VivaLebowski

Since the Banshee has pretty much been confirmed to be in H4 by its presense in some of the latest concept art, I figured I'd make this poll beacuse the banshee is near and dear to so many people, including myself. I thought the H3 Banshee was both more balanced and more powerfull and much preferred that, also felt that it looked allot cooler so I'm glad to see them going back to the H3 style in the concept art.

But this would be a pretty expansive feature...something which would take at least as much time as a large MP map to build and program. 343 can't afford to put time into something which is only a "choice".

Ayah, anyone else have info on this. One tentative reply does not a confirmation make...

This stuff makes me laugh though. I love how their is actually an award for making sh!tty posts. Congratz to the OP.

I dont neccasarily want a carbon copy of H3's system, but there should at least be some sort of ranking that raises up people with higher skill rather thn just credits accumulated. The levels within ranks should be based on Credit, and their should be Credit thresholds to cross for qualifying for promotion BUT at least from Colonol on or so, ranks should be also dependant on Skill. Your both pointless.

Now lets be real here...if they did something which was a true travesty, you could have good reason to boycott the game. The OP's wrong of course BUT, just playing devils advocate here.

Epic ness is loch ness's older brother. They dont talk much. Epic is off saving the world and loch is staying at home at scotland trying to convince foolish tourists that he has a dinosaur inside him. I do not know what to say when confronted by threads like this.

The Dark Knight Rises is Halo 4's viral campaign.

It sounds good but you gotta remember...who wants to play a video game to play a video game? Having to waste time and mental energy walking a character from Main Menu Room A to Spartan Ops Room B would get pretty damn annoying by the third or fourth time.

Your profile pic. It makes me want to kill myself.

Me thinks if you try to overthink and rationalize this whole training simulation thing, your just gonna end up realizing "hey, this really doesnt make any more sense than just having Red and Blue for no reason". The point of it isnt to make sense.

I want them all to speak in Ebonics. I want to see an Elite come up behind a Spartan and go "Sup n!gga" then stab the sh!t out of him. But seriously, they should have them speaking in Alien but with subtitles.

The op was asking a question which you wouldnt neccasarily get answered looking at the top of the Forge topic. Banning threads related to Forge beacuse their is an official forge topic would be ridiculous, considering the expansive nature of Forge. What if, hypothetically, the OP doesnt like the direction the conversation is currently at?

343 should have spent time making enemies and topography forgeable in Halo 4 instead of Spartan Ops. Throw in Forgeable music, ability to weave movies in to forge custom maps/missions, large selection of sky boxes, and some text based narration and objective markers and BOOM. 343 can just rely on the Community to make all the Missions they want.

The design choice with the Elites probably came from them reverting to a more pre-covenant design. The races of the post war covenant probably have allot more autonomy now so they are doing their own thing. I just like how the covenant are more ugly, more alien and more badass looking all at the same time.

I disagree with the OP, just wanna make the point...change is not what made Halo great. Halo's initial vision was what made it great and going to Halo 2 and Halo 3 just upgraded and expanded the vision. Not changing it. It was a matter of innovating and introducing new elements in a world where these elements did not formerly exist...not changing the basic gameplay formula from game to game. The bottom line is 343's changes are a big change to that, the old style of Halo just went out the window, and while the next iteration might be Halo and it might have a whole lot in common with previous iterations, it is going to be a whole new experience. This isn't to say change is bad. Change is neither. What 343 is doing here is a change and that is neither a good nor a bad thing by itself. It depends on what the change is. The loadouts are indeed a blow to the uber competitive Halo community beacuse the game is no longer exactly symettrical BUT most Halo players are not part of that community , nor is that Community the biggest player, financially speaking. Personally, I don't give a damn what they want...I want a game which is fun first and foremost. Doesnt matter how competitive it is. If loadouts ruin that, well I'll have something in common with the super competitive types. If not, they can play another game.

It turning out that allot of the Forerunners are really, really bad would be more interesting to me. They've stayed at the fringes of the story being these pseudo-devine, but pretty much good (since they are fighting the flood) guys for too long. It would be interesting if it turns out they started trying to exterminate themselves along with the Flood. And no one lecture me on the book. Please.

In other games where you have aiming down the sights and a greater focus on recoil, accuracy, etc. you need prone for the greater accuracy. Halo does not have "aiming down the sights" in the sense that COD or BF do and does not need prone as a result.

I always played as an Elite in H3. I always preferred playing as Elites in Reach. Being an elite is something near and dear to me. But this is not a "Oh, dont buy the game beacuse of this!" big deal. If your not going to buy the game over a cosmetic thing like this, albeit a large and influential cosmetic thing but cosmetic nontheless, thats your problem. Id be allot more inclined to support a strong move to get Elites in H4 if Elite players didnt act so crazy about it.

The title pretty much says it all. Anyone know?

Looking forward to the reveal of whatever Elite content they have planned considering I play Elite whenever possible, very happy to hear Jen Taylor is returning, the default map loadout is a classy and well thought out move, very very happy to hear that they plan on changing the names of Spartan Ops and what not. All in all, the info here really helped calm my nerves. Props to 343 for the info and Adam for the excellent post.

Can I haz a link?

You mean all those arguments in your previous post dependent on the assumption that I was rejecting the existence of subjectivity? Saying anything can be classified as a thing is a bit like saying any Human can be classified as a Human. Thanks for the obvious. Safe to say, a thing is a thing no matter how when and why we classify or do not classify it as such. How was I supposed to know that you are going to interpret "thing", in the context of a point about tangible external objective reality, as including an intangible internal phenomenon. Your argument in a nutshell: Your thoughts are jumbled, don't blame me if your stupid. Your just trying to make up for something stupid you said previously because its making you lose this argument. Truly, an objective argument if ever I've heard one. I'm not the one who is talking about forgiving others...*ahem* lack of objectivity. Oh, God forbid, I said you didn't know something! Oh man, I might actually suggest that I think your wrong next. What a proud @sshole I must be, huh? But, if, hypothetically, if I was to talk down about someone who I intervened in an argument on the behalf of, and start talking about how "I'm going to forgive your lack of objectivity". Oh no, that's not condescending at all. And this totally isnt sarcasm. Straw man: Misrepresenting an opponents positions and trying to make points against those misrepresented positions. You: Have you accepted that subjectivity exists? But, heres the bottom line: This argument is going nowhere and spiraling off into incoherency. I'll blame both of us hows that? So I;; try to get it on track: My basic point is that our opinions are subjective but objective reality is not. You pointed out that arguing against this guy is pointless because everything on here is subjective. I disagree with that because this guy is defying any objective standard. He's going against more than common sense. And there's nothing wrong with point that out, and also that he/she/it is being rather melodramatic. Our respective opinions are subjective BUT because they are contradictory, either we are both wrong or one of us is right and one of is wrong. There are arguments which do not necessarily have that feature but this is not that argument. Opinions can be and usually are either right or wrong. There is such a thing as undeniable, rock solid, reality...the OP either overreacted or he did not. He cannot have both overreacted and not at the same time. He either did or he didn't. There is nothing subjective about that tangible reality. If you disagree with any of that, than please, argue with that instead of us getting tied down in semantics. Otherwise, we really don't disagree and one of us has misunderstood the other.

@Zl Malificient Where did I ever say that "subjectivity" does not exist? Where did I specifically say that? I just reread my arguments, so I want a ******* quote! I said "things aren't subjective" because "things" (meaning tangible reality) are exactly what they are. I never said that arguments and opinions aren't subjective. Subjectivity simply refers to how we view reality. Maybe if you want to include arguments and opinions as "things" in themselves (which they sorta, kinda are) you can say that a very very small caveat of "things" are subjective, but I was not thinking in those terms, and if you thought I wasn't you are the one who "misunderstood". Only an idiot would say that arguments and opinions are not subjective, because, as said before our perception is subjective. Subjectivity is not a real world phenomenon like gravity to be observed in nature...as I said, things are exactly what they are, quite independent of our silly perceptions of them. Saying subjectivity does not exist would be as stupid as saying disagreements do not exist...of course disagreements do not exist in nature in the respect that, for example, Transformers 2 was both a good and a bad movie. The movie might be good, it might be bad, or maybe its neither, but it cannot be two contradictory things at the same time..BUT people HAVE disagreements. Likewise Subjectivity exists. A cannot Contradict B, and both A and B be true at the same time, that's not possible. But obviously, I can think A and someone else can think B, so the "subjectivity" exists in the same sense that our "disagreement" exists. I would never say "subjectivity" does not exist, and I never did! Perhaps you misunderstand what I've been saying because you don't realize that there's a difference between what WE THINK and what ACTUALLY IS. You misunderstood what I was saying, not the other way round, so don't start patting yourself on the back over concessions which I never made. Asking me if I've accepted "Subjectivity" exists is like me asking you if you have accepted "Hitler" was bad. You never said Hitler was good, and I never said subjectivity does not exist. And to think you accused me of using a straw man argument! Your entire last post was one colossal straw man argument! Ps. Though in all seriousness, isn't this truthfully a more interesting and rewarding discussion than any one we could be having about video games. Keep the philosophy coming my friend!

They should avoid just trying to make the Forerunner weapons fill traditional niches like "Sniper" and "BR". The Forerunners are Ancient, Alien, and Superpowerfull, moreso than the Covenant. No reason to think they would have the same arsenal as the Humans, so why not get a little bit more creative than redundant retreads of "Here's a semi-automatic pistol", "here's an assault rifle", "here's a long range weapon".