Heresey!! A Chin Strokers Guide

when Lucas changed the Han Solo canteener scene (of Solo shooting Greedo first and in cold blood) he altered the franchise forever, colouring in a background or taking out wires in a scene is acceptable but altering a characters motivation is heresy!!

Halo has to some degree done this with Armour Lock, it has divided opinion and changed Multiplayer forever. (controversial)

Giving the baying horde what they want is bad politics, they are saying we have run out of ideas and passing the challenge over to the masses in an attempt to curry favour (bad politics).

Stick to your guns, Halo cannot become a democracy, I believe this holistic approach came from 343 and Microsoft combined when Bungie ran the show they were Autocrats and ruled with a clear agenda (Halo 3 had less flash and more bang).

So all these problems are going to be solved by Halo Anniversary? (me thinks not).Are they are going back and attempting to alter the narrative?People thought it would have a unique Multiplayer, opinion shifted once they realised it was Reach mechanics.

More to the point what do you think?

Hmmmmmmmmm…strokes chin!!

> when Lucas changed the Han Solo canteener scene (of Solo shooting Greedo first and in cold blood) he altered the franchise forever, colouring in a background or taking out wires in a scene is acceptable but altering a characters motivation is heresy!!
>
> Halo has to some degree done this with Armour Lock, it has divided opinion and changed Multiplayer forever. (controversial)
>
> Giving the baying horde what they want is bad politics, they are saying we have run out of ideas and passing the challenge over to the masses in an attempt to curry favour (bad politics).
>
> Stick to your guns, Halo cannot become a democracy, I believe this holistic approach came from 343 and Microsoft combined when Bungie ran the show they were Autocrats and ruled with a clear agenda (Halo 3 had less flash and more bang).
>
> So all these problems are going to be solved by Halo Anniversary? (me thinks not).Are they are going back and attempting to alter the narrative?People thought it would have a unique Multiplayer, opinion shifted once they realised it was Reach mechanics.
>
> More to the point what do you think?
>
> Hmmmmmmmmm…strokes chin!!

For starters, George Lucas can change whatever he wants. Star Wars is his story, his baby. He wrote it the way he wanted it, he directed it the way he wanted it and so on. Nothing anyone can say will change him from doing what he wants with his story.

That said, on to Armor Lock. It’s not that big of a deal. However, with everything in existence, humans will always pick sides. Some will be for it, some will be against it. People will like Armor Lock, people will hate it, people won’t care about it. That’s how human nature is. But the issue with Armor Lock is blown completely out of proportion. People who are against it say it slows down gameplay. Would they rather it be hectic like Call of Duty where you die within seconds? How can they justify that when our Spartans have regenerative shields? People who are against it say it’s overpowered. Armor Lock is easily countered. Step back and wait. Or go off and kill someone else. It’s easy.

Now, the same people who are complaining about Halo: Reach’s faults are the same ones who want it to be Halo 3.5. They want the same exact gameplay as the last installment. Where’s the fun in that? A “new” game, but it it’s exactly the same with few exceptions as an older game? (Again, CoD is an example.) That kind of monotony kills franchises. A franchise cannot grow if nothing changes. The community ends up literally killing it.

The developer will never have sole authority over what they are making. There are certain constraints such as time, and how much money the publisher is willing to invest in it. Also, the developer needs to consult their loyal community over what they think is good and bad, how they should change stuff, what new things they can implement. There is also things a veteran developer of a franchise can see that no one else can. For example, Bungie’s decision to make Halo 3’s Equipment into Armor Abilities in Halo: Reach. They were able to see how the situation was and planned accordingly.

Halo Anniversary is going to be the exact same as it was 10 years ago aside from graphics and sound. The people who assumed or hoped that it would have it’s own multiplayer only assured their own dissatisfaction. No where was it said it would. The multiplayer will be a tweaked version of Reach so it played more “classic”-like.

and I quote " Halo lost it’s way" Spencer!! Lol you leapt to Georges defence, clever boy!!

Lol

> > when Lucas changed the Han Solo canteener scene (of Solo shooting Greedo first and in cold blood) he altered the franchise forever, colouring in a background or taking out wires in a scene is acceptable but altering a characters motivation is heresy!!
> >
> > Halo has to some degree done this with Armour Lock, it has divided opinion and changed Multiplayer forever. (controversial)
> >
> > Giving the baying horde what they want is bad politics, they are saying we have run out of ideas and passing the challenge over to the masses in an attempt to curry favour (bad politics).
> >
> > Stick to your guns, Halo cannot become a democracy, I believe this holistic approach came from 343 and Microsoft combined when Bungie ran the show they were Autocrats and ruled with a clear agenda (Halo 3 had less flash and more bang).
> >
> > So all these problems are going to be solved by Halo Anniversary? (me thinks not).Are they are going back and attempting to alter the narrative?People thought it would have a unique Multiplayer, opinion shifted once they realised it was Reach mechanics.
> >
> > More to the point what do you think?
> >
> > Hmmmmmmmmm…strokes chin!!
>
> For starters, George Lucas can change whatever he wants. Star Wars is his story, his baby. He wrote it the way he wanted it, he directed it the way he wanted it and so on. Nothing anyone can say will change him from doing what he wants with his story.
>
> That said, on to Armor Lock. It’s not that big of a deal. However, with everything in existence, humans will always pick sides. Some will be for it, some will be against it. People will like Armor Lock, people will hate it, people won’t care about it. That’s how human nature is. But the issue with Armor Lock is blown completely out of proportion. People who are against it say it slows down gameplay. Would they rather it be hectic like Call of Duty where you die within seconds? How can they justify that when our Spartans have regenerative shields? People who are against it say it’s overpowered. Armor Lock is easily countered. Step back and wait. Or go off and kill someone else. It’s easy.
>
> Now, the same people who are complaining about Halo: Reach’s faults are the same ones who want it to be Halo 3.5. They want the same exact gameplay as the last installment. Where’s the fun in that? A “new” game, but it it’s exactly the same with few exceptions as an older game? (Again, CoD is an example.) That kind of monotony kills franchises. A franchise cannot grow if nothing changes. The community ends up literally killing it.
>
> The developer will never have sole authority over what they are making. There are certain constraints such as time, and how much money the publisher is willing to invest in it. Also, the developer needs to consult their loyal community over what they think is good and bad, how they should change stuff, what new things they can implement. There is also things a veteran developer of a franchise can see that no one else can. For example, Bungie’s decision to make Halo 3’s Equipment into Armor Abilities in Halo: Reach. They were able to see how the situation was and planned accordingly.
>
> Halo Anniversary is going to be the exact same as it was 10 years ago aside from graphics and sound. The people who assumed or hoped that it would have it’s own multiplayer only assured their own dissatisfaction. No where was it said it would. The multiplayer will be a tweaked version of Reach so it played more “classic”-like.

Actually Lucas only directed 4 of the 6, and no the movie with the offending sccene, so you have no reason to defend Lucas.

“Halo Anniversary is going to be the exact same as it was 10 years ago aside from graphics and sound”

Spot the delibrate mistakes, Lolz!!

Lol again!!

Your counter-arguments are witty and intelligent.

I don’t have much to say about the GL thing, since I am more of a Star Trek fan rather than a Star Wars fan.

In regards to Armor Lock creating a controversy, well yes , in terms of the basic definition of the word. It has created debate, and debate is not a bad thing. Yes, it has changed multiplayer, but why not change it. My argument has been, change, although it takes a while to adapt, is a good thing. Now, let me clarify by stating that I have played the Reach multiplayer more than any other. However, I believe my opinion is still valid. I have played enough of H3 multiplayer to get a feel for it, and have experienced the differences. That’s all they are different. I don’t believe one is better than the other. This may be due to the fact that I have played one more than the other, but even when I have played the campaigns again recently I approached them in the same way. I like the different styles of play. It makes things new and exciting. Not the same thing over and over.

Also I do not use Armor Lock, I like Sprint a lot better, but I want to be better at Armor Lock as well. It has it’s applications. Players that are using good teamwork, and can use AL for a little bait and switch it works perfectly. Yes, one of the ways to counter AL is to just go the other direction, however that is not so easily done when one of his/her teammates is shooting you.

It seems to me it is all about the willingness to adapt, and the perspective you originally start playing Halo with. I know and look forward to the fact that there is a TU on it’s way. Now from the hints we have all received this might change gameplay in Reach. Don’t get me wrong I am a little concerned as to how I will have to adapt to this new situation, but I am going to put as much effort into that adaptation as I can.

I do not believe they are going to alter the narrative in CE, because of the number of interviews I have seen stating just that. The multiplayer being on the Reach engine is fine by me, because that’s going to free them up to work on H4.

I have seen very little evidence of the “baying horde” or the “they” that you speak of. Except for the dissenters that start discussion like this, which I believe seem to have a stronger voice merely because the sound they make is often individually louder than the small voices of the ascendancy. So no, I don’t need a guide for chin stroking when it comes to Halo and 343i. However, I would like one for a much larger and potentially more impactful controversy…the August 2nd deadline!

Considering that Halo 3 wasn’t exactly my most favourite Halo game of all time, in fact it was probably down there at the bottom, well, 343i can do what they want, so long as it’s not like Halo 3.

And I have no worries about Halo: Anniversary. 343i said they’re not changing anything, so it’s all good.