Jump to content

Constantly

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    81

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Constantly

  1. Constantly
    With the addition of insta-spawns, what if it's like CoD in that you can either spawn or watch a Kill Cam and see how you died. I think this would be awesome. The way you sometimes get kills and deaths in Halo are the coolest/funniest/mindboggling ones in gaming history. And a Final Kill Cam? Could you image the crazy **** people would be trying to pull off when their team is sitting on 49 kills? Make this happen 343.
  2. Constantly
    I'll chime in: 1. I think this is fine. The number of people quitting games in Reach and H3 right now is ridiculous. It makes it no fun for either side. Ever played 1v4 on Valhalla? Doesn't matter which end you're on, it's gonna be boring. 2. This is whatever. I made a separete thread regarding this and kill cams. 3. If it worked out to where I could choose a BR over an AR everytime. Then yes. I love this. 4. I like the idea of having to hold different areas of the map. Maybe you're good at holding a specific room, but can you hold a wide open area? May the better player win.
  3. Constantly
    Exactly. I'll probably never understand why people defend the bloom. And because it was supposedly in other games? Who cares? I sure didn't notice it.
  4. Constantly
    Sprint's there. Ok, fine. BUT, I think that since everyone can sprint then everyone should be able to roll backwards. Sprinting sword and people sprinting in only to try to beat you down twice is ridiculous.
  5. Constantly
    My pants just got tighter. It looks fantastic.
  6. Constantly
    Good arguments, I thought.
  7. Constantly
    I call bull **** on your entire post. Sounds made up to me. Exactly, well put.
  8. Constantly
    The BR, the ranking system, the maps, and RL buddies, would probably be the biggest reasons. At that time you didn't have to worry about AA's, it was just run and gun virtually uninterupted. Those are my thoughts. I know you can argue the same things for Reach. But it's not for me. Edit: Nevermind, you can't argue the BR and ranking system for Reach.
  9. Constantly
    Good. That's what forums are for. Maybe 343i is paying attention.
  10. Constantly
    First, the MLG kid reference was because you immediately opposed my post without realizing that I wasn't claiming that casuals can't figure out the game as much as competitive people. You're opinion was biased and you took that and ran with it. It was my attempt to try and find common ground and maybe help you understand where I was coming from. That was my point. 1. Agreed. Again, I wasn't arguing that. But then I think competitve players will go the extra mile to figure stuff out. Like watching videos or checking in custom games. Not the point, on to #2 2. Because, for me, those new features aren't fun. H3 had me coming back because I enjoyed it's features and wanted to learn/master them. That's what good games do. That's where Reach failed for me. 3. So were their options to radically change the game or face having people leave out of boredom? CoD doesn't seem to have that issue. It just seems to me that they could have done things differently. Twinreaper: When I say a "better understanding" by competitive players it's because they are the ones who usually are putting more time into the game. Their not modding, tearing anything apart, they're just becoming more aware of what's going on the more they play. That's not to say (and I didn't say) that casual gamers don't understand the game.
  11. Constantly
    You missed the point of the whole post. Try re-reading it as if some MLG player didn't pick on you in school.
  12. Constantly
    No. You flipped that around exactly like an angry girlfriend of mine would. You totally missed my point and took offense to that. My B.
  13. Constantly
    I can agree to disagree on the sales/popularity. But I think there is a good reason that they're making Halo 4 and not Halo: Reach 2. Honeslty, I think Halo 3.5 would have been more popular than Reach.
  14. Constantly
    I think that when you play high-end/competitively you get a really good understanding of how the game works. You understand why people go to different places in the map. You get to know exactly the radius of a grenade, which jumps you can make, where you need to position yourself, the best way to take out a sniper, etc. You get to understanding in such great detail every facet of the game and how you can utilize it to your advantage. These are the things that make the game awesome. These are the same things that are disrupted by added features. Things that casual gamers really don't seem to notice or mind but people who used to play competitively will give up on completely. They may add features that people can tell you to accept or learn to adapt, but in the end you just don't want to. They're not as fun as they were in previous games. It's not worth the time.
  15. Constantly
    I think this is a good post. And I can see how someone who feels this way would be able to enjoy Reach. Not saying there is anything wrong with it. I would love to like Reach. It's not about being the best for me. It was more fun to be in a BR battle with someone than to be floating up in the air raining down on people. I liked the fact that you could avoid being rushed by the sword guy simply by backing up. The way I was killed in Halo 3 was more enjoyable than the way I'm killed in Reach and same goes for the way I kill people. And essentially that's all the game is.
  16. Constantly
    My point was in response to the person that said that the quality of the game did not affect the sale or population of the game.
  17. Constantly
    I'm really not trying to argue your DMR, AR thing. My point was something else. Let me ask you this. Did you play Halo 2 and 3? If so, how much? Have you played any of them recenty? Did you play higher-end stuff/ competitively? I'm asking you this because you prefer Reach and I want to understand it. I ask that you answer, but try to keep from bringing up Reach. I'm not trying to be a d*ck with these questions. And I'm not going to say anything negative about any of your answers. After all, there was no wrong way to play Halo 2 and 3
  18. Constantly
    I didn't say it was bad. I asked if it were better, would more people play it? Whether you think the game is a godsend or not. Things can always be better. My point was that the better the quality of the game, the more people will play it.
  19. Constantly
    I'll answer that with a quote: "Halo drifted too far off the beaten path that they knew and loved. Reach has a new playstyle, one that was never seen in a prior Halo game." I played and played Reach trying to like it. I REALLY wanted to like it. But the gameplay was not the same. Thus, the experience was not the same. This was a different game and one that I couldn't get into. So I went looking for a better one. The AR guy gets more time to fire. That was my point. Not what weapon you should be using. So you could either say that they increased the viablitly of the AR at long range or decreased the DMR's at short range.
  20. Constantly
    I too, share these feelings.
  21. Constantly
    Saying, "Reach's quality had no effect on the sales or population" is wrong. For obvious reasons. You can't say that Reach would have been just as successful as Halo 2 if released at the same time. For obvious reasons. The whole "timing" issue and "other titles" is my favorite excuse as to why Reach was a flop. Aside from initial sales to people who expected another great Halo game. Game develpers compete, games come out all the time, the economy has been bad for years... the cream will rise to the top. This goes with quality of gameplay. Let me ask you this. If the game was better would more people play it?
  22. Constantly
    No. Everyone's skill was inhibited by the bloom in Halo 1. They went from bloom to no bloom; where shots became more accurate in Halo 2. Accuracy was rewarded. By re-introducing the bloom in Reach they have inhibited that skill once again. How do you think map control is going to work in Halo 4 when weapon spawns become random? Gonna hold down the whole map are ya? Or does this help further level the playing field? I'm failing to make the connection you're making between comparing a glitch in the game (which took a level of skill to utilize) to a mechanic built into the game that allows snipers to always get the first shot on someone. It's not hypocritical. If you could BxR someone from across the map, then ya, I'd say it is. Why take the BR, which is arguably the most loved weapon in the game, out? That would have to be a weird bloom wouldn't it? They took it out so they can add a weapon that would ultimately be less accurate UNLESS they shoot slower, giving people spraying their AR's more time. Thanks for all the single shot weapons Reach, you've left a bland taste in my mouth after that one. People adapted and loved the previous titles. I pick up what you were throwing down with that. But why did Reach fall short, especially if it "opened up a whole new level of skill"? Halo 3 was MLG's proverbial poster boy. Reach's future isn't looking so good. And don't blame it on other games. People who left Halo were looking for a new game. That's exactly how I ended up getting CoD.
  23. Constantly
    First off, I enjoyed your post. Secondly I think you absolutely can compare skill across different titles. That's why you'd see guys like the Ogre twins wrecking people from Halo 1 to Halo 3. Because each title played so similarly. Now add the bloom and AA's and your taking skill out of those player's hands that were once so useful during the first 3 games. If you're raping me with the sniper, great. That's the way it should be, if you're a better player. But if you're doing it because you always have invis at your disposal sitting across the map, then screw that. You can call that adapting to a new mechanic if you like, but I call that a cheap way to get kills and Bungie handed it right to you. When I initially read up on Halo 4 I felt that 343i was aware of things like this and were going to correct them. But now, it doesn't seem to be the case. Now you get X-ray vision..... That's why the hate on 343. I'm really playing the devil's advocate here because I think the OP started this topic just to get high-fives. I understand that 343i has a broader range of fans now (thanks to Reach) and they have to appeal to them all. But if they're going to have AA's then I think it really needs to be a rock, paper, scissor system. Give the Reach fans their AA's but give the rest of us a way to find "skill" in a way to counter them. I think the BR will help.
  24. Constantly
    Ya. I guess I did. People who love Reach, please explain to me why Reach is better than Halo 2 and 3 without tip-toeing around the fact that it's less likely you're going to get raped. Please factor the bloom in, also.
  25. Constantly

    Disappointed.

    Constantly replied to Tomakazi's topic in Halo 4

    There is nothing wrong with getting beat by someone who's better at using weapons where skill and accuracy is rewarded. Ask any athlete how much fun losing is. Now give a baseball player a bat with holes in it, making it even harder to hit the ball. Then tell him that change is good and he needs to accept it. See if he doesn't whine and cry about it. You can't argue my point about the ZB playlist anymore than I can argue yours. So I'll leave it at that.
×
×
  • Create New...