IIRC, it's always been there, just the bar was set high. Pretty sure they talked about it in a HWU.
Printable View
IIRC, it's always been there, just the bar was set high. Pretty sure they talked about it in a HWU.
I also remember 343 Industries saying in a Bulletin that they were removing the daily credit cap, I can't be crazy, right?
HmmmQuote:
Originally Posted by Hotrod
That may be what I'm recalling thenQuote:
Originally Posted by Kornman00
Hmm, is that the level cap, or is it the offline/online conversion? Iirc, if you get achievements offline, your credits are far higher than when you go online, and it converts them as such.
Welp, that first pic says Halo 4
*e: In fact, if you go in order by terminals:
they say...
1: 343GS
2: HALO4
3: SPARK
4: FLOOD
5: EARTH
6: DEMON
7: RINGS
8: ARRAY
9: HUMAN
10: HAVEN
Bump.
Who else thinks Matchmaking in Halo: Reach needs a tune-up? Check out this article.
I would love to see these implimented into Matchmaking. They would make the game so much more fun.
so uhh is that some sort of console-only-syndrome?
PUNISHING players for leaving a game?
why the hell and how the hell is that reasonable?
if i dont want to play anymore, i quit, regardless of reason.
and here they're suggesting that if i leave a game, i'm not allowed to join another until the game i left has actualyl ended.
WHHHUUAATTTTT????
can anyone explain this garbage to a PC-gamer?
I don't get it either... Being punished for quitting is retarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by neuro
I can understand it because it pisses me the fuck off. In Halo, now-a-days, you're fucked over by spawn kills and superior numbers if someone quits. And that "just go into matchmaking with friends1!!!1111!!!" excuse is a load of shit. I say just remove the quit option all together. Brothers till the end.:iamafag:
During matchmaking games on Xbox Live, other players cannot join the game. On Halo: CE, someone quits and five minutes later another person joins. In Reach, you are pretty fucked when it comes down to just you and another buddy getting spawn-trapped and subsequently raped by four different 12 year olds who require no skill to kill you. Also keep in mind that this is mostly just team based games. FFA matches also get slowed down as the amount of players decreases, but others will only see you as a "n00b". Really, the idea is to play and have fun. It isn't fun when a teammate can simply kill you for a rocket launcher and get away with it or you lose a game because half of your team is gone. The point being that you want to discourage players from being asshats that ruin the experience for others.
And to expand on the "play matchmaking with friends" BS: With newer and newer releases, many of the folks on your friends list are off playing different stuff. Even if you send an invite, they'll likely turn you down because they are having fun and don't want to sacrafice their own time with your trivial requests.
Yeah, while all of that article sounds pretty cool, Reach won't see any of it. Hopefully Halo4 will have improvements. They can start with using the Kinect to streamline some of the in your face shit too (should get people to invest in a Kinect more).
Instead of going through 500 prompts to place a penalty on someone, use a Kinect voice command. Tada. No more complete disconnect from the game with silly UIs.
I imagine they could make it so the system knows when a disconnect is intentional or whether it was accidental.
IE: Kinect sees that the user has stayed in place when disconnected or whether user has left their position to disconnect the cord/adapter.
There's a lot that Kinect could be used that's likely to be never even be checked up on.
@DarkHalcyon- great summary of why quitting on consoles is a pain in the ass. Pretty much one out of every 5 games has people quit, and as a result the odds become weirdly stacked for one side or the other.
@neuro and Hotrod- getting penalized for quitting on a pc is inane, but on a console it's one of the few ways to prevent what amounts to a total clusterfuck. I think COD allows for mid-game joining, but Halo is be-there-at-the-beginning-or-find-another-game.
They should remove the penalty and just let people join like in CoD. That's how games work on PC, I don't see why it has to be different on consoles. It's not the game's fault that you joined late (and as such it shouldn't count that round on your rank that heavily), and you'll get a chance to prove your worth next round.
That's dumb. I would just eject the disk. We used to do that all the time in Halo 3 when it was going to something we didn't want to play, since Bungie tried to be clever by removing the option to back out once the variant is locked in.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHalo003
The reasoning used for not allowing people to join mid-game for Halo has something to do with it being "a competitive game" or something like that. I can't say that I would like to be stuck into the middle of a game for Halo either, but it wouldn't be a bad thing to have people come in during the game to make the sides even.Quote:
Originally Posted by Warsaw
They could split the playlists between Social and Ranked. Anyone in the Social playlists could join mid-match while people looking for Ranked games could wait until a match starts.
I actually really like this idea and could totally see it working!Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHalcyon
Or they could nut up and accept the fact that Halo is not and never really was a "competitive game." That title has always belonged first and foremost to Counter-Strike and remains so to this day.
how the hell does 'competitive' rule out players being able to join a game halfway in?
Because not letting players join mid-way prevents somebody really good from joining in the middle and turning the game around, "skewing" the results.
Yeah, it's total BS.
Basically, Halo takes its matchmaking way too seriously. CoD's matchmaking is far better. Instead of spending half an hour trying to find a 'fair' game it just throws you in with the first batch of people it can find.
tl;dr of the conversation: rankings are stupid and should GTFO of my Halo.
play halo 3's mlg playlist, make it to level 20 then tell me the community's not competitiveQuote:
Originally Posted by Warsaw
people take that shit serial
I stopped playing H3 because the last thing in life I need to stress out over is proving my worth in a fucking video game. I've got debt and employment for that.
How serious people take it doesn't make the game competitive. What makes a game competitive is it actually having a competitive pace and mechanics that don't behave as a handicap to those who already know what they are doing (i.e. aim assist and regenerating health).
Counter-Strike is probably the current epitome of a competitive first-person shooter.
That said, yeah. I never played Halo to prove my worth (or any video game, for that matter). I play them to relax and have fun. If something is causing me to pop a blood vessel (incessant griefers, bullshit mechanics, dysfunctional team) then I'm done. I don't do well in competitive environments because they force me to use tactics and equipment that I feel are cheap/low/not fun for me in order to not get demolished. I don't like being forced into picking up a DMR on a tiny map that the DMR should actually be terrible for.
Rank is srs business in the eyes of prepubecent children. I agree with Warsaw, Halo is made to be fun, but I'll be damned if a little kid kills me once and decides to tell me that I suck on a game that requires no skill. At least when I play Halo: CE, everyone has the nice mentality to call bot rather than saying I'm a n00b for killing them.
And to point out the quitting issue. This is what I'd like to avoid.
I play Halo for leisure. That being said, when I play it to wind-down and relax I expect to be able to enjoy myself. Then someone quits. Then I'm spawn killed. I'm not enjoying myself.
in h3's defense auto-aim didn't mean shit if the players strafe around randomly everywhere. part of the reason everyone loved h3's BR and called the game a competitive masterpiece was because the projectile velocity made the auto-aim completely useless in some situations. yeah, reach didn't have this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Warsaw
ex:
and forgive me but I fail to see how shield regeneration makes a game less competitive. it's not like it regenerates mid-fight. it regenerates between fights to let everybody have a fair chance to kill other players, which encourages team play and "out BR-ing"
but what do I know, I'm not a 50. highest I got was 45
^ i like how that shit would hardly make a difference with a keyboard and mouse. but wow now that i see somebody actually put into words how to strafe around like that in first person, i can see why i hit a fucking wall in ranked slayer. got to 39, could never, for the life of me, hit 40.
watching that makes me want to try halo 3 again, but with a mouse and keyboard.
Halo 3 definitely had the competitive edge much more so than Reach does. In retrospect that probably explains why I played so much more of it.
It does. But it isn't Counter-Strike level of competitiveness.
Also, m00kz, I said regenerating health isn't competitive. The shields are fine, but having a finite amount of health under that means you can formulate strategies based that mechanic. Shoot a guy into half health, you know where the health packs are, you can direct your team to them to cut him off. Similarly, it encourages caution on the part of the player and brings the big picture of the game into focus, rather than placing emphasis individual encounters.
Also, juking on console is bullshit and you know it. It works, and half that reason is because of aim assist. If someone is juking and there's aim assist, then the game is constantly throwing your aim off, making it hard to actually adjust to the juking. It's a pain in the ass; someone juking left-right means I should just be able to aim centre and squeeze the trigger when appropriate to counter (I'm simplifying this, but n00bs will actually aim back and forth until they figure it out), but that just isn't what's happening.
Maybe they should make multiplayer better so people won't want to quit! But since that won't happen, just have drop-in, drop-out matchmaking for fuck's sake.
Just put the game on PC like The Way It Was Meant To Be (TM)
It would still suck on PC. But at least on PC we could mod it and fix it ourselves.
Exactly
You mean like Halo 2 vista?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooky
Touché...Quote:
Originally Posted by =sw=warlord
No, I don't mean like Halo 2 Vista. Obviously if I'm hoping for a PC port I'm hoping for a good PC port.Quote:
Originally Posted by =sw=warlord
That said, there are people out there modding H2V and making it better.
any microsoft games on pc are pretty much always fucking horrible
actually, most games these days are fucking horrible.
brb supporting indie devs
You mean like the buttfuck who took over my XBL account?Quote:
Originally Posted by t3h m00kz
:maddowns:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kornman00
what i don't get, is why you don't get that stuff refunded.
'WE HAVE UR MONEY NOW AHAHHHAHAHAH'
So I've had a 360 for about 3 or so weeks now (XBL: iODX), and it came with Reach. Been having a blast.
Today I decided to try the MLG playlist.
...what
Added ya. All I really play is BTB though, sometimes Invasion. And some of the Anniversary playlists.
I wish I still had XBL (and an Xbox to boot) on my Account. Alas, college does not take kindly to online multiplayer. Too much time overlapping, not enough payoff. Still miss it all though.
hi is this game on pc yet?
No, but Halo 6 will be. It's how MS is going to sell Windows 14
Halo 6 was reach :iamafag:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kornman00
Nay,
Halo1, new engine
Halo2, newer engine
Halo3, newer engine
Halo3:ODST, modified Halo3 engine
Halo Reach, newer engine
Halo Reach was Halo4. Halo4 is actually still Halo4, 343i is just trollin' about some new trilogy. Kinda like Lucas and the Prequels.
well, technically speaking all of the engines were "modified" versions of the older ones. it's not like they completely re-wrote the engine for each game, they just kept rolling in newer and newer code, replaced the old code to fit the needs of the game design, etc etc, just like updates to computer software and programs
I never understood what makes ODST so much different to warrant the "modified" engine label aside from it having less code changes rolled in than any of the other games
NOPE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kornman00
Halo
Halo 2
Halo 3
Halo wars
Halo ODST
Halo:Reach [IE: Halo 6]
Halo wars may be a different studio/engine/game genre but it's still a full fledged game.
If we're counting engines, we should include Marathon. :iamafag:
But seriously, Halo Wars, Halo 3: ODST, and Halo: Reach were more like prequels to the original Halo trilogy. They never told the story post-Halo 3. 343 Industries is now taking center stage with a continuation of Halo 4-6.
In other news, I can't say I'm pleased. Given the direction Bungie took with the last few games, perhaps a new face will make us feel young again and give us the same joy we had back in 2001. We'll see.
The changes done (some systems were pretty much completely redone; gui, shaders, etc) to the engines as I listed them are how a program company would label their programs v1, v2, v3.5, etc. It's still the same product, just the amount of underlying technology is just not the same code as before due to upgrades or drastic remodeling (eg, much of the tag system was changed for the better from Halo1 to Reach, shader tags are MUCH different from Halo1 in Reach, etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by t3h m00kz
ODST didn't really change much of the underlying technology like Halo2->Halo3 or Halo3->Reach did. Engine wise, it was very much a 3.5.
HaloWars isn't included because it's not made with the Halo engine, which is what I was basing my originally sarcastic post on. I mean, people don't count StarWars:KOTOR into the SW triliogies do they? No, because it's not the same stuff. The Phoenix engine is far from what the Blam engine is.
I've seen it called Blam! and I've seen it called Acid Rain. Which one is it?
Pretty sure it's Blam!
true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kornman00
I suppose I base my perspective on the idea of, how much of a change is needed to warrant calling it a new engine?
for instance, let's say you swap out an engine of an old car. would you still call it the same car? now let's say you do body work, replace the tires, seats, the whole shebang. at which point does it stop being the same car?
it all seems like a huge gray area to me, idk
regardless, as far as I'm concerned, halo "6" will be whatever game they give the retail name "Halo 6." the code names for the games are all different, and rarely (if at all) use numerics, and I've never really considered the engine version to have any influence
Just bought the noble and defiant mappacks yesterday. I didn't know they had split the playlist, and the only DLC one was squad, which no one plays. Just washed $20 down the drain, and fuck you too 343.
By the way, the ATLAS app on the iTouch is a waste of $5.
Goddamnit. It's been a year and a half since Reach came out and Invasion is still broken as hell. You only get one spawn point during the first wave. If elites start spawn-camping you on Spire, there is literally nothing you can do. They can just throw down a plasma grenade right before you spawn and bam you're dead.
Reach needs more VIP.
Maybe 343i will fix Invasion like Bungie fixed Forge.
VIP was SUCH a wonderful gametype in the Halo 3 Beta. I still think the Beta had some gameplay elements that should have stayed; then again, I'm still convinced that if they scoped the pistol and introduced the Reticle Bloom as a tool for the AR, then Halo 3 could have been even better.
Reticle bloom doesn't mean much when you can just fire 3 shots then melee the guy to kill him.
This is true. I do like the current setup with Halo Reach, however.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackalStomper
The H3 AR already has degenerating accuracy, there's just no indicator on the crosshair. It doesn't make much difference though when its damage output is so pathetic that you pretty much need a melee to get the kill.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHalo003
I really wish 343i would do a beta. Just so I can prove that people latch on to what they first encounter.
Or maybe that's why they're not doing one? Maybe they want you to love ONLY The finished product?
Or maybe I'm just bitter.
You would be wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kornman00
The only things from the Reach beta I was sad to see go were the Plasma Repeater (that gun kicked ass back then) and having different shaded colors for Invasion based on your Spawn-Bro. Other-wise, the team really ironed out a lot of balance issues (like the grenades being mini-nukes rather than mini-rockets like they are now, sigh) and the game is still very enjoyable.
As far as the Halo 3 beta goes, there were a lot of tweaks I agreed and disagreed with, but most dealt with changes to the maps rather than the weapons. The Carbine is still incredibly useful even if it was weakened since the beta, but the fact that it doesn't appear in half of the maps makes me very :(. I loved how the Halo 3 Beta had the weapon/equipment/vehicle layout in the beta versus now.
What I don't get with Halo 3 is why certain weapons like the carbine weren't even present in the maps for forging. Surely they weren't that pressed for tag space.
Originally, the forge wasn't meant to be anything bigger than "moving a few weapons and spawns around." When Bungie realized the opportunities for forge, they jumped on a new sandbox design known as Foundry to give players the freedom to create whole new maps from virtually nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooky
Later, of course, came Sandbox which blew up into the ultimate forging environment.
In fact, if I recall, Forge was an idea that was thrown in at the last minute and almost didn't make it into the final game.
Yeah, but it affects things like custom gametypes too. You can't ever set the Carbine or the Plasma Rifle as starting weapons because they aren't present in all maps. Again, I can't see any real reason for them to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHalcyon
I feel that was the most frustrating part. I mean, if everyone starts with a weapon there will at least be plenty of that weapon to find on the map because of that source. I'm not sure why Bungie didn't allow starting weapons to include all weapons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooky
As most of you probably know your service record on Bungie.net no longer updates, and this includes your player model. If you still want it to update to get a high res image, and a 3D rotating .avi of it, follow sawnose's instructions here: http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=71225779&viewreplies=true&postRe peater1-p=1
Here's mine in gif form:
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9294/playermodel.gif
I recently read this:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...easableFanbase
This plausibly sums up all of my feelings regarding the gamers and community involved with this game.
Bump.
Online filesharing is back, bitches. It looks like 343i finally got their shit together and brought us on-site file sharing.
Check it out.
We can now go back to postinghorridmaps properly (if we ever did that in the first place).
inb4 Korn says it sucks.
Should be cool if it works well though.
I'm more irate from someone posting a link to something using a fucking FB redirect. Thankfully, HBO hosts local copies so no one has to get redirected from FB to 343 land.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHalo003
