> I proved exactly what I intended to prove… that more players are willing to adapt than to whine in the forums. Thank you for the assist though.
Adapting=/= A Happy fan base. I adapted to the infinity settings, and guess what? I still think they are horrible and so do many others. You sound like that you are implying that the people who adapted are all 100% happy with the infinity settings, when that is far from the truth.
> > > Good for you.
> > >
> > > Too bad that the current iteration of Random ordnance completely throws out strategy through the window when you pit two good, well organized teams of even skill against each other.
> >
> > Is there not strategy involved in choosing when to drop your ordnance? Is there not strategy involved in choosing a binary rifle vs. a rocket launcher, depending on the situation? Or is your complaint that you cannot make A + B = C on the battlefield anymore? The fact that Ordnance drops may nullify strategies that would have worked in previous iterations of Halo does not ‘completely throw it out’. At least not for those of us who can adapt.
> > Okay, who wins? Your ordnance is a Plasma grenade, Speed boost, and a needler. My ordnance is damage boost, Incineration Cannon, and a binary rifle. Again, with the A+B=C thinking. I was under the impression that this was about strategy, not which weapon is more powerful. If you cannot come up with a strategy for taking down someone with an Binary Rifle when you have a needler then that’s your problem, not mine.
> >
> >
> >
> > > And then there’s this “evolution” crap again. Well, seeing as evolution is all about the fittest surviving, Halo 4 “evolved” some stuff that doesn’t really suit it’s environment, if we are to count population as “living creatures” in it’s genetic pool. It’s seems like Halo ventured into a colder environment and then didn’t evolve the necessary traits to withstand the cold. It didn’t get fur, grew larger or the ability to acquire nutrition.
> >
> > Since you’re obviously stuck on my use of the words evolution and adapt, let me offer an analogy. Halo 3… you were a dinosaur. Halo 4 brought the meteor. Now the mammals, who are capable of adapting, evolve into the dominant species. All of this does not mean that Earth is no longer Earth. Evolution has nothing to do with the fittest species surviving, and if you don’t want to take my word for it, take Darwin’s:
> >
> > ‘It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.’ - Charles Darwin
> > Not really evolving if it removes Custom options, and removes gametypes. Evolution is not all about adding things, sometimes it is removing things that are unnecessary. That’s why we don’t have tails, or thick hair covering our entire body, etc. But again, you seem to be stuck on the word evolution, rather than comprehending my argument as a whole.
> >
> >
> > > Yes, I can see, compelling arguments, this “evolution and adapt”.
> >
> > I need only make one argument: before the switch to BTB, BTIS and IS consistently held 90% of the current online population at any given time. BTB has just taken BTIS’s place, and even though there are a number of players unhappy with this change, they seem to be ‘adapting’ pretty well, considering that BTB has done a pretty decent job of maintaining the numbers that BTIS did.
> >
> > The numbers don’t lie. One only need to look where the players are playing to see what the favored game-type is… and IS wins hands-down (and before you make the argument that the IS playlist is dead, we all know this is due to required DLC… before the change IS was the second-most populated list the majority of the time, right behind BTIS).
>
> Numbers don’t lie. How much of the old Pop is left again? This has been discussed to death in the forums, and the general consensus is that the majority of the population who left did so due to the crappy matchmaking, hosting, and the fact that H4 is crippled with lag. The fact that the majority of Spartan Ops multi-player games have ridiculous lag, and not just War Games, was more than enough for the population to dwindle… without Spartan Ops and War Games, all that is left is the Campaign and Forge.
>
> Again, with the A+B=C thinking. I was under the impression that this was about strategy, not which weapon is more powerful. If you cannot come up with a strategy for taking down someone with an Binary Rifle when you have a needler then that’s your problem, not mine.
It is not about whether someone can take down a binary rifle user with their needler. It is about giving an unfair advantage to someone who really doesn’t deserve to have the advantage. For instance a lesser skilled player with an incineration cannon is more likely to kill a more skilled player who has a needler. Thats not to say the guy with the needler can’t win, but the odds are stacked againts because the GAME decided that one player got a better weapon over another.
> Evolution is not all about adding things, sometimes it is removing things that are unnecessary. That’s why we don’t have tails, or thick hair covering our entire body, etc. But again, you seem to be stuck on the word evolution, rather than comprehending my argument as a whole.
Right… so custom game options were unnecessary, the ability to take screenshots and film clips from campaign and spartan ops was unnecessary, the ability to use precision forge was unnecessary(Sarcasm). There are things that could be removed for being unnecessary, but guess what? The things that were removed in halo 4 were not all necessary to remove!
> This has been discussed to death in the forums, and the general consensus is that the majority of the population who left did so due to the crappy matchmaking, hosting, and the fact that H4 is crippled with lag. The fact that the majority of Spartan Ops multi-player games have ridiculous lag, and not just War Games, was more than enough for the population to dwindle… without Spartan Ops and War Games, all that is left is the Campaign and Forge.
There are alot more reasons than what you listed as to why people left halo 4.
Custom games destroyed
No classic playlist
Downgraded Forge
Downgraded Theater
No Firefight
Horribly unbalanced sandbox
No in game ranking system
These are just a few extra reasons as to why some players left.
> > Again, with the A+B=C thinking. I was under the impression that this was about strategy, not which weapon is more powerful. If you cannot come up with a strategy for taking down someone with an Binary Rifle when you have a needler then that’s your problem, not mine.
>
> It is not about whether someone can take down a binary rifle user with their needler. It is about giving an unfair advantage to someone who really doesn’t deserve to have the advantage. For instance a lesser skilled player with an incineration cannon is more likely to kill a more skilled player who has a needler. Thats not to say the guy with the needler can’t win, but the odds are stacked againts because the GAME decided that one player got a better weapon over another.
>
> No, what it was about, if you refer to the previous replies, was that all strategy goes out the window when someone gets a power weapon ordnance. My point was that all strategy does not go out the window, it just changes your available strategies, and you have to adapt.
>
> To take it even further, my original point was that if someone is on a skilled team of organized players, and the opposing team getting a few ordnances was all it took for your team to “lose a well-deserved win”, then maybe you didn’t deserve the win in the first place.
>
> Evolution is not all about adding things, sometimes it is removing things that are unnecessary. That’s why we don’t have tails, or thick hair covering our entire body, etc. But again, you seem to be stuck on the word evolution, rather than comprehending my argument as a whole.
> Right… so custom game options were unnecessary, the ability to take screenshots and film clips from campaign and spartan ops was unnecessary, the ability to use precision forge was unnecessary(Sarcasm). There are things that could be removed for being unnecessary, but guess what? The things that were removed in halo 4 were not all necessary to remove!
>
> You are pigeon-holing my reply. I never said that everything that was removed was a good thing… you can’t please all the people all of the time. What I said was in response to the fact that the poster was stuck on the word ‘evolution’, and trying to use a word that I had used against me. He took my use of the word evolution and whittled it down to a meaning to suit his argument, and when I countered, youe re-expanded the definition of the term to suit your argument of the game. I was merely pointing out that if you are going to use evolution of a video game and compare it to evolution of a species, then evolution is not always the addition of things. Your arguments are now including a whole list of things that are completely off topic. IS has nothing to do with the exclusion of your game types, unless you’d once again like to speculate and assume you know that these game types are missing only because IS exists.
>
>
>
> > This has been discussed to death in the forums, and the general consensus is that the majority of the population who left did so due to the crappy matchmaking, hosting, and the fact that H4 is crippled with lag. The fact that the majority of Spartan Ops multi-player games have ridiculous lag, and not just War Games, was more than enough for the population to dwindle… without Spartan Ops and War Games, all that is left is the Campaign and Forge.
>
> There are alot more reasons than what you listed as to why people left halo 4.
>
> Custom games destroyed
> No classic playlist
> Downgraded Forge
> Downgraded Theater
> No Firefight
> Horribly unbalanced sandbox
> No in game ranking system
>
> These are just a few extra reasons as to why some players left.
Which explains my use of the word “majority”. Look it up, I’ll wait.
> No, what it was about, if you refer to the previous replies, was that all strategy goes out the window when someone gets a power weapon ordnance. My point was that all strategy does not go out the window, it just changes your available strategies, and you have to adapt.
>
> To take it even further, my original point was that if someone is on a skilled team of organized players, and the opposing team getting a few ordnances was all it took for your team to “lose a well-deserved win”, then maybe you didn’t deserve the win in the first place.
The strategy that comes from ordnance drops are lesser than that of non ordinance gameplay. Player predictions is the only thing that should truly dominate the game and that it. Look at chess, players start equally and the only things that can change up the game are player choices. Imagine a chess match where one player gets 3 queens randomly because he took a few pieces and then was able to continue to dominate. He had assets given to him that the other player had no equal opportunity to obtain. I almost never on the receiving end of ordnance drops. I am the one dominating because the GAME allowed me to win, not my skill.
> You are pigeon-holing my reply. I never said that everything that was removed was a good thing… you can’t please all the people all of the time. What I said was in response to the fact that the poster was stuck on the word ‘evolution’, and trying to use a word that I had used against me. He took my use of the word evolution and whittled it down to a meaning to suit his argument, and when I countered, youe re-expanded the definition of the term to suit your argument of the game. I was merely pointing out that if you are going to use evolution of a video game and compare it to evolution of a species, then evolution is not always the addition of things. Your arguments are now including a whole list of things that are completely off topic. IS has nothing to do with the exclusion of your game types, unless you’d once again like to speculate and assume you know that these game types are missing only because IS exists.
Your argument is so broad and non specific that the definition of evolution that is being used is broad and non-specific. Again you were the one who brought up evolution as the removal of something to suite your own argument.
> Which explains my use of the word “majority”. Look it up, I’ll wait.
There is no majority or general consensus as to why so many people left halo 4 because there is very large list of issues that turned players away.
> > No, what it was about, if you refer to the previous replies, was that all strategy goes out the window when someone gets a power weapon ordnance. My point was that all strategy does not go out the window, it just changes your available strategies, and you have to adapt.
> >
> > To take it even further, my original point was that if someone is on a skilled team of organized players, and the opposing team getting a few ordnances was all it took for your team to “lose a well-deserved win”, then maybe you didn’t deserve the win in the first place.
>
> The strategy that comes from ordnance drops are lesser than that of non ordinance gameplay. Player predictions is the only thing that should truly dominate the game and that it. Look at chess, players start equally and the only things that can change up the game are player choices. Imagine a chess match where one player gets 3 queens randomly because he took a few pieces and then was able to continue to dominate. He had assets given to him that the other player had no equal opportunity to obtain. I almost never on the receiving end of ordnance drops. I am the one dominating because the GAME allowed me to well, not my skill.
>
> If you feel the strategy is lesser, then that’s your opinion. if you feel player prediction is the only thing that should truly dominate the game, then that’s your opinion as well. Player prediction is just one of many skills that should determine the outcome of a match IMHO. Also, I cannot imagine a game of chess with that set of rules, nor could I imagine one where I had to aim at the pieces, or my bishop came with Plasma Grenades. Look at TCG’s or any other game that includes a bit of randomness (which is the majority of games). Just because there is some random does not mean that all skill and strategy goes out the window. How you handle and use that randomness is a skill in itself. So, to completely summarize my point: just because H4’s skill sets and strategies are not completely fine-tuned to suit your desires does not mean they do not exist at all.
>
> My final point on your chess analogy is this: two players, with equal skill level and strategies, go head to head. If player prediction is the only skill set that should be required, then one of the two players obviously has an edge over the other, since both cannot be the first player to move. The only fair way to determine which player goes first without bringing a different set of skills into play is randomness. This edge was not determined by their skill level, and it certainly does not determine the outcome of the game. What does? The players ability to adapt to the current situation at hand, their ability to see several moves ahead of their opponent, etc. My point being that your argument would require an idealistic, unattainable version of Halo 4 in which there was no lag what-so-ever, the game was hosted on a dedicated server in which all players were an equal distance from the server itself, and everyone had the same latency. Everyone was using the same controller, and everyone’s XBox was hard-wired into their router, etc. etc. Because you cannot possibly have a game like this, where the better team will ALWAYS get their “deserved” win, the randomness equals things out, by turning the game on it’s side a bit. At face value, it seems like it would be the determining factor in a lot of games, but probability and large numbers suggest that over the course of time, randomness does not seem random at all, and that things even out in the long run. You may lose a game because someone got an incineration canon when you got a needler and you didn’t have the skill or strategy to beat them, but there will also be a time in which you win because you got the more powerful weapon. So, in keeping with the topic at hand, I love IS for this reason. Because in the long run, it’s not who gets what weapons that determines anything, but it’s who can, over time, make best use of these weapons as they are offered. It gives me the chance to nab a win from a team that is only winning because their best player got host. It gives me the chance to take down that Mantis that has been teleporting and wiping out my team… it balances a game that is inherently unbalanced due to the nature of online gaming, and that balance may not be perfect, but it suits my needs.
>
>
>
> > You are pigeon-holing my reply. I never said that everything that was removed was a good thing… you can’t please all the people all of the time. What I said was in response to the fact that the poster was stuck on the word ‘evolution’, and trying to use a word that I had used against me. He took my use of the word evolution and whittled it down to a meaning to suit his argument, and when I countered, youe re-expanded the definition of the term to suit your argument of the game. I was merely pointing out that if you are going to use evolution of a video game and compare it to evolution of a species, then evolution is not always the addition of things. Your arguments are now including a whole list of things that are completely off topic. IS has nothing to do with the exclusion of your game types, unless you’d once again like to speculate and assume you know that these game types are missing only because IS exists.
>
> Your argument is so broad and non specific that the definition of evolution that is being used is broad and non-specific. Again you were the one who brought up evolution as the removal of something to suite your own argument.
>
> My argument was quite to the point exactly. And I didn’t bring up evolution as a removal of something to suit my argument, I used it to counter his use of the term to serve his argument. Removing things from H4 was never part of my argument. If it was, I would have been the one to bring it up.
>
>
>
> > Which explains my use of the word “majority”. Look it up, I’ll wait.
>
> There is no majority or general consensus as to why so many people left halo 4 because there is very large list of issues that turned players away.
There is very much a consensus as to the majority of players left due to lag. I never made the claim that the only reason they left was lag. The only reason that shows up across the board on the list of reasons why people left is LAG. The fact that some people left for other reasons, or that some people had other reasons to leave on top of the lag, does not mean that they wouldn’t still be playing if not for the lag. Feel free to pigeon-hole this counter to suit your argument as you see fit.
I do agree that a multitude of issues leads to all the people leaving; but I’m think it’s ‘decently safe’ to say that lag / connection problems / black screen (whatever you want to call it) leads the pack.
At least that’s why 6 of my 7 friends that played left. And I hear it around (here, at work, random friends when talk about games, etc) a lot.
Obviously there is no proof; but a fairly safe call I would think ^
> > > Again, with the A+B=C thinking. I was under the impression that this was about strategy, not which weapon is more powerful. If you cannot come up with a strategy for taking down someone with an Binary Rifle when you have a needler then that’s your problem, not mine.
> >
> > It is not about whether someone can take down a binary rifle user with their needler. It is about giving an unfair advantage to someone who really doesn’t deserve to have the advantage. For instance a lesser skilled player with an incineration cannon is more likely to kill a more skilled player who has a needler. Thats not to say the guy with the needler can’t win, but the odds are stacked againts because the GAME decided that one player got a better weapon over another.
> >
> > No, what it was about, if you refer to the previous replies, was that all strategy goes out the window when someone gets a power weapon ordnance. My point was that all strategy does not go out the window, it just changes your available strategies, and you have to adapt.
> >
> > To take it even further, my original point was that if someone is on a skilled team of organized players, and the opposing team getting a few ordnances was all it took for your team to “lose a well-deserved win”, then maybe you didn’t deserve the win in the first place.
> >
> > Evolution is not all about adding things, sometimes it is removing things that are unnecessary. That’s why we don’t have tails, or thick hair covering our entire body, etc. But again, you seem to be stuck on the word evolution, rather than comprehending my argument as a whole.
>
>
>
> > Right… so custom game options were unnecessary, the ability to take screenshots and film clips from campaign and spartan ops was unnecessary, the ability to use precision forge was unnecessary(Sarcasm). There are things that could be removed for being unnecessary, but guess what? The things that were removed in halo 4 were not all necessary to remove!
> >
> > You are pigeon-holing my reply. I never said that everything that was removed was a good thing… you can’t please all the people all of the time. What I said was in response to the fact that the poster was stuck on the word ‘evolution’, and trying to use a word that I had used against me. He took my use of the word evolution and whittled it down to a meaning to suit his argument, and when I countered, youe re-expanded the definition of the term to suit your argument of the game. I was merely pointing out that if you are going to use evolution of a video game and compare it to evolution of a species, then evolution is not always the addition of things. Your arguments are now including a whole list of things that are completely off topic. IS has nothing to do with the exclusion of your game types, unless you’d once again like to speculate and assume you know that these game types are missing only because IS exists.
> >
> >
> >
> > > This has been discussed to death in the forums, and the general consensus is that the majority of the population who left did so due to the crappy matchmaking, hosting, and the fact that H4 is crippled with lag. The fact that the majority of Spartan Ops multi-player games have ridiculous lag, and not just War Games, was more than enough for the population to dwindle… without Spartan Ops and War Games, all that is left is the Campaign and Forge.
> >
> > There are alot more reasons than what you listed as to why people left halo 4.
> >
> > Custom games destroyed
> > No classic playlist
> > Downgraded Forge
> > Downgraded Theater
> > No Firefight
> > Horribly unbalanced sandbox
> > No in game ranking system
> >
> > These are just a few extra reasons as to why some players left.
>
> Which explains my use of the word “majority”. Look it up, I’ll wait.
Are you familiar with the word “minority?”
Evolution implies moving forward.
All 4 did was move sideways. It improved on Reach’s core and it pissed a lot of fans off. How is moving on with 20k people helping Halo? As for the terrible lag, it is just more crap added onto the pile.
This could all be solved with a Ranked and Social Playlist.
> Are you familiar with the word “minority?”
>
>
> Evolution implies moving forward.
>
> All 4 did was move sideways. It improved on Reach’s core and it pissed a lot of fans off. How is moving on with 20k people helping Halo? As for the terrible lag, it is just more crap added onto the pile.
Again, using your choice of the definition of evolution, and it’s implications, to suit your counter-argument. I could just as easily make the argument that H4 did move “forward”, in the fact that it left a lot of players behind.
> > Are you familiar with the word “minority?”
> >
> >
> > Evolution implies moving forward.
> >
> > All 4 did was move sideways. It improved on Reach’s core and it pissed a lot of fans off. How is moving on with 20k people helping Halo? As for the terrible lag, it is just more crap added onto the pile.
>
> Again, using your choice of the definition of evolution, and it’s implications, to suit your counter-argument. I could just as easily make the argument that H4 did move “forward”, in the fact that it left a lot of players behind.
No, you couldn’t. Evolution implies moving forward, improving. How did Halo 4 improve on the series by taking away custom options and just making a general mess of a matchmaking? If anything, its mutation.
> > > Are you familiar with the word “minority?”
> > >
> > >
> > > Evolution implies moving forward.
> > >
> > > All 4 did was move sideways. It improved on Reach’s core and it pissed a lot of fans off. How is moving on with 20k people helping Halo? As for the terrible lag, it is just more crap added onto the pile.
> >
> > Again, using your choice of the definition of evolution, and it’s implications, to suit your counter-argument. I could just as easily make the argument that H4 did move “forward”, in the fact that it left a lot of players behind.
>
> No, you couldn’t. Evolution implies moving forward, improving. How did Halo 4 improve on the series by taking away custom options and just making a general mess of a matchmaking? If anything, its mutation.
Evolution:
the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth.
the gradual development of something, esp. from a simple to a more complex form.
I see no implication of improvement in either of these definitions. Evolution is not a straight-line shot to the best option. Your definition of evolution, which obviously refers to biology, is looking at the term as though the only evolution of every species is the one that survived. The one’s we see today. Evolution does not imply improvement. It implies change and development, which may or may not be for the better. On top of that, your argument against my use of the term is based solely on your opinion that H4 is not forward movement. So even if evolution did imply forward movement, which it does not, then you would still be charged with proving that H4 was not forward progress, which you cannot do because it is an opinion. Unless of course you refer to the numbers of people playing the game, which I have already pointed out, and everyone agrees, that lag is at the very least a factor in determining why people left (although most agree it’s the largest factor). Now if you’re all done striving to make absurd arguments against my use of the term evolution, maybe we can get back to the topic at hand.
Because human evolution and video game evolution are the exact same thing.
I’ll admit, H4 adapted to its surrondings. That however, made it worse, and more generic. The end result is a game with too much Halo to be called COD, and too much COD to be called Halo.
> Because human evolution and video game evolution are the exact same thing.
>
> I’ll admit, H4 adapted to its surrondings. That however, made it worse, and more generic. The end result is a game with too much Halo to be called COD, and too much COD to be called Halo.
Human evolution and a video game evolving are not one in the same, which is the point that I have tried to make repeatedly. Once again someone is using my own argument to argue my point. Gaming evolution is still evolution, and does not imply improvement, only development.
I like infinity slayer and the randomness (I do admit the personal ordnance needs fixing, I find i rarely deploy it) because I’d rather think on my feet then pre-empt everything before it happens. I don’t have a problem with custom loadout and enjoy overcoming obstacles that I come across. I dealt with two guys each totting a detachable machine gun on longbow (by one of the small bunkers) and they would have had me; but I managed to throw up my Hard light shield just before dying, rush through cover and riddle one of them with the Suppressor, run round the rock and assassinate the other. in any other Halo game i would be dead.
A lot of you sound very stuck in the old ways of halo, infinity slayer works, I stated that a while back.
You sounds like you can’t enjoy anything new.
> A lot of you sound very stuck in the old ways of halo, infinity slayer works, I stated that a while back.
>
> You sounds like you can’t enjoy anything new.
New≠good
Neither is change for the sake of change.
> > Because human evolution and video game evolution are the exact same thing.
> >
> > I’ll admit, H4 adapted to its surrondings. That however, made it worse, and more generic. The end result is a game with too much Halo to be called COD, and too much COD to be called Halo.
>
> Human evolution and a video game evolving are not one in the same, which is the point that I have tried to make repeatedly. Once again someone is using my own argument to argue my point. Gaming evolution is still evolution, and does not imply improvement, only development.
You obviously don’t understand sarcasm.
> > > Because human evolution and video game evolution are the exact same thing.
> > >
> > > I’ll admit, H4 adapted to its surrondings. That however, made it worse, and more generic. The end result is a game with too much Halo to be called COD, and too much COD to be called Halo.
> >
> > Human evolution and a video game evolving are not one in the same, which is the point that I have tried to make repeatedly. Once again someone is using my own argument to argue my point. Gaming evolution is still evolution, and does not imply improvement, only development.
>
> You obviously don’t understand sarcasm.
No, no, I definitely picked up on the sarcasm. Hard to miss actually.