This is my current opinion based off of strategy, function, appearance quality, and uniqueness of the gameplay, any thoughts? prove me wrong if I am please. Im referring to small things like the demand for exact accuracy with most weapons, cross hair reaction to critical shots including the click noise you hear, unique critical damage zones on vehicles and character, endless variety of ways to kill an enemy spartan/AI quickly wether its spartan abilities/power ups/weapon combos, thruster movement strategy for reversal kills, map radar speed visibility specification, different weapon fire rates, down scope detail(for example; The glare when u look into the scope on the BR & DMR), the extremely large multiplayer maps, the load out specs, the prestige quality weapon sounds and spacial sound detail, etc. My opinion is based off of the extreme attention to strategic detail which i find unique.
Not to be rude, but besides stating a few one word qualities about the game is there any warrant to your opinion? Your OP is lacking more substance than I expected.
It definitely takes more thinking and teamwork than people give it credit for, at least in Arena. I always have considered Halo the chess of console shooters.
Halo 5 is also the most balanced game in the series, so there’s that going for it.
By definition, opinions aren’t facts that can be proven right or wrong. They are just opinions. People can agree or disagree with you.
Examples:
“Halo 5 has the best multiplayer in the series” - opinion, because it cannot be empirically proven right or wrong. The concept of "best’ differs from person to person, and also the parameters that define it. Some people determine “best” by number of players populating the game, others by how much money it made, and so on and so forth.
“Halo 5 was written by Brian Reed” - fact. This is a statement that is accepted as everyone as true and can be empirically proven (multiple sources cite Reed as the writer). Some may argue that Halo 5 was written by a team of writers, but to that I counter that the statement was not “Brian Reed solely wrote Halo 5” (which would be incorrect), and therefore is still true.
Now true enough, many things we take as fact today started out as opinions (e.g. the Earth revolves around the Sun). But through the scientific process, evidence was found using (at the time) modern technology that turned that opinion into fact. The future may uncover new knowledge that disproves current facts, but until that occurs, the facts we have today are just that: facts.
It has a lot of tools, how many of these are forced on the player compared to be taught is a different story all together. Intelligent? Not so much. Complicated with a sense of enjoyment once figured out? Possibly.
I would agree- the combat is top notch and the new features add more depth to the series. The HCS and the Pro League are great examples at how intelligent the game can be.
Perhaps out of all current console games, which isn’t saying much since most console shooters are very casual.
Of all console games? Nope.
I feel like with all these class and ability based shooters the depth is pretty superficial. It’s surface-level strategy but there isn’t much going on under the surface. Just people spamming abilities whenever its opportunistic to do so.
Just watch various Ce commentaries by Missingno Wilder.
In many ways, I agree… even pertaining to some of the factors that (to many) work against the appeal of the game…
REQ’s? Remixes? In many ways, the content feels rehashed, lazy, etc… but from a design and engineering/business standpoint, it is brilliant… In the business of game design… shady? Maybe… but brilliant.
From a gamer’s standpoint, is this a valid concern? Yes… but we also have a game with amazing and generally very well thought-out gameplay, and some really great content mixed in. In all reality, most of the H5 maps are ranging on decent to pretty excellent… with a few leaving more to be desired. The visual identity between them may be somewhat lacking, but the visuals themselves are quite good.
The game and its overall vision is very well put-together and the gameplay and design feels very cohesive in terms of its full package… Something H4 lacked. Its gameplay felt very rigid and pieced-together if you know what I mean. A “Frankenstein” of ideas just thrown into a pot and given the label of “Halo.” It lacked a certain seamless feeling and flow relative to H5.
> 2533274817408735;4:
> By definition, opinions aren’t facts that can be proven right or wrong. They are just opinions. People can agree or disagree with you.
> Examples:
> “Halo 5 has the best multiplayer in the series” - opinion, because it cannot be empirically proven right or wrong. The concept of "best’ differs from person to person, and also the parameters that define it. Some people determine “best” by number of players populating the game, others by how much money it made, and so on and so forth.
> “Halo 5 was written by Brian Reed” - fact. This is a statement that is accepted as everyone as true and can be empirically proven (multiple sources cite Reed as the writer). Some may argue that Halo 5 was written by a team of writers, but to that I counter that the statement was not “Brian Reed solely wrote Halo 5” (which would be incorrect), and therefore is still true.
> Now true enough, many things we take as fact today started out as opinions (e.g. the Earth revolves around the Sun). But through the scientific process, evidence was found using (at the time) modern technology that turned that opinion into fact. The future may uncover new knowledge that disproves current facts, but until that occurs, the facts we have today are just that: facts.
Dude… everything you just said has nothing to do with the topic. Obviously this is an opinion based discussion that investigates the intelligence of the game design. Never was this a discussion on halo being the “best” game I explained why i find the mechanical details of halo 5 to be more intellectual than any other game i have personally played or researched. I asked if you did not agree to please demonstrate why. You do not need to be giving me a lesson on basic empirical scientific certainty especially in a situation like this. Pay more attention next time dude…Not to be rude or anything. lol
> 2535461287427665;5:
> It has a lot of tools, how many of these are forced on the player compared to be taught is a different story all together. Intelligent? Not so much. Complicated with a sense of enjoyment once figured out? Possibly.
Im referring to the way the game was built. Is there a game that does not force limitations on its players? I would be very interested in playing a game with absolute free will and endless abstract possibility!
> 2533274873580796;8:
> In many ways, I agree… even pertaining to some of the factors that (to many) work against the appeal of the game…
>
> REQ’s? Remixes? In many ways, the content feels rehashed, lazy, etc… but from a design and engineering/business standpoint, it is brilliant… In the business of game design… shady? Maybe… but brilliant.
>
> From a gamer’s standpoint, is this a valid concern? Yes… but we also have a game with amazing and generally very well thought-out gameplay, and some really great content mixed in. In all reality, most of the H5 maps are ranging on decent to pretty excellent… with a few leaving more to be desired. The visual identity between them may be somewhat lacking, but the visuals themselves are quite good.
>
> The game and its overall vision is very well put-together and the gameplay and design feels very cohesive in terms of its full package… Something H4 lacked. Its gameplay felt very rigid and pieced-together if you know what I mean. A “Frankenstein” of ideas just thrown into a pot and given the label of “Halo.” It lacked a certain seamless feeling and flow relative to H5.
I totally agree man. In a world with so much diversity and limited resources it would be difficult to be absolutely appealing to EVERY player though. So yeah I mean for the most part it has to be one of the most intellectually designed…in my opinion.