> @DaveElway “Everyone can be successful” is not a good game design mechanic unless you’re designing an MMO subscription or a pay-to-win model. Having everyone wins means that the game mechanics are random enough to throw off better players and award players randomly. Ordnance drops are a great example of this.
>
> A bad player can get a few kills and get an ordnance drop with a Fuel Rod cannon which is a devastating weapon that is easy to use and get kills. Even if you miss you can still kill someone. While a good player could get grenades and speed boost which isn’t really much they can do against a fuel rod.
>
> This isn’t something that happens once in a while, it’s something that happens often.
>
> Games need to reward skill (not kills) by allowing players to earn victories. You take and control the high ground, you have a vantage point. You control weapon spawns, you get weapons. You control vehicle locations, you get vehicles.
>
> Players should not be rewarded for kills over skills. You shouldn’t be rewarded for hanging back on Ragnarok with active camo, crouched in one position and managing to steal someone’s kill and getting a rocket launcher.
>
> Everyone shouldn’t be successful and everyone shouldn’t win. Only the best should win.
Your missing the point. In your flawed logic, the only “skill” of Halo is aiming the BR. What Halo does is level the playing field. You’re good at aiming the BR. That shouldn’t decide a game as diverse as Halo.
In fact, speed burst is EXACTLY what you need against the fuel rod cannon.
Also, hanging back on Ragnarok and helping your team by finishing off kills is a great strategy. I’d rather a guy do that than run in like Rambo and give the other team a bunch of kills. A player should be rewarded for good strategy.
Sorry if you think that is stealing kills, but in a team game, kills are kills no matter who gets them.
> Assassin, I notice you hate the game so much that you’ve played nearly 8 days, have a 130 rank, completed the campaign, and have completed 45 out of 50 Spartan Ops. For someone who hates it, you’ve sure played it a lot.
>
> Seems you really do like this game and will probably buy Halo 5. You’ve just gotten board with it. Like Microsoft wants.
Nope, I’ve just fully spent enough time to learn all the problems with it. The only thing I ever bother to play in the game is Customs.
> > Assassin, I notice you hate the game so much that you’ve played nearly 8 days, have a 130 rank, completed the campaign, and have completed 45 out of 50 Spartan Ops. For someone who hates it, you’ve sure played it a lot.
> >
> > Seems you really do like this game and will probably buy Halo 5. You’ve just gotten board with it. Like Microsoft wants.
>
> Nope, I’ve just fully spent enough time to learn all the problems with it. The only thing I ever bother to play in the game is Customs.
Halo 2 is like a B action movie where you just kill everything, everyone. It’s story is only above average when you follow the Arbiter which, is not too much. The Chief was like an action hero from the 80’ era. It wasn’t that good. Maybe it was seems to be good when you were 8 years younger but that isn’t a good statement.
Somebody said here, Halo 2 was better because you don’t need to read 3 books to know what’s going on.
Now, Halo 4 follows the MASTER CHIEF. You only know things from the game, that the Chief is going trough, and that is how it’s right. The game delivered it’s part of the story, and that is how it’s right. The dramaturgy factor was more like it was in Reach, the game does not “cheat” on higher difficulties etc, etc.
I agree, Halo 4 could be more. That is right, but coming with the almighty Halo 2 again and again. I mean, it’s 8 been now. No offense but since Halo 2 there were six Halo titles released. If none of them as good as Halo 2, I don’t know why those people still around here. No offense, but if I don’t like something I drop it.
> They didn’t make it crap. They just gave it a finite amount of time to play it. You get to rank 130 and then complete the campaign, and you’re ready for the next one.
>
> People didn’t stop playing because they don’t like it. They stopped playing because they finished it.
*Some people.
My friends don’t play Halo 4 because they simple didn’t liked it, they didn’t started a single specialization and they sold the game to another person. I’m not saying you are wrong, but everyone plays the game different and have diferent opinions.
> They didn’t make it crap. They just gave it a finite amount of time to play it. You get to rank 130 and then complete the campaign, and you’re ready for the next one.
>
> People didn’t stop playing because they don’t like it. They stopped playing because they finished it.
You seriously believe that? haha foolish kid. People stopped playing because they didn’t like it for sure not because you think they finished the game
> And I’ll say this, making a game that only a very few can be successful at, is no way to sell a game.
>
> Halo 4 is made for the masses, not just professional gamers. If the masses can all be successful, the game will sell.
Enough with the rambling, you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.
> I could tell you a fair bit about Johnson, The Arbiter, Half Jaw, Truth and a little bit about Tartarus (although he was porely developed) as well as Hood, Keyes and unfortunately not much about gravemind, although that was Halo 3’s job.
Using absolutely no extended universe content, tell me the significance of Half Jaw, Lord Hood, and Miranda.
> It was released in an unfinished state then go on to praise Halo 2, hypocritical much? Halo 2 was much more unfinished and broken than Halo 4 ever has been
Is this your attempt at defending Halo 4? Better arguments have tried and failed.
In the opinions of those who dislike Halo 4 and like Halo 2, Halo 2 was not nearly as negatively affected by how unfinished it was. It was also much more forgivable, seeing as the game actually felt much like a Halo game.
Halo 2 was much more broken than Halo 4 ever has been? I suspect that you were not around Halo in those days. Those sound suspiciously like the words of someone who came to Halo with Reach or Halo 4.
This is all based on our own opinions. So you really can’t call those people hypocrites, they genuinely prefer Halo 2 over Halo 4.
its sad that halo 2 had the ending cut off from it and had the online issues in the beginning and was still a better game in every aspect. 8 years ago.
You make a good point, but Halo 2 played very different than Halo 4 and in my opinion was a lot funner. I like Halo 4 but I find myself bored or mad after 6 or 7 matches. I could play Halo’s 2 and 3 all day long and I wouldn’t find myself raging or bored at all. They were literally the peak of the Halo franchise, unless 343 fixes a lot with the next Halo title I don’t know how much faith I’ll have for the games multiplayer.
> > I could tell you a fair bit about Johnson, The Arbiter, Half Jaw, Truth and a little bit about Tartarus (although he was porely developed) as well as Hood, Keyes and unfortunately not much about gravemind, although that was Halo 3’s job.
>
> Using absolutely no extended universe content, tell me the significance of Half Jaw, Lord Hood, and Miranda.
> > It was released in an unfinished state then go on to praise Halo 2, hypocritical much? Halo 2 was much more unfinished and broken than Halo 4 ever has been
>
> Is this your attempt at defending Halo 4? Better arguments have tried and failed.
>
> In the opinions of those who dislike Halo 4 and like Halo 2, Halo 2 was not nearly as negatively affected by how unfinished it was. It was also much more forgivable, seeing as the game actually felt much like a Halo game.
>
> Halo 2 was much more broken than Halo 4 ever has been? I suspect that you were not around Halo in those days. Those sound suspiciously like the words of someone who came to Halo with Reach or Halo 4.
>
> This is all based on our own opinions. So you really can’t call those people hypocrites, they genuinely prefer Halo 2 over Halo 4.
I love how when someone says something against Halo 2 it’s always “you started with Reach or 4”, no I didn’t I started with Halo 2 and it was flat out broken, I’m not saying people can’t like Halo 2 but if they are going to use the argument that Halo 4 wasn’t fully complete when released but praise Halo 2, they should look back at Halo 2s release
