-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo 4 Announced (MS Conf, 2012, Start Of New Trilogy)
- Thread starter Sanic
- Start date
When did I say skill. I said fun. I expect to have fun when playing a game, and your sense of servitude is ridiculous.
If you are not good at the game, it can be hard to have fun with it. They're pointing to your stats and saying, you're not very good, so that's probably why you're not having fun.
Which may be true. But I'd argue a good game should be fun even if you suck at it; I wasn't great at Halo 2 or Halo 3 MP, but I was able to have fun even when losing (most of the time) because the games were simply fun to play. That's not my experience with Reach.
SomeOneInaHat
Member
Edit: lost interest.
This is basically exactly what I mean.
Why didn't you rent the game and/or play a friends copy/demo and/or listen to HaloGaf/the world before buying it?
Buyer beware?
I'm a data person, so I figured I'd look into this. I'm a decent player. I have a headshot percentage of 81.3% over 1556 games of competitive. 789shadow has a percentage of 69.5% over 419 games of competitive. From my point of view, there's nothing wrong with the headshot system if I can miss a headshot kill in 1 out of 5 kills.
Miggytronz
Member
Whats going on..............................Oh.. :|
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Okay, where the fuck are you perceiving a sense of servitude?
You've complained numerous times about how you get dominated in the game. This leads me to wonder: are headshots not registering, or are you just not landing headshots? Go back in theater mode and watch. I've seen headshots not register, but more often than not I'm just missing them.
And you keep on denying that your skill doesn't affect the fun you have, yet a lot of your complaints are based on you losing. And then you post in the OT about how much fun you had when you won 50-18 or whatever. THAT'S YOU HAVING FUN BASED ON WINNING. Stop blaming the game on you not having skill.
I get the feeling some of you play a game, don't have fun, and then say "it's my fault."
The only thing in games that can never be your fault is if you aren't having fun. As Ghaleon said, a good game is fun even if you suck. Reach is often infuriating, and that has nothing to do with me sucking big time. Armor lock, other horrible AA/weapon combinations, grenukes, poor matchmaking that often puts me against teams coordinating with mics, poor spawns that spawn you or other players that want to kill you right next to each other. Reach has problems.
The only thing in games that can never be your fault is if you aren't having fun. As Ghaleon said, a good game is fun even if you suck. Reach is often infuriating, and that has nothing to do with me sucking big time. Armor lock, other horrible AA/weapon combinations, grenukes, poor matchmaking that often puts me against teams coordinating with mics, poor spawns that spawn you or other players that want to kill you right next to each other. Reach has problems.
SomeOneInaHat
Member
As long as I get a visual connect between whether they are punchable/ 1 shot I'll be good. Bleed through for both bullets and melee in Reach hurt me so.
You'll find many sympathetic hearts on that one.
Although I would amend your statement to it being both the game and the person's fault if they're not having fun. "Fun" isn't an objective quality.
Which you could've discovered by doing any one of the things I listed in my last post. You didn't have to buy the game to find out about all of these problems.
Also, buyer beware is stupid.
I remember you were an honorable bullet sponge in halo 2, you have come a long way
The idea is to train your shot then release the shot. Have your aim trained to the intended target (or position) then fire, if you are being harassed, you can still achieve the kill. If you are being zoomed out mid motion, your long range attempt is likely lost... You then have to take defensive strategy. It's a game of tactics and skill. Halo games generally have an emphasis on player positioning over skill (though that won't save you from being dominated by skill)
I was arguing that the headshot registration doesn't suck, he does.
Also, he's been saying that the game sucks and that it wasn't worth its money in multiple posts already, we get it.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Whatever. Personally, the fun I have in competitive multiplayer is very closely tied to how well I'm performing, and thus my skill in comparison to my opponents. And the same seems to be true for you, Shadow, but you're for some reason denying it.
It's a key part of harassing DMRers and snipers. It's annoying when it happens to you, but that's the point.
Why should I have to work for fun in a game, the main purpose of which is to provide fun and entertainment?
Because "fun" is not objectively measurable?
I know damn well when I'm not having fun, thank you very much.
I understand that, I deliberately stayed out of the headshot portion of the back and forth. He's wrong there. I was just noting that while it's often hard to have fun when you are losing (he's clearly not very good at all), ideally there should still be some fun to be had. But perhaps not when you're that deep in the hole constantly.
It's reasonable to have to become at least competent at the game to get optimal enjoyment from it. Halo isn't a game where you can button mash and win, you have to learn the mechanics. It can be punishing in a competitive environment for those with little experience or skill. If you are unwilling to put in even token effort to raise your skill level, you are not likely to have a good time. Regardless, Reach does have a number of less competetive options.
However, it's partly for this reason that I hope social playlists return in Halo 4. I suspect you are more likely to have a good experience in them.
squidhands
Member
Maybe the competitive side of multiplayer isn't your cup of tea. Might I suggest Campaign or Firefight for where there's little to no work involved at
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
So... Whenever you don't have fun in a game, it's the game's fault? Or is this unique to Halo / Reach somehow?
Actually it's one of the most notable pieces of wisdom in human history and has been for a couple of thousand years.
It doesn't mean you're a sucker, it means you're an INDIVIDUAL with individual tastes, needs and preferences. A seller cannot account for that, so therefore, caveat emptor.
thezerofire
Banned
I'm assuming you've never played CS, Quake, Gears, or some other shooter that's competitive? You work to be good. When you're good it's more fun.
Um, yes, it is a game's fault. That is the one and only thing I ask of a game, for it to be fun. If it's not, well, the game has failed on the only thing I ask from it.
Winning does not equal fun, but failure should equal a lack of it. And Reach is often infuriating for the reasons I've posted.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
There's also the flip side of this, that because they gave you sprint/jetpack/whatever AA, they nerfed your latent abilities like move speed and jump heights. Dangers you could escape on foot with smart maneuverability in previous Halo games is just that much riskier and that much more difficult to dodge a grenade or evade an attack without relying on the added abilities.
By nerfing your latent skills, boosting your ancillary skills with AAs, and not doing anything different to the enemies, they fucked the whole sandbox up!
Gabotron ES
Member
What is this?
Pay attention to the maps, focus on where you are exposing yourself. Always take precaution in engagement. If you always sprint your way into a cluster, you will likely lose. You have to weigh the positives and negatives of each encounter before you go running in. It doesn't work like single player. Everyone (even those with minimal skill) pose a threat. Any little error can cost you a death.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Sometimes games suck because of bad design / mechanics / etc. Sometimes games suck because they're just not to my tastes or I'm just not good at them. I'd say Reach has qualities that I'd put in both categories. It's a distinction that might help your argument.
Totally agree. I lameted this in a Campaign context at length in a review I wrote, where a side effect I disliked was how the sluggish base traits combined with the long range of the DMR to push out combat distances. It's riskier up close, and we can engage from longer range. And that meant the game was at its best when there were fewer elements at play, whereas the previous games shined when they all came together. But in many ways it's compounded even further in multiplayer.
thezerofire
Banned
By the way, you're complaining about headshots not registering, and then saying you like Vanilla Reach. Headshots are less reliable in Vanilla Reach. They're more reliable in TU settings. Just play those settings more.
I haven't really noticed any difference. I'm just a guy who doesn't trust computers over my eyes.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Giving you a single-shot weapon with up to 100 bullets with 3x scope was a bad idea. Since its a clusterfuck fighting up close, and you have this godlike long-range weapon, AND AAs that encourage you to escape situations, I found myself mostly camping back and taking potshots with the DMR was the most successful strategy. Pretty boring stuff!
Halo 3 was also a BR-fest. I wish that there was more reason to use non-power or DMR/BR weapons.
thezerofire
Banned
Bloom resets a lot faster, and in general is just reduced. You can fire faster more accurately with more reliability. TU settings also (kinda) fix the double-beatdown stuff, so that if you shoot them and beat them down, you will beat their double-beatdown
Has the monkeypaw fable taught you nothing?!