By CRIMSONxSERAPH Go To PostOn the plus side, I'm not butthurt about subjective aesthetic changes a company makes.
INTERNAL CONSISTENCY AND VISUAL IDENTITY MATTERS DAMMIT
By -Ryn Go To PostI'm not saying it doesn't matter...just that it only matters so much. There are things that 343i has changed that I dislike, and other things I'm glad they've changed. Ultimately, I see three main reasons for visual change: 1) availability of and/or better use of technology, 2) IP changing from one company to another, 3) preference. It could be anywhere from just one to all three of these reasons (as well as possibly some other, less prevalent ones as well).
INTERNAL CONSISTENCY AND VISUAL IDENTITY MATTERS DAMMIT
I refuse to get so attached to one visual design that I can't at least accept modification and moderate change later on. We see it all around society with automobiles, logos, etc., so it's just as natural that it happen in video games. Are there exceptions to the rule? Yes, there are (Mario Mario), but by-and-large it's a given that some things do change visually with time, tech, controlling interests, and preferences.
If we hadn't seen any change from HCE to HR then it would have been a bit harder to swallow once we got to H4, but in each iteration of a Halo game, aesthetics and design aspects changed. Consider that this was done internally within Bungie with their own original IP. When 343i did take over, which design aesthetic were they to match? HCE, H2, H3, HW, H3ODST, or HR? No clear cut answer. If they take the precedence set by Bungie, then it was already a precedent to change it up if for no other reason than that it was a new Halo title. Then you consider that it was a seperate company with different preferences, different approach to story, and different ideas about how far the availability of tech should help dictate detail in aesthetic, and you've got some potentially major changes that can be justified to be made.
Does that mean I like all of the designs or the decisions to make such changes? Absolutely not. I just think it's naive to make such a large issue about the changes and use the changes as points to attempt to prove the company incapable of handling the beloved series.
Complaints about the MCC, while I still feel sometimes are made simply to feel some form of self-satisfaction and justification, are in concept completely valid and worth mentioning. I can even say that if a person has such an issue with the MCC that I shouldn't complain that they don't want to trust 343i anymore. That's fine. Say your piece a single time, and then leave the series alone for those who have more patience/tolerance/understanding. But using aesthetic changes like what we've gotten as major points to same-as boycott 343i (except where it counts, the $), does nothing but cause irritation in all the wrong places.
Also, I love the graphic.
^ agree with much of that.
Someone on GAF said H5 looks to have no good maps because of some questionable geometry in a screenshot.
Right.
Wat?
Someone on GAF said H5 looks to have no good maps because of some questionable geometry in a screenshot.
Right.
Wat?
By CRIMSONxSERAPH Go To PostI'm not saying it doesn't matter…just that it only matters so much. There are things that 343i has changed that I dislike, and other things I'm glad they've changed. Ultimately, I see three main reasons for visual change: 1) availability of and/or better use of technology, 2) IP changing from one company to another, 3) preference. It could be anywhere from just one to all three of these reasons (as well as possibly some other, less prevalent ones as well).+1
I refuse to get so attached to one visual design that I can't at least accept modification and moderate change later on. We see it all around society with automobiles, logos, etc., so it's just as natural that it happen in video games. Are there exceptions to the rule? Yes, there are (Mario Mario), but by-and-large it's a given that some things do change visually with time, tech, controlling interests, and preferences.
If we hadn't seen any change from HCE to HR then it would have been a bit harder to swallow once we got to H4, but in each iteration of a Halo game, aesthetics and design aspects changed. Consider that this was done internally within Bungie with their own original IP. When 343i did take over, which design aesthetic were they to match? HCE, H2, H3, HW, H3ODST, or HR? No clear cut answer. If they take the precedence set by Bungie, then it was already a precedent to change it up if for no other reason than that it was a new Halo title. Then you consider that it was a seperate company with different preferences, different approach to story, and different ideas about how far the availability of tech should help dictate detail in aesthetic, and you've got some potentially major changes that can be justified to be made.
Does that mean I like all of the designs or the decisions to make such changes? Absolutely not. I just think it's naive to make such a large issue about the changes and use the changes as points to attempt to prove the company incapable of handling the beloved series.
Complaints about the MCC, while I still feel sometimes are made simply to feel some form of self-satisfaction and justification, are in concept completely valid and worth mentioning. I can even say that if a person has such an issue with the MCC that I shouldn't complain that they don't want to trust 343i anymore. That's fine. Say your piece a single time, and then leave the series alone for those who have more patience/tolerance/understanding. But using aesthetic changes like what we've gotten as major points to same-as boycott 343i (except where it counts, the $), does nothing but cause irritation in all the wrong places.
Also, I love the graphic.
Minor changes like the Jackals really don't bother me. As long as the models remain quickly recognizable it's a non issue for me. Also the dragon, reptile design looks awesome.
By Lord of Admirals Go To PostDid ESRB just confirm human adversaries in campaign?Possibly. We know that Chief kills insurrectionists during a HTT... And Halo 5 opens before that event. Possible that we play that scene out maybe?
Also, your father is a filthy colo and your mother is a hole in the wall!
Or it could just be referring to the MP.
By CRIMSONxSERAPH Go To PostI'm not saying it doesn't matter…just that it only matters so much. There are things that 343i has changed that I dislike, and other things I'm glad they've changed. Ultimately, I see three main reasons for visual change: 1) availability of and/or better use of technology, 2) IP changing from one company to another, 3) preference. It could be anywhere from just one to all three of these reasons (as well as possibly some other, less prevalent ones as well).Crimson is da real MVP. +1
I refuse to get so attached to one visual design that I can't at least accept modification and moderate change later on. We see it all around society with automobiles, logos, etc., so it's just as natural that it happen in video games. Are there exceptions to the rule? Yes, there are (Mario Mario), but by-and-large it's a given that some things do change visually with time, tech, controlling interests, and preferences.
If we hadn't seen any change from HCE to HR then it would have been a bit harder to swallow once we got to H4, but in each iteration of a Halo game, aesthetics and design aspects changed. Consider that this was done internally within Bungie with their own original IP. When 343i did take over, which design aesthetic were they to match? HCE, H2, H3, HW, H3ODST, or HR? No clear cut answer. If they take the precedence set by Bungie, then it was already a precedent to change it up if for no other reason than that it was a new Halo title. Then you consider that it was a seperate company with different preferences, different approach to story, and different ideas about how far the availability of tech should help dictate detail in aesthetic, and you've got some potentially major changes that can be justified to be made.
Does that mean I like all of the designs or the decisions to make such changes? Absolutely not. I just think it's naive to make such a large issue about the changes and use the changes as points to attempt to prove the company incapable of handling the beloved series.
Complaints about the MCC, while I still feel sometimes are made simply to feel some form of self-satisfaction and justification, are in concept completely valid and worth mentioning. I can even say that if a person has such an issue with the MCC that I shouldn't complain that they don't want to trust 343i anymore. That's fine. Say your piece a single time, and then leave the series alone for those who have more patience/tolerance/understanding. But using aesthetic changes like what we've gotten as major points to same-as boycott 343i (except where it counts, the $), does nothing but cause irritation in all the wrong places.
Also, I love the graphic.
Overall... What 343 has done has been very positive and their changes or iterations to Halo have taken the series to a higher level imo. Is it perfect? No. But Bungie's games weren't either.
I don't want to play the same game every 2-3years. I want something fresh, yet familiar. Halo 4 was both of those things.
By jem0208 Go To Post+1The new jackals are great. And they are here to stay looks like haha.
Minor changes like the Jackals really don't bother me. As long as the models remain quickly recognizable it's a non issue for me. Also the dragon, reptile design looks awesome.
By Ragnarok Flames Go To PostWe need a +1 button. Also what is your opinion on SB4?Smash 4 has potential, but they need to re-evaluate how they approach defensive play in their shield and dodge systems. They've actually made a slight nerf to air dodge by increasing vulnerability by one frame IIRC, but they're still not seeing how strong defensive play is.
And don't even get me started on its online functionality, or lack thereof. I can talk about Smash at length; it's my multiplayer jam outside of Halo and it breaks my heart to see another studio that perpetuates this stigma of competitive vs casual game design. Funny thing though is they already achieved that with their first game, but somewhere along the line Sakurai and his team, much like Bungie with Halo, put it out there that there's this vocal minority of people that are trying to change Smash for the worst, when in actuality that fun balance between competitive depth with casual accessibility already existed. Then you have the millions of drones who started with Brawl or Halo 3 calling long time fans elitists even when they're presenting rational arguments as to why they feel a certain way.
Smash 64 was amazing and Melee was great, but it's because of Melee's competitive depth that Sakurai was scared into making Brawl, and CE / Halo 2's competitive depth (as much as I say Halo 2 started the downfall of Halo gameplay, I still consider it a competitively viable game) is what led Bungie to create Halo 3. Smash 4 is essentially them trying to strike that balance, but it misses on several key notes like Halo 4 by being a "diamond covered in poo" as many people have claimed.
Many love Smash 4, and I don't disagree because I love it too, but it's the same thing with Halo where I see so much potential. Halo 5 has that potential more than previous games, so let's hope Smash has their Halo 5 at some point. And while yes, the next Smash may have ADS or Smart Scopes, if it's legitimately a step in the right direction after what many perceive to be years of going backwards, then we need to accept that for the time being and build from there.
By CRIMSONxSERAPH Go To Post-snip-I got you.
By CRIMSONxSERAPH Go To PostI'm not saying it doesn't matter…just that it only matters so much. There are things that 343i has changed that I dislike, and other things I'm glad they've changed. Ultimately, I see three main reasons for visual change: 1) availability of and/or better use of technology, 2) IP changing from one company to another, 3) preference. It could be anywhere from just one to all three of these reasons (as well as possibly some other, less prevalent ones as well).lol I love it so much.
I refuse to get so attached to one visual design that I can't at least accept modification and moderate change later on. We see it all around society with automobiles, logos, etc., so it's just as natural that it happen in video games. Are there exceptions to the rule? Yes, there are (Mario Mario), but by-and-large it's a given that some things do change visually with time, tech, controlling interests, and preferences.
If we hadn't seen any change from HCE to HR then it would have been a bit harder to swallow once we got to H4, but in each iteration of a Halo game, aesthetics and design aspects changed. Consider that this was done internally within Bungie with their own original IP. When 343i did take over, which design aesthetic were they to match? HCE, H2, H3, HW, H3ODST, or HR? No clear cut answer. If they take the precedence set by Bungie, then it was already a precedent to change it up if for no other reason than that it was a new Halo title. Then you consider that it was a seperate company with different preferences, different approach to story, and different ideas about how far the availability of tech should help dictate detail in aesthetic, and you've got some potentially major changes that can be justified to be made.
Does that mean I like all of the designs or the decisions to make such changes? Absolutely not. I just think it's naive to make such a large issue about the changes and use the changes as points to attempt to prove the company incapable of handling the beloved series.
Complaints about the MCC, while I still feel sometimes are made simply to feel some form of self-satisfaction and justification, are in concept completely valid and worth mentioning. I can even say that if a person has such an issue with the MCC that I shouldn't complain that they don't want to trust 343i anymore. That's fine. Say your piece a single time, and then leave the series alone for those who have more patience/tolerance/understanding. But using aesthetic changes like what we've gotten as major points to same-as boycott 343i (except where it counts, the $), does nothing but cause irritation in all the wrong places.
Also, I love the graphic.
While I don't think it's worth boy cotting 343 over, I do find it worth being pointed out and criticised (constructively of course).
My issue isn't necessarily with the changes themselves so much as with the way in which those changes were implemented. While Bungie did iterate on the design of enemies, weapons, characters, etc., they still stayed true to the design itself. The grunts for example felt like natural evolutions of their design which took advantage of better tech with the most jarring change happening from 2 to 3 where their skin was made to look more like an exoskeleton. However they still kept the look and proportions of the grunt intact with Reach being for all intents and purposes the final evolution since the platform it was on was capable of rendering it with plenty of detail.
Arguably this is what 343 should've gone with for the Grunts in Halo 4. Instead however they went with something entirely different that changed not only the skin, but also the proportions and overall anotomy of the Grunts body (I feel like I speak with way too much authority on Grunt anatomy). Now, this isn't necessarily bad. Frankie later said that it was them trying to open up the universe by creating more sub species. That's cool. As a matter of fact Bungie did just that in Halo Reach with the Skirmishers which were a more aggressive sub species of the regular Jackals. And they looked the past too. The important thing here though was that they addressed this in the game by putting them alongside the original Jackals throughout the game. That's how you expand.
Halo 4 didn't do that for any of its design changes. Biological or technological. Chiefs armor could've been handled much better than "nanomachines". The only things we got were a couple throw away lines like that and "These covenant are a lot more fanatical than the ones we've fought before" which sounds nonsensical given that we've had all of 5 minutes with them and they don't seem much different.
Overall it's mostly a matter of implementation imo. They can put their new stuff in without killing off good designs.
Despite my better judgement, I am drawn into Halo 5 reveals because of the design aesthetic and the story. But then, the SOUND...what the heck is all this "clackety-clack" cheap sounding weapon fire in the videos? It all seems so tinny and inconsequential.
I like the animated hitmarkers. That being said, I think an easy way to rectify grenade hitmarkers would be to only let them show up if either A) you kill someone with it, or B) the grenade itself physically hits them. In other words, if it just happens to catch someone in the blast it wouldn't register as a hit, but if you stuck someone / nailed someone in the face with a frag grenade, you'd be notified. That way it lets you play aggressive (where permissible) but doesn't give away enemy positions on every single occasion.
HGS 2 and/or stormfront
By JayEleven Go To PostSo, minus Ragnarock, all the softies came here. Where did all the angry bitter HaloGAFers go?
HGS 2 and/or stormfront
We're back to grunts again. The new grunts are the old halo CE grunts with more polygons and mystical 343 hates nerds magic
By JayEleven Go To PostWhats the joke with stormfront?
Just a jab at "normal" gaffers getting perma'd from GAF only for their next destination to be one of the reddit hate groups. It's really 0-60 with them for some reason.
By Wesleyshark Go To PostWe're back to grunts again. The new grunts are the old halo CE grunts with more polygons and mystical 343 hates nerds magicSimply using them as an example in this case and no the new Grunts are still different to the originals in very noticeable ways (if you would like I could instead go on about the Jackals which we all know are not supposed to be the bastard children of Zilla and angler fish :p). I've given up hope that 343 will bring back the actual original Grunts but that doesnt mean i have to agree with or like their design decisions. These guys aren't too bad now though. Plus they're funny again so that wins points.
By Wesleyshark Go To PostI'm just glad they speak English again. I miss their chaotic nonsense. :pYou and me both dude.
By Wesleyshark Go To PostI'm just glad they speak English again. I miss their chaotic nonsense. :p
“I have copulated…with your genetic progenitors!”
Best "dialogue" example the ESRB has ever given in a ratings explanation
http://gameidealist.com/news/halo-5-guardians-teen-rating-explained-by-esrb/
By FUNKNOWN iXi Go To PostI got you.I'm glad some people picked up on that ;)
By -Ryn Go To PostYou and me both dude.See, we can all play nice (outside of MP, of course)
Edit: Covenant design aside, while Chief's design change was initially more jarring, I can't take the old design (the one that etched into my nostalgia core) seriously anymore. That's how much the new design added aesthetically, imo.
New Chief design or bust.
I've noticed some minor changes in the detail of the Mark IV armor between Halo Wars and Wars 2, but they only serve to enhance the look of the armor so overall i'm really enjoying the consistency.
Also liking the consistency with H2A too, like the blur BR/pistol models and the new Brute enemy looking similar to the H2A Brutes.
Blur did H2A right so i'm looking forward to their next take on Wars as well.
Also liking the consistency with H2A too, like the blur BR/pistol models and the new Brute enemy looking similar to the H2A Brutes.
Blur did H2A right so i'm looking forward to their next take on Wars as well.
By Silky Go To PostI got a couple of hours to kill before my next class. Any new Gamescom footage of Halo out?
Bout to have some pro teams face off right now
twitch.tv/halo
By AnonomissX Go To PostDespite my better judgement, I am drawn into Halo 5 reveals because of the design aesthetic and the story. But then, the SOUND…what the heck is all this "clackety-clack" cheap sounding weapon fire in the videos? It all seems so tinny and inconsequential.Welcome to real life firearms on a device that doesn't have much base.
I can confirm the game's weapons sound ridiculously punchy with headphones on. I'm not lying when I say that Halo 5 has the most incredible sound design I've ever heard in a video game. The quality of the sounds, and the skill level of the mixing present is phenomenal. The only other game I've played that comes close is Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, and by proxy MGSV:TPP.
By Fata1moose Go To PostOh no, we're not going to hear the end of this disconnect. :PAt this point, it won't matter what issues (small or large, faulted or not) there are surrounding H5G, it will inevitably be turned to "See, they suck, I told you so" trolling.
God DAMN.
I don't think I had one disconnect in the beta, but 343 can't run one tourney without getting on?
WTF
I don't think I had one disconnect in the beta, but 343 can't run one tourney without getting on?
WTF
Its bad enough it takes them 20 fuckin minutes to get a match going, but they can't even get through a 12 minute match without shitting the bed? Is this the future of Halo competitive multiplayer?
By Poodlestrike Go To PostGod DAMN.
I don't think I had one disconnect in the beta, but 343 can't run one tourney without getting on?
WTF
probably need more dedotated wam for the dedotated swuhvuhs
By Poodlestrike Go To PostGod DAMN.It has to be something server related this time.
I don't think I had one disconnect in the beta, but 343 can't run one tourney without getting on?
WTF
And yup, nothing Halo related.
By Wahrer Go To Postprobably need more dedotated wam for the dedotated swuhvuhsTHE POWERADE OF THE CLOUDICAN
By ViewtifulJC Go To PostIf only there was some way tournaments could play Halo games on a local area network…I don't think gaming is ready for such advanced technology.
Still trying to manage how an unproven, relatively new developer like The Coalition managed to get offline LAN...and not 343.....
By Silky Go To PostStill trying to manage how an unproven, relatively new developer like The Coalition managed to get offline LAN…and not 343…..
I think its something about the way Gears 1 was built for P2P. Gears 4 tournaments probably gon have these trash problems too.
By Silky Go To PostStill trying to manage how an unproven, relatively new developer like The Coalition managed to get offline LAN…and not 343…..Chances are their profile system functions radically different than other games. Whereas most Xbox One games utilize the Xbox One itself for user profiles, I'm thinking that The Coalition actually made a system to have a user profile that the game itself creates.
Of course, that's entirely baseless speculation.
By ViewtifulJC Go To PostI think its something about the way Gears 1 was built for P2P. Gears 4 tournaments probably gon have these trash problems too.
Does H1-3 in MCC have offline LAN...?