Jump to content

TheIcePrincess

Member
  • Content Count

    5,053
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

2 Followers

About TheIcePrincess

  • Birthday 05/21/1998

Recent Profile Visitors

39,182 profile views
  1. Both had some fucked settings on launch. Fucked abilities. But Halo 4 had the ability to shoot your gun straight. With every single precision weapon you picked up and used.
  2. Why not, what. Don't get the question. Second, I disagree. I think the game stayed relevant because people played more than just forge on it. Multiplayer, for shit, or shittier had a good hook for people, ranks existed, MLG was in full swing, the like. Forge helped. I wouldn't say it was THE reason. It was A reason. Third, I still disagree with the notion you need entirely new concepts to succeed. Or that the lack of them is what killed the games following 3. Don't get where you get this idea, lol. MCC on PC I wasn't docking because the sequential release of a title is much different than Halo 5's manner of "sustain". One is releasing a full title as it's ready, and then moving onto the next. That I don't mind when you're literally getting a full game ported over time. It's not just "one feature", it's THAT game you want for PC. So it's nowhere near Halo 5. My only issue is Reach's manner of removing forge and theater for what is apparently an overhaul? But still launching it first. Why not just do CE/2/3 and so on then since Reach isn't ready. I'll dock the individual game for not releasing content, but not a collection for pushing out individual content filled games. So it's not featureless. It's just one full game, lmao. I don't consider games to be "features", they're individually filled with features, and in this case, happen to be unified, UI wise. Already ranted on why I think the idea that the sequential release is bad is a misguided one as it was. Was in a past response, lol. I'm not saying Halo would have the pull it did ten years ago. Nowhere did I say that, even IF the hype train somewhat disagrees with me and tons of people are stoked for this. I just find it funny that it's to the point where critically acclaimed games NEED mods to live. I find the heelturn hilarious, given how much we praise these games for their gameplay, yet, they apparently won't stand a chance on their gameplay alone. Despite having sustained a population before, for a decade, without mods as their UGC and social mechanics worked well in aiding a game's lifespan. Again, mods aren't bad. Not against them at all, and do want them. But they will not kill a game if they're not there. Other games exist to show this just as much as games with mods do.
  3. Halo died on console because of games fans deemed subpar. Halo succeeded during a decade's worth of no mod support. Never forget that, lmao. No mod support isn't the reason Halo died.
  4. Apparently on PC, and playing Apex, waiting for the next Halo, lol. I don't blame them for not existing now when the last new title was in 2015, lol. Still doesn't really shake how tons of people are excited over this announcement. And Halo 3's success (Just for the sake of argument) had so much more to do with hype and the time where it came out (Being the end of a trilogy, and the first Halo on a new console following the acclaimed Halo 2) over forge and theater being features that exist. Don't get me wrong, they're great features and aided in longevity with the advent of the file share for consoles. Buuuuuuuuuuuuuut I would argue they were not the reason the game sold like hotcakes, nor would I say that, just because a Halo past it didn't bring anything hilariously new to the table means THAT'S why they hemorrhaged population numbers, even though that statement is disingenuous. Take Halo 5. Its forge alone makes Halo 3's forge absolute garbage in comparison. It was the endcap of this near decade of refinement for forge, and made something truly special, while not being an inherently new feature. Which I argue is more important. Given how much Halo 5's forge can do. And that's just forge. It doesn't count the customs browser, and I'd argue MCC's match composer, while not in a mainline title is an insanely cool innovation for consoles that sets a good standard for multiplayer based repackages of games. One that 343i is setting their own really good bar for. However, 5 lost people because it was feature-less on launch, and also pretty alienating to casual and most hardcore fans. Not because it failed to bring insanely new bright shiny features. Because it did that in spades, just fine. And that's also going with the fact that games don't need to innovate to be successful long term, either, as shit like CoD shows. Again, I'm not arguing modding isn't good, or can't be needed. But one has to remember Halo literally succeeded for a decade or so without major modding capabilities ever being officially endorsed widely. Again, major modding being implemented into Halo didn't really happen until about Halo 4, when 343i ran with mods for some new gametypes they put into MM. The franchise succeeded on other aspects, over the ability for the end user to radically change the core game through aesthetic means, or the like. Given gameplay means WERE provided in forge. You can't tell me Halo somehow needs it now, of all times, or it'll die when you're talking about four games that literally kept their population hooked for a decade or so, without them. Apparently, besides what I think, the games were good enough on their own for a good technological, and platform-based bump to be all they need for a good few more years of life with a new community. I want mods, mostly for some aesthetic reasons. I don't think they're gonna be the reason this collection keels over. Nor do I think they would stave it off, fully.
  5. It's like you missed the entire announcement for Halo on PC, lol. Or the years of people wanting PC Halo. Doesn't really disprove my point either. In short, if a game is good, I would expect people to play it en masse, regardless of mods. Other games prove this. Mods can help, but aren't an essential backbone unless your game is designed around UGC, which it doesn't need to be to survive. Aaand I consider the staggered release argument to be a slight cop-out, or at least misused. I'm waiting to play H2A and H4 on PC. The fact they're coming later than other games won't dissuade me from MCC on the PC given I never cared about the other games enough to play in the first place, bar brain-melting social times with friends. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts because of how Halo is, everyone has their favorite like I do. I'd bet hardcore the people who're getting MCC to play every single Halo or don't care and end up playing them all are in an honest minority, and are a part of the population that won't really stick around. Most people have their one or two Halos they enjoy, and a staggered release means dickall when the games as a full release (Barring Reach for some reason I assume we'll learn of later) are being ported over time. This isn't like Halo 5 where it's one game being patched in with old content over time, driving people away. It's an essential hub being patched in with full titles over time. Someone who loves Halo 3 won't be offput when Reach, CE and 2 come out before it, if they never cared for those titles. They'll just wait for Halo 3, lmao. Or fill space with the other games. Same for every other title. I'd expect the worst part to be optimization if anything. If the build is stable now, and already PC native (Given MCC's origins) porting it to work across a ton of variable settings is the biggest issue. We already know it works, there's no real reason for it to not work unless they went back to an earlier build to port, which I doubt. Kinda like Halo 5's shit optimization.
  6. I mean, yeah, I'd assume tens of thousands of players would swoop in to just play a game to play a game, provided it's good enough, regardless of mod support. Especially if they've never been able to by virtue of the platform. The most popular games now in some cases don't inherently have it. Halo 1-Reach didn't have it originally, either. While I'm not saying it's a negative to have them, I don't think not having them for now will tank a game that is simply good and can stand on its own from a purely gameplay perspective, and I find the idea that Halo running on gameplay alone seemingly isn't good enough to last without them to be funny, given how much praise the past titles get for that reason, lol. Past Halos certainly didn't need it to succeed, current games now don't need it to, even though it can aid in longevity.
  7. So, the games, feature complete and all, really can't stand on their own as good games that hook people for a good, long time without community mod support, and are just a novelty product. Something that wasn't ever brought in in any way until Halo 4. Lol.
  8. N o b o d y p l a y s t h i s g a m e a n y m o r e. So, yes.
  9. I know, I just wish they did it from the get-go as it was, over just randomly omitting it. There shouldn't have to be clamoring and hype to get a past pretty major feature in game. ALTHOUGH, on an unrelated note, come to think of it, MCC on PC will now basically eradicate the need for a file share, given Steam's store hub can operate like one. If we can put forge maps and shit on the workshop, unf. It'd be a superb implementation of a past feature with present software.
  10. Or they just rushed the port job, given MCC's dev history.
  11. Just wish they'd do it for Halo 3 and 4, lol. Dunno why this wasn't a thing they went for in the first place if they make a big deal of it here.
  12. I can get being mad about form over function, because I agree with the idea, but you're actually nuts if you think Coli and Truth are dogshit, lmao. They're literally two of the three best maps in that game's competitive suite. They look good and convincing lore-wise, but unlike Eden, or Torque, they didn't suffer in the gameplay department.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.