The complaining won't stop because no one is listening

Games Other Halo
1

Everything in Halo 1 worked soooooooo good and with Halo 2 Bungie literally changed the gameplay top to bottom. EVERYTHING WAS CHANGED. EVERYTHING. That is why people complain.

Its not nitpicking.
Its not failure to adapt.
Its not trying to look cool.

EVERYTHING was changed -Yoink!-, EVERYTHING. That is the problem. It has never been addressed by Bungie or 343 and its -Yoink!- off the people who care/cared. Myself and countless others thought that finally, 343 gets it, we’re getting Halo back…but wait…this is Reach with a 3 shot pistol disgracing everything about Halo 1, not Halo 1 remade in the Reach engine. I have no doubt in my mind that myself and several other members of the community could save this game if given the chance…we just want Halo back…

2

i agree with you completely. i was expecting the halo ce multiplayer with the lead the lag the feel of the pistol the 3sk’s …just everything…even the reload glitches and double melee tricks…but they disgraced the game in a way. how hard is it to replicate a game that was made 10 years ago? even with subpar graphics, it would -Yoinking!- rape all the multiplayer games out right now.

halo is what it is because of the multiplayer !

3

The new multiplayer blows CE out of the water.

4

lol. seriously? doesnt take any skill with no lag in the game.

5

halo reach doesnt even hold a candle to halo CE

6

Wait, you are saying lag is a good thing?

7

> Everything in Halo 1 worked soooooooo good and with Halo 2 Bungie literally changed the gameplay top to bottom. EVERYTHING WAS CHANGED. EVERYTHING. That is why people complain.

This is just blatant over-exaggeration.

> EVERYTHING was changed -Yoink!-, EVERYTHING. That is the problem. It has never been addressed by Bungie or 343 and its -Yoink!- off the people who care/cared.

And it is exactly that emotion that is blinding you to logic. I find these nigh-endless complaints especially humorous given the fact that, one of the biggest and longest-standing complaints with the Halo franchise is that it remains with the familiar and stubbornly refuses to stray from its comfort zone. As it stands, there was ample justification, more so than originally recognised, as any attempt to deviate, to evolve, is met with stubborn refusal to embrace anything but an exact remake of the game you held so closely years ago. Change does not mean bad, it just means change. Learn to embrace it in place of this pitifully regressive attitude.

> could save this game if given the chance…we just want Halo back…

No, if Halo was booted over to the nostalgiafags we’d undergo the Call of Duty effect whereby every new instalment is in fact simply the last game with updated visuals. There is a time and place for captivating on nostalgia, but not at the expense of progress. This notion of ‘I can do better’ is especially idiotic, and I feel obliged to ask, is this just a claim without substance, or when push comes to shove, would you actually be able to walk the walk?

> just everything…even the reload glitches and double melee tricks…but they disgraced the game in a way.

This is about the point where nostalgic indulgence becomes deterimental.

> how hard is it to replicate a game that was made 10 years ago?

it isn’t about the level of difficulty, it’s about the recognition that oftimes it is better to make changes than remain for the purposes of generating nostalgia and nothing else.

> even with subpar graphics, it would Yoink! rape all the multiplayer games out right now.

No, it would not. Combat Evolved was great, and will always have a special place in my heart, but there comes a time to move on. That is what the industry is doing, that is what almost everyone else is doing. Why aren’t you?

> halo reach doesnt even hold a candle to halo CE

And what is your justification?

> lol. seriously? doesnt take any skill with no lag in the game.

I’m sorry, what?

8

> lol. seriously? doesnt take any skill with no lag in the game.

I think he’s talking about weapon sway. Like Killzone 2, BF3 etc…

9

> > lol. seriously? doesnt take any skill with no lag in the game.
>
> I think he’s talking about weapon sway. Like Killzone 2, BF3 etc…

Either way, I’m tied of the Reach threads here. It’s like he was forced to play with a gun to his head.

10

> Its not nitpicking.
> Its not failure to adapt.
> Its not trying to look cool.

Yes, it is.

Frankly, Halo is famed for its loud and typically immature community. It’s thanks to people like you wanting Halo: Reach to play exactly like the previous Halo games that have dissuaded me from playing Matchmaking so much.

Yeah, I’m sure Halo: CE’s multiplayer was absolutely great, kids, but take off the rose-tinted specs for a minute and realise that it’s now 2011, not 2001. Things change, improve, evolve and innovate - and for some reason, you seem to be absolutely terrified of that.

Contrary to your belief, Halo will not go swirling down the pan like a fresh turd if things begin to change, alter and improve. But, of course, thanks to you lot screaming like kids, I have to now play an imitation of a ten year old game’s multiplayer instead of the Halo: Reach gameplay I wanted. After all, if I’d wanted to play Halo: CE I’d have put that in the disk tray, right?

11

all im complaining about is how halo became a game of NO SKILL. halo 1 was an amazing multiplayer because the lag made the game harder to play, harder to master. The pistol and the sniper were the only two weapons you really needed to cause a bloodbath. Reach now has jetpacks, some type of shield, other crap…wtf is that? why make it noob friendly? people play multiplayer because they want to have skills…they want to say o -Yoink- u saw that 3sk? things like that…no one is gona say o man u saw how i hit this guy with the hammer!!! that was so pro. no. of course not.

nowadays we get games with flashy graphics but with no content. its all about the money now. releasing a -Yoinking!- halo game every 2 years or so. let the game age, and let techniques develop, or the community settle. let players become legendary in the multiplayers just like in halo 1.

man when people started talking about halo 1, people always started saying oh man you remember this guy man he was so good, we always 1v1d and i never beat him i wonder what he is doing now …and things like that. but the game doesnt settle to give birth to lethal players instead halo develops into a new thing and it takes now some more time to get used to the new feel of the game so yea.

12

> > Its not nitpicking.
> > Its not failure to adapt.
> > Its not trying to look cool.
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> Frankly, Halo is famed for its loud and typically immature community. It’s thanks to people like you wanting Halo: Reach to play exactly like the previous Halo games that have dissuaded me from playing Matchmaking so much.
>
> Yeah, I’m sure Halo: CE’s multiplayer was absolutely great, kids, but take off the rose-tinted specs for a minute and realise that it’s now 2011, not 2001. Things change, improve, evolve and innovate - and for some reason, you seem to be absolutely terrified of that.
>
> Contrary to your belief, Halo will not go swirling down the pan like a fresh turd if things begin to change, alter and improve. But, of course, thanks to you lot screaming like kids, I have to now play an imitation of a ten year old game’s multiplayer instead of the Halo: Reach gameplay I wanted. After all, if I’d wanted to play Halo: CE I’d have put that in the disk tray, right?

Agreed, you know whats funny? the whiners are litterally a small handfull of people that think their opinion is fact, and then proceed to speak for the whole community. Well im sorry, tell that to the 100k people that play reach MM everyday

13

> > halo reach doesnt even hold a candle to halo CE
>
> And what is your justification?

There’s one reason from one perspective with which I can agree with that, Halo CE was better because it was designed entirely for recreation. Gaming, at least as far as console gaming, had yet to really see a competitive bent applied to any successful shooter. By that point, sure, there was Unreal Tournament (which Halo’s multiplayer is largely based on) and a slew of other PC games before and after that establishing the idea that you could do something more with a multiplayer FPS than frag your friends, and friends alone. And further there was goldeneye and perfect dark to bring a taste of this to the consoles of the day, but they certainly did not go as far as the former in making the act of shooting someone into a much-too-important affair to be left solely to fun.

That left Bungie with no real precident within their own niche to make, say, a Halo 2 before Halo 1 had shipped since the fan response that prompted bungie to reconsider that peripheral game mode that they may have even had to cut in the chaos that was Halo 1’s development had not happened yet. All there was was the PC side, offering a glimmer of the future, and console games lagging behind that trend which would soon envelope all but yet offered something good and wonderful. And so they pushed for the latter, but still manage to allow the fromer in some capacity either of out brilliant foresight, never thus far claimed, or simply the chance that their dimly chosen direction aligned with the greatest possible end to it.

And thus since there was no other concievable way to look at it’s potential, Halo CE multiplayer was made for our unadulterated enjoyment, fostering ideas and, in particular, balances which would have never flied in the sensible arenas of that day’s competive gaming. However out of that birthed a new competitive bent with terrible implications since, going forward, competive gaming would be based on that ill-balance which works well for friends on a LAN wanting to slam eachother down with ghosts for the -Yoink- and giggles of it, but not for hardcore online gaming as Halo 2 soon introduced.

And with each new game, further modifications were made to try to bring the desparate points of view together, competition and fun, hardcore and casual as most of us would call it. And with each, not understanding the root relationship outlined above, things became worse and worse for Halo since these new directions rarely chanced upon the right path as the first game fortuitously did. All culminating in Reach, which offers the most bastardized gameplay, and the least enjoyable because it’s the furthest departure from what unadulterated good there was in the series, and in the environment from which it first evolved, and is so proned to retain the most errors in judgement because of it.

That isn’t to say “Let’s be like COD!” but rather to point out that simply being different is not enough to be good. There needs to be more thought, more consideration, that needs to be applied to the problems of multiplayer encompassing both it’s present state and it’s history elsewise the random directions that we take out of ignorance or, worse, incompetence will not meet out wanted ends.

14

> halo 1 was an amazing multiplayer because the lag made the game harder to play, harder to master.

> halo 1 multiplayer lag

You do realise that, over a LAN connection, the latency is negligible to almost zero? And before you start - Halo: Custom Edition (the PC version) doesn’t count, since it’s a port of a game originally designed for the console, not to mention that PC gaming operates on a completely different level to console gaming.

I’m beginning to think you’re just tossing the toys around a bit now, and don’t actually have a clue as to what you’re on about.

15

> That isn’t to say “Let’s be like COD!” but rather to point out that simply being different is not enough to be good.

I never even insinuated as such. What I did convey, was that the notion of embodying a regressive attitude in regards to how the game should move forward, (That being, it shouldn’t.), is completely foolish. Baring your post in mind, even assuming the original was objectively better, remaining in the past is still an -Yoink–backwards approach as any attempt to revisit your memories will inevitably fall short regarding expectations, because nothing will stack up to the overly-idealised concept you have held onto over the years.

> Halo CE was better because it was designed entirely for recreation.

Gaming as an industry is focused on entertainment, and this notion isn’t mutually exclusive to Combat Evolved at all.

> All culminating in Reach, which offers the most bastardized gameplay, and the least enjoyable because it’s the furthest departure from what unadulterated good there was in the series

The belief that Reach is inferior solely on the basis that it dared deviate is ludicrous. Departure =/= worse. For example, the idea of implementing Armour Abilities is not necessarily a bad idea based entirely of its own merits. In some regards, yes, there are negative elements which prove detrimental to the overall experience, but that falls to execution as opposed to the notion itself being flawed. My main ‘beef’ with fans of this variation is the way which they conduct themselves; that being, any new idea is inherently flawed. Something may be good on paper, but may be implemented poorly. People need to learn the difference, and not let their nostalgic indulgence cloud their capacity for logical thinking. This level of regressive behaviour is reflected perfectly in the stance of some of the posters here who actively advocate that blatant glitches, aka faults, of the game be maintained solely on the basis that they were there before. I did not feel the need to respond to the majority of your post as it was comprised mostly of ‘waffle’, and while Halo: CE may have been the best of the series, the answer for the future does not lie in remaining exactly the same.

> elsewise the random directions that we take out of ignorance or, worse, incompetence will not meet out wanted ends.

Way to remain unbiased. The idea that any new implementation is simply ‘random’ and born entirely on ignorance or incompetence is such a pathetically narrow-minded viewpoint that I honestly feel obliged to question whether you too are allowing nostalgia to interfere with logic. The ideal result is one which combines elements from the past while embracing the future, though I fear the insight you seem to posses is being applied to pursue a flawed viewpoint. As I said before, Halo: CE may have been the epitome of Halo gaming, but that does not mean 343 should not try to expand or innovate, and that is what I am trying to put forth here. (As well as, y’know, the fandumb is dumb.)

16

NO ONE EVER SAID THAT IT WOULD HAVE IT’S OWN MULTI-PLAYER!!! the problem here is that the fans don’t listen to what the company says is going to happen, they go off and think of what they want to have happen, and then assume that’s what’s going to happen