more time figuring out how to use your brain productively.
I'll just be leaving this here.
Damn, you really got me there. That's quite the response you provided. Mind, blown.
Glad I could open your eyes to how 343 Industries is essentially just creating "Baby's first Call of Halo" with the insane aim assist etc. It's so "competitive" that since MLG refused to put them on the circuit they had to create and sponsor their own "professional league" because it failed to meet MLG criteria.
Spoiler alert: Bungie had aim assist too. It's kinda foundational to console shooters.

Pro-tip: responding to a comment that states "15 seconds of fun" was a more predominant design philosophy for Bungie's Halo than "the golden triangle" with a video about how aim assist works is so out of left field I can't even imagine how you made that leap.

In conclusion......
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't take away from my point.
What doesn't change is the uselessness of the discussion. But it absolutely does take away from your point.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't take away from my point.
What doesn't change is the uselessness of the discussion. But it absolutely does take away from your point.
Nope. Same concept.
A real Halo veteran would be able to recall what Bungie thought of their golden triangle with their next game launch, and also recall the mental gymnastics needed to explain "Halo canon" in the story of that launch as well.

Anyway, they later admitted the golden triangle wasn't a hard-and-fast design philosophy ("15 seconds of fun" was always used as a key design philosophy more anyway). I just...oh boy. If you're dumb enough to think, "Only newb plebs like 343's Halo," then you should spend less time playing Halo and more time figuring out how to use your brain productively.
I'll just be leaving this here.
Damn, you really got me there. That's quite the response you provided. Mind, blown.
Glad I could open your eyes to how 343 Industries is essentially just creating "Baby's first Call of Halo" with the insane aim assist etc. It's so "competitive" that since MLG refused to put them on the circuit they had to create and sponsor their own "professional league" because it failed to meet MLG criteria.
Did you ever compare it to Halo 2 and Halo 3?
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't take away from my point.
What doesn't change is the uselessness of the discussion. But it absolutely does take away from your point.
Nope. Same concept.
This is the part where I'd usually stop replying because the argument is going in circles.
Quote:
No, I don't think the golden triangle is a good argument, and I'm saying that as a classic fan. There's been so many exceptions to the golden triangle in the original games alone, and as a description itself it's very open-ended and vague, it could fit several games that clearly aren't Halo. "Guns, grenades, melee." Give CSGO a melee button and suddenly it's Halo right? Melee was entirely situational in Halo Ce as well, definitely not some major part of the game.
If the golden triangle is broken, Halo is broken.
So halo was broken in halo 2, 3, reach, 4, and 5? Wow, halo really needs to fix itself. There have been 5 broken halo games, and only 2 regular ones. Man halo's in bad shape /s.
do you know how to properly use the golden triangle?
Um, yes, but I'm not really sure what you mean by that.
it was not broken in halo 2 and 3 imo. your thoughts?
Dual wielding. 'Nuff said.
That is exactly why early halo games are favored so much, because maybe 343 thinks dual wielding is all it is too. The golden triangle is much more than just dual wielding.
It the golden triangle is broken by dual wielding. You can't throw a grenade or melee while dual wielding, so it breaks the triangle.

Just to let everyone know, I'm going to bed, so don't wait up for a reply.
there is more secrets to the sacred golden triangle but i guess we can discuss later
Wait, Triangle? Secrets?
Spoiler:
Show

glad to see you drop back in. here some more goodies to discuss.

I have experienced and understand the concepts of Bungie's invention of the Golden Triangle; my understanding is not through your typical internet research but from the good old fashion way, "actually playing all the halos".
My interpretation may be different from yours so please, feel free to share your opinions.
Remember "3" is the magic number. 3 weapon options (magnum,BR,DMR) 3 range options (close,mid,long), 3 tools of destruction (melee,gun,grenade); think of "Rock Paper Scissors":
1) At close range, your magnum is highly effective on the offense with only "3" shots to the head followed by a single melee attack or vice-versa= instant kill
2) At mid range, 3 quick burst with Battle Riffle then grenade= instant kill
3) At long range, DMR's are simply deadly with 3 well placed shots to the head alone= instant kill
Other weapons such as Snipers, rocket launchers, dual wielding, covenant/promeatean/brute weapons, and shotguns are considered "power weapons" I don't really classify these weapons as part of the Golden triangle because it would be a privilege and advantage to have these weapons during standard combat. However, what actually breaks the golden triangle is special spartan abilities. Reach started with Armor Lock, this provided Noob enabling counter-measures so that can avoid the wrath of legendary players who were highly skilled at using the Golden triangle method. later in halo years we get golden triangle breaking abilities such as spartan charge and evade. Some people in this new generation think the Golden Triangle is only simply melee,gun and grenade, because maybe they saw a video that gave only a brief description? But I'm happy to inform you that it goes a little further down the rabbit hole.
I only think the triangle applies to only the guns/grenade/melee. The 3 weapons you mentioned weren't even in the same game until halo 4, and you forgot about the AR and SMG. I also don't really think of it short/mid/long range, because every shooter game has that, it's not exclusive to halo.

Dual wielding isn't a power weapon. It's an ability and it breaks the triangle. Spartan abilities do somewhat break the triangle, but to me, the triangle never had to be used at all times. You could argue that Spartan charge and ground pound are melee attacks. Sprint, slide, clamber, and thrust don't let you use the triangle while its activated, but do we really need it to be active at all times? These things just enhance the game (IMO). If halo 2/3 didn't have to make the triangle useable at all times, then halo 5 shouldn't either.
Can you better elaborate on how Halo 2/3 didn't make the triangle available at all times? ( I don't quite buy into the idea that dual wielding breaks the triangle, as your ability to shoot is never taken away from you.)

And just to add my opinion, yes, Halo is better when the Golden Triangle is available at all times.
The triangle is guns, grenade, melee. While dual wielding, you couldn't melee or throw grenades, which broke the triangle.
But when dual wielding..... you're using guns which is part of that triangle.....
But you can't do the other things, which is one of the sprint haters biggest arguments.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't take away from my point.
What doesn't change is the uselessness of the discussion. But it absolutely does take away from your point.
Nope. Same concept.
You got a lot of tricks up your sleeve, I see.

The word 'awful,' by definition, means "full of awe." You can't change that definition, scrub it's original and intended meaning from the history books. You can change the meaning over time to reference things that are bad, but the original and intended definition remains.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't take away from my point.
What doesn't change is the uselessness of the discussion. But it absolutely does take away from your point.
Nope. Same concept.
This is the part where I'd usually stop replying because the argument is going in circles.
That's fine.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Halo is defined by its fans, if it has none, there is no Halo.
No it's defined by the developer.
No, it's not.
Yah it is. The developers dictate what it is, not the fans. They can say; " halo should be this" or "halo shouldn't be this," but they don't define what halo is.
So if 343 literally put a digital model of human -Yoink- on a disk and tell you it's Halo, that makes it Halo? No.

We decide what's Halo. They are making the game for us, so it doesn't matter what they say is Halo, it matters what we say. Until they start handing it out for free then what we say goes.

We told them Halo 4 was not Halo. Their response? "Well damn, we should probably switch it up" because even 343 is smart enough to know what I told you.
They could actually do that and call it halo. Of course, then halo would be dead and everyone would have to find new jobs. We don't decide what halo is. We can influence them, but we don't decide. What is halo to you? I can almost guarantee it will be different from mine. So if the community dictates what halo is, which of our ideas is halo?
They could and they would be wrong. That's my point.
The developers define what it is with each game. They make one game that defines it. The community makes hundreds of thousands of ideas that define what halo is, but they're not right. We can define what it means to us. I think that is where you're confused. We can say what halo means to us, but the devs define what it is.
I know what you're saying. I'm just saying that you're wrong. A digital model of -Yoink- is not Halo even if they say it is. I do think it's laughable though that you're suggesting that it would be if they said so.

You speak about them defining Halo, but even in the real world definitions aren't set by whoevers writing the dictionary. The definitions of words you find in a dictionary are based of how people use those words. In other words, the writer of a words definition can't just write down whatever they want, they must go by how people use the word. The writer doesn't determine a words definitions, the people do and the writers look to the people to get the answers. The same applies with Halo.
Like most analogies, this one doesn't work. The ones who come up with the word decide what is means, in this case, it's the developer. The job of the dictionary people is to put it all together.
Definitions change based on how people them. No one person can definitively say what a word means, the people do and the dictionary reflects that. The word "literally" being the perfect example where what used to be the flat out wrong use of the word is now part of its definition because that's how people started using it. When writing a definition, the writers are at the mercy of how people use words to determine how they're defined. The same applies here.
Yeeeeeeah, that's not really how it works. You might be thinking about connotations or meanings, but the definition....by definition....is defined.....
He is sort of correct. Words don't have any inherent meaning. What they have are usages. People use them in a certain way, until it becomes popular. Eventually someone writes down those usages as a definition in order to be more precise, but that doesn't change the fact that word usages evolve over time. Thy change and continue to change and eventually the definitions reflect that again. There are a few reasons that a proper argument begins with the 'defining of terms.' These include common acceptance (So everyone agree when we say this, we mean this.) and in order to prevent certain fallacies (equivocation, etc.)

This does not relate to his original argument about who defines Halo however. Simply put, Halo is a fictional universe and any game set in that universe is a Halo game (Regardless of quality.) Halo wars is still a halo game and has nothing to do with the golden triangle or any other similar nonsense. The mobile games are halo games and still have no mechanical similarity to the core series. Mechanics aren't what makes something 'Halo', it is the universe it is set-in (and the features of it for when the eventual reboot comes.)
Quote:
No, I don't think the golden triangle is a good argument, and I'm saying that as a classic fan. There's been so many exceptions to the golden triangle in the original games alone, and as a description itself it's very open-ended and vague, it could fit several games that clearly aren't Halo. "Guns, grenades, melee." Give CSGO a melee button and suddenly it's Halo right? Melee was entirely situational in Halo Ce as well, definitely not some major part of the game.
If the golden triangle is broken, Halo is broken.
So halo was broken in halo 2, 3, reach, 4, and 5? Wow, halo really needs to fix itself. There have been 5 broken halo games, and only 2 regular ones. Man halo's in bad shape /s.
do you know how to properly use the golden triangle?
Um, yes, but I'm not really sure what you mean by that.
it was not broken in halo 2 and 3 imo. your thoughts?
Dual wielding. 'Nuff said.
That is exactly why early halo games are favored so much, because maybe 343 thinks dual wielding is all it is too. The golden triangle is much more than just dual wielding.
It the golden triangle is broken by dual wielding. You can't throw a grenade or melee while dual wielding, so it breaks the triangle.

Just to let everyone know, I'm going to bed, so don't wait up for a reply.
there is more secrets to the sacred golden triangle but i guess we can discuss later
Wait, Triangle? Secrets?
Spoiler:
Show

glad to see you drop back in. here some more goodies to discuss.

I have experienced and understand the concepts of Bungie's invention of the Golden Triangle; my understanding is not through your typical internet research but from the good old fashion way, "actually playing all the halos".
My interpretation may be different from yours so please, feel free to share your opinions.
Remember "3" is the magic number. 3 weapon options (magnum,BR,DMR) 3 range options (close,mid,long), 3 tools of destruction (melee,gun,grenade); think of "Rock Paper Scissors":
1) At close range, your magnum is highly effective on the offense with only "3" shots to the head followed by a single melee attack or vice-versa= instant kill
2) At mid range, 3 quick burst with Battle Riffle then grenade= instant kill
3) At long range, DMR's are simply deadly with 3 well placed shots to the head alone= instant kill
Other weapons such as Snipers, rocket launchers, dual wielding, covenant/promeatean/brute weapons, and shotguns are considered "power weapons" I don't really classify these weapons as part of the Golden triangle because it would be a privilege and advantage to have these weapons during standard combat. However, what actually breaks the golden triangle is special spartan abilities. Reach started with Armor Lock, this provided Noob enabling counter-measures so that can avoid the wrath of legendary players who were highly skilled at using the Golden triangle method. later in halo years we get golden triangle breaking abilities such as spartan charge and evade. Some people in this new generation think the Golden Triangle is only simply melee,gun and grenade, because maybe they saw a video that gave only a brief description? But I'm happy to inform you that it goes a little further down the rabbit hole.
I only think the triangle applies to only the guns/grenade/melee. The 3 weapons you mentioned weren't even in the same game until halo 4, and you forgot about the AR and SMG. I also don't really think of it short/mid/long range, because every shooter game has that, it's not exclusive to halo.

Dual wielding isn't a power weapon. It's an ability and it breaks the triangle. Spartan abilities do somewhat break the triangle, but to me, the triangle never had to be used at all times. You could argue that Spartan charge and ground pound are melee attacks. Sprint, slide, clamber, and thrust don't let you use the triangle while its activated, but do we really need it to be active at all times? These things just enhance the game (IMO). If halo 2/3 didn't have to make the triangle useable at all times, then halo 5 shouldn't either.
I think many still have it misunderstood. Having those spartan abilities and dual wielding does not handicap the user from the Golden Triangle (GT) but instead enlightens the opponent with a countermeasure advantage. example, a dual wielding player would have an advantage against the player who is a pro at GT.

"dual wielding is not a power weapon" according to Halo5, of course its not a power weapon, but I'm using that term in a different manner, it breaks the triangle in the same manner as a rocket launcher.
I don't really see how Spartan abilities give the player an advantage. After all, everyone has them.

The rocket launcher doesn't break the triangle, you can still shoot, melee, and throw grenades.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 6
  4. 7
  5. 8
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. ...
  9. 15