"We hired people who hated Halo"

#81Johnny_Jon_117Posted 4/28/2013 5:01:39 AM
SterlingFox posted...
Johnny_Jon_117 posted...
Having read that article I can say that I'm a little surprised that 343i did that but in the end of the day it's better to do something different than to do the same thing. 343i didn't wanted to be in Bungie's shadow and wanted to make their own halo stand out and it did. Hopefully they will really improve when halo 5 comes out on the new xbox.


Its okay that they tried something different, the real problem is that they tried too much that was different. People like gradual change, or change for the better. What 343 did was change Halo for the sake of changing it, not for the sake of making it better.

They should have done a few changes first (Keeping the formula largely the same as past Halo games) to see if they were well received. Then put some of their other changes into a few playlists to see how they were received so then they could remove it or fine tune it if need be.
But instead what they did is go "Hell with the fans, all in!" and slap everybody in the face with their big list of changes. They were cocky and arrogant, and took a big risk thinking that they were the **** and Halo would sell itself either way. Turns out they were wrong and their risk backfired, because they lost hundreds of thousands of players very quickly.

I'd like to think that one of the reasons why they put all the big changes was because they REALLY wanted to make their own version of halo. There are some bad elements in the game and trust me when I say this I was surprised in a bad way when I read that article. I think it's completely weird to hire programmers who don't even like halo but like my last post it's better to try to make a different iteration than to make the same. The complaints would've been "it's the same game" kinda like the complaints call of duty be getting. Like I said 343i really, really has to improve and has to carefully listen to what the fans are saying because if something like this happen to halo 5 we might not even make it to halo 6.
---
Every game is overrated because the Internet hates everything and wants anything that's going up to go down. Like a true villain.
#82Coca-ColaPosted 4/28/2013 5:04:02 AM
Reminds me of when Mel Gibson got Homer Simpsons help to "fix" his movie
---
Signature
#83JaidabeccaPosted 4/28/2013 9:00:03 AM
Omniphagos posted...
Jaidabecca posted...
Now look at HALO: CE, it comes pretty much out of nowhere & becomes a huge, console-selling hit that made console FPS games a more viable possibility with it's well-mapped control scheme, insanely addicting gameplay & linear-yet-replayable single player game.


Am I the only one who still considered Goldeneye the first FPS that made the genre viable for consoles? everything you stated about Halo 1 can easily be said about Goldeneye and that game came out way before Halo ever did.


Well, Goldeneye was a good game with a some-what fun multiplayer but the controls sucked balls & it wasn't really a console-seller like HALO:CE was. I never played the campaign because at the time Goldeneye came out in '97 I was busy playing Super Mario 64, Mario Kart 64, & Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire. On top of the fact that I never owned Goldeneye, the only time I played it was at my friend's house & that was a rare occasion since if we weren't playing Goldeneye he was playing FFVII & I was outside playing Baseball.

Either way, Goldeneye was good but not great like HALO:CE was & the way I see it my comparison between the progression of both RE & HALO still stands.
---
RE4, REmake, HALO 1 & 3, & other videos here v
http://www.youtube.com/user/Jaidabecca
#84Private_NoobPosted 4/28/2013 9:55:26 AM
No wonder CoD is the industry-consuming cancer it is right now.
---
Arceus: "It's time to bring Humanity to JUSTICE!"
Haggard: "Oh yeah? Says YOU and what army?"
#85DvoloS88Posted 4/28/2013 10:07:19 AM
ema0093 posted...
DvoloS88 posted...
Maybe they just hated the same "grab the power weapon own the match" type of game play and thought hey! this is a fourth sequel lets try some new things out? Seriously people if you hate halo 4 and 343i that much STOP TALKING ABOUT IT OR THEM find a new hobby, yall are the most whiny negative kids on this site. Yes the whole site get off bungies d***, they started taking the "skill out of halo" the minute they introduced AAs like the jet pack and armour lock. Not to mention they did load outs first as well.


You should have stopped that post after the first sentence. I was agreeing with you until you starting antagonizing people.

They tried something different, and it was okay for their first attempt. As a fan who has been playing the game since the original back in 2001, I wasn't quite fond of all the changes they made. I'm not saying change is bad, I quite liked Reach, despite all of its differences and innovations, except for armor lock and jetpack. This was because armor lock ruined the pacing of the game, and the jetpack made map control a pointless endeavor, because they could just flank you... from above, which is problematic on a console shooter, as its easier to deal with threats on the X axis as opposed to the Y axis. Other than that, I thought Reach was a solid experience.

To me, I still enjoy Halo 4, but it feels a bit like a watered down Reach. The most fun I've had so far was on the Majestic maps, but they only had that playlist out for about a month, which is a little disheartening. If they're going to borrow from Call of Duty, they may as well include premium playlists, where you can only play if you have the DLC.

Sorry for the wall of text.


Antagonizing people? Do you read the s*** thats comes from some of these people? OP is one of the many trolls who every post bashes this game and 343i while completely trolling anyone who wants to come here and like this game. Hence my sig, you cant post one positive thing about this game on this ridiculous site with out the same group of little kids circle jerking each other making you want to rage.
Not to mention most of them accuse 343 of taking the skill out of halo as if bungie did not.
---
I troll the trolls...
#86That1GuyyPosted 4/28/2013 10:12:50 AM
You to can post positive things about this game if you want. Everyone has their own opinion. But if you post things that are factually wrong, expect to be called on it. Like saying the AR takes more skill than the precision weapons. Or saying that power weapons guarantee victory. Or saying that there isn't anything suspect about this game's population falling so quickly.
---
Perfection. Where everyone fails.
If you expect nothing you can be happy for everything.
#87AurawhispererPosted 4/28/2013 10:20:09 AM(edited)
And the AR hardly takes skill is the ironic part. Its fixed aim, making it the easiest weapon to handle.

I run through 20 foes a game with it; more times than a precision weapon. If you think the AR takes skill, then you must've NEVER played battlefield 3
---
It's funny how so many immature imbeciles on here try hard hating me. You think I care, yet I don't.
Try harder kid. You amuse me :)
#88DvoloS88Posted 4/28/2013 10:27:09 AM
Aurawhisperer posted...
And the AR hardly takes skill is the ironic part. Its fixed aim, making it the easiest weapon to handle.

I run through 20 foes a game with it; more times than a precision weapon. If you think the AR takes skill, then you must've NEVER played battlefield 3


Ar takes more skill than the Dmr unless of course your inside shotgun range. Does the Ar have red reticle aim assist that reaches across maps or bullet magnesium that auto head shots at times when your clearly aiming at the chest? Exactly.
---
I troll the trolls...
#89That1GuyyPosted 4/28/2013 10:58:38 AM
You have to consider more than just your effective range with the weapon to determine how much skill it takes.

Do you have to aim for the head with the AR? No. You aim center mass, which is significantly easier. Do you have to strafe to avoid getting headshotted if your opponent has an AR? No. Strafe or not, you get hit the same due to the AR's high spread and rate of fire. If your opponent has an AR, do you have to stick to cover when crossing the map? No, because he can't hit you.

Precision vs precision takes far more skill than AR vs AR.
---
Perfection. Where everyone fails.
If you expect nothing you can be happy for everything.
#90JaidabeccaPosted 4/28/2013 11:11:43 AM
That1Guyy posted...
You have to consider more than just your effective range with the weapon to determine how much skill it takes.

Do you have to aim for the head with the AR? No. You aim center mass, which is significantly easier. Do you have to strafe to avoid getting headshotted if your opponent has an AR? No. Strafe or not, you get hit the same due to the AR's high spread and rate of fire. If your opponent has an AR, do you have to stick to cover when crossing the map? No, because he can't hit you.

Precision vs precision takes far more skill than AR vs AR.


You're wasting your time trying to explain skill-based things to Dvollo considering she prefers H4 over better, more skill-based HALO games(ie ALL of them).
---
RE4, REmake, HALO 1 & 3, & other videos here v
http://www.youtube.com/user/Jaidabecca