Thoughts on Halo 4.

Technology and Gaming
#41

I think the only other popular Xbox exclusive was Mass Effect, and that exclusivity ship sailed with Mass Effect 2. Look at the PS3. They’ve got shit tons more really good PS3 exclusive titles.

#42

if they dropped the project and made marathon 4 that be even better!!!

#43

You’re either a sweet ass troll or you sincerely thought Bungie was making this

#44

I actually like 343’s MKVI more than Bungie’s. It’s bulkier build makes it look like a more natural progression from the MK V. Especially since, if you think about it, the Halo 2/3 MKVI are way too god damn skinny to fit a proportionate person in them, much less a genetically enhanced muscly bruiser.

Halo actually changes quite a bit from installment to installment. Halo 2 felt like a completely different game than Halo 1, and Halo 3 felt completely different than Halo 2. The weapons never handle the same way twice. Hell, from Halo 1 to Reach the same weapon has NEVER been repeated (with the exception of ODST); all the guns that “return” just have the same name, but always behave drastically different than when they were last seen. Features get implemented and others get removed. Halo 2/3 is much more linear than 1/reach. ODST was laid out more like Spyro the Dragon with it’s open hub world with portals that lead to linear levels.

I know you’re trying desperately to be the cool nonconformist guy here by actively posting in a thread about a game you don’t give a fuck about, but make sure when you say something against the series it holds at least a bit of water. Have a go at it’s generic (now retro and therefore ‘in’) art style or campy voice acting instead. Halo pretty much goes through a COD :II to COD :IV caliber change with every release.

#45

that’s the joke

#46

^ hurr

Also:

#47

I only played the PC port of the first Halo & I thought it was meh. The levels were very repetitive, the story was pretty weak, the driving bits (namely the ending) weren’t fun & the physics was strange & floaty. Every time I hear about how ‘good’ Halo or most of the popular FPS’ on the 360, it’s always about the multiplayer.

If there’s ever a Halo game developed without any multiplayer, then I’ll pre-order it. :stuck_out_tongue:

#48

that’s like the first dumb thing Dias has ever said

#49

Fix’d

#50

Hey look, a game with an entirely optional multiplayer component. Better not buy it until there’s no multiplayer component at all.

#51

I think the point Dias was trying to make was that Halo’s single player felt like it came up short, whereas most of the love shown for the game was due to its multiplayer. Thus, the implication is that more effort was spent upon multiplayer development than the campaign. So, his preference being for story-based single player games, he would give Halo a second chance if a game in the series were to lack a multiplayer component, because it would suggest to him that the single player could be good because it was the sole focus of development.

Actually, though, this has already happened; ODST was single player only - the multiplayer from Halo 3 was carried over until Reach came out. But, ODST did not seem to be significantly more well-received than any of the other games. So Halo is probably just not a series you’ll ever get into.

#52

You pretty much hit the nail on the head with that one. :slight_smile:

I guess not. Oh well, there’s always more games in the sea.

This is the best compliment I have received in quite a while. :slight_smile:

:frowning:

#53

I must say that I agree with Dias.
Halo 2 also had a horrendously dull end game.

#54

I stopped playing multiplayer period on the 360 anyway, mostly because I refused to pay for Gold. Halo 3’s multiplayer seems more ‘done’ than the story. I enjoyed the campaign, it just felt like it was just included because the other Halo games had one. Though I’d be lying if I didn’t think some of the story moments were pretty cool. But I haven’t played it in a while (nor any other Halo game for that matter) so my opinion may change whenever I play it again.

#55

I gotta agree there. That last Arbiter level felt like the first level of any other shooter.

#56

This.

Also, I don’t really care for Halo, and I didn’t have intentions of posting in this thread…

[COLOR=‘Red’]…BUT I NEED TO KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THAT SIG.
[/SIZE]

#57

https://forums.blackmesasource.com/showthread.php?t=9768

#58

Thanks for clearing that up.

#59

Halo 1 doesnt need a gritty reboot. Remember when they tried that with Goldeneye? As for Halo 4, my first thought when Microsoft announced it at E3 was “Cool story, bro”. Don’t get me wrong, I love the series. But id feel more comfortable letting Reach being the last entry in a series that encompasses most of my childhood. Besides, what the he’ll does Chief hope to accomplish on Onyx? If youve read the book, you know the answer: nothing.

#60

It’s not a gritty reboot, you curmudgeon. It’s hardly even a remake.
Check out the screenshots. It’s the same purple and green stuff it’s always been, but with the juicy, chunkified characteristics of any generic modern-day videogame

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.