Halo just feels so... old, gameplay wise. You can't zoom in with the weapons like in games such as Crysis, Far Cry 2, Killzone 2 and Call of Duty (like this: http://image.jeuxvideo.com/images/x3/c/o/cod3x3075... ) and after Killzone 2, it feels very primitive when you have to jump around to not getting killed... there should be cover mecanics, especially in ODST since it has a more tactical approach... but from i've seen, it doesn't have either of those things.. >_<
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:08:40 In reply to nepton
Posted by nepton
Halo just feels so... old, gameplay wise. You can't zoom in with the weapons like in games such as Crysis, Far Cry 2, Killzone 2 and Call of Duty (like this: http://image.jeuxvideo.com/images/x3/c/o/cod3x3075... ) and after Killzone 2, it feels very primitive when you have to jump around to not getting killed... there should be cover mecanics, especially in ODST since it has a more tactical approach... but from i've seen, it doesn't have either of those things.. >_<
Cover and even that zoom-in feature would break the Halo-formula.
Its an action fps. If it doesnt suit you, look for something else.
Imo it does not feel old, it just feels different to the fps-mishmash out there...
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:12:17 In reply to nepton
Posted by nepton
Halo just feels so... old, gameplay wise. You can't zoom in with the weapons like in games such as Crysis, Far Cry 2, Killzone 2 and Call of Duty (like this: http://image.jeuxvideo.com/images/x3/c/o/cod3x3075... ) and after Killzone 2, it feels very primitive when you have to jump around to not getting killed... there should be cover mecanics, especially in ODST since it has a more tactical approach... but from i've seen, it doesn't have either of those things.. >_<
Completely disagree about the zoom, its fine as it is, and that image you linked looks plain wrong what happened to focal depth. However you do make a good point about cover especially being an ODST you are far more likely to die.
I'm definately unhappy with the graphics, they talked about improving the sky in the other vidoc which just made me laugh. Hopefully Reach is on a brand new engine and will live up to expectations. As for ODST
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:18:31 In reply to nepton
You could, you know, play these games instead of bitching about Halo. If you take away its unique gameplay it would have to compete with these you listed directly... and it would be hard against someone who already perfected the style of gameplay you prefer (CoD). The gameplay might end up being as medicore as KZ2 or even worse Far Cry 2.
In the end it's good Halo is sticking to its roots, it gives an excellent alternative to the sea of shooters all scaled in the same shade of gray.
I like Halo MP, but after playing COD4 MP I haven't looked back. To me, the best thing that can happen to Halo is the introduction of A: Sprinting and B: Aiming down the sights.
I know people will say it'll kill the Halo formula et all, but I disagree. With those two added features, it will only improve the game. It's not like change has done the Halo MP any worse before (for example: going from Single -> Dual weapons). There's a lot more to Halo for those two features to ruine the game...I think even claiming such a thing is doing the franchise injustice. Halo MP is much more than that...
Stop complaining about the graphics you babies. They can't update the graphics engine for an expansion pack. Halo: Reach is the next big Halo game, that has been in development since Halo 3's launch in 2007. Reach comes out in 2010 and will have a new engine. ODST was an expansion developed in 1 year.
At this point Halo has been around the block way more than it's welcome. I think only the hardcore Halo nerds can really still play it. I mean since 2001 the gameplay hasn't really changed. Sure they added a few tid bits here and there but the main gameplay hasn't been touched. It's like playing an MMO for 8 years huh? I bet most Halo nerds have less of a life than those MMO nerds.
i'm not a fan of franchise milking but there's plenty of milk left in those udders imo. The spinoffs sound pretty sensible and interesting so far. If they release Master Chief's Crossbow Training for natal then we'll talk. Come to think of it they're probably thinking of ways to shoehorn halo into their natal lineup as we speak.
It's not like change has done the Halo MP any worse before (for example: going from Single -> Dual weapons).
No, it just so happened to ruin a great part of the weapon balance in Halo 2. Bungie actually acknowledged it backpaddelled in Halo 3. The next change that watered down the Halo experience was adding equipment, whenever one is deployed it immediately broke the pace and dynamic of the game.
Adding what you suggest opens up yet another can of worms. Killing multiple enemies in a row is an essential part of the Halo formula, I have yet to play a game that has been that satisfying in this regard. Shields in a way, are a substitute for sprinting and cover, you're durable enough to cross greater distances without the need of both. Also sprinting is only useful on a 2D plane but since elevation is a huge part of the Halo gameplay (one that I love the most) it would take away that emphasis.
What aiming down the sights adds to the game I don't know, you don't want to aim at close ranges since you either want to throw a grenade or punch the opponent, for long range you can aim with the scope of your pistol/sniper/BR.
Commented on 2009-08-25 19:21:57 In reply to Viginti_Tres
Sure, adding stuff can arise other challenges to balance a game, but damn...let's just not improve on anything and go for the safe bet coming 10 years or so. :| With thinking patterns like that, progression in gaming is sure to die in an instance.
Also, how does adding sprint or aiming down the sights not enable you to kill multiple enemies in a row? Don't quite get that. Aiming down the sights enhances immersion and offers better and more natural aiming imo. It just 'feels' much more satisfying. Sprinting in a Halo game makes perfect sense and could provide more gameplay elements like sprinting + jumping covers more height/distance which they could incorporate in the level design I.E: You have regenerating 'sprint stamina', and if you're out you can't escape on to that certain platform, whereas you could if you had preserved your 'sprint stamina'. It opens up other tactical elements to the game.
Like I said, I don't expect the Halo fanboys to be openminded on changes like this, so I'll leave it at that.
Jato, its more that Aiming down the sights in Halo is entirely pointless. One of the core aiming conventions Halo upholds is that your accuracy doesn't change no matter how much you are moving. (unlike your example of CoD)
To have any use for aiming down the sights the entire aiming model would have to change. and thats a VERY drastic change. Which would kill much of the run and gun nature of the game.
Plus, its a technological explanation for the lack of "ironsights" in Halo: The weapons sights are all smartlinked to the HUD in the helmet. Which, BTW, is far more functional than half my screen being blocked by the weapon when i'm zoomed.
FYI, sprinting was almost in Halo 2. But was scrapped. Said it resulted in people just tearing around the level in sprint. Which was not what they wanted.
Some pretty ridiculous gameplay change ideas flying around in this thread. Those people should really stickt to the basic gunplay/combat found COD, infact pretty much every other FPS out there because Halo simply isnt and probably will never be for you.
Commented on 2009-08-25 20:00:55 In reply to RC_Master
Those drastic changes is exactly what Halo needs after all these years imo. You make some valid points, but I feel they are all in defense of keeping Halo exactly the way it is.
I want Halo to evolve, and if that means less bunnyhopping and changing the aiming model...please!
Edit: Lol, I see the sensitive fanboys are already arriving. Time to leave this thread before I hurt their feelings...
Commented on 2009-08-25 20:08:10 In reply to Viginti_Tres
Posted by MasterChief2829
They can't update the graphics engine for an expansion pack.
If it's an expansion pack, how come it's full priced?
Posted by Viginti_Tres
The next change that watered down the Halo experience was adding equipment, whenever one is deployed it immediately broke the pace and dynamic of the game.
I gotta disagree with you there. I loved the addition of equipment, especially the shield degenerator thingy. Great for stopping warthogs dead in their tracks too!
Just because you don't like the mechanics of a game, doesn't mean that they're broken :P Apparently plenty of other people DO like the mechanics. If you like Call of Duty's mechanics, PLAY CALL OF DUTY lol. I'm not saying that Halo shouldn't evolve, but it's a guarantee that if they change something to suit YOU, somebody else is going to be p*ssed about it. Plain and simple. There is no RIGHT answer.
I want Halo to evolve, and if that means less bunnyhopping and changing the aiming model...please!
Evolving, yes, but not in a sense of copying other games. This is the main reason why I couldn't give a shit about any FPS franchise except the biggest three. Don't we have enough games already that are just copies of one another?
There is plenty to improve on Halo, I'm no fanatic, the kids on the Bungie forums are (every bit of slight critic is shot down at an instant). But these improvements are not to be made on the fundamental basis that is the core gameplay but aspects of the incorporation. The game features should be designed around a strong idea of how the game should play, not the other way around. That's why I'm strictly against adding features that don't follow that idea (like equipment for instance).
That's why the MLG playlist is my favourite. They cut everything that distracts you from the core gameplay and ad new ways to navigate through the map (one of the core aspects of a Halo game, imo). As a result you get a game that is very close to the idea behind Halo CE/2. Maybe it's just being puristic but that's my idea of Halo.
Driftwood
Download is now functional again on Gamersyde. Sorry for the past 53 days or so when it wasn't. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Another (French) livestream today at 2:30 CEST but you're welcome to drop by and speak English. I will gladly answer in English when I get a chance to catch a breath. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
GSY is getting some nice content at 3 pm CEST with our July podcast and some videos of the Deus Ex Mankind Divided preview build. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
For once we'll be live at 4:30 pm CEST. Blim should not even be tired! (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
More Quantum Break coverage coming in a few hours, 9:00 a.m CEST. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
We'll have a full review up for Firewatch at 7 pm CET. Videos will only be tomorrow though. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Tonight's livestream will be at 9:15 GMT+1, not GMT+2 as first stated. (> 3 Months ago)
Patreon
All comments (46)
Commented on 2009-08-25 04:34:00
Commented on 2009-08-25 16:42:44Still not sure if i'm getting this ?
Commented on 2009-08-25 17:02:31
Commented on 2009-08-25 17:12:27
Commented on 2009-08-25 17:20:25
Commented on 2009-08-25 17:21:47
Commented on 2009-08-25 17:32:15
Commented on 2009-08-25 17:34:16
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:08:40 In reply to neptonIts an action fps. If it doesnt suit you, look for something else.
Imo it does not feel old, it just feels different to the fps-mishmash out there...
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:12:17 In reply to neptonI'm definately unhappy with the graphics, they talked about improving the sky in the other vidoc which just made me laugh. Hopefully Reach is on a brand new engine and will live up to expectations. As for ODST
...PREORDERED!
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:18:31 In reply to neptonIn the end it's good Halo is sticking to its roots, it gives an excellent alternative to the sea of shooters all scaled in the same shade of gray.
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:26:20I know people will say it'll kill the Halo formula et all, but I disagree. With those two added features, it will only improve the game. It's not like change has done the Halo MP any worse before (for example: going from Single -> Dual weapons). There's a lot more to Halo for those two features to ruine the game...I think even claiming such a thing is doing the franchise injustice. Halo MP is much more than that...
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:27:41
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:47:08
Commented on 2009-08-25 18:59:51
Commented on 2009-08-25 19:07:04 In reply to JatoAdding what you suggest opens up yet another can of worms. Killing multiple enemies in a row is an essential part of the Halo formula, I have yet to play a game that has been that satisfying in this regard. Shields in a way, are a substitute for sprinting and cover, you're durable enough to cross greater distances without the need of both. Also sprinting is only useful on a 2D plane but since elevation is a huge part of the Halo gameplay (one that I love the most) it would take away that emphasis.
What aiming down the sights adds to the game I don't know, you don't want to aim at close ranges since you either want to throw a grenade or punch the opponent, for long range you can aim with the scope of your pistol/sniper/BR.
Commented on 2009-08-25 19:21:57 In reply to Viginti_TresAlso, how does adding sprint or aiming down the sights not enable you to kill multiple enemies in a row? Don't quite get that. Aiming down the sights enhances immersion and offers better and more natural aiming imo. It just 'feels' much more satisfying. Sprinting in a Halo game makes perfect sense and could provide more gameplay elements like sprinting + jumping covers more height/distance which they could incorporate in the level design I.E: You have regenerating 'sprint stamina', and if you're out you can't escape on to that certain platform, whereas you could if you had preserved your 'sprint stamina'. It opens up other tactical elements to the game.
Like I said, I don't expect the Halo fanboys to be openminded on changes like this, so I'll leave it at that.
Commented on 2009-08-25 19:43:46To have any use for aiming down the sights the entire aiming model would have to change. and thats a VERY drastic change. Which would kill much of the run and gun nature of the game.
Plus, its a technological explanation for the lack of "ironsights" in Halo: The weapons sights are all smartlinked to the HUD in the helmet. Which, BTW, is far more functional than half my screen being blocked by the weapon when i'm zoomed.
FYI, sprinting was almost in Halo 2. But was scrapped. Said it resulted in people just tearing around the level in sprint. Which was not what they wanted.
Commented on 2009-08-25 19:54:04
Commented on 2009-08-25 20:00:55 In reply to RC_MasterI want Halo to evolve, and if that means less bunnyhopping and changing the aiming model...please!
Edit: Lol, I see the sensitive fanboys are already arriving. Time to leave this thread before I hurt their feelings...
Commented on 2009-08-25 20:08:10 In reply to Viginti_Tres
Commented on 2009-08-25 20:12:00 In reply to Jato
Commented on 2009-08-25 20:12:47
Commented on 2009-08-25 20:38:42
Commented on 2009-08-25 21:27:07 In reply to JatoThere is plenty to improve on Halo, I'm no fanatic, the kids on the Bungie forums are (every bit of slight critic is shot down at an instant). But these improvements are not to be made on the fundamental basis that is the core gameplay but aspects of the incorporation. The game features should be designed around a strong idea of how the game should play, not the other way around. That's why I'm strictly against adding features that don't follow that idea (like equipment for instance).
That's why the MLG playlist is my favourite. They cut everything that distracts you from the core gameplay and ad new ways to navigate through the map (one of the core aspects of a Halo game, imo). As a result you get a game that is very close to the idea behind Halo CE/2. Maybe it's just being puristic but that's my idea of Halo.