Is not JL

Omg I know it takes time but pls Just release a normal gametype with those halo 2 armor colors I beg of you Nothing like that pale sissy halo 4 sky blue and dull pink teams.

I prefer the first. That actually looks like a paragraph. If I'm gonna read anything, it's not going to be a slew of single lines separated every time by a line.

We can happily double lynch our two confirmed Mafians here. I'll go with Ruby now.

For me, this is my point proven and also cue to leave this thread. Sorry for the....mess.

Except each time you attempt to 'revolve discussion around those arguments' it involves a lot of verbal gymnastics that generally results in your opinion being said in an objective manner while you flaunt that other people either don't understand your points and should read it again (Or, in other terms, you simply ignore certain points raised by opposing participants of the discussion) or you simply say something weird about how our opinions is equivalent to us thinking that sand is green or something equally as stupid as what is suggested. In the end, your argument goes back to giving us a fair situation that you judge as unfair simply because a good player wasn't as good as he thought and wasn't able to successfully finish his enemy. I hate sprint......but that's an opinion based heavily around how I feel sprint impacts the game - or at least, Halo 4. There are times where it feels like you are flaunting your opinion as to how bad sprint is as though it is from an objective standpoint and thus factual, and you use that to counter our points which you call subjective. That, or, as said above, you simply ignore opposing points by referring them to another 'objective factual counter-argument' already posted before. Thus, you are simply not letting our words reach you in a state that even lets you consider them - after all, you have the facts while we just have feels, right? - and that's probably why there's a general feeling that you aren't here to debate or discuss, but rather as though you're repeating a pre-rehearsed script that has opinions being repeated consistently like it's a fact in hopes of SJ points while martyr syndrome is in full effect. Sorry, but that's just how it feels. I have no intention in seeing a discussion continue if it feels one sided not due to facts but due to opinion being claimed as fact and my points are either ignored and are either repeatedly stated to be because 'oh man you don't understand something please read it again or I don't know what to do' or equated to the utterly retarded sentence 'Sand is green' - because in my eyes, that isn't a discussion. ....... The only thing I have left to say is that you shouldn't blame the game for your inability to play. There are times when the game truly **** blocks you, but the personal experiences I've seen you raise are always situations where (X is not good enough to kill Y before Y retreats, X blames his inability to kill Y on the fact that Y has something that X also has).

The only time there will ever be no complainers is if the product/service is perfect for everyone, and as we all know that will never happen.

Not without taking you with us.

No. As Coldfreeze said, this game might've had a highly unique singleplayer context to it but as to whether or not it's a good enough game to support a yearly release, that we don't know of. Games like Call of Duty have 3 developers working on it's dev cycle to churn out games yearly, and its a multiplayer game that has enough brand recognition out there that it has a healthy influx of players. Games like Assassins Creed have a secured niche of SP-wanting players, it has gameplay that isn't available anywhere else (Parkour stealth action-rpg + it's great stories and unique settings) and it has like, a few thousands devs working on each game. Watch_Dogs? Highly doubt it'd work for a yearly release cycle.

It may not be a very convincing argument but it is nonetheless argument that you literally cannot argue against because it is an opinion. "I like something." "No, you're wrong." That clearly doesn't make sense, and in this situation it's the same; you can't argue back against an opinion, because opinions, to the person who generated the opinion, are always right. Maybe he's dumb and objectively wrong, but subjectively, to him/her, he or she is right. This just simply doesn't relate in any shape or form to what I've been saying. What you're claiming here is not only something that I haven't been saying, but it is in fact the polar opposite of what I've been saying. What I've been saying is that an individual's personal enjoyment of a feature is not enough in itself to argue in favour of the feature. That's very different than suggesting that we should look at an individual's opinion and then for some reason cater to the exact opposite. It may be two different things but the situations can align. Just because the intention isn't to cater to the exact opposite, doesn't mean it isn't possible to cater to the exact opposite as well. Your point is that an individual's personal enjoyment is not enough to argue for or against a feature being included; here is an example of just that - and you clearly understand how illogical it is. Logical fallacy: some things are consistent, therefore all things must be consistent. All you've done here is pointed out that there are some aspects that are consistent from Halo 4 with the original Halo games, but that does absolutely nothing to demonstrate that every important aspect of the game has been kept intact. But why do we need to keep every single important aspect of the game intact? If that were true, then we'd be playing clones of whatever Halo you are referring to as the 'core' gameplay. Halo 2 would not have been the same if every single important aspect from Halo: CE was kept; Halo 3 would not have been the same if every important aspect from Halo 2 was kept. You've demonstrated to me that you either didn't read over that part properly, you didn't understand it, or you are being dishonest in your response. That's an argument for keeping sprint in Halo 4 post-release (due to the game having been designed, made and shipped already), not an argument for keeping sprint in the franchise from now on. If you don't understand the difference, then I'm lost for where to go from here because any attempt to clarify would just be saying what I already said in the post you were responding to. I guess I'll ask you to read it over for clarification and hope for the best. Except Halo 4 is clearly a Halo game, and you've consistently said that the new games should be made with the older games' core features intact. Halo 4 had sprint as a core feature - do we have to 100% not build off Halo 4's core gameplay? What I can tell you are the reasons that it is not consistent with the things that made Halo play the way Halo used to play at a core level. Whether or not you think games should be consistent from a core gameplay perspective from game to game is up to you, but whether or not the games actually are consistent from that perspective is not a subjective matter. I mean, we can have our opinions on those things, but we are still either right or wrong about it. We can think that green is a nice colour, and we wont have to worry about being right or wrong because that is a genuinely subjective point of view. We can think that green is the colour of sand, but we are either right or wrong about that. How on earth does thinking sprint should/shouldn't be in a future Halo game relate to thinking that Green is the color of sand? It's like you were attempting to make a metaphor, but along the way of making it logic decided to not take part and just walked out. Yes, this is obvious, except: Unfair and unearned advantages to players always appear in any situation; you're nitpicking on a single 'unfair and unearned' advantage. The reality of the fact is that you can consider this situation in 2 different ways - it is completely fair: Because both players spawned EQUALLY - OR at any given moment one player has a momentous advantage over the other: Because gameplay is dynamic, and always in motion. The situation you've described above can be summed up like this: - 2 men enter - 1 men is defeated in the encounter due to a number of factors - However, he isn't dead yet and thus is given the option to retreat - His retreat is successful; the person attacking him was given ample oppurtunity to chase down, kill, or prevent the retreat but simply wasn't skilled/lucky enough to do so due to yet another set of factors - The person who failed at killing his adversary blames it on the fact that his enemy had the ability to escape while he didn't utilize his ability to chase at all. Not just that - lets say you chase, shields recharge, yadahyadah - the encounter is in no way over, because your chase is successful. If there was a perk that the escapee/chaser had that gave them an advantage, then yes, that's unearned. But in this situation, if we assume that it isn't - the encounter hasn't been finished, and therefore it is STILL 2 men enter, the better (with a number of governing factors *cough* luck *cough) man leaves. Except gameplay still revolves around the skill in players combining their movement and shooting simultaneously. They simply have a new choice to make, one that could be a deciding factor in many engagements. It definitely isn't a necessity. And yes, the inevitable response is that this is your opinion - and it is. Sprint has changed up the gameplay, in a unique way that has changed the way Halo 4/Reach plays with non-sprint Halo. Whether or not you find enjoyment in this new playstyle is completely subjective. Your argument entirely is that you want Halo 1, 2 and 3 styled gameplay being the style of gameplay in future Halo games and for that reason sprint shouldn't be in the game. However, it's clear that you can build sprint into the game even if you build off your so called 'core' of Halo games, as evidenced by Halo 4. Any further feelings you have that implies sprint goes against said core gameplay has been subjective opinion, and most of them based off of/referencing situations where a player isn't skilled enough to win an encounter and places the blame on a game mechanic that he, too, can utilize.

i don't think these comics are good at all but drawing balls is my speciality If you think its a lemon you're either stupid, or so naive and innocent that you pass of as stupid on the internet

See counter to argument 8 in the OP. Whether or not we like sprint as individuals is actually incidental and is irrelevant to whether or not it should be in the game. So basically, it doesn't matter if everybody finds the implementation of it utterly retarded/the greatest thing ever to the metagame? That makes no sense considering games are made to cater to players. If a developer had that thought process, this is how they'd go: "Oh, I think sprint isn't good when added to Halo. But my opinion is irrelevant as to whether or not it should actually be in the game though - therefore that's why I should add it." *Add's sprint to Halo* Just because it is designed from the ground up around core gameplay doesn't stop something from featuring sprint. Halo 4 is certainly designed from the ground up around core gameplay that is consistent with that of the original games; it has, y'know. Guns, Melee, Grenades - a la golden triangle. It has radar. It has shields. It has many core features; it has many new features. I think the reason why it's relevant to point how how Halo 4 could suffer due to lack of sprint is because, y'know, this is an argument FOR sprint. Tell me the FACTUAL, PROVEN, 100% true reasons that have no relation whatsoever to opinion, that sprint is plain bad and that it should never be in a Halo game ever again. Yes.

1. Caboose the Ace 2. DarkAngel 3. SiberianHuskyY 4. Bnus Civilian, Killed by Mafia as extra kill due to leaving game, Round 2 5. Connor Kenway 6. Frankenzer 7. Yoshi1176 8. Unease P34nut Civilian, Killed by Mafia, Round 2 9. Delpen9 10. Twinreaper Detective, Lynched, Round 1 11. Self Destruct 12. Ledgend 1221 Mafia, Lynched, Round 2. 13. therubyprincess 14. Butch Flowers Medic, Killed by Mafia, Round 1 15. JL Scene 1: SiberianHuskyY Twinreaper Frankenzer Self Destruct Scene 2: Yoshi1176 Ledgend1221 Connor Kenway Caboose the Ace Red = Mafian why is a mafian in the pro-town pm Anyways, 10 people are still alive. Of those, 7 are Pro-town and 3 are Mafians. Of those Mafian, one of them are confirmed. That leaves 2 people who can show up in suspect lists that we don't know of.

Yoshi can still be Mafia.

can the people voting yoshi switch to ledgend because frankenzer and ledgend can just switch votes and save ledgend

i know what screen sharing is

Oh, no. I'm not sharing MY computer with a bunch of people on the internet. nononononono. I don't even care if you lynch me because of it.

You used Your instead of You're. Therefore you're mafian.

Really? Or are you ignoring the years that the Spartan-II's were kidnapped as children and forced to train? Spartan II training is far more brutalizing - they literally kidnapped 5-7 year olds and forced them into training routines for 18> year olds who have passed the physical examinations to sign up for the military.

This isn't related to gametype selections at all.

An alternate solution to our problems imply that there was an original solution.

so its like in 10 minutes so invites have been sent.

No, silly. Axilus makes you Mafia. You questioning my decision perhaps pertains to the possible chance that Axilus made you Mafia. Scumface Mafian. Just don't switch your vote at the last second saying 'omg i suddenly have evidence' because lets be honest, nobody has evidence.