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

[Lt._nefarious]

I'm sorry but he said the slow, methodical combat in large areas didn't hold up when compared to Far Cry and, well, isn't slow, careful combat in a big environment kind of the point of Far Cry? And Dishonoured for that matter? And while we're at, no ironsights is a bad thing? That's what I love about Halo. In an age where everything is pre-scripted, linear and full of looking down Ironsights Halo would stand up, shout "ENOUGH!", put on a jetpack and punch an ostrich...

 

[omega 616]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...this just reminds me of that Wallstreet Journal review of Borderlands 2 that basically broke down to "it's bad because it's not Call of Duty", I mean...WHAT!?

That was nerd baiting, writing an article that is total crap in order to send us gamers into a rage so we start talking about it on forums like this, so then other gamers will want to see this article and it drives people to the site.

It was never meant to be a serious piece of journalism.

On topic. Iron sights is just another name for better aim, I like it 'cos I always use it. Seems pretty important in Halo since the maps are so large that hip firing would be ineffective.

 

[an annoyed writer]

Right from the outset that title made my blood boil. You see, I come from an era without linear corridor-fests and Iron sights. I like big environments that I can explore and make new strategies for various encounters. I like to be able to pick off some unsuspecting fool with a sniper rifle, jump in a car, drive THROUGH the enemy encampment with my buddy on the gun, then use a jetpack to get to the top of a tower and fight the guy up top with a sword. And I like not ramming the iron sights up my nostrils while doing so. Hell, I'll go so far as to say those things are completely unnecessary, and only serve to make your average gun less accurate. It only really makes sense to use such a feature when you've got a scope or you've got a third-person shooter.

Cap's quite the comedian today. "Magical Realism."

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

Oh well boo-bloody-hoo, I can't kill someone on the otherside of the map with a sub-machine gun.

I've never been a great fan of the Halo multiplayer, especially Reach, but they're also epically fun co-op experiences. It doesn't need shitty hollywood cutscenes, it's an old series that anyone can play as long as their attention span is larger than the average CoD player.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Halo doesnt need it, reviewer should have known that the crosshair displayed on a Spartans helmet comes from the sights of the gun.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Halo doesnt need it, reviewer should have known that the crosshair displayed on a Spartans helmet comes from the sights of the gun.

If that's the case, why doesn't the reticule shift all over the screen anytime Master Chief uses his gun as a melee weapon/pulls his gun up to reload it?

good question actually, but that is how it was explained.

 

[Pandalisk]

Halo doesnt need it, reviewer should have known that the crosshair displayed on a Spartans helmet comes from the sights of the gun.

If that's the case, why doesn't the reticule shift all over the screen anytime Master Chief uses his gun as a melee weapon/pulls his gun up to reload it?

good question actually, but that is how it was explained.

Because the game doesn't bother going into that much detail, having this circle reticule bouncing around your screen when you melee or reload would be kinda obnoxious.

Everything else is in his helmet, the lack of recoil is because of his suit.

 

[Simonoly]

I don't understand why he's being declared stupid for stating a preference. He's a games journalist. His views are all encompassing across a broad range of games therefore he won't simply say "Halo doesn't need iron-sights because it's Halo" because he will hold Halo 4 up to the standards of other games. This is a good thing. Disagree with it sure, but don't dwell on the fact that someone criticised a game for not including something that you deem unnecessary.

Personally, I would have actually liked to have seen iron-sights in Halo 4 purely because, ever since Wolfenstein 3D, I've had a preference for being able to aim down the barrel of my gun. How idiotic.

 

[xDarc]

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.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

If we still use ironsights when we have that level of technology...well...I had something for this, but it boils down to that's stupid.

As for the rest, simply f*** these people. Didn't even have to scroll down and I already saw criticisms of a lack of handholding objectives and about magically spawning enemies behind you. BETTER THAN MAGICALLY DISAPPEARING ENEMIES BEHIND YOU and magically spawning ones in front. Unnecessarily large environments. You know what I saw recently that had unnecessarily large environments? Medal of Honour Doorfighter. Because it had anything other than a few rooms and perhaps corridors, which is unnecessary for that game. Slow, strategic gameplay? You mean reflexes aren't everything? Well call the police, we have different gameplay here!

 

[Norrdicus]

It only really makes sense to use such a feature when you've got a scope or you've got a third-person shooter.

Because obviously offering a way to fire a gun that's not a sniper rifle without wasting a whole magazine at 100+ meters, by sacrificing field of view and movement speed, is a completely goofy feature regardless of just about every gun in existence possessing potentially useful iron sights.

You know what, I hate reloading, long reload times make some weapons less fun to use, let's give every weapon unlimited magazines! Let's also take away firing modes from automatic weaponry!

Now, I dislike the military shooter genre as much as any other guy, but calling ironsights a stupid addition to the FPS genre is simply baffling. Iron sights are just another balancing factor based on actual gun design. Some have rather good ones like assault rifles, and pistols have basic ones because they usually have a much bigger spread and bullet drop




Edit: For the record, I have absolutely nothing against Halo 4 NOT having iron sights, I'm in the camp that thinks iron sights are a neat, optional feature. It doesn't make or break anything

 

[Winthrop]

It's a valid complaint, especially considering how screwy the reticle can be in Halo. I'd certainly appreciate them a lot.

Just imagine for a minute ironsights with the needler. It would be so freaking distracting noone would ever land a hit.

OT: I like ironsight in Killing Floor because they serve major functions (no reticle without ironsights, but you move slower with them on). Not a huge fan of them in other places.

 

[Alssadar]

So wait, using a good basic formula instead of copying other games means one is outdated?
Chose a different gun, then, whiner. Halo doesn't have an accurate, high rate of fire, high damage gun that gets headshots. Why? Because it'd be unbalanced as all hell.
But I guess the site is just a CoD sellout, as they only have 3780 Halo 4 subscribers and 42774 BlOpsII subscribers, they have to appeal to the main market somehow...

"...rinse-repeat relay of pumping way too many bullets into the same half-dozen enemies over and over..."
In comparison to the same Russian/terrorist guys with different guns.

 

[mjcabooseblu]

Opinions... how do they work?

I don't care. Somebody has an opinion about a game I'll never play. Big whoop.

Huh, that's a new level of meta. A user coming out to state his opinion complaining about people getting mad at opinions, while simultaneously stating that he has no opinion of his own, yet at the same time attempting a subtle jab at the subject matter of the thread, thus expressing an opinion.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

If those are the worst things they can stick to Halo 4, it sounds like it'll be quite a decent game in the series.
Just people trying to find the littlest things to whine about, it seems. The previous games didn't need iron sights, so I fail to see why it is bad that this game lacks them.

 

[ZehMadScientist]

Noooo, lack of ADS is what sets Halo apart from all the CoD clones! That, and the fact that you don't die in half a millisecond.

 

[Jfluffy]

>"THE BAD: That representation is the same old formula we?ve played for years."
> Criticizes for not having aiming down iron sights.
I'll have to reread it, but what formula is he talking about? The non-regenerating health, non-iron sights formula?