> 2533274806427910;14538:
> It being “entirely” subjective doesn’t justify said “opinion”. Halo is an Arena/Squad FPS hybrid game, not a simulator. Just because both sides may be, by definition, subjective, doesn’t mean that the mechanics that noticeably affect how the game is played shouldn’t be objectively analyzed.
I don’t disagree with the last sentence, but there’s a difference between analyzing what can be analyzed objectively, and dictating that there is only one way to design a Halo game.
When it comes to Halo being an arena FPS, if you still think it is, sure. But genres are inherently descriptive. When we say what genre a game belongs in, we base it on an observation of how it has been designed. However, there is no universal law that dictates the sequels of a game should belong in the same genre for all eternity. It is often extremely convenient to not drift too far from the previous games, but it is by no means compulsory.
> 2533274806427910;14538:
> I don’t have an obligation to understand, or care about someone’s argumentative framework, especially if it boils down to “you need to adapt”. And it goes both ways, too.
Of course you have no obligation to understand, but what do you hope to accomplish then? Not understanding where people are coming won’t help you turn their heads. Of course, if you’re just here to be hostile and mock people who disagree with you, then I can see why you wouldn’t care.
> 2533274806427910;14538:
> in my eyes
Good to see you’re starting to get a hang of it.
> 2533274806427910;14538:
> Though not all of them are subjective. It’s a fact that Sprint causes players to avoid death easily, thus slowing down the game. It’s a fact that Sprint causes developers to make maps bigger, and don’t use 1:1 remakes from previous games to disprove that. It’s a fact that Sprint causes randomness in the game because now you can’t anticipate where players might go, thus affecting how the match flows. It’s a fact that Sprint affects how players are able to exploit the spawn system. All of these are objective because they have empirical evidence, and validated reasoning to back them.
Again, you are confusing what is fact, what is conjecture, and what is just opinion. “Sprint causes developers to make maps bigger” is an observational fact that, as far as I’m concerned, is backed by substantial enough evidence. “Sprint causes players to avoid death easily” is not a fact. It’s a widely held conjecture based on anecdotal evidence (that I also believe, by the way), but strictly speaking doesn’t have any substantial evidence backing it up. “Sprint causes randomness in the game” is an unclear statement, the interpretation of which depends on what one means by randomness. But let it be said that any mechanic that opens up options for the player can be said to “cause randomness”.
Don’t get me wrong, all of what you said are objective statements. Some of which even I have made, which are often accompanied by solid reasoning, and some are even backed by observational evidence. Unfortunately “solid reasoning” doesn’t make something a fact, as the history of science bluntly reminds us. Almost always, reasoning requires experimental evidence to back it up.
But even if we assumed all of these statements as fact, they don’t say anything objective about the question whether sprint should or shouldn’t be in Halo. They are just a bunch of observations about the effects of sprint, but it’s up to everyone to decide how they react to those observations.
> 2533274806427910;14538:
> Skill has been a part of Halo since the first game. Just because a few people might not consider it an important aspect of the game, doesn’t mean that framework does not have a factual basis. Halo was one of the most popular games during the MLG during the Halo 2-3 years because they took skill (not nearly as much as CE, but that’s a different topic).
Skill has been an important part of Halo only to those who care about it. Bungie seemingly never did, as the observation of the evolution of Halo after CE aptly reminds us. That skill is an important part of Halo is not a factual basis. It is just an opinion held by many. Alas, just because we like it doesn’t mean anybody else needs to care about it.
> 2533274806427910;14556:
> > You cannot, under any circumstance, objectively say what is or what isnt good for Halo.
>
> Of course I can, because I’m very passion about Halo and actually have the ability to recognize that it’s a delicate formula that doesn’t need gimmicks to be innovative. Loadouts were removed for the very reason that they WEREN’T good for Halo, because it’s an Arena Shooter, not a class shooter. There’s a reason why certain types of shooters have different types of mechanics.
No, really, you can’t. You can subjectively say what you think is good for Halo. But since “goodness” is an entirely subjective concept, there is nothing objective you can say about it. Your passion doesn’t make you an authority on anything.
