Remind me again why Reach was bad

#31MetaIGearRexPosted 12/2/2012 1:26:41 PM
NiMRODPi posted...
MetaIGearRex posted...
NiMRODPi posted...
If you couldn't handle bloom, you sucked with precision weapons. Pace the shot over distance and you win. Instead, Halo 4 is about who sees who first since the DMR has absurd aim assist. Frankly, I'll take bloom over this new easy mode DMR. Halo 4 is still fun as hell though.

Oh and if you're spamming DMR over short distance, you're playing the game wrong.


No. I can get people to miss a shot or two very often in mid to close range with a good strafe. Your just bad at Halo and making crap up.


Says the guy who can't handle Reach. I thought Reach was all "noob" friendly. And strafe miss a DMR at close range? Great, since DMR is a mid to long range weapon that is meaningless. Anyone can miss there. If you're that close you should be using boltshot or pistol.

Learn to play.








Yeah.... he just said that...
---
My sarcastic tone doesn't translate over the Internet, which makes me sound like an ass. Usually I mean no offense.
#32Brave_VesperiaPosted 12/2/2012 1:28:19 PM
I liked Reach's campaign a billion times more than Halo 4's but I prefer H4's multiplayer and maps over Reach (Although Id love a powerhouse and Sword Base remake).
---
Go Vancouver Canucks Go
Hockey meets Soccer/Football - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIC2u-S6_M8&feature=plcp
#33Demon SlicerPosted 12/2/2012 1:30:04 PM
danger_sHarKs posted...
I actually thought DMR bloom was a very good and clever mechanic. As opposed to H4 where it does sort of come down to who sees who first (ala CoD) in Reach both opponents have a fair chance even if one does get the first shot. Because bloom makes it more difficult to kill it required more skill, therefore Reach DMR's are much more interesting than H4 DMR's.

That's just my two cents.


God, no.

NiMRODPi posted...
If you couldn't handle bloom, you sucked with precision weapons. Pace the shot over distance and you win. Instead, Halo 4 is about who sees who first since the DMR has absurd aim assist. Frankly, I'll take bloom over this new easy mode DMR. Halo 4 is still fun as hell though.

Oh and if you're spamming DMR over short distance, you're playing the game wrong.


And no.
---
GT: Makes It Rayne
"Incendite tenebras mundi" - "Liberi Fatali"
#34Bigtymer113Posted 12/2/2012 1:32:05 PM
I actually thought DMR bloom was a very good and clever mechanic.

Lol
---
Poetic Justice
GT: Swizzy Dangles
#35danger_sHarKs(Topic Creator)Posted 12/2/2012 1:32:14 PM
Demon Slicer posted...
danger_sHarKs posted...
I actually thought DMR bloom was a very good and clever mechanic. As opposed to H4 where it does sort of come down to who sees who first (ala CoD) in Reach both opponents have a fair chance even if one does get the first shot. Because bloom makes it more difficult to kill it required more skill, therefore Reach DMR's are much more interesting than H4 DMR's.

That's just my two cents.


God, no.

NiMRODPi posted...
If you couldn't handle bloom, you sucked with precision weapons. Pace the shot over distance and you win. Instead, Halo 4 is about who sees who first since the DMR has absurd aim assist. Frankly, I'll take bloom over this new easy mode DMR. Halo 4 is still fun as hell though.

Oh and if you're spamming DMR over short distance, you're playing the game wrong.


And no.


Instead of just saying no, could you provide some counter-arguments?
#36Demon SlicerPosted 12/2/2012 1:32:15 PM
I feel like I've posted this 32907923 times but apparently people still don't get it so:

Precision weapons have one function that is inherent to their very nature; they are supposed to provide the player with a reliable weapon that demands and rewards accuracy. Bloom is the antithesis to both of these tenets; it reduces reliability and reduces accuracy.

But! You may scream; the weapon is perfectly accurate and reliable when you control the bloom. I agree, however, there is one major problem; shooting while bloomed does not ensure you will miss. In fact, shooting with slight bloom is preferable the majority of the time due to the rate of fire benefits. Suddenly, our precision weapon has neither precision nor reliability when used most effectively. At that point, it is no longer a precision weapon but it still rewards headshots, which are now almost completely random. The outcome of two players aiming exactly the same and shooting exactly the same is random, which is unacceptable for low damage precision weapon.

The role of bloom is to punish players for missing shots and spamming the trigger. The more you miss and spam, the less accurate your gun becomes. While this is a decent principle in general, it requires weapons that can kill quickly to operate properly. In Reach, bloom doesn't just punish missed shots, it punishes everyone because it is literally impossible to kill someone with the DMR or Pistol before bloom becomes a factor. What this means is that in every 1v1 encounter, bloom is going to be the determining factor; you either spam your shots and play the odds, or you pace your shots and risk the other player's odds. Either way, chance is what determines the outcome.

With such lengthy kill times and bloom playing such a central role, many players have fallen back on the argument that "controlling" bloom is a skill. Controlling the bloom is not so much a skill as it is a risk assessment and risk tolerance test; essentially risk management of a randomize outcome. A "skill" implies that you can increase your aptitude with experience and practice, which is simply not the case with bloom. Because of the inverse relationship between accuracy and rate of fire, you will never be able to rely on non-random elements in a firefight. As I pointed out earlier, even if you pace your shots completely, the enemy may choose to spam: chance enters the equation. Unless both players begin shooting at the exact same moment, it will always be beneficial for one player to spam.

There is no "perfect" bloom level that a player can fully rely on; if you choose to shoot at a medium pace to marginalize the effects of bloom, someone could choose to shoot at a rapid pace and beat you. There is nothing you can do to change that. That is not skill, its accepting a certain amount of randomization. That is never good for a competitive title and is unacceptable for the primary utility weapon.

Regardless, let's pretend it is a skill. Does that mean that the skill value of controlling bloom is greater than the skill of controlling precision shots? The punishment for mismanaging bloom is not as severe as it is for missing a shot; mismanaged bloom, no matter how extreme, still gives the player a chance to win the fight. Missing a shot with a true precision weapon leaves no chance in the equation. If controlling bloom is a skill, it's a secondary skill at best because you can never master it to such a degree that you can fully rely on it.

Not only does bloom destroy the basic function of Reach's precision weapons, it encourages players to bring random chance into every battle. While bloom isn't inherently unacceptable, it is when you combine it with the kill speed of the DMR and Pistol. Random chance should never be a fundamental aspect of Halo's utility weapon.
---
GT: Makes It Rayne
"Incendite tenebras mundi" - "Liberi Fatali"
#37LugovesPosted 12/2/2012 1:33:44 PM
I thought Reach was one of the best Halo games. Never been that hard core of a Halo fan but I loved Reach.

Recently picked up the other Halo games after playing 4 and 3 has been pretty cool so far too.
---
"I want to see more of Lugoves' posts. That *%$# cracks me up." - mrvercetti
#38iRGushPosted 12/2/2012 1:44:33 PM
I didn't like all armour abilities, movement speed, jump height, bloom, majority of the maps, melee ties, no bleedthrough, strafe response. and a ranking system.

Other than that, I thought it was a pretty solid game.
---
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.
#39yomamma297Posted 12/2/2012 1:49:29 PM
iRGush posted...
I didn't like all armour abilities, movement speed, jump height, bloom, majority of the maps, melee ties, no bleedthrough, strafe response. and a ranking system.

Other than that, I thought it was a pretty solid game.


Pretty much this. Reach wasn't a bad game compared to the average game out there. It fell well short of Halo standards though and was a bad Halo game.
---
Go Dolphins, Heat and Marlins!
GT: shock297
#40Blue-AdeptPosted 12/2/2012 2:12:08 PM
gray forge world matchmaking