Halo Is the entire Halo series as we know it becoming old and out of date?
- Thread starter ShockBolt21
- Start date
xAudienceofone, theSpinCycle
Take a look at this screenshot of a part of my latest map, Jetpack Attack.
I think this is one time that Halo 4 really shows off its nicer look. This is really just a pretty plain enclosed area, and even if you removed the weapons and spartans, it actually looks pretty nice, with the vivid white walls and their textures, which make it look better in this case. Even if you think that the Halo 4 textures look worse in general, certainly you'll agree that they actually enhance this environment. The dynamic lighting also adds to this by darkening the area, and if I angled it right or added holes or windows to allow the sunlight to shine in, it would look even better.
If this was forged in Reach, it would look extremely dull. Not only would the grey be less pleasing to look at, but those objects have very few noticeable textures, so it would all be just a dull, ugly grey. You guys agreed that the map in the video didn't look good, and this in Reach wouldn't look any better, as they're both just enclosed spaces. Halo reach maps can look very nice when forged in the presence of/in combination with nature, but the forge objects alone look bland and monotone. Enclosed areas will always look this way in Reach, but the Halo 4 color change, enhanced textures, and dynamic lighting.
Now look at this one, from the same map.
I know that someone else could have done this better than I did, but I thought that this one showed off the dynamic lighting pretty well, as well as the objects, including those trees and that Rock 5.
I know you may disagree with me on the second one, but I still feel like I made a pretty convincing point with the first screenshot.
Take a look at this screenshot of a part of my latest map, Jetpack Attack.
I think this is one time that Halo 4 really shows off its nicer look. This is really just a pretty plain enclosed area, and even if you removed the weapons and spartans, it actually looks pretty nice, with the vivid white walls and their textures, which make it look better in this case. Even if you think that the Halo 4 textures look worse in general, certainly you'll agree that they actually enhance this environment. The dynamic lighting also adds to this by darkening the area, and if I angled it right or added holes or windows to allow the sunlight to shine in, it would look even better.
If this was forged in Reach, it would look extremely dull. Not only would the grey be less pleasing to look at, but those objects have very few noticeable textures, so it would all be just a dull, ugly grey. You guys agreed that the map in the video didn't look good, and this in Reach wouldn't look any better, as they're both just enclosed spaces. Halo reach maps can look very nice when forged in the presence of/in combination with nature, but the forge objects alone look bland and monotone. Enclosed areas will always look this way in Reach, but the Halo 4 color change, enhanced textures, and dynamic lighting.
Now look at this one, from the same map.
I know that someone else could have done this better than I did, but I thought that this one showed off the dynamic lighting pretty well, as well as the objects, including those trees and that Rock 5.
I know you may disagree with me on the second one, but I still feel like I made a pretty convincing point with the first screenshot.
That really didn't change any of my opinions. You just restated your old arguments with pictures.
Pictures that prove a point.
Look at the first screenshot and compare it with the map in the video. Which one looks better?
My point is that they prove nothing new. I've seen this stuff before and we've argued it steadily already. I agree it looks nice with the lighting, though i stand by all my previous standpoints as the images bring nothing new to this discussion. They are simply restating what you already argued, and I already gave you answers to those statements.
No they don't. But they provide a stronger argument for my previously mentioned points. They also serve as evidence to back them up. That's why I posted it.
Well, I don't think halo is dead (YET) but if halo 5 is a bad of a flop as halo 4 then personally i think it's never going to return to how it was.
Bungie let the franchise down with Reach and 343 just made it worse rushing Halo 4 out.. Now they're rushing Halo 5... We'll have to see.
I'd love a re-make of halo 3 to come out with decent servers as of now it's not worth playing.
Bungie let the franchise down with Reach and 343 just made it worse rushing Halo 4 out.. Now they're rushing Halo 5... We'll have to see.
I'd love a re-make of halo 3 to come out with decent servers as of now it's not worth playing.
@Shockbolt721
I agree with some of what you said, and while I like many of the points presented in this thread, some of which are yours, I have one thing to point out that's a *bit* of a good counterpoint to your AR statement..,
Go into a Slayer custom game and turn off shields. Then, spawn everybody with nothing but an AR. You will get many, many long range kills if you aim carefully and fire in bursts. The simple fact is, since Spartans have shielding, the bursts that would take out a marine in a couple of bullets just aren't quick or effective enough to take out a fully armored Spartan.
Sorry for the relatively short length of this post; I'm posting/reading from my mobile device, not typing.
I agree with some of what you said, and while I like many of the points presented in this thread, some of which are yours, I have one thing to point out that's a *bit* of a good counterpoint to your AR statement..,
Go into a Slayer custom game and turn off shields. Then, spawn everybody with nothing but an AR. You will get many, many long range kills if you aim carefully and fire in bursts. The simple fact is, since Spartans have shielding, the bursts that would take out a marine in a couple of bullets just aren't quick or effective enough to take out a fully armored Spartan.
Sorry for the relatively short length of this post; I'm posting/reading from my mobile device, not typing.
When you say short (off topic i know) you're VERY right about that. I've seen things on this thread 2-4 times as long as this....
Because post length totally illegitimizes whatever the poster is saying.
I was just saying that other people are typing more than you. Im not saying more words is more legit, im just saying that people have typed more to get their point across. And yes i saw the sarcasm there
I still stand by my opinion that Halo 4 is the best in the series, followed by Reach (when forge actually became worth using)
But yes, they are rushing Halo 5. 343 is under extreme pressure to make H5 an amazing game, but if they're hurrying to get it done by a time limit like they did with Halo 4 (according to some rumors I've heard), then... yes, this does concern me.
Bungie did that with Halo 2 they set a deadline for themselves... Although rumors you mentioned about 4 aren't true...
I still stand by my opinion that Halo 4 is the best in the series, followed by Reach (when forge actually became worth using)
But yes, they are rushing Halo 5. 343 is under extreme pressure to make H5 an amazing game, but if they're hurrying to get it done by a time limit like they did with Halo 4 (according to some rumors I've heard), then... yes, this does concern me.
That's actually true. But things in history have always follows a pattern- "measure, countermeasure." If armor like that was developed, it would likely stimulate the development of stronger weapons that can beat the armor, or even a whole new kind of ranged combat. The weapons in Halo are almost worthless- to the point where swords and hammers are frequently more useful (which is why they're considered power weapons). I'm not sure how I should feel about how, after 500+ years, combat has moved back to close quarters like it was during the medieval ages
Just curious (please don't take this in an offensive manner): What was your first Halo game?
FYI there was a survey a while back and most of the people who thought that Halo 4 and Halo Reach were good games joined in the Reach/H4 era.. Not sure where it is. The link might be somewhere archived on THC.
Halo CE. Then Halo 3. Then Reach. Then 2. Then 4.
However, I didn't join the community and start getting involved in forums and customs until January of this year.
Ah, I am aware of the countermeasure- but consider that one suit of Spartan armor is worth a whole Battle Group in production cost; the weapons that are mass-manufactured were designed to combat targets that are not shielded, so of course it would be less effective against a Spartan.
The Spartan-IV program weakens this point, since if EVERY soldier had a Mjolnir suit, it would definitely be reason for a countermeasure... Just one of (many) reasons I disagree with the Spartan-IV's presence in the Halo-verse.
Hmmm... good point. However, I am actually aware that it can be explained, and that the companies behind Halo have a good excuse for making it this way. But even if it is very logical and makes plenty of sense, I think that the game should change anyway. The way Halo plays makes it feel kinda like an old arcade-style space shooter, where you're a hero in a one of a kind suit- humanity's last hope- and you run straight towards hordes of aliens and kill them all. That's just not how combat works, and it's not how it should work. No strategy, no tactics, no stealth- nothing.
I do see how the concept of spartans does make sense, but it just ruins the fun of combat in my opinion.
Ahem, different difficulties maybe? Heroic and legendary allow you to actually have so escort of a challenge