And yeah I kinda oscillate between appreciating what 343 did, and absolutely not understanding how they could take over 3 years and their exorbitant budget and make a game only marginally better than Halo 2, which took Bungie a little over a year (after they scrapped their first attempt). Thankfully they have publicly stated they are aware of their missteps, and have been updating matchmaking issues. Nonetheless they need to do better with Halo 5.
If severely limiting the fun and overall lifespan of halo was their aim then yeah, good job.
Halo 4 isn’t anywhere close to being a good game and no amount of TU’s can save it.
> If severely limiting the fun and overall lifespan of halo was their aim then yeah, good job.
>
> Halo 4 isn’t anywhere close to being a good game and no amount of TU’s can save it.
THAT is COMPLETE RUBBISH. It has problems but is better than at LEAST Halo 2 and the matchmaking is among the best, even with the issues. TU’s are fixing the remaining problems.
> THAT is COMPLETE RUBBISH. <mark>It has problems but is better than at LEAST Halo 2</mark> and the matchmaking is among the best, even with the issues. TU’s are fixing the remaining problems.
Based on what?
> > If severely limiting the fun and overall lifespan of halo was their aim then yeah, good job.
> >
> > Halo 4 isn’t anywhere close to being a good game and no amount of TU’s can save it.
>
> THAT is COMPLETE RUBBISH. It has problems but is <mark>better than at LEAST Halo 2 and the matchmaking is among the best,</mark> even with the issues. TU’s are fixing the remaining problems.
chokes
Ok WHAT?!
I have a blast in Halo 4. It is fun, which is what matters. Also, when taking the time to consider all of the additions (most of which I like) to the sandbox, it is almost mind boggling that it is as well tuned as it is. Again, not only is it fun, but it does bolster an atmosphere of competition. To me, fun and competitive play does not mean only BR or only DMR and no Armor Abilities - it means making good use of all the tools (which need to be as balanced as possible) available. Playing the same gametype, with the same settings and weapons endlessly, would become a bore. It seems to me that this setup (never changing, always the same “only BR!! No new things!!” attitude) would stagnate Halo. I think the core experience is evolving well (considering all of the pressure that other popular games put on 343) and that, while some decisions are odd (some, even objectionable), the game overall plays like nothing else but Halo.
> Playing the same gametype, with the same settings and weapons endlessly, would become a bore.
So why didn’t Halo 2 and Halo 3 stagnate?
Let me give you all a reality check.
Your boss gives you paperwork to do.
You turn the paperwork in a week late.
Do you think your boss is going to go “OH MAN THANKS FOR DAT PAPERWORK, I AM SO GRATEFUL”?
No.
He’s going to be pissed, it will cause unnecessary problems for the company, and you will be lucky if he doesn’t fire your -Yoink-. You haven’t earned his respect, you have just finally done what should have been done to begin with.
That said, I will admit Forge Island is pretty cool.
> So why didn’t Halo 2 and Halo 3 stagnate?
Same question can be asked about Call of Duty. When you have something that works, something that everyone loves, you don’t just throw it out the window.
As bad as it hurts to say this, I hope Halo 4 is the last entry in the franchise. Halo has long been the pinnacle of competitive shooters, and 343 has made a mockery of its legacy.
I know it sounds harsh, but the comments made at the GDC panel says it all.