snqrls

as much as i like the idea of a mech battle, it would be rather limited.

Try solo-heroic. You get to fight 2-3 generals at a time with dozens of elites and several fuelrod guns and swords, and have them rush you... all the time. And that's not to mention the wraiths and promethean knights that chase you down.

just fyi, it's harder to rank a team objective playlist, and with no leaving penalties, and join in progress, people will tend to quit the ones they don't want to play. Overall it's a bad idea to put them all together, especially when they're unique enough to be seperate.

know what's sad... this **** could have been easily prevented, but it wasn't.

im not good enough to know which sort of snipe I am yet.

actually, most of the mistakes/complaints on his list have either been tactfully handled in past titles, or are not as extensive. For instance, objectives were a blend of saving marines, buying time to evacuate them, destroying generators or AA guns on foot while being confronted with an assortment of vehicles and a scarab, assasinating a prophet, finding cortana, and searching for a commanding officer. THe problem with halo 4, is that a large part of each mission was essentially, fight through a maze and once you're done clearing out enemies, either click on something, or insert cortana into a panel. Dawn and Infinity, and Composer all handled this well enough since it wasn't overdone and fit well with the plot. However, a large part of requiem was fighting through a series of rooms to access the cartographer, and then a portal. Then Forerunner consisted of essentially the same thing. Same with Reclaimer since it was more of a point and press, and that's all you did aside from defending some mammoth that should have been shot down before even firing a single mac round; overall the mission was okay, though a bit repetitive to be honest, but as a continuation from using a mantis to wreck ****, it didn't do so well. Shutdown was... how should I say, aside from gimicky, very dull. You went from pillar to pillar in a pellican destroying defenseless dropships, only to fight through a remake of HAlo 2: regret, except you have to do it twice before you could finally move on to the next objective. There must have been what, 12 different buttons you had to click on this level alone, and to get to each, you had to fight through 2-3 levels of prometheans. Fluff.

^that part was great. But unfortunately it had nothing to do with the rest of the level.

you could just solo it... It's one of the easier ones.

I guess I'm influenced by playing legendary. Personally, the campaign felt solid to me cause it took me so god damn long to beat each mission, but after replaying it some, I'm not as certain on how good the campaign was. The story was terrific, but the music was too fast paced, A.D.D. friendly, and lacked the awe-inspiring tracks of halo 1, 2, and 3. As to the gameplay, I felt it was similar to Cod in that you very rarely came across the same place twice, or even knew where you were going before you got there. Nothing was memorable about it until you got to the halo installation, cause nothing stood out. It felt like a spartan-ops expansion pack for the master chief in otherwords, where you pay for new maps and locations. As to the vehicles, they were all gimicky, and didn't fit in well with the campaign. Infinity for instance would have been best explored and fought through on foot.

all he'd have to do is camp at their end, and wait for the endless stream of morons to come to him... it'd be too far to destroy it without a sniper, rocket, railgun, or tank.

snqrls------im not the most available, or i suspect good, but im good for a game or two. i know how to support a team at least.

i can see that happening if for some reason they had no power weapons of their own, and yet still rushed you.

About this strategy thing.... It's pretty annoying when you have a team that can't keep up so they start playing it safe. And then by the time they quit... it's too late cause the other team has 2 saws and a shotgun. On the otherhand, the population was low, so I'm not completely taken aback by it, but it was terribly frustrating until the end where I felt we were picking things up (and then lost). Uh, yeah, and I don't get complex. I mean the spawns... and the types of games... who the **** wants to camp in a building allday? While it's more dynamic and interesting, it feels like swordbase when you spawn across the map from your team and get sniped by one of em'snipers on the roof cause the rest of your team is still taking cover in that building. In short, strategy is fun so long as it doesn't stagnate the game.

YEah, a great deal of the campaign is like that. For instance, at the very beginning of Forerunner, when you go through the teleporter and appear on a deck with a view of the inner surface of a planet, there is abolutely no music to intone awe. On the other hand, some of the level designs were fitting. Dawn for instance had a great atmosphere; Infinity did well despite most of it being a jungle; Requiem's crash site and warthog was very artful, and the latter missions had a sense of awe to them as well. It's just, so much could have been tweeked to make this a great campaign. Like, instead of going through a few forerunner buildings in requiem, make us explore the facility you see as you're picking up a warthog... that'd have given the player perspective, and a sense of accomplishment, much like HAlo 2: regret did. As for the vehicles, they felt gimicky to me. The mantas wasn't needed outside of putting the mission on easy mode, and the pellican could have been swapped with a banshee or hornet, and nothing would have changed, not to mention the mammoth that appeared out of nowhere. A great deal of those few missions, in respect to gameplay, felt unnecessary.

laughing so hard. Great story man, classic.

ARs are a staple; half of what's actually wrong with the multiplayer is the boltshot and easy sticks, and not the system. Granted, there's an argument to be made against instant respawns in 4v4 and nade indicators, but some of op's quirms are just ignorant. For example, not knowing where the flag carrier is, handicaps people without a headset or team. There's no reason for it, since it doesn't actually increase the skill gap, or have anything to do with it. Same with the radar, since with a good sound system you could tell where they were, but if you were of the unlucky few, it was yet another thing that handicapped you for no reason. In short, while yes, the multiplayer has to an extent shifted focus off from pure marksmanship and towards teamplay, it's not nearly as dramatic as all that.

meltdown and vortex look the best. i dont understand exhile either. it's just an overall campy map. There are so many places to set up...

^rd second point... i don't see the problem with every few games, taking a break and checking out your rank. Why is it necessary to have it right there after every bloody game? What does it do. Make it more competitive, nonsense, offer a greater incentive to win, bull. What it does do is lessen the emphasis on game by game performance, to instead emphasise game by game improvement.

the point is that you get better matchups? Uhm, I mean, putting it on waypoint ain't that big a deal, it just detracts from the emphasis on it. If you want to improve, and then set a goal for youself, it should work just fine.

jetpack ain't getting a buff. sorry.

not for me. I often get the sniper on the second or third ordanance on complex (i.e. dmr), get a sticky detonator, rarely a saw, or often a needler if I'm using the br; and, i get cqc weapons if I use the Assault rifle... just by experience.

Well, first of all it rarely effects gameplay dramatically in the gametypes where it's implemented, and secondly, without it, I'd have a lot more teams trying to backstab me for my ordanance drop. It's not like you shoot through your teammates, you're still wasting bullets.

if you use the br you tend to get the needler.

benefits outweigh the costs in this case.

30 in 4v4. I think it was on adrift.