<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not call out individuals. This includes forum members, moderators, administrators, and non-forum members.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
I know the title of this sounds provocative and assertive, but that’s not the message I’m trying to deliver.
Have you noticed that every major youtuber that talks about 343’s have one thing in common? Youtubers like <mark>REDACTED</mark> (especially him) all deliver their messages as factual. Even when they admit some aspect of a game being a matter of taste, they basically have the attitude “my taste is better than yours”.
The Act Man is one of the bunch that actually gives the benefit of the doubt the most, so when he tries to substantiate his “facts” he’s more reputable than the others.
Xperia mainly focuses on lore of the halo universe, however when he talks about the new mechanics in 343’s games, he keeps falling back on “this is not what Halo was MEANT to be.” This sounds like he’s getting his information from some bungie executive from 8 years ago that wrote a “Declaration of Halo Foundation Mechanics” that he refers to. There was never a set rule for what Halo was “meant” to be, and yet he proclaims what he says is indisputable truth.
<mark>REDACTED</mark>
Dear God…
<mark>REDACTED</mark>…
I don’t mean to insult him, because he IS very analytical. But he suffers the same problems as others before only on a MUCH more drastic scale. I would say more than 80% of his videos on Halo are nothing but him saying something like “this mechanic takes away from ____” and declaring it as “fact”. This is not to say when he brings up facts that he is immediately discredited. For instance, he analyzed jump heights between all the halo games in one of his videos, and the figures he came up with are indisputably factual. The main problem is what he concludes with the evidence he finds, “this creates a bad habit blah blah blah” or “this is lazy game design” or “this ruins the flow of blah blah blah”. Even when he tries to remain neutral about something, his tone displays otherwise.
Now it’s ok to call what you’re proclaiming as facts as long as you try to substantiate them with logic and evidence. The problem that these youtubers exhibit is they base their facts mostly on “this is how bungie did it and it worked great” or “you don’t NEED ____ to have a good game” Both of these statements may be true to some extent, however they are still only as factual as a group agrees them to be. Jump height is factual, saying that a smaller jump height in H5 compared to H3 being bad is not factual.
This mentality is what I believe is holding Bungie Zealots back from earning my consideration.
Now some of you who have read my posts in the past may be thinking I am guilty of the same mentality. Depending on what argument of mine you are thinking of, you may be right.
On of my main arguments I bring up when comparing 343 to bungie is this:
Bungie games were largely based on a Rock Paper Scissors kind of gameplay. Meaning if I have an AR in a hallway, and my opponent has a BR in that same hallway 50 feet away from me, assuming both of us have the same prior playtime of 20 hours, Rock Paper Scissors determines that the BR wins. The rock Paper Scissors gameplay is determined by the fact that the map environment and weapon placement determines a large portion (I would say 60%) of a player’s success rate, leaving about 40% top the skill of the player. 343’s gameplay in Halo 5, because of the enhanced mobility, allows the player to overcome nearly every obstacle if he uses his tools correctly.
Now some of you may disagree with my conclusions, and if you did, please let me know. However, did you notice how I concluded that Bungie is more Rock Paper Scissors where as 343 is more open ended skill based? I never said either one is bad, but which would you rather play? Would you rather play a Nerf game with friends? Or run around playing rock paper scissors with friends? Some of you might like that (for some reason I will never understand), but regardless, my methodology was to isolate the two games down to their respective play styles, rather than declaring one or the other as “bad”.
Maybe I’m getting all of this wrong. Who really knows?