Jump to content

TheIcePrincess

Member
  • Content Count

    5,530
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

2 Followers

About TheIcePrincess

  • Birthday 05/21/1998

Recent Profile Visitors

40,892 profile views
  1. I would defo just dig a big-team gametype with no vehicles all the time. Or at the least, go to H2A standards where I can one shot a Ghost and borderline one tap a 'Hog that can in turn merk me. Former more just because even at their weakest, vehicles can still give cheese kills and have a dumbass amount of presence.
  2. Arguably. Difference is I'm only speaking on older-style Halos. Not newer ones changing older mechanics. H2A is relevant to me since only because it's the older-style Halo 343i had involvement in. And it's a specific remake of an older Halo, allowing for a direct comparison of how they handle things. Whereas Halo 4 wasn't following up on Halo 2's original promise to include it. To the map, doesn't matter about praise. I don't really care. It existed for an identical purpose, it's gimmicky. You can argue they're a non-factor but that really only speaks to bias here, lol. H2A's can literally be summed up in the same way as Wetwork. Inconsequential and a pure non-factor. But in this case, one's brought up as inherently negative and gimmicky, and the other is being argued on the basis of it being a non-issue. Can't really pick and choose. It's a literal 1:1 gameplay mechanic. Is it gimmicky, bad, and somehow a point to prove they can't make a Halo, or is it really just a non-issue that is, at best, needless, and not really an issue in the long run and in the core gameplay loop.
  3. No one was talking about belonging, lol. I'm only saying they followed their original plans through, and as such do understand what they hell they're doing. Of course, with this last post I made, I forgot how Halo 2 did have "gimmicky falling rocks" on Wetwork. So H2A didn't add them as a fully new function. They already existed and H2A just executed them on the original arena maps they were intended for.
  4. If by long shot, you mean wading through shit, then yeah, better and still synonymous to the point that Halo doesn't have a good strafe and hasn't until Halo 5's settings enabled us to rocket around like freaks in spite of our joystick limits. Second, nade indicators aren't bad, lmao. Third, we know hitmarkers aren't bad for weapons, they're only funky for nades. Fourth, we also know gimmicky falling ice was part of Halo 2's development, and was included as part of the fact the game's a "director's cut" of the original title. Finally, you ignored the point. Older Halos always had easier guns and magnetism properties and again, always had a shit strafe. HOW shit is up for debate, but it's never been good, and we know this. And we also know Halo 2 specifically has one of the easiest spawn weapons on the planet with a wide-ass reticle, and generous magnetism with it. H2A literally just continued a trend in Halo's basic design. A pretty big part of basic design. Meaning they actually do understand how to make a classic Halo. And not just that, but in the case of the falling ice, they understand their actual original vision enough to capitalize on it and make it a reality.
  5. I don't, luckily. But I certainly recall older Halos having easier (At the most, inconsistent) weapons, and slow-ass strafes along with H2A. Almost as if their remasters carried over their basic gameplay elements to a tee, lmao.
  6. I'll take a whoosh for 500. Lotta this has buttfuck all to do with actual gameplay. And some of this isn't even exclusive to H2A. Like the strafe and mag properties which we know carry over to other older Halos. If anything, the gameplay flaws like that should make it more obvious they understand how to make an older-style Halo.
  7. No, I don't think I could. Mostly because I like varying things in what I listed across varying titles in varying contexts, lol. I don't have a "specific" thing I like for most things. The only thing I can elaborate on is how longer killtimes have more of a tendency to enable better players to dominate bots. Or, rather, show it better. Since you have a full second or so of fighting you can process. And learning that curve on its own is its own reward.
  8. How it can looks, how it feels, the type of gameplay it can enforce at its subjective best, and the gap between those who suck and those who're gods being much wider than some other games. Among other things.
  9. Depends on how said feature's implemented. If it's done better, people will stay, if it's done worse, they'll go. Although, I don't think that'd be the sole driving force. If you added a Halo gameplay feature to CoD, I don't think Halo players would stay or go solely based on that feature's implementation, they'd go because CoD itself is a wildly different beast, already. To the latter, I dunno, dude, lol. People don't watch good H3 tournaments, let alone play it.
  10. I never once said what they actually ended up doing was the good part, just the idea of broadening their staff horizons. Former's just a matter of perspective. Dunno what Infinite has to do with this, though. More so to the point, if it has things I like, and results in me playing it, then obviously it's something a Halo fan wants given I play games in the franchise and tend to enjoy them, lol. Are we gonna start this slippery slope of insinuating who's a true(er) fan and who isn't based on what they like, again? Barring the fact we, yunno, dunno anything about the game, so, lol.
×

Important Information

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