Absolute Dog Posted October 22, 2011 Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 They have also not said or given any indication that they will not be in Halo 4, as well. Why do you say that Halo: Reach is a standalone game? What do you even mean by that? That it's not part of the franchise? That it's not part of the main story? I hate to break it to you, but it is. It takes place before Halo: Combat Evolved. It shows what happens before that game takes place. It is a part of the overall Halo story. It's not part of the Master Chief's story, no. But it IS a part of the overall Halo story. It's clear that most don't, how? Have you looked at any polls given to the Halo community? Have you seen a place where millions of Halo fans have voiced their opinion AGAINST armour abilities? I understand wanting the classic Halo feel. I understand wanting to play the exact same flipping game over and over (just like Call of Duty, no?), but Halo needs to evolve. If people continue complaining just because the gameplay changes, even just a tiny bit (like in Reach's case), the series will soon stagnate. I understand that people love the classic Halo feel, but it's played the same exact way ever since Halo 2. Halo: Reach doesn't change things up that much, and yet people go crazy just because of a few minor changes that were made. With all do respect Mystic, everyone, and I mean everyone, knows that Reach takes place long before the Halo series as you point out. Halo 4 follows Halo 3 and you are playing as the Chief again, not a Noble team member. The Chief does not need AA's from the "distant" past, he never has before. By calling Reach a "stand alone game" I was referring to the fact that you, for the first time in MM are playing as some one other than the Chief. Players should be willing to accept the fact that the AA's will not continue beyond Reach is all I am saying. You refer to polls that are in forums and different sites I assume. Many players of the game never join sites like this and therefore never vote in polls. Almost 9 million people bought Reach and less than 100,000 continue to play it. That is a vote right there. Hopefully they will return when the particulars of Halo 4 are shared and it hits the market. The people who have given up on the series for now are no less or more fans of Halo than any who currently play Reach. It appears that a majority of players who play Reach do like the AA's in one form or another. They are not the entire population of the Halo fans. Yes you will here more props for AA's in current forums because of the active population playing Reach. I accepted long ago that Bungie was trying to bring something different to the franchise, but like many saw Reach as to big of a departure from the original. There is not a desire from anyone I know to play the "same flipping game" over and over again. Time passes, graphics improve, advances are made in both gaming technology and in game story technologies. Last, if you honestly believe that the game play changed "just a tiny bit" from H3 to Reach......I do not know what to say to that other than it was a wholesale change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted October 22, 2011 Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 They have also not said or given any indication that they will not be in Halo 4, as well. Why do you say that Halo: Reach is a standalone game? What do you even mean by that? That it's not part of the franchise? That it's not part of the main story? I hate to break it to you, but it is. It takes place before Halo: Combat Evolved. It shows what happens before that game takes place. It is a part of the overall Halo story. It's not part of the Master Chief's story, no. But it IS a part of the overall Halo story. It's clear that most don't, how? Have you looked at any polls given to the Halo community? Have you seen a place where millions of Halo fans have voiced their opinion AGAINST armour abilities? I understand wanting the classic Halo feel. I understand wanting to play the exact same flipping game over and over (just like Call of Duty, no?), but Halo needs to evolve. If people continue complaining just because the gameplay changes, even just a tiny bit (like in Reach's case), the series will soon stagnate. I understand that people love the classic Halo feel, but it's played the same exact way ever since Halo 2. Halo: Reach doesn't change things up that much, and yet people go crazy just because of a few minor changes that were made. Lol @you. Halo reach is a side story. Halo 4 is a sequal to halo 3, not some prequal bs. Halo reach only changed are few minor things? Lol thats a joke, everything about reach is a change. Its the classic feel that gives you that feeling of nastalgia while being new at the same. Reach strayed too far away from a WINNING formula. As for your call of duty reference, reach is pretty much cod so I dont get it. Reach has loadouts(perks), sprint like cod and **** for weapons like cod. You dont know what you're talking about, its obvious you love jetpacking or sprinting or one of the other ridiculous AA's that save your ass from dying. AA's BREAK maps, halo was about team work and map control but now some dip**** with a jetpack can fly over and totally break a setup. Reach is a failure, sorry to break it you reach lovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absolute Dog Posted October 22, 2011 Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 Lol @you. Halo reach is a side story. Halo 4 is a sequal to halo 3, not some prequal bs. Halo reach only changed are few minor things? Lol thats a joke, everything about reach is a change. Its the classic feel that gives you that feeling of nastalgia while being new at the same. Reach strayed too far away from a WINNING formula. As for your call of duty reference, reach is pretty much cod so I dont get it. Reach has loadouts(perks), sprint like cod and **** for weapons like cod. You dont know what you're talking about, its obvious you love jetpacking or sprinting or one of the other ridiculous AA's that save your ass from dying. AA's BREAK maps, halo was about team work and map control but now some dip**** with a jetpack can fly over and totally break a setup. Reach is a failure, sorry to break it you reach lovers. There ya go! harder than I post, but the point none the less! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 There ya go! harder than I post, but the point none the less! Lol can't help it sometimes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CandiBunni Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 There ya go! harder than I post, but the point none the less! His post was absolute rubbish. If he's going to claim the things he did, he's going to have to do so while giving examples as to the things he points out. If for example, someone manages to break an entire teams holdout because that person used a jetpack, the other team was absolute garbage. While you're using the jetpack, you're a sitting duck. Everyone can see and hear you flying about in the air. In what way is Halo: Reach like Call of Duty? Is it because it has things like sprinting? News flash : other games use sprinting as well, y'know. Armour abilities are nothing like perks. You can only choose one when you choose a loadout, and there are only a few of them available. They also happen to be balanced within the game, so your argument is meh. You're saying the weapons are **** like in COD? How are they ****? Please explain this to me. Everything about Reach is a change? So being able to carry two weapons, shields, no regenerating health, bunny hopping, the universe it is set in, etc. are all changes? Hm....nope. The only things they've really done is remove bleed through, enable a sword block, add a FEW abilities, reintroduce health packs and fall damage, and that's pretty much all I can think of. Those are only a few changes. They're also nothing really major. Halo: Reach, for your information, is nothing like Call of Duty. It plays nothing like Call of Duty. Are there perks? No. Are you constantly seeing people noob-tube? No. Can you aim down your sights? No. Do you see people unlocking new weapons and add-ons for their guns in Reach? No. Do the games play similarly? No Halo: Reach plays like Halo. The few changes that they've made are nothing drastic, and the core feel of Halo is still very much intact. .I never said Halo 4 was a prequel, nor did I ever even suggest that it was so. I said that Reach was a part of the overall Halo story, which it IS. The entire Halo story is not just the Master Chief, y'know. =/ Hate to break it to you. Reach is a failure to YOU. Not to everyone else. Don't try to tell everyone who enjoys Reach that the game is a failure. From both a business and playerbase standpoint, it is clear that it is not. I know millions of copies were sold, but the game is high on the charts of the most played games on Xbox Live. (last time I checked) So it's not really a failure in terms of players. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absolute Dog Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 Lol can't help it sometimes She is her own best argument against herself sometimes! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CandiBunni Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 She is her own best argument against herself sometimes! lol And would you care to explain how I am such? Want to give me some examples as to how I'm my own best argument against myself? If you're going to claim something like this, give examples as to how I am such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 His post was absolute rubbish. If he's going to claim the things he did, he's going to have to do so while giving examples as to the things he points out. If for example, someone manages to break an entire teams holdout because that person used a jetpack, the other team was absolute garbage. While you're using the jetpack, you're a sitting duck. Everyone can see and hear you flying about in the air. In what way is Halo: Reach like Call of Duty? Is it because it has things like sprinting? News flash : other games use sprinting as well, y'know. Armour abilities are nothing like perks. You can only choose one when you choose a loadout, and there are only a few of them available. They also happen to be balanced within the game, so your argument is meh. You're saying the weapons are **** like in COD? How are they ****? Please explain this to me. Everything about Reach is a change? So being able to carry two weapons, shields, no regenerating health, bunny hopping, the universe it is set in, etc. are all changes? Hm....nope. The only things they've really done is remove bleed through, enable a sword block, add a FEW abilities, reintroduce health packs and fall damage, and that's pretty much all I can think of. Those are only a few changes. They're also nothing really major. Halo: Reach, for your information, is nothing like Call of Duty. It plays nothing like Call of Duty. Are there perks? No. Are you constantly seeing people noob-tube? No. Can you aim down your sights? No. Do you see people unlocking new weapons and add-ons for their guns in Reach? No. Do the games play similarly? No Halo: Reach plays like Halo. The few changes that they've made are nothing drastic, and the core feel of Halo is still very much intact. .I never said Halo 4 was a prequel, nor did I ever even suggest that it was so. I said that Reach was a part of the overall Halo story, which it IS. The entire Halo story is not just the Master Chief, y'know. =/ Hate to break it to you. Reach is a failure to YOU. Not to everyone else. Don't try to tell everyone who enjoys Reach that the game is a failure. From both a business and playerbase standpoint, it is clear that it is not. I know millions of copies were sold, but the game is high on the charts of the most played games on Xbox Live. (last time I checked) So it's not really a failure in terms of players. You pretty much just reposted. I gave you examples but your just going to shoot them down again. You obviously are offended and closed minded to this little debate.I'm done with this topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardent Prayer Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 If this is just going to be an arguement.......Just delete the thread or make a poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 And would you care to explain how I am such? Want to give me some examples as to how I'm my own best argument against myself? If you're going to claim something like this, give examples as to how I am such. Examples, examples, examples. Your examples may be rubbish to her even if they make valid points. Good luck lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absolute Dog Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 And would you care to explain how I am such? Want to give me some examples as to how I'm my own best argument against myself? If you're going to claim something like this, give examples as to how I am such. What? Ignoring you is the best solution. People have repeated stated their thoughts and ideas and you childishly repeat, like a parrot, "Examples, examples!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CandiBunni Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 What? Ignoring you is the best solution. People have repeated stated their thoughts and ideas and you childishly repeat, like a parrot, "Examples, examples!" So it's childish to want to understand why they have the opinions that they do? If someone is going to say something works terribly or is terrible, I'd just like to know why they think that way. I ask for people to explain because again, I would like to understand their side. I would like to understand why they believe what they believe. Asking them to explain their thoughts and ask for the reasons behind their thinking is not childish. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Lord Death Jr Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 I say keep them, but don't make them available in campaign and Matchmaking. Make them a forge/custom game type thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CandiBunni Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 You pretty much just reposted. I gave you examples but your just going to shoot them down again. You obviously are offended and closed minded to this little debate.I'm done with this topic. You gave things stating that it was like COD. That armour abilities break the maps, etc. I asked you to explain how they do so. You never responded to me with any explanations as to why you stated those things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 You gave things stating that it was like COD. That armour abilities break the maps, etc. I asked you to explain how they do so. You never responded to me with any explanations as to why you stated those things. I gave you an example? I'm not going to write a page on this again. Look at my posts on this site if you want to know my opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Chief GT Posted October 25, 2011 Report Share Posted October 25, 2011 Why do they need to remove armour abilities? Armour abilities add more depth to the gameplay. They add another layer of skill on top of the existing gameplay. Sure it may not be much, but it's something that keeps it from being the same exact game as previous entries. I can't really take you seriously if you're going to use "gay" as an insult, so I'd really recommend not doing something as immature as that in the future. It's hard to take anyone seriously if they use "gay" as a way to describe something in a negative way. Armour abilities force you to learn how to adapt to different situations. You must learn how to deal with a sprinting opponent, someone who is jetpacking, someone who uses armour lock, etc. It's no longer just a simple "aim and shoot" game. You now have to deal with opponents who have the ability to run, block, become invisible, send out a doppelganger, reach incredible heights, etc. This, all while shooting and learning how to kill said opponents. But its not "fun", it may be fun for a while but the lasting effect isn't there, halo was NEVER about extra tactics or gimmicks, if you can't comprehend that then you must have not been around when halo ce and halo 2 were online, those were the good o'l days, true sportsmanship, and skill, I would get so lost in those games after high school lol, hours and hours, but you wanna know what made it fun? the simplicity of it all, like I said, a few guns, grenades, teammates and a cool place to battle on. You want all these extra perks stick to call of duty or any other shooter, but DONT mess with our beloved halo, 343 would do so many players a favor by not including such abilities in halo 4. Its time to bring back halo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absolute Dog Posted October 26, 2011 Report Share Posted October 26, 2011 But its not "fun", it may be fun for a while but the lasting effect isn't there, halo was NEVER about extra tactics or gimmicks, if you can't comprehend that then you must have not been around when halo ce and halo 2 were online, those were the good o'l days, true sportsmanship, and skill, I would get so lost in those games after high school lol, hours and hours, but you wanna know what made it fun? the simplicity of it all, like I said, a few guns, grenades, teammates and a cool place to battle on. You want all these extra perks stick to call of duty or any other shooter, but DONT mess with our beloved halo, 343 would do so many players a favor by not including such abilities in halo 4. Its time to bring back halo. I agree with your post. I really loved the first three. When people say go back and play H3 or adapt, I. on the inside, tell them to "Piss Off"! On the outside I will usually have a respectful discussion about how neither answer is an answer. When a game is successful and it is changed to reflect features of another game that is gaining ground or has taken the lead, that is a fail in my opinion. Different types of people play, like and enjoy different types of games. Some play many different ones, I get that. I always felt let down when these series drifted into the direction it did. I will state here and now that if 343ind. does continue with Halo 4 where Halo 3 left off, they will have my devoted respect, money and praise. If they bring the game play style and abilities that exist in Reach, I will leave and never come back. I do not care how many current members are fans of Reach or AA's and out number us in this forum, you are a small percentage compared to the number of players who were lost in the past years. Sure, economics, other games, players moving on in their lives has been part of the loss, but Halo has to get back to it's roots or they will loose those of us who held on hoping for more and never get back the players who left because of a lack of interest in where the franchise was taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fail Master Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 If they include the crappy armour abilities they for some reason put in Halo: Reach, I will go ape ****. **** Jet Packs, Armour Lock, Sprint and ****ty Camo. I hope 343 will do the right thing and make Halo: 4 more like Halo: 3, 2 and 1! Please god! don't be a kill joy... surely you use sprint or evade to get to a combat area quicker and surly you're fed up of being splattered by ghosts and not being able to do jack about it. with jet pack i can see your point though, only good for making vertical accents and over used in MP. but with sprint and evade are useful for getting to battle fields and getting from cover to cover,; Armour lock is good for splattering the person trying to splatter you. always funny when you think of the guy on the other end of the mic going ape **** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 don't be a kill joy... surely you use sprint or evade to get to a combat area quicker and surly you're fed up of being splattered by ghosts and not being able to do jack about it. Im fed up with sprint and evade, well all of them to be honest. Sprint just lets you run away from the enemy, dont pretend you like it because you can "get to battles quicker". Im not buying it, if thats your argument. You died in the game so you shouldnt be able to run right back over there and maybe even clean your own kill up lol. As for the armor lock statement, can't you just jump over the ghost? We dont need that bs in the new halo period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlobalHawk722 Posted November 20, 2011 Report Share Posted November 20, 2011 I dont kow why everyone gives armor abilites so much ****, seriously! have any of you ever seen the you tube video where a guy using evade dives over a rocket and kills the firer with a sword? that was possibly the coolest thing ive ever seen in halo. The only people who complain about armor abilites are the ones that get their asses whooped by people using them. What i would do with armor abilties. leave evade exactly as it is leave sprint how it is but make it last longer jetpack should have fuel not a recharge time, so when you run out, its useless. armor lock should last 4 seconds not 7 drop shield is fine hologram is fine but should not be included in matchmaking active camo should have a shorter use time and a longer recharge time, so snipers cannot camp with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted November 20, 2011 Report Share Posted November 20, 2011 Master chief himself has NEVER had armor abilities. We will be playing as master chief again in halo 4, not some regular noble 6 team member. Master chief doesn't need armor abilities period. Its time to get off the "AA Train" people, it ruined halo for alot of us. If you like AAs, you most likely didnt play the other halos. If you did and still like them, then your just bad and hide behind your abilities instead of your skills. Simple as that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CandiBunni Posted November 20, 2011 Report Share Posted November 20, 2011 Master chief himself has NEVER had armor abilities. We will be playing as master chief again in halo 4, not some regular noble 6 team member. Master chief doesn't need armor abilities period. Its time to get off the "AA Train" people, it ruined halo for alot of us. If you like AAs, you most likely didnt play the other halos. If you did and still like them, then your just bad and hide behind your abilities instead of your skills. Simple as that! Way to judge entire groups of people without even playing with them. What you just said was very very foolish. Just because someone doesn't have a problem with Armour Abilities doesn't mean they're a terrible player, or hide behind them. If you want to judge someone's skills, you'd best play with them for a few games before doing so. It's foolish of you to assume that anyone who doesn't have a problem with armour abilities must not be a very skilled player, because there are plenty of players who don't mind them that can kick some serious arse in previous Halo titles, as well as Reach. I know, I have a few friends that do so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iTz KeeFy Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 You should read his post. He said people were bad if they didn't like AAs. I merely said the opposite and that makes me foolish? Thanks for your misinformed post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 It's really no use arguing. Serene is the biggest supporter of Armor Abilities I've ever seen. Don't know about you, but every Halo has a different feel to it, especially the jump from Halo 2 to 3, since they're on different systems. I doubt taking AAs out would make the game exactly the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CandiBunni Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 You should read his post. He said people were bad if they didn't like AAs. I merely said the opposite and that makes me foolish? Thanks for your misinformed post. Sure, I'll read his post. If you'll tell me who HE is and what HE said. How about you point out to me who said what, what page it was posted on, and then I'll check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.