Jump to content

BigShow36

Member
  • Content Count

    1,329
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by BigShow36

  1. I like how proper aiming is still some impossible conundrum for new Halo games.
  2. How can I change your mind when you've just clearly displayed to us that you've lost it?
  3. Actually they've been in every game since the beginning (including CE). They are also one of the things that even "CE purists" would be just fine getting rid of. Damnation would play a hell of a lot better without them.
  4. I really wanted to like the game because of all the awesome features it has, but the maps, lighting, and claymore type shit just make it an absolute campfest of randomness. It just wasn't fun for me.
  5. There's always a silver lining to Halo being so shitty; it makes you go outside and do other things.
  6. An opinion on subjective taste can't be wrong. If you define opinion as "a personal judgement on a subjective matter," then no, an opinion cannot be wrong. But that's not the definition of opinion, no matter what people on here seem to want to think. Here are several definitions: " a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter" "a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." "the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing." "a formal statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter." "opinion and belief mean a judgment that someone thinks is true." None of those definitions require an opinion to be unverifiable or completely subjective. You can have an opinion on something that is factually incorrect, whether those facts are currently known or not known. People are trying to argue that I'm using "opinion" wrong because it doesn't meet their definition of opinion. That's not how it works.
  7. It's hardly pedantic when we're literally debating whether or not an opinion can be wrong. To continue with the example then, using your definition of opinion as "a judgement based on facts known to you at that time" (I don't agree with that definition, btw): someone 500 years ago could be of the opinion that the earth is flat, based on all the known facts at that time. That opinion would be wrong. An opinion does not require factual backing to be considered an opinion.
  8. Let's use a different example: In my opinion, your opinion is wrong. Now where do you go?
  9. "opinion [əˈpinyən] NOUN a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing." An opinion is a view or judgement on something. It does not require that "something" to be a subjective matter. I can "view" the earth as being flat; in my opinion the earth is flat. Factually, that's an incorrect opinion. The existence of proof refuting an opinion does not suddenly make it not an opinion, it makes it a factually incorrect opinion. i.e. your opinion can be wrong. Your assertion that opinions are only about "likes" is false. Opinions about subjective material, such as enjoyment or taste, cannot be "wrong," but that does not mean that all opinions cannot be wrong. It's not a misuse of the term opinion, it's just a dumb opinion.
  10. That right there is how you balance vehicles. We need to get it out of our heads that vehicles need to be overpowered "because they are vehicles." They need to be balanced, and that means throwing some realism out the window. The Scorpion was an indestructible, one-shot kill behemoth in CE, but it wasn't overpowered because you could snipe the driver right out of it. Every vehicle should give opposing players the opportunity to slay the driver with a few well-placed shots.
  11. That's the same argument for having power weapons on a pick-up timer. "If you don't grab the rockets the first time, you should have even less of a chance of getting them the second time."
  12. They don't do any damage. Furthermore, I certainly wouldn't reward them by potentially allowing them to land a shot with random bloom.
  13. The depth of any gametype, SWAT included, should not and can not come from random elements of shooting.
  14. Beyond the punishments that already come from missing and assuming we're talking about a headshot specific 1-shot gametype? Yes, I disagree.
  15. Decrease aim assists, increase strafe. Problem solved, and you just avoided the shitbag of issues that come with bloom. Bloom does the opposite of what you think. If I'm a bad player playing against a good player, I want bloom. I want as much randomness as possible. If I know the other player has better aim than me, then spamming the trigger and getting as many shots downrange in as short a time as possible, even with bloom, will work out in my favor. Simple is better.
  16. The fact that another player is shooting back is the punishment. Why are we complicating this?
  17. No, there really doesn't need to be. If you miss a shot, the other player has an opportunity to land a shot. If you both miss, then you both need to aim again. With bloom, you both now have randomness affecting your 2nd shots. Completely unnecessary. You've got the Bungie logic going. "We need to make shooting harder, let's add bloom." How about you just lower aim assist and make strafing better?
  18. A bullet that goes straight. You see, it misses 100% of the time.
  19. Hyperbole. The very existence of bloom ensures that someone hits a headshot when they should have missed. You know who really isn't hitting headshots? People who miss when there is no bloom.
  20. Except it can also reward players who miss.
  21. Sure, but that doesn't mean it's a good thing, and we're talking very different levels of bloom/randomness vs. Reach. One of the reasons I never got into CS as a kid was because of the randomness. You ignore bloom in Reach because there isn't any other option. That's the issue with random features; you literally cannot do anything about them. If someone enjoyed playing Reach enough to play the tournaments, I would suspect that they accept bloom and are willing to play with it. The top pros ignored bloom, but that doesn't mean plenty of other players (who could have been pros) didn't abandon the game because of bloom. It's just survivorship bias, like current Halo 5 players having no issues with the movement or abilities; they're the only players left playing the game, so of course they accept the gameplay as it stands. Everyone else has already abandoned the game.
  22. The point is that bloom NEVER HELPS THE PLAYER WITH BETTER AIM. No one is saying that spamming with bloom is better than having perfect accuracy on the first shot; that's a completely asinine strawman. What people are saying is that bloom will always bring an element of randomness that can ONLY be beneficial to the player with worse aim on average. The punishment for missing a shot is that you missed the shot. 1 less bullet in your magazine, 1 more bullet fired by your opponent. Why add randomness to that?
×

Important Information

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