Jump to content

TheCelticDragon

Member
  • Content Count

    334
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. But ODST was fun, and reach had its moments.. though yea after CE anni, H4, MCC and H5 i don't think a person or people could change the quality, until the structure and direction changes it'll just be more disappointment, and little replay value.
  2. wow i didn't know that, great to hear kevin franklin left, lead designer of infinity settings, warzone and breakout? good riddance.
  3. i liked going in to multi-team to get stylish ninjas, or getting easy nade multi-kills in multi-team koth. randomly choosing a guy before game and devoting all your energy in shutting him out of the game and demoralizing him barrelling into the other team at the start of the game just to get first strike trolling teammates with the laser pre-fire beam voting for vertical maps in reach (like spire or swordbase) to get falling assassinations debris kills scaring players by jumping out from semi-concealed places throwing blind cross-map nades and getting kills signing in to two controllers and getting high sprees as both the warthog driver and gunner searching full 8s in BTB and not get a death to the other team finding unorthodox ways to spawntrap people winning the game with the least map and weapon control possible (without camping)
  4. not to be nit-picky but i find gow 3 to be more like reach and judgment like h4, either way they were both pretty shit and it's great to see gears 4. i feel we're currently like star wars fans, we're just going through the prequel phase, we might never get classic halo again, but if we get something like the new trilogy, a company with their head screwed on properly, then maybe, we'll get to enjoy halo like people are enjoying gears 4.
  5. h5 has like no social gameplay, the gameplay it does have is trash, unless you want to play warzone, which is just an attempt to re-introduce infinity BTB with additions. i'd rather have the reach nonsense than shit playlists, a game with more focus on autos, bland maps, shit aiming system, poor user interface, not being able to find games at peak times because you live in a foreign country (in reach i could find games at 3am in snipers every time), and a game with over the top movement and pacing. a game where you can chain thruster, infinite sprint, ground pound, clamber, slide and stabilizers is far worse (for me) than jetpack or a 2 second invincibility for scrubs.
  6. i read that as the games final outcome eg close games, though it seems they were implying that random aiming systems could induce that..which isn't quite translatable considering they studied the reaction of chess players and not something that required a dice roll. When a game lacks uncertainty (or in a video game sense the least amount of uncertainty) then close games ie games with an uncertain final outcome are more enjoyable than a clear win, hence why people lose their shit over a close series or comebacks. The same doesn't apply to monopoly, or atleast after a few games of monopoly when you realise you don't have full control of the outcome. still even these researchers can't quite seem to differentiate a final outcome in a game based on certainty vs uncertainty. It was the comment just before the one you posted that irked me the most "Therefore the increased competition and increased uncertainty of the outcome of games in which the weaker player is assisted are experienced as more enjoyable for stronger players too." what i was talking about in my first paragraph comes down to these two posts "In a study of internet chess players, Abuhamdeh and Csikszentmihalyi [1] found that enjoyment peaked when players held a small performance advantage over their opponent (slightly smaller than the value of a pawn). Although unexplained by self-determination theory, the authors hypothesized that the differences could be explained by the suspense of an uncertain outcome." "Our results mirror these effects in the case of multiplayer FPS scenarios. Our participants experienced greatest enjoyment with the balancing scheme that made the games closest, i.e., where the outcome was most uncertain. In addition, our stronger participants sensed that their weaker opponent was assisted, yet still felt the most enjoyment when outcome was uncertain" thankfully they realised what could undermine their research in the limitations section.
  7. While movement options are great i think i'd rather have more subtle movement, one that works off (what used to be) the amazing halo physics system rather than them being mapped to a button press. Stringing them together can bring a technical element, though there are ways to introduce more movement tech without having to sacrifice actions or over-emphasizing its impact on map flow and movement. what i'm trying to generalize here is that i'd rather see UT 99 movement or quake 3 than something a little more over the top like tribes. For me it's the significance of movement tech that i don't enjoy about h5, i'm uncertain if that's why others dislike it though.
  8. Reach had AAs and bloom 4 had personal ordnance, global ordnance, AAs, h4 beam, boltshot off spawn, quick weapon despawn, personalized loadouts, the promethean weapon set, the saw, rail and sticky were very inconsistent online, the mantis, all vehicles were shit etc etc ..reach wins reach had countdown, zealot, boardwalk, powerhouse, reflection and swordbase 4 had haven, adrift, solace, abandon and complex this may be controversial, but i would rather have a shit game loaded with AAs on swordbase, than to play on either fucking solace, adrift or complex, abandon was also shit and haven < zealot and countdown ..reach wins reach had snipers, swat, BTB, slayer, multi-team, infection, grifball, action sack, mlg, rumble pit, team objective and doubles, all before 2011 (except for MLG i believe), within the first 3 months, and smoothed out from what they were initially. 4 we had to wait for snipers, competitive game-mode and doubles, slayer and BTB were infinity slayer and BTB, h4 swat was shit, so was infection actually to be honest even with updates doubles was the only fun thing for me in this game, all the other playlists offered fuck all else. ..so yet again reach wins in my opinion reach had a shit direction with an ok result, h4 had an even worse direction and something that didn't look, feel or play like a halo game reach just had better and more halo-like maps, weapons, vehicles, art-style, audio design, playlists and mechanics
  9. guess i'll make the first proper reply, you don't need a creative writing degree to write creatively in the same way you need a music degree to play music, however what you do need is understanding. Character bios are nice to have but there's a few key issues, usually you don't find your way with them or even start to reveal any true character. What i've done as a means to tell story is usually either try to draw to get a very general idea of the character or write some really rough text, usually pretty scrambled, maybe some dialogue, monologue, speaking as a narrator etc. I like to get a visual sense as much as the conceptual / intangible. I find idealism usually leads to failure as it's those imperfections or a way to view things that really make it stand out, usually writers who try to put their stuff in visual format (tv, films, games) get an artist to really market it for their pitch. though it depends on what route you want to go down, i'd look up pitches of tv, film, games you like and/or also read some really classic novels / short stories or watch films and play games with the intent to learn off it not just idle viewing (don't do it if it's your first time through though). Study and take notes, whatever you think is valuable information becomes it, if you can put it to good use. to give my take on your situation try to write a bio about yourself, using your method, then think of all the personal experience / feeling / thoughts and moments that bio has missed about your life, especially all the little things or the things you wish weren't there or hadn't happened and all the grey area. That's the fun bit, the enjoyable part, the stuff people want to watch, to see it unfold or continue (not always "progress"), now try to imagine that through your character, live in that experience and find the story in it. I wouldn't waste my time being in the shadow or experiencing it vicariously through others, quite often it's found the hard way, trial and error, trying to replicate someone or be something that isn't what others have done will never yield the results you're looking for. atleast that's my 2c
  10. reminded me of age of empires online
  11. i don't think speed is the issue, halo is slow yet i find the pace much faster than most modern, movement ability focused shooters these days. there is less perceptible competition in-game in modern shooters, engagements have less value and every action has less impact on the game, less pressure, less pace. i feel aside from quake and quake clones the shooters today are faster in movement, but have less thought, less punishment, less calculation and prediction, less management / multitasking, less influence on the outcome etc. the locus of control is moving further away from the player, even without randomness and imo it's because of factors such as complexity in map and mechanic design being less important due to power off spawn, less variables to play with because of power off spawn and more abilities to the player to the point there is less value in execution, and manipulation of other players, since abilities are easy to perform but difficult to punish, unlike quake where you try to acquire power off spawn or through performance. the focus on empowering the player has devalued the competitive merit of the game, for very much the same reason as items are in smash, perks / loadouts in cod or slot machines, no matter how poor you perform with more options at your disposal you'll at least get some lucky streaks. games are always meant for the general audience, and getting shit on is bad business (at least that's what i think the devs think), however lol, dota 2 and CS:GO are the biggest games atm and they are competitive, dunno why AAA console games cling to the everyone is a winner mentality when there are other avenues to enrich a players experience.
  12. Probably an ignorant question since i don't know your career or how much time you have, but have you ever looked into maya or other modelling software? always wondered what someone the like of you or waldo could do with more options at your disposal.
  13. looking too far into it. all gaming execs are awkward to some degree on stage, E3, conferences etc. unlike others, microsoft and 343 aren't big on the personality department..also on that roger goodell comment, John Lasseter is the chief creative officer of pixar, walt disney animation and disney toons, yet he still dresses like he's vacationing in the 80's.
  14. it was a general reference not an exact comparison, people grow up with basketball and still have an opportunity to compete, there just isn't a league anywhere near the calibre of the nba, also there's no other sport that has one country more dominant than the us, that isn't local (nfl), i just can't think of a closer comparison, aside from other gaming communities, LoL being the obvious one.
  15. sorry i was supposed to mention the olympics in that, the event where all countries compete, the key point is why make the competition so exclusive at the cost of downgrading global presence? akin to basketball where there's a good bet that the 30 nba teams would be above most countries, though with more representation through events like the olympics you see global competition, even if that's at the cost of a lower skill ceiling. Edit: tormented already had it covered EU and OCE teams will never be as large as NA, though it's not like it's a new development, these have been scenes since H1 too, and aside from the few chances to fly over this is the first event to truly allow foreign teams to have more of a chance, since at WCG NA sent their B teams
×

Important Information

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