Is it just me or am i the only one that thinks that making the game faster paced is the problem?
Well, if Halo 4 was like Halo 3 i would agree with you, but with all the things that Halo 4 have a fast based game will fix most of our problems like Camo Campers
It’s just you. Halo has always been a fast paced arena shooter. The CE magnum killed faster than any other gun (excluding 1sk weapons obviously) in all Halo games.
> It’s just you. Halo has always been a fast paced arena shooter. The CE magnum killed faster than any other gun (excluding 1sk weapons obviously) in all Halo games.
Well, i agree and disagree with your opinion maybe i am worng but maybe i am rigth, the battle itself is very fast, but there another fator that make Halo a slow paced, first is the Halo’s exclusive ARENA movement i mean they don’t have rockets in their feets which is common in ARENA games like Quake and others, and how you gonna enter the battle, most of the time i see me reflecting what is the enemy weapon and if should i stay or should i go.
Agree with this.
Halo 4’s pacing is pretty horrible. With almost unlimited sprint (even some are unlimited) instant respawns and stickies on spawns it is just a mess of die, respawn, charge and rinse and repeat.
The weapon kill times may be slower than previous halos but every other mechanic speeds a lot of games into uncontrollable chaos.
Eh, personally I would like for Halo to remain a more moderate pace.
I really enjoyed Halo 3’s kill times the most. I am really not a fan of hyper fast gameplay.
I’ve played every last Halo game from the beginning, and honestly didn’t care much for Halo 2 or CE’s multiplayer due to the speed. I’m not a bad player, by any means, but I believe Halo has a better feel at a slower pace.
Though, I won’t deny that Reach’s pace was a little too slow.
I feel what would help with Halo 4 the most, would be the removal of instant respawn. And, perhaps a slight decrease in the delay for your shields to charge.
> Eh, personally I would like for Halo to remain a more moderate pace.
>
> I really enjoyed Halo 3’s kill times the most. I am really not a fan of hyper fast gameplay.
>
> I’ve played every last Halo game from the beginning, and honestly didn’t care much for Halo 2 or CE’s multiplayer due to the speed. I’m not a bad player, by any means, but I believe Halo has a better feel at a slower pace.
>
> Though, I won’t deny that Reach’s pace was a little too slow.
>
> I feel what would help with Halo 4 the most, would be the removal of instant respawn. And, perhaps a slight decrease in the delay for your shields to charge.
Reach definitely could be slow at times but other than some AA’s it is my favorite multiplayer (didn’t get to play H2 online much). I feel that it takes more teamwork and strategy since it is slowed down than just running in guns blazing.
I feel that increasing the movement speed alongside the killtimes is a definite must. However, I feel that Halo 4 (And Reach) have overcomplicated factors that get in the way of it being a “Surgical” Arena Shooter, where mastering the angles, and distances between places on the map, as well as any tools at your disposal, and your enemies is what wins the game. With factors such as Instant Respawn, Sprint, Ordinance and any other either factors that either add random elements, affect map geometry, or don’t accurately flow with the strategic side of the game’s skill gap, Halo is more of a chaotic experience than a purposefully designed one.
The fast pace in Halo 4 already bordered on preventing any sort of strategical play. You run in get as many points as possible, die so you don’t have to wait for you shields to recharge then repeat until you get ordnance. While the increase in pace would be awful on any other Halo game (Reach included, it sped up at higher levels), it’s not going to hurt Halo 4, because the strategical gameplay that it would compromise isn’t there in the first place.