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
討論區規矩與守則
5 
檢舉此篇文章
and yes evolving is a good thing
and yes Halo 4 is better then CE,2,3
but you lost me when calling the BR a good weapon... burst fire.... really????? the same barrel and ammo as the AR but it gets to headshot and be artificially, be better, even OP, like really OP in comparrison to the AR... a burst fire gun that only burst fires...
there is a reason why no weapon manufacturer makes that ♥♥♥♥ anymore, why no military around the world worth anything uses burst fire weapons
and Halo makes it the most OP POS since Halo 2 and is still holding on to it... being the most OP weapon you GOT TO USE or else you LOSE
that and the fact they are still making Halo games with aim assist for controler are keeping the franshise from becoming a truly great one
Did you turn your brain off when you played the halo 3 campaign? Serious question because I think you're either a 343 fanboy or purposely blind to the story that hey were building for 3 games...
(though you managed even to write something resembling sentences and did not scream slurs at me, I'm impressed)
edit: okay, one is in the SBI detected group and the other cries about censorship, exactly the type of people I expected rotflmao
How the ♥♥♥♥ was it "not Halo" when half the stuff is a direct continuation of 1-3 + Reach, and the other half builds directly upon it? Because the campaign tries to have a coherent story and atmosphere instead of being a Yet Another Dumb And Boring Warthog Section Simulator? In fact Halo 4 is more like Halo 1 and 2 to me than the dumbed down version that 3 is.
I had to turn off my brain to finish it. They literally stretched out and padded what should have been the last one-two missions of Halo 2 into an entire campaign, the whole thing is "yep we're still chasing that one prophet". I could basically summarize you the whole Halo 2 campaign from memory right now, all I remember from the Halo 3 campaign is the one genuinely great Cortana/Gravemind mission, and besides that just lots of crappy vehicle sections, having to destroy a million scarabs and having to choose between constantly scavenging ammo or having to use some of the worst guns I've seen in a game (Brute shot, omfg).
- Many Bungie fans being blindly anti-343i (a lot of them didn't realize Bungie wanted to ditch Halo to focus on Destiny until years later).
- Struggling to compete with other popular franchises (Halo peaked with H3, and while Reach was a strong entry in the series there were already other franchises that were gaining speed while Halo was slowly declining).
- The multiplayer Join in Progress feature (JIP) that H4 launched with encouraged a significant portion of players to constantly cycle through matches, making the matches way less fun to play (I recall it got so bad that they completely removed JIP from H4 after a few months, but the damage to the reputation was already done).
- The plot of H4's Campaign required players to really pay attention to various terminals (on sub-Legendary and Legendary difficulties) and the H3 Legendary ending, or read some of the other Halo media (books, comics, etc) to fully understand what was happening and why.
- Just the sheer amount of other games and systems that were widely available at that time (not to mention the internet in general) readily provided a huge range of alternative things to do rather than play H4.
- Time to Kill (TTK) in H4 was faster than H3, slightly faster than Reach, but slower than H:CE and H2. Ironically, moving toward the slightly shorter TTK roots of Halo caused players to feel like it was too similar to Call of Duty, and the effect was exaggerated with how the TTK steadily decreased from H3 to Reach and decreased again from Reach to H4.
All of those combined really are what gave H4 a generally bad name. Some of those things were external factors like other popular games (or other games/activities in general), while others were specific design choices that in retrospect could have been done better. Unfortunately, it seems that 343i didn't quite take their lessons to heart, because then they gave us H5.
I view H5 as the real test for 343i, because it was their chance to see if they really learned anything from their feedback about H4, and they splendidly demonstrated that they only partially understood the issues. The Campaign in particular was just... yikes. If you had played the other less popular games and read all of the books and comics then it made sense, but otherwise the plot did not make much sense. Heck, even knowing about all of that other media, the plot for H5 is still puzzling with respect to why they did what they did. The multiplayer was very polished, but the bait and switch with all of the advertisements about what the Campaign was actually about upset a lot of people, and the microtransactions they added to the multiplayer also made people mad (although it did make Microsoft a lot of money).
They even continued that same fundamental mistake with respect to basic story telling with Infinite: players who only played the core games (H:CE, H2, H3, ODST, Reach, H4, H5) were largely clueless about what the heck was going on in the world. Like H5, the plot of Infinite really required players to have played the other games (Halo Wars 1 & 2, Spartan Assault, Fire Team Raven) and read the books/comics to understand what was going on. Sure, some people did, but that was still a pretty high expectation to set for people who just remembered Halo as an XBox franchise.
Just for the record, H4 has a lot of issues, but it's more than just the art style and the slightly obscured Campaign that caused it to gain the reputation it did.
4 is no way better than 3.
the opening was decent and felt like a proper continuation of 3's ending. however the new enemies could've been a little less aggressive. but i mainly blame 343's art director for making fighting them annoying by adding stupid screen flashes when the robot dog things explode.
there was less use of a vehicles in 4 due to smaller maps. not that i mind linear stuff in halo games. i'm not a open world fan. i like linear with open areas and some cqb.
massive boring open maps is not fun.
i'm still enjoying the infinite campaign though due to the numerous encounters. can't say the same for other open world games...
[it seems that their moderator also permbanned me from the Halo Infinite forum for calling gravity hammer a bad word, rotflmao]
The stories of both can be a bit overwhelming if you hadn't played *everything* before, but they still do a decent job at being self-contained. I don't think it's any worse than 2 or 3, which are both direct sequels and don't even try to pretend to be completely standalone stories.
But I think these two parts are key:
I've seen the same people whining about newer Halos having thousands of hours in Destiny 2, one of the most notorious cash grab games in the world. It's beyond hilarious.
As someone who played all these games in order for the first time recently, it's actually pretty baffling to me how the newer games try to keep the best aspects of Halo 1 and 2, and... it seems these are the things getting the most crap. Halo 3 to me felt both slower and dumber, whereas 1, 2, 4 (and Infinite) are reasonably fast, with just the right flow, and an actual developing story and lore rather than "here's the 50th warthog section for some reason, yes you're still chasing the same prophet".
oh and
I genuinely still don't understand why and how Halo peaked with 3, as I said knowing what games were coming out at the time, it feels painfully outdated even for its time and has aged even worse (and I've been playing a whole bunch of games from the early 00s recently).
And given how Call of Duty actually got away with releasing a reskin of the same game for like 12 years now and keeps beating sales records, whereas Halo 4 and Infinite (again, can't speak for 5 as it's not on PC) which are actually good games have gotten mountains of ♥♥♥♥ thrown at them for reasons that baffle me, tells me pretty clearly that the main issue here is that innovation = bad, copypaste and more of the same = good.
RED ALERT, DEFCON 1
Are they that aggressive though? In fact, there was nothing I welcomed more than much fewer enemies like bumrush gravity hammer brutes and suicide grunts, and feeling like I was actually fighting something semi-intelligent.
And it was just the right balance. I'm not big on vehicles, but in 4 (and 2) the vehicle sections were just right and actually fun. I groaned at the third or fifth "here's a warthog/ghost and a bunch of wraiths and scarabs to destroy in an empty open field, enjoy" section in 3.
Bungie halos story
You're fighting a losing war for Earth colonies, the enemies are religious fanatics that are trying to wipe out all human life. If they get the slightest hint of where Earth is then they'll wipe it off the map, effectively destroying the last major stronghold of humanity.
You are a spartan that was kidnapped and had your death faked by a clone, you grew up being trained to be an insurrectionist pacifier but now you are the key to the war effort against an alien species.
Clear, concise and to the point. You can take this in almost any direction and make a great saga.
343 halos story
You wake up at a forerunner shield world a few years later, for whatever unknown reason the elites hate you again, after fighting through the covenant you crash onto the shield world and fight your way out because the infinity (the magnum opus) is there to save you.
You wake up the didact and he is now on his way to Earth, Cortana is also no longer to be trusted because she reached the end of her shelf life but she goes out trying to save the chief.
Oh wait - scratch that
Cortana is now your enemy, she is trying to pacify humanity. And now you need to watch out because Locke is trying to bring you back (but we had to change the story from what the trailers were about, hunting the truth)
After fighting Locke cortana takes chief and his team away
Oh wait - scratch that
The chief is now fighting the banished a split off faction from the covenant that hates them and the unsc, there an unmatched force that has almost limitless resources at their fingertips and even destroy the infinity (how? idk)
Now you may be asking how did the banished get this insane amount of resources and power in their possession, wouldn't a faction like that eventually run out of resources and scatter to the wind like pirates?? No idk why but somehow they're able to go toe to toe with the UNSC which defeated the covenant?
Somehow the UNSC has basically lost everything and is losing to the banished but it definitely isnt just lazy writing...
If you like 343's writing thats fine but it doesn't hold a candle to what bungie created and never will. I will never trust 343 especially after they hired people that hated halo to make halo what were they thinking???
https://www.343industries.org/forum/uploads/imageproxy/Halo4_360_Visuel_019.jpg.bd7f48c96f40ee05578402ef7a71f603.jpg
what were they thinking??
As for the rest, this thread is about Halo 3 and 4, not all Bungie games vs. all 343 games. I've said multiple times that Halo 1 and 2 are amazing. Halo 3 is not. Halo 4 is much better than 3 and is a return to form.
So when I wanted to enjoy 3 because I heard how great it supposedly is and got massively disappointed, then tried 4 out of curiosity and got a 10x better game that I was supposed to expect, I'm a contrarian because I don't like what I'm supposed to like?
The hivemind sheep types really struggle bad with people having different opinions.