Support NeoGAF

[Seance]

I guess the interesting thing is that many people never considered Halo to be an arena shooter in the first place.

Many people would be wrong.

 

[Diablohead]

worst thing about halo 4 online for me is the random ordinance drops, they are ok but it's way too easy to get one and everyone in a game will get like 2, so that's 16 random weapon drops in 10 minutes unless the match ends sooner due to kill count.

It's a huge roll of the dice and I dislike that in halo, the drops should have not included power weapons for a start.

 

[Killer]

The definitive Halo.

 

[Grief.exe]

I actually read a really good write up over on Reddit about this. I don't have a console anymore, but used to love halo and was curious why this one was considered so bad. Sounds like an absolute train wreck for competitive gaming.

Apparently he was a little drunk when he wrote it, but he touches on some key points and, according to the comments, seems to hit the nail on the head.

So, I guess I have to start with Halo 2.

Halo 2 was the pinnacle of fun gaming to me for multiple reasons, but to avoid rose-colored glasses, I'm gonna stick to just gameplay and general multiplayer topics for this.
Halo 2's gameplay (post-update, BR starts) was simple: every man starts equal, and power weapons are placed around the map in timed spawns (sort of... they actually improved on this in H3). Whether you're playing slayer or oddball or flag, this promotes map control and map movement (if you let them get the rockets, they might slay you and score a flag, etc..).
Halo 2's gameplay was made greater by excellent maps. Open sight lines, clear positions of power (with decently placed weapons), and a general lack of clutter made for a CONSISTENT, fun experience. That's not to say all the maps were good, but this game had Lockout, Midship, Sanctuary, and Turf in it. Amongst a lot of other great maps.

Halo 2 also debuted a fun matchmaking system. You compete (in a consistent game) against peers your equal. That was awesome to me. I love that. You win or lose, based on skill. It was sweet.

Halo 2 was also buggy, and featured tons and tons of cheating. It wasn't perfect, but when it worked, it WORKED.

Halo 2 also featured my favorite playlist ever, Team Hardcore. This was a playlist of fairly competitive settings (but not MLG settings!), that didn't stray from the core game, but still was tuned to be more competitive (removed radar requiring more team chat, different objective gametype settings).

Halo 3 was also pretty awesome. I'm gonna skip through this to get to the Halo 4 stuff, but it was mostly similar to Halo 2, except it added in some stuff that was largely ineffectual (regen pickup, etc). This stuff changed the game some, some hated it, I never really noticed it much. It was meh. The BR was slightly less fun in this because it had a spread and wasn't hitscan (that really sucked, but in retrospect, I would gladly take that compared to stuff now), the maps were decent (more cluttery) but forge was sweet, and the matchmaking (IMO) was slightly better than Halo 2's. It also got rid of 99% of cheating and host problems. It didn't quite have Halo 2's charm, but it certainly was serviceable, fun, and competitive.

Then Reach. Fuck Reach. Fucking Reach.

Reach made me realize so many small things about Halo made such a huge difference in gameplay. I'll start small (ish). They removed melee and grenade bleed through (I think nades at least, I don't remember perfectly), meaning if you got meleed or naded when you had any amount of shield left, you would only take shield damage. This was fucking absurd. Goddamnit I'm still pissed thinking about this. This meant that if you were in CQC, and you shot, and the other guy meleed, he would win because one melee removed shield in that game. You were essentially down a melee. It meant that if you ran up to someone, double meleeing was more effective than shooting them. That removed all skill from CQC. Fuck that. CQC used to be a dance of shooting and meleeing at the right moment. One false step and you lose. It was a skill. People played Boxer just to be better at it. This killed that.

Then there was bloom. asdklfjkl;asdj. Bloom.

you know, I was about to bitch about this a lot, then I realized its not really in Halo 4, so forget it. I hate it, fuck bloom, whatever.
Armor Abilities were the biggest, and most bullshit change in this game. They remove the "every man starts equal". Now every man starts different. That doesn't seem like a big deal. But what it does is remove consistency from the game. Oh, you threw a great nade and removed a dudes shield? Armor lock. Oh, you gained a great position on the map, providing superior cover against the other team? Jetpack. Oh, you went around a corner and got assassinated by a dude in camo? That's fucking sweet. Its not competitive, its cheap. Because you are essentially starting with a power weapon, but its not communicated in any way. The enemy has no way of knowing until you reveal it, allowing you to get an edge without working for it. You aren't winning by skill, you're winning because you started with a trump card. And don't get me wrong, I adapted, I used the cheapest AA's I could, because I play to win. But it took out a lot of fun. It wasn't competitive.

The maps also blew in this game, but hey, we're not talking about Reach.

Reach also started the destruction of matchmaking. While it had matchmaking, there were no skill based ranks. This removed that other essence of fun to me; playing a competitive game, competitively. Now when you win its not because you played a fair match, its because you joined up with your Halo 2 friends and stomped some noobs. Fun at first, but it gets old super quick.

Halo 4 is worse than Reach. By a lot. Geez I don't even know where to start.

If Reach got rid of every man starting fair, 4 pissed on its grave. You know start with a unique loadout that you select, out of a primary, secondary, and some COD-esque perks. None of this is communicated to the enemy. They have no idea if you have more powerful grenades, if you have a better radar, if you have less flinch. Oh fuck that's right there's flinch now. When you got shot in the old games while zoomed in, you would get zoomed out. You're punished for being shot, but you can still continue the fight fairly. In 4, if you get shot, your aim just recoils. Quite a bit sometimes. Enough that in long range DMR battles, if you get shot first, your odds of fighting back are real, real low. Anyways, you have no idea of knowing who has what anymore.
On top of that, Halo 4 killed my other favorite part of Halo, map control. No longer do weapons spawn on timers in known areas of the map, promoting movement and teamwork. Nope. Aside from some initial guaranteed weapons spawns at the very start, weapons spawn at random, in random spots. Pure luck which team gets them. For instance, I played a game of slayer where a teammate had a sniper. A sniper then spawned right next to me at random. The game WAS tied 20-20, and we went on to win 60-38. Wonder if those two snipers had anything to do with it?
Even worse, in slayer, you now get "ordnance drops" that unlock after x amount of kills or points or whatever the fuck it is. These ordnance drops have random weapons/powerups in them that you can select. This is how weapons are spawned in slayer. Keep in mind, its random. sometimes you'll get a rocket, and sometimes you'll get plasma grenades. Now that's fair.

Furthermore, in most gametypes, there is instant respawn. seriously, you die, and respawn instantly. There is no reward for killing an enemy; you don't get their power weapons (those disappear almost instantly in this game, 12 seconds if I remember correct), and they don't STAY dead in most gametypes (I think CTF has like a 3 second respawn). There's no punishment for dying. You don't even lose map position because... there's no reason to control a map. In my experience, most CTF games (especially on fucking Adrift) devolve into "score and camp".

On top of this, 343 saw fit to add super cheap versions of every exisiting power weapon. They added a 1sk sniper (hit them at all and they die), a higher dps AR (kills in about 1-2s, not sure, but its real fast), a more powerful rocket launcher (incineration cannon), and I think there's another gun I'm forgetting. These aren't fun to go up against; they kill you before you have a chance to fight back. It's also worth noting that in general, you have less health in this game than the previous games. Kill times are probably 3-4s, whereas they used to be 4s+ for standard weapons. Combine this with flinch (where you don't really have a good chance to fight back at range), and maybe you're starting to understand my hatred of this game.

There's also the boltshot. A pistol that charges up as a shotgun at close range, that kills in one shot if you are halfway decent with it. It charges up very quickly, and you can spawn with it. you can essentially spawn with a shotgun. I can't remember the last time I had a melee battle in this game; there's no reason to melee when there's the boltshot.
Grenades are also insanely weak in this game, although this wouldn't be nearly as bad if it wasn't for all the other crap.
So after eviscerating any form of competitive gameplay, 343 saw fit to destroy matchmaking. There is still no ranking system. Worse, there's no "making". There's just matching, then you're in a lobby with the same group of people until they decide to quit. Why would I want to play the same people again? If you want us to be able to do that, put a "rematch" option after the game instead of just matching us up together. Its so fucking dumb. Even worse, games now feature "join mid-game", which sounds cool at first. Someone on your team quits, and you should get a replacement. Except that in reality, this sucks. Because you often join games that are half done, where your team is getting creamed because everyone has quit. And games will start with teams being 4v3, 5v3, whatever. I've started multiple games 4v1. The matchmaking is straight fucked up. Its the capstone of shit on this game. Its unreal. No ranking system is idiotic to me... but to remove the crux of Halo online experience for years? The thing people loved? WHY????
Why? That's all I can ask. That's all I can wonder. Why these changes? To get the COD crowd? All they did was alienate old fans, and remove so much depth and fun to the game. I don't think I even touched on all the things that piss me off. Oh wait, I forgot.
The playlists and maps blow. The playlists are garbage: you can choose between slayer, big team slayer, ctf, oddball, koth, regicide, and swat. No "team objective", no "team hardcore", no combination gametype playlists. No genre playlists. Just gametypes. stupid. The maps also suck. They're all huge, and have incredibly obstructed sight lines. Incredibly, absurdly huge, mind you.

Oh yeah, and sprint is now a mandatory ffeature. You can't get rid of it. Everyone has it, permanently. It just slows down gameplay IMO, because people have a slower base running speed, and you can only fight will running at base speed. It's not huge to me, but I don't like it.

Also they removed a ton of gametypes. No assault. No 1 flag. No classic flag. why? why?
I just don't get 343. I hate Halo 4. I do. I tried to love it. this was what I got on the night of release. http://imgur.com/HvyKw. I was stupidly excited for this game. I thought anything could be better than Reach. I thought they would do right, maybe freshen the game up. I really wouldn't mind ordnance drops if they did them in a more intelligent way (rather than distribute power weapons through them, distribute side-grades). So don't let people tell you I'm just a hater. I've loved Halo since Halo 1. Halo 2 will always be my favorite multiplayer. I've read all the books. I fucking love Halo.

I just hate Halo 4. Fuck.

Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/16ujth/halo_is_officially_off_the_mlg_circuit_for_the/c7zkdmr

 

[rar]

I agree with pc shooters requiring more skill, but you guys underestimate halo's skill only because you probably haven't played it competitively. And I don't mean online.

Teamwork is where the skill lies and is why a top team can dominate teams outside the top 8.

If you don't play it in that manner you won't find that video impressive at all.

It's like a non-fighting game fan calling fighting gamers button mashers.

teamwork becomes key in ANY team game when player mechanics are relatively even, which they usually are at a high level. this isn't exclusive to halo. there isn't some special kind of teamwork required to win in halo that you don't need in the best pc shooters, and the amount that a team has to work together isn't inherently greater than those games

from what i've played, both quake and team fortress require more team communication and coordination than halo. i never played other pc shooters seriously enough to offer a meaningful opinion on the amount of teamwork required in competitive play

i don't really get how the button mashing analogy applies to this situation

 

[Rand0m TAG]

this is honestly horrible news. hope an mlg style gamemode gets released

 

[Bombadil]

Not really surprised. The game hasn't been great for MLG since 2. A lot of pros disliked the changes in 3 and the maps were terribad.

The next game should probably get out of the same old arena gameplay and put their spin on a BF like title. Probably won't happen though.

I think the Halo 3 maps were the best of any in the series.

Guardian
The Pit
Sandtrap
Costruct
Last Resort
High Ground

There were some bad ones, like Isolation and Epitath (not bad, but boring).

Halo 2's best map was Lockout. Halo 3's remake of Lockout was shitty.

 

[twofold]

teamwork becomes key in ANY team game when player mechanics are relatively even, which they usually are at a high level. this isn't exclusive to halo. there isn't some special kind of teamwork required to win in halo that you don't need in the best pc shooters, and the amount that a team has to work together isn't inherently greater than those games

from what i've played, both quake and team fortress require more team communication and coordination than halo. i never played other pc shooters seriously enough to offer a meaningful opinion on the amount of teamwork required in competitive play

i don't really get how the button mashing analogy applies to this situation

Some of the strategy executions in Counter Strike blow me away.

Check these out - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHJLj6f1kd8 / http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDtk_LNQ5zU

It's awesome to see that sort of stuff play out in games.

 

[Avinexus]

So what's the news on Virgin Gaming? Has that venture offset the blow to the competitive Halo community?

Does Virgin even do live stream tournaments? They seem pretty new and insignificant. Other than the truck joke, I haven't heard anything about it.

I don't see anything good coming from Virgin. The only thing I remember about them is that they announced a $1.6 million tournament for Battlefield 3, had it advertised by EA/DICE and everything, but never even had the tournament.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

teamwork becomes key in ANY team game when player mechanics are relatively even, which they usually are at a high level. this isn't exclusive to halo. there isn't some special kind of teamwork required to win in halo that you don't need in the best pc shooters, and the amount that a team has to work together isn't inherently greater than those games

from what i've played, both quake and team fortress require more team communication and coordination than halo. i never played other pc shooters seriously enough to offer a meaningful opinion on the amount of teamwork required in competitive play

i don't really get how the button mashing analogy applies to this situation

I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's the standard argument that pops up every time someone dismisses the competitive aspects of console shooters since there is really nothing else that could be said in their favor.

Spending hundreds or thousands of hours in Halo believing you are playing a hardcore competitive shooter and then being confronted with reality must be a tough pill to swallow.

 

[Reagan's BR]

I posted this a few days ago, it details how "fixing" the game was handled during Reach and now with Halo 4. I feel it is relevant here as well. You can read the original post here, but I have copied and pasted it below as well.

Yeah, I need a source for this. I know asking for sources is annoying to read, but I just don't remember that at all. Well even so, it still shouldn't take that long. TU's for Halo 2, 3 and now 4 came out around a few months post launch. They had more than enough time to compensate for the Anniversary update in September.

Re: Bungie patch on Reach

Weren't the details of Bungie's Reach support and 343 handover in the Activision contract, and it specified that 343 would issue a TU if they wanted to, and that Bungie was only allowed to make that first DLC and do matchmaking support for the first 6 months?

Long post, sorry:

Nothing was ever officially announced but it was hinted at. Megalo, the game type editor for Reach seems to point towards some sort of post release patch though. The whole development of Megalo was intended provide post game support for Reach. They tested it with Halo chess and some of the other gametypes that fell under insane category in the gametype list. It seems highly unlikely that they would have spent so much dev time on Megalo to not actually use it. Megalo was developed specifically to make patches like 343's Reach TU possible. With the way the Halo engine worked before Reach changes like zero bloom would not have been possible without directly editing the .map files which was not really something they could have done. So they had developed the tools to patch the game post launch but they never used it which leads me to believe something happened post launch that made them change their plans. The megalo Q&A seemed, to me at least, to be Bungie hinting at their desire to make a TU and the scope that the TU could have encompassed. So while I say they planned a TU I mean they had planned to do one before the game was even released but it looks like something to do with the upcoming transition stopped them from doing so. We can only guess as to what happened but the most plausible answer is that 343 told Bungie to provide playlist support but not patch support so that 343 could patch Reach for the sole purpose of CEA.

Here is the Q&A, it is an interesting read

Question 3 seems to hint at Bungie originally planning a patch:

3 . Who or what group in Bungie made the decision to throw out the tried and trusted gametype setup from previous Halo titles, and why? Was it hard to convince the studio to go for what was definitely a risk?

I did. Megalo started as an experiment/toy just after we shipped Halo 3. It was definitely a risk, but the benefits of iteration and creating new gametypes/fixing bugs post-ship were pretty obvious. At that point we didn't know what the handoff plans with MS were though.

So, it looks like Bungie was planning a patch.

The idea of Megalo is pretty awesome. It all works via scripts and isn't too difficult to use. In the interview it mentions that they had a gametype where people dropped random weapons when they died. Apparently that gametype only took 15 minutes from the idea to actually playing it. This actually has some implications for Halo 4. In theory, because Halo 4 uses Megalo too, someone at 343 could write a script that disabled sprint and it wouldn't take too long to complete it. This means true classic settings are possible.

Going back to Reach; here are some posts from David Ellis regarding the CEA update:

It wasn't a matter of not wanting to do it, but rather it was outside the scope and scale for the TU.

The Anniversary slayer magnum has different bloom and ROF fire settings.

As you can see, they could have changed the DMR's rate of fire but chose not too. It wouldn't have been too much extra work to fix that thanks to Megalo. So 343 did not fully commit to the Reach TU despite the fact that they had the tools to do so. If they can change the ROF on one gun they can do it on two. This leads me to believe that the Reach TU was really just a way to push the sales of CEA because the magnum was the essential change to be made. This is why I don't like people saying " You don't understand how hard it is to make a patch!!". I understand they it takes time and testing and that it could take a couple months before they are happy with the changes they have made. They have great tools at their disposal to ease the process though. Actually, we could have had true classic settings at Halo 4's launch if they had really wanted to make them. This is why I am also frustrated with 343 and why I complain often; 343 has the power to make a lot of changes to Halo 4 and could have had classic game types at launch but they have, thus far, chosen not to use the tools they have at their disposal.




Sorry, I kind of jumped around between Bungie's patch, what 343 could already be doing for Halo, and their decision not to change the ROF in CEA slayer. The short of it is Bungie set themselves up to make a patch but something happened that stopped them short of actually making it.

Perhaps someone else can shed some light on the possibility of Bungie patching the game.

Edit:

Oh, one more thing I need to add. The modded gametypes that people are enjoying in Halo 4 are essentially modified like Megalo gametypes. You don't need a TU to change gametype values. The TU part of the Reach update was really just for sword block and bleed through, it had no effect on bloom. The bloom issue was handled by the introduction of new gametypes.

This means that 343 could fix a lot of Halo 4's issues without a patch. In fact, they could have already fixed them.

I know people joke that modders have fixed Halo 4 gametypes before 343 has but it is actually true. 343 has the tools to make the same changes that modders are making. Actually, 343 has an editor for that particular purpose, the modders are making these changes without the great editor that 343 has.

 

[NullPointer]

Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/16ujth/halo_is_officially_off_the_mlg_circuit_for_the/c7zkdmr

From that post:

And don't get me wrong, I adapted, I used the cheapest AA's I could, because I play to win. But it took out a lot of fun. It wasn't competitive.

I'll never fathom this mentality, of forcing yourself to play in a way you don't find fun, just for the win. That's not adapting, that's masochism, for an ephemeral reward.

How about just not using the stuff you dislike?

 

[MysteryM]

I've been playing nothing but halo multiplayer for the last 10 years or so, my first online halo games were pre xbox live playing online via lan tunnelling and i've loved it ever since. Halo 2 and 3 were definately the highest points and I deem them both as being pure multiplayer nirvana. According to halo waypoint, i've clocked in 20435 online games so far, which isn't a huge number given that i don't play on weekends, and only game an hour and a half after work.

Halo 4 multiplayer for me has been a complete backstep for the series, they've taken core parts of fundemental halo mechanics and nerfed them. I fully appriciate that games need to evolve with each iteration, and indeed i didn't hate reach multiplayer like other people do (although they could have done with more vehicular maps like halo 3's highground), however removing fixed spawn weapons to the complete lack of infinity slayer maps has been a real let down.

I've been playing gears of war 3 multiplayer lately and its been a breath of fresh air in comparison.

 

[Synth_floyd]

I never really thought that bloom made any difference to the game. I'm not a hardcore player but I just thought it was a small change at best.

As for the armor abilities, I just always used armor lock because it was the best, or sometimes invisibility or sprint on objective maps.

IMO Reach and 3 had the best multiplayer in the series but Reach was a fine continuation of the Halo series.

 

[gamemadmax]

Destiny's time has come.

 

[VeeP]

You seem to be moderating everyone you holds negativity on Halo 4. Please, it's ok to admit that Halo 4 is bad game. Anyway MLG will obviously move to where the money is and sadly it's not Halo anymore.

But Halo 4 isn't a bad game. Yes, it has its flaws, but so did the other Halos. If you didn't like Halo 4 that sucks, personally I think besides a few issues, it's the best Halo since Halo 2. The weapons could be balanced better, and a few more smaller maps would be nice. But the gameplay is fast and fluid, and the game is fun.

And another thing, MLG wanted Halo 4, but they were outbid.

 

[Striker]

I think the Halo 3 maps were the best of any in the series.

Guardian
The Pit
Sandtrap
Costruct
Last Resort
High Ground

There were some bad ones, like Isolation and Epitath (not bad, but boring).

Halo 2's best map was Lockout. Halo 3's remake of Lockout was shitty.

Halo 3 had too many turds. And the gametypes were a major downgrade from Halo 2.

 

[rCIZZLE]

Shooter competitions/leagues in general have been dying hard over the past several years. Doesn't help that it's one of, if not the worst genres for spectating.

 

[Madness]

As much as I don't really like Halo 4, it's still fun to watch pro's play sometimes. Look how many people were watching Ninja during his tournament.

Is it just me or do people actually enjoy watching others play call of duty? I would think it'd be extremely boring and tedious.

 

[Ichabod]

Not surprised at all. Even my most die hard Halo buddies have stopped playing altogether. I ain't even mad though. After I was soured by Reach, I've had a morbid fascination with watching the series Hindenburg. Not because I want the franchise to die or for 343 to close its doors, but in hopes that the series becomes such a shattered, shadow of its former self someone will eventually call a time out, go back to the drawing board, and get back to the Halo basics that made the game so beloved in the first place.

 

[scar tissue]

[...] in hopes that the series becomes such a shattered, shadow of its former self someone will eventually call a time out, go back to the drawing board, and get back to the Halo basics that made the game so beloved in the first place.

I feel the same. I hope Halo 4 numbers dwindle so far that 343i has no choice but to dial back the CoD-ification for Halo 5.

 

[Future PhaZe]

I think the Halo 3 maps were the best of any in the series.

Guardian
The Pit
Sandtrap
Costruct
Last Resort
High Ground

There were some bad ones, like Isolation and Epitath (not bad, but boring).

Halo 2's best map was Lockout. Halo 3's remake of Lockout was shitty.

Lulz

Construct is the worst map in the series. Maps based around jumping up lifts where people can camp = fail.

Guardian is basically a claustrophobic and annoying lift based version of Lockout.

The Pit is actually good.

Last Resort saw its best days in H2, barely played competitively in H3.

I did like High Ground.

 

[Hyun Sai]

From that post:


I'll never fathom this mentality, of forcing yourself to play in a way you don't find fun, just for the win. That's not adapting, that's masochism, for an ephemeral reward.

How about just not using the stuff you dislike?

It can only work if all the players share the same mindset.

I totally understand him. When everybody abuses the stupid shit, you either always lose, or you use it yourself.

Don't blame the players, it's the developper work to make things right.

 

[Rickenslacker]

I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's the standard argument that pops up every time someone dismisses the competitive aspects of console shooters since there is really nothing else that could be said in their favor.

Spending hundreds or thousands of hours in Halo believing you are playing a hardcore competitive shooter and then being confronted with reality must be a tough pill to swallow.

I just don't get why it needs to be a dickwaving contest of my game can beat up your game. I mean people will often lob Quake and CS in the same sentence yet you don't really see the fanbase of the former going "Ah those CS babies, look at their slow movement speed and buying things off spawn instead of having to learn map spawns. Guffaw." There's clearly competitive depth in all of them including Halo, and I would absolutely agree that on paper Quake does most of the same ratcheted up to 11, but what does it really matter anyway.

 

[professor_t]

Man, what is with all the Halo 4 bashing?

I have still yet to play it for the simple reason I don't want to pay for live. Does Halo 4 comes with a trial for live?

Halo has never fared well on NeoGAF. This is not a new development. Personally, I think most of the criticism is way over the top, but I'm a huge fan of Halo.

So far, I think Halo 4 is significantly better in the MP department than Halo Reach. The maps alone are a substantial improvement. Then you have more of an emphasis on precision weapons than spray and pray, and the absence of the awful armor lock, and it's hard to see how anyone can like Reach better.

 

[DR3AM]

damn, that reddit post sums it up perfectly. that's exactly how I feel. as a huge halo fan, i had to stop playing after only 1 week.

 

[King Beyond the wall]

I feel the same. I hope Halo 4 numbers dwindle so far that 343i has no choice but to dial back the CoD-ification for Halo 5.

They will probably do the opposite and make it even further like call of duty :/

 

[M.D]

Is Planetside 2 replacing Halo? not making a new thread since I'm not sure

Sony Online Entertainment and Major League Gaming Partner to Bring PlanetSide®2 to Competitive Gaming

 

[Blueblur1]

From that post:


I'll never fathom this mentality, of forcing yourself to play in a way you don't find fun, just for the win. That's not adapting, that's masochism, for an ephemeral reward.

How about just not using the stuff you dislike?

Because its even less fun to lose.

 

[Harlock]

http://www.destructoid.com/an-mlg-developed-fps-is-inevitable-says-ceo-243512.phtml

An MLG-developed FPS is 'inevitable' says CEO

What's interesting to note is that DiGiovanni explains how things that one would expect in a popular multiplayer FPS -- such as killstreaks, persistent leveling, and perks -- actually make it harder for them to gain popularity in the eSports field. He remarks that an MLG FPS would be more akin to Quake or Unreal Tournament.
Read more at http://www.destructoid.com/an-mlg-d...ble-says-ceo-243512.phtml#TlUC6gU222mBUEVx.99

 

[FyreWulff]

http://www.destructoid.com/an-mlg-developed-fps-is-inevitable-says-ceo-243512.phtml

They probably just should, since they spent so much time trying to turn every FPS into this meta-MLG-FPS.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

I just don't get why it needs to be a dickwaving contest of my game can beat up your game. I mean people will often lob Quake and CS in the same sentence yet you don't really see the fanbase of the former going "Ah those CS babies, look at their slow movement speed and buying things off spawn instead of having to learn map spawns. Guffaw." There's clearly competitive depth in all of them including Halo, and I would absolutely agree that on paper Quake does most of the same ratcheted up to 11, but what does it really matter anyway.

Because some people put way too much of themselves in a luxury product that they can't help themselves in wanting to feel superior to everyone else.

They all are FPS. They all have strategies. And everybody and anybody can be killed. If I want arena, I go Quake. If I want chaotic large combat, I go Battlefield. If I want team-play, TF2. Fast, mixed games? Halo. Feeling like I need my ass kicked? CS. All have their strengths AND weaknesses.

 

[sixghost]

http://www.destructoid.com/an-mlg-developed-fps-is-inevitable-says-ceo-243512.phtml

Wasn't CPL always talking about developing their own FPS? That shit is never going to happen. MLG isn't big enough on its own to get enough people playing their own game. They helped out with the competitive side of the Shadowrun FPS game on 360 iirc, and got behind that game in a big way, but that didn't work out.

 

[Harlock]

Wasn't CPL always talking about developing their own FPS? That shit is never going to happen. MLG isn't big enough on its own to get enough people playing their own game. They helped out with the competitive side of the Shadowrun FPS game on 360 iirc, and got behind that game in a big way, but that didn't work out.

But they team-up with Valve. If Valve make Dota2, why not a FPS from the ground to e-sports?