Halo 4 criticized for not having iron sights...wut?

[xDarc]

Oh God, please don't tell me you just pulled the "real" card, can we please avoid going into No True Scotsman territory here? And can we please stop it with the console vs pc argument?

No we really can't. You will never see a 90's arena style shooter on a console, or a game like Tribes: Ascend if you prefer something a little more recent. Why? Because of the limitations of the input device, i.e. the controller.

It is exactly because of the differences of the PC and the console. By denying that the console has influenced the design principles of the FPS genre due to limitations of the hardware and input devices; and subsequently making them a household item, a mainstream success by lowering the bar- there is no discussion.

I grew up with the genre, I have been there since the beginning spending thousands of hours on modding, map building, playing. I know these games inside and out and I know what changed because I watched it happen.

If you don't look at the whole genre, you don't see the problem. If you weren't around from the beginning, you likely don't have the proper frame of reference. Doesn't mean it isn't true. It absolutely is.

 

[Erttheking]

Oh God, please don't tell me you just pulled the "real" card, can we please avoid going into No True Scotsman territory here? And can we please stop it with the console vs pc argument?

No we really can't. You will never see a 90's arena style shooter on a console, or a game like Tribes: Ascend if you prefer something a little more recent. Why? Because of the limitations of the input device, i.e. the controller.

It is exactly because of the differences of the PC and the console. By denying that the console has influenced the design principles of the FPS genre due to limitations of the hardware and input devices; and subsequently making them a household item, a mainstream success by lowering the bar- there is no discussion.

I grew up with the genre, I have been there since the beginning spending thousands of hours on modding, map building, playing. I know these games inside and out and I know what changed because I watched it happen.

If you don't look at the whole genre, you don't see the problem. If you weren't around from the beginning, you likely don't have the proper frame of reference. Doesn't mean it isn't true. It absolutely is.

Pal I'll level with you, I really don't care that much about the history of FPS or how console's are inferior, I just want to avoid a freaking flame war.

 

[Ethan Bewley]

The top comment on this review is great.
Halo>CoD

 

[Singularly Datarific]

Wait, so what you're trying to say is that someone on the internet is an idiot?
I never would've guessed...

 

[ecoho]

Oh God, please don't tell me you just pulled the "real" card, can we please avoid going into No True Scotsman territory here? And can we please stop it with the console vs pc argument?

No we really can't. You will never see a 90's arena style shooter on a console, or a game like Tribes: Ascend if you prefer something a little more recent. Why? Because of the limitations of the input device, i.e. the controller.

It is exactly because of the differences of the PC and the console. By denying that the console has influenced the design principles of the FPS genre due to limitations of the hardware and input devices; and subsequently making them a household item, a mainstream success by lowering the bar- there is no discussion.

I grew up with the genre, I have been there since the beginning spending thousands of hours on modding, map building, playing. I know these games inside and out and I know what changed because I watched it happen.

If you don't look at the whole genre, you don't see the problem. If you weren't around from the beginning, you likely don't have the proper frame of reference. Doesn't mean it isn't true. It absolutely is.

Pal I'll level with you, I really don't care that much about the history of FPS or how console's are inferior, I just want to avoid a freaking flame war.

ah but trying to avoid one tends to spawn one as some, and i stress SOME, pc and console gamers think theirs is the best system ever. Its not. Its your PERSONALLY best system as graphic power and confort are both personal prefrances in games.
OT: this guy should not write game reveiws......hes way out of touch.

 

[1GAMEplayer]

As long as they dont add QTE's or big set piece cinematics that only let you control the camera, I'm okay.

they did (spoiler ahead) first level starts and with a QTE and a big set piece where you climb and dodge falling rubble and have no camera controle, i predict that 343 will add iron sights, its only a matter of time

 

[chinangel]

EH I'm of two opinions. I enjoy ironsights and it would've been nice to have them, but not necessary.

 

[DataSnake]

You know what, I hate reloading, long reload times make some weapons less fun to use, let's give every weapon unlimited magazines!

That...actually sounds like a really good idea, at least for deathmatch. Anyone here old enough to have played Doom 1 and 2? No reloading (except the super shotgun, but since that was after every shot it was more like a long cooldown time), no ducking behind chest-high walls, and no regenerating health. And it was AWESOME.

 

[Something Amyss]

I don't need to play on consoles

And that's why you have the false impression that moving and shooting is so impossible on a controller.

That's all I really needed to know. Thanks.

 

[xDarc]

I don't need to play on consoles

And that's why you have the false impression that moving and shooting is so impossible on a controller.

That's all I really needed to know. Thanks.

You can do it... but about as well as you can drive a car with your knees.

Clearly, there is a difference- which is why there are no high-skill FPS games on consoles. They are all MMS with Aim down sight to artificially slow it down for the thumbsticks.

That's all it is.

 

[Erttheking]

I don't need to play on consoles

And that's why you have the false impression that moving and shooting is so impossible on a controller.

That's all I really needed to know. Thanks.

You can do it... but about as well as you can drive a car with your knees.

Clearly, there is a difference- which is why there are no high-skill FPS games on consoles. They are all MMS with Aim down sight to artificially slow it down for the thumbsticks.

That's all it is.

I don't need to play on consoles

Oh for the love of God can you please just stop!? Can both of you just stop!?

And that's why you have the false impression that moving and shooting is so impossible on a controller.

That's all I really needed to know. Thanks.

For the love of God, can you two please just stop?

 

[DataSnake]

You know, I think Yahtzee had a point about old-school FPSes essentially being a different genre from modern "realistic" shooters, and one side effect of that is that it's hard to tell what ruler you should use to measure an in-between game like Halo.

Try to judge it by the standards of old FPSes like Doom and Quake, and you'll find it doesn't quite fit because the shield and extremely high melee damage lend themselves to a completely different play style. In Doom, conserving ammo by charging an enemy and punching them into submission meant either you had just found a major powerup, you were really low on ammo, or you were a colossal showoff. In Halo, the fact that any damage that doesn't remove your shield entirely doesn't have any lasting consequences and you can do more damage with the butt of a rifle than the bullet-spewing end makes that a favorite tactic against grunt squads. And there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, it really adds to the "oh crap" factor when Flood combat forms are introduced, with their massive resistance to melee damage and ability to dish it out in spades. It is, however, different, and if you went into it expecting Quake with better graphics you'd be in for a surprise.

On the opposite side of the same coin, consider trying to judge Halo by the standards of "spunkgargleweewee". Now it's frustrating because it doesn't tell you exactly how to get from point A to point B, expects you to get yourself out of tricky situations instead of just mashing X until your character does it for you, and generally treats you more like a participant than part of the audience. If you're expecting essentially an action movie where you occasionally tell the main character where to stand, you're going to get pretty annoyed pretty fast.

 

[Karfroogle]

I agree with the guy. Every game should be like every other game, that way it's easier for journalists.

Would probably just put the journalists out of business.

OT: I don't understand people. They complain about CoD being too linear and always the same, yet they want other games like Halo to be exactly like CoD and no longer be its own game? It doesn't make any sense.

 

[Jacco]

As long as they dont add QTE's or big set piece cinematics that only let you control the camera, I'm okay.

they did (spoiler ahead) first level starts and with a QTE and a big set piece where you climb and dodge falling rubble and have no camera controle, i predict that 343 will add iron sights, its only a matter of time

I know. I'm currently containing my inner rage and desire to go on a murdering spree. -_-

 

[Uriain]

There are a couple of things to consider here when digesting his review.

1) He talks about the game from his singular perspective. With quotes like " I just won?t be blown away until his handlers find the guts to finally break the mold.", "Halo 4 fell woefully flat in its attempt to grab me." and " I was left with a frustratingly similar Halo experience that other top-tier shooters have long since blasted into the oblivion of dog-tired gaming conventions."

There is nothing wrong with him making these observations in this manner, as they represent how the game has effected him. You may disagree with him, and that is 110% fine, but just something to think about.

2) The "iron-sights" comment isnt ACTUALLY about having iron-sights. - " ..ignoring obvious enhancements like big-ticket sequences and proper iron-sights mechanics.." Iron-sights mechanics seem to me to be how your ADS mechanic work, and how Halo has had a bit of a wonk ADS at times with certian guns. I could be wrong, but again, something to consider.

3) 7/10 isnt a bad score. Its 70%...a pretty darn good...a would go back and play again. So its not the end of the world. Every "Triple A" title doesn't automatically deserve an 9 or a 2 depending on the game title.

I dont have Halo yet (they forgot to ship my pre-order to me so it would have arrived on time) but the people I talk to really enjoy it so far, and I imagine I will enjoy it as well. My own "score" for it will most likely be higher than 7/10, but the points this guy brings up may or may not be entirely incorrect.

So, please.. Just take a min to think about how he (and any reviewer for any game really) is applying their comments within the context of their entire review.. not just "Halo with iron-sights wtf"

 

[ArialUchiha]

I haven't read all the previous comments, mainly because i don't have the time to read through 6+ pages. but Halo does not need iron sights at all. Its weapons fall into 3 main categories. Long, Short and Medium range. Long range guns (DMR, Battle Rifle, Carbine) all have a scope as standard, and are precision weapons so would not have iron sights anyway. Short range (shotgun etc) shouldn't need iron sights because you should be so close that you cant miss.

There are only 4 weapons that could possibly support iron sights. The assault Rifle, Suppressor, Storm Rifle and Needler. All of which have a binocular sight on them so you can get some sort of zoom, however their design in the universe would make iron sights impossible.

I'm not against the mechanic, i actually enjoy it in other shooters, but it does not fit Halo's style at all. In shooters with a modern setting, the AI is usually human military that stay at a distance and shoot back, which is where being able to look down the sights of a gun will be useful. However in Halo, the enemy will often run at the player forcing them to move and avoid. In this situation iron sights would be extremely impractical. Before anyone says no it wouldn't, imagine trying to take down an elite wielding an energy sword, while walking backwards aiming down the sights of a gun, before they reach you and kill you instantly. It would be an exercise in futility.

Jackals using shields and hunters have specific weak points that require precision weapons, not machine guns. Grunts die easily from any distance with very little ammo consumption. Finally, Elites and Prometheans wear shields that makes precision shots infective before the shield comes down. Where, with these types of enemy, does the need for iron sights come into the game? Even in multiplier, precision shots are only important once a shield is down, which is why the battle rifle and DMR are the most popular weapons.

I don't understand where the reviewer is coming from saying that the game needs the mechanic adding. Halo has never had it, and probably never will.

 

[scorptatious]

I wish they brought back run and gun laser crosshairs with barely any Cone of Fire.

Cone of Fire has gotten larger and larger over the years. In FEAR MP in 2006, CoF was present but it was so small you could easily kill from 50 ft away as long as you put your crosshair on center mass shots would hit.

Now a days, unless someone's face is right up in your grill, you must use stupid Aim down Sight mechanic. Because the CoF expands to your whole screen after a few shots and bullets fly out at right angles.

It's consoles, they don't want you moving and shooting. It's too hard for everyone to walk and chew gum and to sell copies they need you to kindly stand still and aim down sights so someone else gets a turn to kill you.

That's FPS gaming today, that's what it's come down to and it's pathetic.

I can understand not prefering games that use iron sight, but I don't think there's any need to insult those who play those kinds of games.

Personally, I don't really get the hate for iron sights. I like to use them in Fallout: New Vegas myself. Especially since VATS is sometimes unreliable for me.

 

[LordLucan375]

Well this guy is goin' on the list...

 

[Something Amyss]

You can do it... but about as well as you can drive a car with your knees.

Look, I have no idea why you're incapable of doing it, but that doesn't mean it's anywhere near as difficult as you make it out to be.

Look, it's clear you like games where you win by simply clicking on someone. That's fine. You don't need to disparage everyone else's preferences though, simply because you seem unable to keep up.

For the love of God, can you two please just stop?

I can understand if you do not wish to have this conversation, but this post seems largely unnecessary. If you think it's a problem, by all means mark us. Otherwise, the best course of action is to move on.