安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
此主題已被鎖定 
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
4 stripped out stuff like playable Elites, Dual-Wielding, Firefight, and a good story to make a game that was much closer to Call of Duty. I do not think we can pin all of those issues solely on Microsoft. Microsoft is a convenient scapegoat for the incompetences of a developer who got the reins to a massive, multi-million dollar franchise without the know-how or expertise to execute it to the level of prior Halo games. Nothing 343 has put out even comes close to matching Halo CE's feel, 2 and 3's story, or 3's multiplayer.
Halo as an idea isn't dead - I'd play the living daylights of a Halo 3A or just a flat-out remake of Halo 3 that has the exact same gameplay but with more meaningful additions - but 343's execution of it has been very lacking.
Y'all wonder why you're never taken seriously and then you keep making the cod comparison that never made any sense
Spartan ops was supposed to be replace fire-fight but y'all didn't like change so it was dropped.
Duel wielding was literally garbage and dual wield-able guns were the worst to use in both 2 and 3, it was also removed in Reach because Bungie themselves didn't like how dual wielding turned out
Halo 4's story was literally untouched by 343, that was supposed to be bungie's last halo game and they didn't want to leave at the start of another story arc, congratulations you outed yourself as hating 343 for not being bungie
The elites, fair enough but that's one complaint out 4. Don't like the monetization, go after Microsoft, that's their decision, want something specific to be focused on, unify your voices over the instability infinite has over certain GPU's All 343 sees is a bunch of wild and random ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxP-q2QeKInjxv045ieSH57hB1YcNYRlMb
I played Spartan Ops - it sucks. It sucks really bad. Aside from the fact that no one plays it (apparently, there are missions in MCC that crash the game and no one knows about it), it took existing campaign maps, plonked some objectives onto it, and spawned some enemies to call it a day. You can't play it as Wave-Based Survival and you can't tweak it beyond Skulls, Difficulty and Loadout. If Spartan Ops was supposed to replace Firefight, it's a pretty pale imitation of what Firefight is.
Okay. And? Dual Wielding was fun. I enjoyed playing the game and dual-wielding guns because I thought it was fun. Bungie and 343 might not have liked it, but it worked well enough in 3 for it to be fun in Casual. The people who complained it about it most were the competitive players, and we all know listening to them results in a fantastic and fun game for casual players.
I don't even know how to tell you that you're completely wrong on Halo 4's story being something Bungie created. I don't think Bungie intended for there to be a high-level of melodrama in Halo 4, or for there to be massive retcons to the Forerunner-Human relationship. While they had a similar idea to investigate the Forerunner mystery, the Bungie staff who talked about it made it sound much more mysterious than what we got with 4.
We ultimately don't know what happened behind closed doors, but I highly doubt that the writers who created Halo 1-Reach would have written the abomination that is 4.
So we have the usual "cHanGe iS BaD" first episode you're right it was like that because it's what firefight used to be episode 2 started to add more things to do, and episode 3 and beyond barely re-used levels from campaign unless you were actually back in those areas for a reason like tracking the librarian, so you played 1/10 of it and said that's all there is.
Duel wielding, again not in reach, again opinion is not fact, and again I don't hear you ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ about it being removed by Bungie
Story: "I think" is not a fact, Bungie literally stated they wrote a script for 4, and changed to reach specifically to avoid idiots like you, they're quite familiar with how ♥♥♥♥ the halo fanbase has been since 2004
And you're stupid video, People were actually mad kill cams weren't a thing in Reach
The loadout is a continuation of Reach, The ordinance was to an attempt to deal with heavy campers that wasn't worth dealing, and you got one perk used.
If someone made a video like that for Bungie's Halo you would lose your mind about twisting words.
I have no intention of changing minds of people insisting on hating something, I do however go out of my way to make sure there isn't one side screaming so it seems like they're in the right.
Again, you want to be heard, you can stop with the justifying blatant ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ complaints
Bungie didn't write Halo 4 either. Here are the folks who wrote all the games stories up to 4.
Halo 1 - Brannon Boren, Matt Soell, Eric Trautmann
Halo 2 - Joseph Staten
Halo 3- Joseph Staten, Robt McLees, Luke Smith
Reach - Joseph Staten, Peter O'Brien
Halo 4 - Armando Troisi, Christopher Schlerf
Halo 4's story sucked exclusively because Armando and Chris are garbage story writers who very much were employed by 343. So if it was untouched by both 343 and Bungie, explain who was responsible for its story then and who employed those two story writers? I'll spoil it for you: Troisi was the Narrative director of 343 from 2011 - 2013
B. Change is bad when it's for the sake of change. Bungie made a lot of change between 1-3, and it was good change because it built up rather than radically branch out to appeal to a different audience. The introduction of kill cams and other Call of Duty esque features is not "building" on the foundation of what Halo is. Reach is a spin-off, a deliberate attempt to be different, much like ODST was a spin-off and was balanced differently. 4 was a continuation, except it took the worst aspects of Reach, and then mashed them together with Call of Duty to create a multiplayer game that lost 60%+ of its playerbase less than 4 months post-launch.
C. I don't talk about Reach much because, outside of its Campaign and Firefight, I actually don't like it very much. I don't like the weapon balance, I don't like the loadouts, and I don't like the general gameplay design. My hope was that a new mainline Halo game would go back to what worked with Halo 3. Said hopes were dashed.
D. Do you really want to get into the game of trying to determine what's fact with me? You're constantly posting your own opinion and passing it off as fact. The facts are that one employee attests to the presence of an internal script for Halo 4 at Bungie, but it never made it past the conceptual stage and he openly admits it was very different from the direction that 343 went. It also never made it past the conceptual stage, because what Bungie wanted to do wasn't possible under Microsoft's contract.
Here's a source. Something you have yet to provide,
https://www.ign.com/articles/bungie-halo-4-vision-same-343-industries
E. So the solution was to deal with Campers. A problem that 343 enabled by allowing players to spawn with Precision Weapons like the DMR to plink at you from across the map. Problem solved, I guess. Guess what? Campers got worse with Ordnance too, because now you don't have to leave your hidey hole to get a Sniper. Or Rockets. Or a Railgun. Rack up kills, get a Sniper and get some more. At least Call of Duty makes it risky to use Kill Streaks - Care Packages have to be retrieved, most air-based ones require the player to remain completely stationary and can be shot down.
In any case, Infinite's problems can be tracked back to Halo 4. That was the first nail in the coffin, Halo 5 was the funeral procession, and Infinite's launch was being lowered into the ground. This franchise is very close to the teetering edge.
A. Swearing has never been indicative if someones angry, but happy to know you're willing to share your emotions even if you need to project to make yourself feel better.
B. Duel wielding doesn't really "build" into the game when it takes away the power of previous guns. Reach is not a spin-off, a prequel is not a spin off; halo wars, and the phone games are spin-offs, but that ruins you're point, you're just factually wrong here. Thanks for ignoring the demand for kill cam btw, people wanted it because it caught cheaters a lot and that's it. and also contradicting yourself on wanting more stuff added, imagine other games existing and blaming 343 for not being first to get to it, If 4 is a CoD clone 2 and 3 are clones of 007 for N64 clones because Duel wielding and gadgets were a major part of that game. My stance is that neither are clones of a game that did it first, but you'll ignore that part to try and make a failed point.
C. Except Infinite takes direct inspiration from 3, even the biggest whiners about 343 admit Infinite does go back to that formula, so again you're just kinda proving my point about why you shouldn't be taken seriously and wonder why 343 doesn't take a barrage of stupid complaints seriously
D. thanks for proving yourself wrong the major story point that people ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ endlessly about was Bungie's idea back before Reach https://halo.fandom.com/wiki/Terminal/Halo_3
E. Actually dealt with less campers in 4 because map design made it harder to camp, the best way to play was to keep moving otherwise you would get removed with grenades/ an ordnance someone got sooner for exploring or playing the objective. Ultimately it wasn't worth the effort even if they did have an anti-snowball mechanic preventing over shields, rocket launchers, anything that's super powerful from dropping the faster you get ordnance, not very call of duty since that game has always been about snowballing.
We are actually in agreement on ordnance being bad, just because I explained why it was added doesn't mean it I found it fun, I was just happy the shotgun and needler were viable again, and I miss the speed boost power up 4 introduced
Also, if you want to really have fun with it, Wikipedia has Halo Reach and ODST categorized as spin-off games.
Anyway, to the point about the kill-cam - that's the job of the anti-cheat to detect cheaters. Halo's lack of death-cam is intentional, so you can use the time you're dead and staring at your corpse to watch it either get t-bagged (as is tradition) or observe your surroundings. This was a feature in Halo 2, 3, Reach, 5 and arguably even Infinite. Funny that Halo 4 is the only Halo game to have a kill-cam... Which was later removed because it served no purpose. Also, you conveniently forget that Theater exists (though 343 has forgotten about that too, seeing as it rarely works in their games).
As for your point about N64 games... Literally what are you even trying to say? As far as I'm aware, Halo 2 and 3 didn't lift features wholesale from the 007 games and hap-haphazardly slap them into their own games. You're wrong, buddy, try again.
C. Halo Infinite does harken back to the classical Halo days, but it's not as close as I would like for a number of reasons. Shock Weapons, for example, are insanely overpowered. Shock Rifle is just a better Sniper Rifle, as it also kills on headshot, but has the added bonus of lots of ammo, EMPing vehicles at any range, daisy-chaining damage, and is more common than the Sniper Rifle. Halo Infinite is probably the best 343 Halo game by far, but it's still a far cry from how incredible Halo 3 in particular executed its gameplay. Even little details like inertia-based movement are completely absent in Halo Infinite. Others, like the lack of team colors, ensures I'll never play it again until the feature is added back into the game as I and others have been subject to not knowing what team people are on. It sucks.
D. To address the Terminals first - those were written by Frank "It's like P---, you know it when you see it" O'Connor. Frank O'Connor was a blog-writer at the time for the Halo franchise, and had no creative input on its story. There's a reason those Terminals suck, and should have been stricken from canon if Bungie would continue with the franchise. There's also a reason why you'll get two answers on who the Forerunners are based on who you ask, as Frank O'Connor was given relative free reign to do whatever he wanted with those Terminals.
Now, to address the article - you're reading what you want to out of that. Halo 3 ends with Chief drifting toward a planet. While this was originally a Marathon reference, I don't doubt that Bungie intended for that to be where Halo 4 took place. From what angle, I can see the similarity. However, the article also very clearly states that what 343 did with the game in terms of its direction is a stark difference from what Bungie wanted to do. I would imagine that their plans more sat alongside the lines of what they originally did with Destiny as opposed to what happened with Halo 4.
E. HA. As if. Halo 4's loadout system crippled that game. The Meta Loadout was DMR, Boltshot, Plasma Grenades and Promethean Vision. You find a nice little corner, pull out your DMR, and start taking pot shots. Check your motion tracker to see if anyone's coming, use the Promethean vision to see if anyone is coming at you, and then go back to camping. If someone is, Boltshot em, it has a longer kill range than the Shotgun. Outside of vehicles, I can't even remember any on-map pickups for Infinity Slayer game modes, and because all drops are otherwise randomized in non-Infinity modes, there's no reason to explore the map and find new weapons anyway. Least of all when new ones just appear in front of you.
Pitch your tent, camp to your hearts content, and get your Power Weapons so you can punish anyone coming at you or continue camping. That's the Halo 4 way.
Oh, and you also regenerate Shields while Sprinting, so just Sprint away if someone gets on you. There's literally no downside to doing this, and there are Tactical Packages that openly reward this style of gameplay.
Reach was a solid step up again though, I'm inclined to believe 3 fell short because of McLees and Smiths influence. They coulda pressured him like "No no no, we should do it *this* way." and he caved. Things like that happen a lot when translating a script into a game/movie/show, usually by the editor though.
C. Yeah and that wouldn't happen for you if even bungie returned, all the map makers left I think 6 months after it released (boy does it show in crucible maps) Halo 3 was awful in weapon balance, it had the same problem 2 did in that the only effective non power weapon gun was the battle rifle, except now the shotgun is total garbage, they for no reason at all nuked the pistols fire-rate making it slower than switching from PP to BR for head shots, the energy sword could be replaced with the gravity hammer since that can hit more than one person and knock others back, and the carbine got screwed in hit registration. The only thing 3 does have infinite beat is content but that's not going to last if Staten is given to permission to get the ball rolling.
D.oh so a bungie employee since halo 2 doesn't matter? I mean it's not like he had to work with the story writers to not spoil anything for the lead up updates, oh wait that was part of his job and why he got selected to write for 3 and ODST. I mean it's almost like you have to make an invalid excuse for your argument or something and but nothing on the article when it exactly states the main story about the didact was the intended focus for Bungie's 4 and also you know ♥♥♥♥ all about bungie's Destiny story because they don't know either, that over-all plot has changed 3-4 times now, even base Destiny's ending implied the speaker wasn't a good guy before quickly scrapping that.
E. Yeah, that was how it used to be played, and I know for a fact you never played 4 because the DMR,LR,BR were interchangeable (people demanded BR starts be default since 2 but ignore that like you ignore everything else wrong with your arguments) The boltshot beat the Carbine in 3 in terms of most unreliable gun, in my 100 hours of 4s multiplayer (because i was in highschool and couldn't afford live membership often, but once again im sure you'll ignore the fact you need a subscription for halo multiplayer on console) I got killed by the boltshot twice, in the same match and the dude needed someone else to help him.
Even without getting hard counteted by an Armour Augment that removed you from it's sight (and hid your name when getting shot at) Promethean vision was awful, it's range was short, and the predator vision effect was so disorienting also it was very fun to troll these people with holograms they were my main source of assassinations. The actual meta was something like precision gun/AR or Storm rifle with flinch resistance being busted or stick with plasma pistol/pistol and go for x4 nades, the ordnance perk actually sucked because again, the sooner you got it the worse the choices were, so 90% of people stuck to faster shield recharge with 10% switching off for experimentation or going for armor achievements like I believe wetwork required something else be picked.
Reach had a lot more campers outside maybe 2 because it's map layouts made it hard to chase people out with grenades, mostly because bubble would HEAL PEOPLE and crap like the Rocket launcher and sniper rifle were in very easy to defend spots as opposed to being out in the open
It's starting to become more obvious you never actually really played the halo games with how much ♥♥♥♥ you're ignoring
Story 1 is wanting to show a desperate fight for survival by Humanity against Aliens that clearly outmatch them in most respects.
Story 2 is "Oh, this is a PREQUEL to Halo CE, gotta tie it in a bit" and throws Cortana and the Pillar of Autumn in. Outside of the presence of Halsey in one mission at the start of the game, there isn't a lot of hint that there's anything deeper going on than "War, but it's going badly."
Think about 1, 2 and 3's story. Even ODST's. They all have a clear goal they're working towards, and have the typical story structure of rising action, climax, falling action though a bit more spread out. This story structure is in place because it works - think about how great it felt to finish off Truth in 3, or the betrayal of the Elites in 2, or the revelation that the giant Hula Hoop in CE is a Death Hula Hoop.
I think Reach has a strong story, but it would have been stronger if they committed to one and stuck with it. For all its faults, I do like 3's story a lot - not only because it has a hint of the wider mythos without becoming deeply mired in it to the point the game suffers (ala Halo 4, 5 and Infinite) but because it's a satisfying conclusion to the trilogy.
since launch they added forge, 3 arena maps, and what else? this is less of a halo game than Reach was. i never played 4 or 5 and i can say without a doubt this game is a downgrade from what we got in Reach. how long ago did that game come out? that was the last good Halo game.