Vamphaery

This isn't exactly a new phenomenon. If you've ever been a longtime member of any gaming community (I know I'm new HERE, but I've been around... and I've lurked here a very long time) you should know that this kind of divisive trolling happens virtually everywhere. People on the internet seem to go into this strange mental space. Some attribute it to the anonymity. Others attribute it to people's ages, but I have my doubts about the latter. In any case, yes, both "sides" of the debate should really refrain from being so hostile and belligerent in the expression of their opinions. If, like me, you enjoy the game... just say so and move on. Don't tell people who don't like it that they're wrong. Understand that they love Halo as much as you do, and that for them this game is a massive disappointment. Think back to times when you've had a beloved franchise butchered from your perspective, and how crappy that felt. Have some empathy. And likewise, if you despise the game, don't go around telling people who love it that they're in denial or stupid or don't know anything about the series. Just accept that not everyone experiences the game the way you did. Continue to voice your criticisms in constructive ways and hopefully someone somewhere will hear them and do something that comes closer to satisfying everyone, yourselves included.

As I keep saying, some people will loathe the game, some will love it, and some will find it "just okay." Trying to establish an objective quality for something predicated on how much someone enjoys it, which is totally subjective, is very difficult and arguably impossible. People have every right to complain about the game if they were disappointed by it. I wasn't personally, but that's me. If you love something, and someone else takes custodianship of it, and they disappoint you, you have a right to complain imo.

People talk about how unbalanced the game is and how OP everything is, how weak and useless vehicles are, that the Mantis can't be used effectively, etc. and then someone else comes online and posts a video like this: How is it that for some people the game is awesome, well balanced, and versatile, whereas for others it's virtually unplayable? Could it be that everyone is a little different and the reality of the game is somewhat more subjective than people would like to believe? Either way... what I do when I consistently lose at a game like Halo 4 is this. I either play until I get better, or I just satisfy myself with leveling up as far as I can and then go back to campaign co-op or a mode like Spartan Ops. It's not life or death that I become proficient at a multiplayer shooter. But that's me. I'm not a particularly competitive individual, so... Is it really worth everyone constantly arguing about it?Can we not simply accept that some people are severely disappointed by the game, and that they have a right to say so, but that others also thoroughly enjoy it?

It will reset at midnight in your time zone.

Oh, no. The ending was amazing. I think most people (except for those who have said they wish there was a final battle rather than what essentially amounted to a QTE) liked the ending. It's just...

Vamphaery uses Hope Attack on Cortana Lover It's super effective! P.S. The ending genuinely affected me on some deep, profound level too. Something a game has never quite done to this degree. Probably because, while I wasn't as young as you when Halo CE came out (I was about 19 or 20,) I was young enough that my life was totally different then, and the Halo series is one of the few constants that has evolved with me through the course of my adult life. And for it to change so radically really kicked off some sort of realization of how much my own life has changed, and it made me deeply depressed for a day or two there.

I agree. The only complaints I have about the game as a whole currently are what you mention, and maybe the lack of larger maps for BTB. And the return of some game types that are gone, as well as just MORE playlists would also be nice. But their absence isn't game-ruining for me. It would just be really nice and make the game feel more complete.

Even Halo 3 terminals make reference to the Librarian and the Didact. Halo 4 itself explains who the Promethians are and their origin during a cutscene... one of the most important cutscenes in the game. The idea of Chief being a "reclaimer" and what that means has been hinted at in virtually every previous game in some form. Much more detail can be found in Halo 4's terminals. Just because the game (and the other games) doesn't spell it out point blank at all times, doesn't mean the answers you seek aren't there. And as others have said, while not strictly necessary, the novels do fill in A LOT of the blanks as well.

If she ends up as "part of MC's being" I will cry. In a good way. Man I'm such an overemotional dork lol.

I don't believe it's trying to be CoD. I do wish it had more game types, larger BTB maps, separate social and ranked playlists, and more playlists in general. But I don't believe it's trying to be CoD.

I think the rebellion has left them weakened, and with the Prophets' deluding influence removed, they are probably undergoing a lot of restructuring and internal change. I wouldn't be surprised if they become resurgent or a rival to humanity to "assume the mantle" that the Forerunners have held to date. It might even bring them back into conflict. We have yet to see a true, full on invasion of Earth and a desperate resistance against them happen in any Halo game. It was teased in 2, and in 3 there is a much more prominent presence, but their incursions on Earth proper were mostly localized. I would love to see, after this trilogy ends perhaps, a resurgent and less friendly Covenant actually occupy Earth, and have a human resistance fighting against them led by MC.

After every game's release, the same thing happens. There are two possibilities. 1) The disappointment and anger are reflective of a broader consensus of customers throughout the world. 2) The disappointment and anger are reflective of a vocal minority. Which one is the case will not be borne out until a month or two pass and either the online community dwindles, or it remains strong and full of dedicated players. Online petitions, form postings, etc. aren't valid ways of establishing what the consensus is, because only a fraction of all customers ever post online about the games they buy. It's easy to assume that the way things look online reflect the overall reality, but in fact this is "fog of war" thinking. I say if you hate the game, say so and why. And if you love it, enjoy it. I'm not perturbed by people having opinions.

http://www.343industries.org/forum/topic/16665-did-you-like-halo-4-official-thread/

Fairest and most well supported review I've read.

If you guys have been gaming since at least the second Halo - which I would speculate is the case since the criticism of the game is predicated upon comparisons to past games' multiplayer - and probably longer, then you should be old enough, experienced enough, and knowledgeable enough to be fully aware by now that a small sampling on a passionate forum compared to hundreds of thousands of customers from all across the gaming spectrum is in no way statistically significant or reflective of any sort of true consensus. In fact, even if you took every member of every populated hardcore Halo fan community on the entire web, you wouldn't necessarily be able to get a statistically significant sampling reflective of the majority of Halo 4 players throughout the world. This is what is known as "fog of war". It is what happens when people only see what they have access to, and draw conclusions about the larger reality based on limited information or a limited perspective. There are more people playing Halo 4 than can be reflected by a passionate minority populating internet message boards. As I have always maintained and always will maintain, everyone has the right to their opinion on the game (and everything else.) No one should be censored or shouted down or stopped from criticizing a game they found woefully disappointing. Especially not one that's a part of a franchise as beloved by so many as Halo. And no, I'm not saying that if a proper study or survey of players was conducted it wouldn't necessarily show the same results. But seeking to cast the opinions of a small minority as being reflective or a broader consensus is simply not consistent with the reality unless it can be proved by a statistically valid sampling of a far larger and more diverse range of respondents. In short, you don't (and can't) know what the broadest consensus is right now. Just saying.

I like most of them (or just don't care one way or the other.) But I do wish there were more large maps for BTB, more varied playlists, separate ranked and social playlists, and more game types. I don't have any issue whatsoever with the implementation, balance, etc. I didn't buy the game to have an identical experience to previous games. And I have never felt that it "has become CoD." It does feel incomplete without that functionality to me, though.

What can I say, cbr? I didn't feel the way you did about it. You are entitled to feel however you do.

As always, this is just an opinion. Feel free to disagree. Halo 4 does not strike me as being particularly CoD-like, despite the near constant refrains to the contrary. A game would have to do a lot more than add instant respawns and give me loadouts to feel like CoD, a game I've never particularly cared for personally. Halo 4 feels nowhere near as arcadey as CoD. (Though, despite what many hardcore Halo aficionados feel, I do think it's more on the arcadey end of the spectrum than many online shooters, and always has been. It's not ARMA or something... but it's also not Quake or CoD. There's a little more complexity and uniqueness to Halo than those games in my opinion.) Deaths don't feel as cheap as they do in CoD to me. Loadouts and specializations, while definitely significant, don't feel anywhere near as decisive in matches as in CoD. New players don't seem anywhere near as outmatched by a specialized, optimized player as they would in CoD generally. Maps don't feel as cramped (or in the case of their larger maps, scattered) as CoD. Just because something exists in CoD or was popularized by CoD does not render it automatically anathema to me. I am not a fan of CoD, but I will not deny that there are what I consider rational reasons why some of its mechanics have increasingly become industry standard. Specialization and loadout adds granularity to games that would be more cut and dried otherwise, or would be limited to aesthetic customization options to make a player feel unique. It makes sense to me that they would be included. Instant respawns don't feel like a bad thing to me. Maybe I'm crazy, but I want to get back into the game as quickly as possible once I die. And they apply equally to everyone, so I don't feel that they unbalance the game as much as others seem to. And perhaps most importantly if you're a fan of the universe and the fiction, Halo 4 has (to me) a satisfying, substantive single player (and co-op) campaign. I know a lot of people disagree, but that's how I feel about it. The irony here, at least to my thinking, is that the insistence on keeping things as they were (no instant respawns, no loadouts and specializations, etc.) and the vitriol exhibited toward any change to what we had before (which is everyone's prerogative, don't get me wrong; you have the right to an opinion,) is exactly the kind of response that makes developers think to themselves, "Well we know this works, so we better not change it or we risk losing sales." And that's exactly what CoD seems to do consistently. They may make some marginal tweaks here and there, but ultimately it's tried and true with a fresh coat of paint. Which is fine, if that's your thing. I'm just sayin'. Anyway. Just my two cents. I am not going to argue about it.

I miss the iconic themes we're used to. But I think the campaign was well served by a thematic break from what has come before musically.

I wouldn't say everyone can agree on that point. I don't, for one. I thought the ending and the final segment (I agree it can't be called a battle) were epic and appropriate. The level before that interactive scene was the battle to me. I didn't need a cliched boss fight to feel satisfied. And the campaign doesn't feel short to me. It feels roughly comparable to the previous games, give or take an hour here or there. That's just my subjective impression, though. You are free to disagree.

Was it a complaint someone else had already made? There are rules against duplicate and redundant (cluttering) topics.

You can see my reasons in the pinned "Did you like Halo 4 Official Topic" topic at the top of the forum. A topic which is also full of a lot of criticism of the game.

While no game is perfect and I do think many of the criticisms are more than fair, the game is overall a very worthy successor to Halo 3 in my opinion. Much better than I expected based on some people’s very vocal concerns. I’m one of those Halo players who loved CE, was disappointed by 2 at the time (but in retrospect I think it was a huge leap forward, especially for its time and for the hardware it was on,) thought 3 was a near perfect synthesis of the two and had some of the most enjoyable and well rounded multiplayer of any game released on a console to date, didn’t enjoy ODST, and only thought Reach was “okay.” I have no exclusive loyalty to Bungie, and in fact felt that they seemed pretty burned out (not in terms of poor development, but personally) after years of making nothing but Halo, so I am happy to see someone else take the reigns. And I welcome some modicum of change, as long as the heart is there. And for me, by my standards, it’s there and then some. They ALMOST completely nailed it, in terms of what I wanted. More than close enough for my money. Campaign: I don’t agree that it’s devastatingly shorter than previous games. It feels just as middle of the road in length as just about every Halo campaign has ever felt to me. I don’t agree that the game is too easy. I think the standard difficulty has been bumped up by my standards (perhaps I simply suck - that’s not for me to decide, I just play the game,) and on higher difficulties replaying with friends to find skulls and terminals should be the same blast it always was in previous games. The levels feel a lot more tactical and open than any Halo since CE imo. That’s what I’ve always wanted a lot more of from Halo, and 4 delivers this. Though I still want it to be EVEN MORE open. Not open world open, but more options. More opportunities for AI emergent behavior on the battlefield. That’s one complaint I do have. I miss the marines and covenant going at it more emergently, jacking each other’s vehicles, cracking hilarious one liners, etc. That’s the only part of the Halo spirit that wasn’t nailed by this campaign imo. It happens, but not nearly enough. And with that, I also miss the "wort wort wort" and the "WAAAAAaaaaaah" from 'nade elite kills. But at the same time, the more serious tone serves the tension of the narrative well. Oh, and as another poster mentioned, weapon drops don't seem persistent enough. They vanish quickly, eliminating that Halo classic ability to backtrack to a weapon you know was laying a whole level back because you're out of ammo. Of course, the ammo and weapon pacing is good enough that it isn't really necessary imo. That said, it’s still my favorite campaign since CE. Story (and the ending): Wow. 343i has given me one of the most moving stories I’ve experienced in 26 years of gaming for my money. What more can I say? Standing ovation on this front from me. Jen Taylor should win an Oscar. No other game has come close to making me this emotional. Games have moved me, made me think, and engrossed me in their world and characters. VERY FEW have made me outright cry. This is one of them. Graphics: I don’t agree that they look in any way worse than Halo 3 or its successors. It may be, to my eyes, the prettiest game ever released on 360. They have clearly pushed the hardware to its absolute limit and used every trick possible to get it to look this good, at least in my mind. There may be one or two isolated nitpicks to be made, but graphical presentation is about a cumulative effect, and cumulatively Halo 4 leaves me awestruck visually. Multiplayer Pros: Instant respawn. Yes, I said it. I know those of us used to previous Halo games really liked for people to stay dead longer. For several reasons. But at the end of the day, this is a game, it’s meant to be played, and I want to get back to doing so as quickly as possible. I don’t feel it unbalances the game because everyone respawns at the same rate. Any advantage or disadvantage conveyed is applicable to all players and both teams. Loadouts. Yes, I said that too. No, I’m not a COD fan. I can’t even remember the last COD I actually enjoyed. It’s been that long since I played one I felt any compelling reason to stick with. But perks and specializations are not inherently bad in my book. Just because it’s something COD does, does not make it satan incarnate. Specializations and perks are a largely industry standard feature in games now, especially games with competitive multiplayer, and finding a niche and playstyle that works best for me makes multiplayer feel more like a gradual evolution that I’m working towards rather than just a number or an aesthetic modification as a reward for all my efforts. I understand why it’s controversial. I like it. I do not feel that it makes the game unfair, because of the... XP cap. While initially annoying, I like that I don’t have to play for hours upon hours each day - even though I probably will anyway - in order to make as much progress as I can. And it staggers progression so that late adopters won’t be too far behind necessarily (although in practice they probably will be.) Either way leveling up in the game doesn’t feel like an insurmountable time sink, so I don’t think any disadvantage suffered by non-specialized characters will seriously hurt balance in the long run. We’ll all get there in fairly short order, with relatively minor effort. Spartan Ops: No, it’s no firefight. But I like the feel of a co-op mode other than the campaign that still has some lore as its basis. It feels like it matters more, and it’s one of the reasons leveling up to specialization isn’t going to be that big of a deal to me. Look and feel: I don’t agree that the game looks and feels totally unlike Halo now. It has the same general Halo aesthetic to my eyes, and it still feels like a Halo battle is raging. I don’t agree that the weapons are unbalanced. They all have their purpose, though some are just there for variety despite having some redundancy. That’s not a bad thing inherently, either imo. I like the weapons, frankly. It doesn’t feel that foreign to me after playing a good deal of Halo 3 BTB back in the day. It’s DIFFERENT, yes, but it kind of had to be in my opinion. I didn’t buy a new game just to play the same thing with shinier graphics and a few new features. It still looks and feels like a Halo match to me. Multiplayer Cons: Not enough maps for game types. I know there will be DLC, but there should have been more out of the box imo. No ranked matchmaking. I know this is being added, but like the maps, it should have been present out of the box. Not enough match type variety. There are some game types I dearly miss. No separate social and ranked games. This is pretty essential, because one of the largest sources of criticism of the game and inability for some players to play it and enjoy it, is going to come from serious players and teams having to play with more casual players. Both styles of play are valid, and the game needs to cater to them without forcing them together imo. Needs larger maps for BTB. Multiplayer in general: While MP isn’t perfect, it’s still FUN and that’s what counts in my book. And it still feels like Halo. And I LIKE the changes (though I understand why others do not.) Just not the omissions. It’s extremely well executed by my standards, but incomplete. Game in general: for me, I’m just being honest... the game really is a 8 or 9 out of 10 for me. It’s not completely filled in in all the right places, but it very nearly is. It’s not lacking THAT MUCH of what I want, and what is here is absolutely amazing by my standards. This is just one person’s opinion. Feel free to totally disagree. You’ll get no fight from me. I encourage constructive criticism of any game, especially one that is part of a franchise so widely loved and as storied as this one. But I’m loving Halo 4. The best thing I can say about it is this. Halo 3 was my first foray into HD. I bought my first HDTV for it. I bought a 360 for it initially. It was my first initiation into online gaming (on a console) as well, as I had never had high speed internet before that due to my area sucking. It was one of the most amazing, eye opening, mind blowing gaming experiences I had ever had. And all these years later, Halo 4 feels ALMOST as polished and exciting by my standards today, even after every amazing game I’ve played since then. And it feels like a natural progression from what Bungie started 11 years ago. For 11 years I’ve played and loved these games, and now they are continuing, and it feels great. It doesn’t feel like the total departure or the failure many feared to me whatsoever. That’s all I can say.

I agree with Mark Henry. The game is fun as is personally, but these additions would be icing. Much appreciated icing.

Ah, now I remember why I left GameFAQs and other online gaming communities. The whole, "if you don't agree with my opinion you're just in denial" thing. It's a game. People are going to have differing takes on it. They're not deluding themselves if they genuinely enjoy the game. And they're not butthurt if they legitimately disliked it. The problem arises when the whole "my opinion is fact" thing arises. Which is why I literally DREAD participating in these communities these days.