Sci-Fi Halo v Bare-bones Halo

Games Other Halo
1

Everyone just having a BR, Magnum, Frags, no radar, no AAs, no ODs etc, reminds me of fighting/combat in real life in the twentieth century. I’d call that bare-bones, baisc, simple Halo. Or, if you like, just some ordinary war/combat game. It makes one feel like just some USA solider running around in the middle east. How is that real Halo? Sure,it might have been how things were done in some long past Halo 2/3 game but, that time has past.

On the other hand, AAs, ODs, variety of weapons (human and nonhuman), and everything else that was attempted in Halo Reach and exists in Halo 4, is what actually makes Halo a SciFi game. I want to feel like a Spartan when I’m in MM. I want to believe it is somehow SciFi related and have it be a SciFi experience. That is Halo 4!

I sometimes wonder if all the people that want a return to Halo 2 or Halo 3 forget that this, the Halo universe is science fiction. In that universe there should be AAs, ODs, the ability to run faster and jump higher, hence, the Spartan.

343i does not get Halo 4 perfect but,it has many SciFi elements in MM instead of making just feel like some grunts running around the Arizona desert doing basic training.

Any thoughts? <—somehow I feel like I should regret asking that

What it lacks is being able to play as an Elite or Promethean in MM like we could play as an Elite in Halo Reach MM. Invasion was good! It added to the SciFi feel of Halo. Yes,we have Flood but, I simply don’t like it. I’d rather the objective element of Invasion.

2

> Everyone just having a BR, Magnum, Frags, no radar, no AAs, no ODs etc, reminds me of fighting/combat in real life in the twentieth century. I’d call that bare-bones, baisc, simple Halo. Or, if you like, just some ordinary war/combat game. It makes one feel like just some USA solider running around in the middle east. How is that real Halo? Sure,it might have been how things were done in some long past Halo 2/3 game but, that time has past.

^^This^^ is CoD with shields.

3

What makes Halo Sci-fi is its awesome atmosphere and story. People came back each time to continue the Chief’s story, and multiplayer helped them stay. This “barebones” variant was balanced, newbie-friendly, and competitive. It was unique.

343 linked multiplayer to compaign. Customization and such suffered somewhat as a result as well as Halo’s unique identity. I understand games need to evolve to continue their success, but this should not be an excuse for those wanting an even playing field; something common in the “barebones” style.

With what we have that is core H4 multiplayer, we must make do. IMO 343 gave us decent new features, but how and where they were implemented is what is wrong with the game (I’m pointing to PODs, AA-distribution, loadouts, and playlist structure).

4

IT IS A GAME. NOT REAL LIFE. You make a game to be balanced, not to make it realistic. Any argument that starts with “Im a super soldier, why cant i ______” or “Im a super soldier, that’s why i should be able to ____” should automatically be thrown out.

5

Halo 1, 2, and 3 all had stuff like Active Camo and Overshield as well. Plus, the weapons and vehicles are pretty Sci-Fi.

I do enjoy the more “bare bones” games because I like having a level playing field.

6

You can have AAs, you can have futuristic weapons and guns, you can have whatever you need to make it a futuristic shooter. What you don’t need are classes and ordnance. That’s what is ruining the game.

You seem to be under the assumption that previous Halo games were simplistic in comparison, and that may seem like the case at a base level, but in reality the trilogy is lightyears(see what I did there) ahead of Reach/H4 when it comes to strategy/complexity.

7

> IT IS A GAME. NOT REAL LIFE. You make a game to be balanced, not to make it realistic. Any argument that starts with “Im a super soldier, why cant i ______” or “Im a super soldier, that’s why i should be able to ____” should automatically be thrown out.

You made my point. It is not real life, thus, no need for the absurd argument for balance, BR, Pistol, Frags blah blah. It is a game, a scifi game, hence, halo 4 343i style. They got it right.

Thank you for realizing it is a game and jot real life. Which,then, begs me to ask the question,why do you want it to resemble real life with only BR, Frags etc?

8

Okay I don’t have a problem with all the extra things that was brought into the Halo games. However some things really break the game (Jet Pack I am looking at you). Ordnance Drops that wield power weapons is just stupid IMO. The core of Halo since CE was always team balance, and with the implementation of Custom Load Outs, Power weapons that fall out of the sky, AA’s that encourage map breaking, random power weapons that spawn in random spots on maps, the overall balance of a game is completely lost, and frustration is extremely high in most players.

I am by no means a hater of Halo 4. It is, and will continue to be my game of choice until Halo 5 launches, but I am not blind to what is a problem.

9

> why do you want it to resemble real life with only BR, Frags etc?

Balance, competitive viability, popularity…

10

> > IT IS A GAME. NOT REAL LIFE. You make a game to be balanced, not to make it realistic. Any argument that starts with “Im a super soldier, why cant i ______” or “Im a super soldier, that’s why i should be able to ____” should automatically be thrown out.
>
> You made my point. It is not real life, thus, no need for the absurd argument for balance, BR, Pistol, Frags blah blah. It is a game, a scifi game, hence, halo 4 343i style. They got it right.
>
> Thank you for realizing it is a game and jot real life. Which,then, begs me to ask the question,why do you want it to resemble real life with only BR, Frags etc?

Real life isn’t balanced.

11

> Halo 1, 2, and 3 all had stuff like Active Camo and Overshield as well. Plus, the weapons and vehicles are pretty Sci-Fi.
>
> I do enjoy the more “bare bones” games because I like having a level playing field.

There is no such thing as a level playing field in real life…not really.

Athletes are born with different abilities, height and many other factors which give one an advantage over another, despite rules which try to put in place a level playing field.

In war, in real life, does not have such a thing as a level playing field. Halo 4 reflects the real life in that it recognizes there is no such thing as a level playing field. It puts you in a MM situation where you are given many tools and the outcome, as in real life, is determined upon how you use those tools given.

Yes, halo 4 is a game but a game which is more realistic than Halo 2/3 in terms of its scifi nature.

12

> > Halo 1, 2, and 3 all had stuff like Active Camo and Overshield as well. Plus, the weapons and vehicles are pretty Sci-Fi.
> >
> > I do enjoy the more “bare bones” games because I like having a level playing field.
>
> There is no such thing as a level playing field in real life…not really.
>
> Athletes are born with different abilities, height and many other factors which give one an advantage over another, despite rules which try to put in place a level playing field.
>
> In war, in real life, does not have such a thing as a level playing field. Halo 4 reflects the real life in that it recognizes there is no such thing as a level playing field. It puts you in a MM situation where you are given many tools and the outcome, as in real life, is determined upon how you use those tools given.
>
> Yes, halo 4 is a game but a game which is more realistic than Halo 2/3 in terms of its scifi nature.

And this is a game. And this game isn’t faring well in its online population. And it just so happens that this game took a radical new approach that took it a step closer to reflecting other mainstream FPSs.

A game that keeps players coming back can benefit from sandbox balance, something which H4 is teetering off of. The original trilogy kept players coming back, both social and competitive alike.

Oh, and Halo has never been the most realistic game. Infinity gamemodes are an acceptable change but should have stayed as the nonranked social offering, which is what it currently plays as.

13

> You can have AAs, you can have futuristic weapons and guns, you can have whatever you need to make it a futuristic shooter. What you don’t need are classes and ordnance. That’s what is ruining the game.
>
> You seem to be under the assumption that previous Halo games were simplistic in comparison, and that may seem like the case at a base level, but in reality the trilogy is lightyears(see what I did there) ahead of Reach/H4 when it comes to strategy/complexity.

I like your ‘lightyears’ reference :slight_smile:

Halo Reach was my first Halo game. Some months after getting it I played Halo 3 for the first time.I then played Halo ODST followed by Halo 3 MM. Going from Halo Reach to Halo 3 MM for me, was like going back in time. I did not enjoy it.

Halo 4 has strategy and complexity because of the AAs, ODs etc. One has to ensure you use the right load-out, hence five slots, at ten right time to achieve your aim in any given game and, that might include changing the load-out two or more times in a match. This,of itself, adds a degree of complexity. The games are more strategic aned complex because of not despite of the 343i additions.

Bungie saw the need to evolve, hence Halo Reach. That evolution has continued under 343i watch.

14

> Okay I don’t have a problem with all the extra things that was brought into the Halo games. However some things really break the game (Jet Pack I am looking at you). Ordnance Drops that wield power weapons is just stupid IMO. The core of Halo since CE was always team balance, and with the implementation of Custom Load Outs, Power weapons that fall out of the sky, AA’s that encourage map breaking, random power weapons that spawn in random spots on maps, the overall balance of a game is completely lost, and frustration is extremely high in most players.
>
> I am by no means a hater of Halo 4. It is, and will continue to be my game of choice until Halo 5 launches, but I am not blind to what is a problem.

Look,you make some fair points. However what you and others see as problems, many others see them not being problems but improvements.

15

> > why do you want it to resemble real life with only BR, Frags etc?
>
> Balance, competitive viability, popularity…

ANd, that is why, better late than never, 343i is,in my view, being fair and balanced.

How?

By providing what you want in some play lists and game modes and, by providing what I want in other play lists and game modes.

16

> > IT IS A GAME. NOT REAL LIFE. You make a game to be balanced, not to make it realistic. Any argument that starts with “Im a super soldier, why cant i ______” or “Im a super soldier, that’s why i should be able to ____” should automatically be thrown out.
>
> Thank you for realizing it is a game and jot real life. Which,then, begs me to ask the question,why do you want it to resemble real life with only BR, Frags etc?

This is a very unintelligent assumption. People obviously want it “like real life” for a level playing field, and thinking anything else is ridiculous. I really can’t see how you came to your conclusion.

Your opening argument is just as flawed. It’s a game. Gameplay mechanics are gameplay mechanics, and nobody cares about how well gameplay meshes with the actual universe. Except for you, maybe. Gameplay mechanics are obviously not supposed to supplement the lore, or give an authentic representation of how certain situations would actually play out. If it was supposed to, then a single BR burst would pop shields, and a plasma bolt would wreck armor. Gameplay is supposed to be for fun, and for fun only. Nobody cares about how true it is to the actual experience.

17

>

Again, you only think that because you have a very limited understanding of the trilogy. No offense, but you just admitted it.

Having loadout options might seemingly make the game complex, but in reality it just creates a random, unbalanced, and for lack of a better word, sloppy experience all around.

Having everyone start off equal actually makes the game more complex. You are able to actually predict your opponents and outplay them using your knowledge of the game. A game where you have weapons (random weapons, I might add) delivered directly to you will never be more complex than a game where the weapons are set and predictable. Predictability and complexity actually go hand in hand. You can’t create strategies for randomness. Look at chess. Both players start off equally, but it is regarded as an incredibly complex game and is incredibly difficult to master. A game like monopoly will never be on that same level because there is a heavy focus on luck and randomness.

It may seem like having loadout choices would make the game more of a strategic experience, but in reality all people do is choose whatever is broken and abuse the hell out of it.

18

> > > why do you want it to resemble real life with only BR, Frags etc?
> >
> > Balance, competitive viability, popularity…
>
> ANd, that is why, better late than never, 343i is,in my view, being fair and balanced.
>
> How?
>
> By providing what you want in some play lists and game modes and, by providing what I want in other play lists and game modes.

What you are referring to is not balance. Giving players whatever they want, even without any real effort, does nothing to maintain the playing field.

19

Everything in the game cant always make sense or be logical.

20

I desperately wish the Carbine didn’t suck, and the Plasma Rifle was available as a Sidearm. I’d take those, with Sticks, and Camouflage, and feel like I’m playing a real Sci-Fi game.

For now I guess I have the LR and Boltshot.