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

[WouldYouKindly]

NO! JUST MOTHERFUCKING NO!

That's not just for the ironsight aiming, but the entire article. We do not need every game within a specific genre to be exactly the same. Especially considering this is a game set far into the future. Why couldn't we have a HUD in that visor with a targeting reticle that shows exactly where your weapon is pointed by then? In other words, it's not necessary in the setting, or the mechanics more importantly, and people just want it put in for the sense of familiarity.

Same applies for the pace and set pieces. After all, I like combat to be a bit methodical. Makes me feel like I'm thinking my way through the problem rather than just bursting my way through. Finally, I prefer to cause massive explosions on my own rather than to watch them in a slightly more interactive cutscene.

 

[LordFeast58]

Any thoughts on this?

First thought: Wait, what EGM still exists?
second thought: Why the fuck does EGM still exist? I though almost everyone hated them, even more than IGN.
In all seriousness that was a fucking awful review, but I guess this proves that Microsoft couldn't pay off everyone for good reviews. (Disclaimer: that was a joke)
[sub] seriously? EGM? Still? why? how? grrrr[/sub]

People hate EGM? Glad I'm not the only one. I remember when I buy the first EGM magazine that contains the MGS4 review, it's judging by having a three judges grading system which feels idiotic and they don't even care much about the game.

They also preview Killzone 2 like it is really going to be a Halo Killer. With all the lousy jokes they put inside the magazine, I don't even want to bother to look at their website.

 

[The_Echo]

So, from what I gather... people are criticizing a Halo game for keeping in line with other Halo games?

Also, I don't think Halo EVER had iron sights. I think it'd be kind of weird if it did. Especially considering the Covenant weapons, which have no iron to see with.

 

[Gatx]

I've always thought that Halo was vaguely justified in not having iron sights because Master Chief was wearing power armor, which had a built in targeting to help him aim.

Anyway I wasn't too big on Halo getting a 4th installment but with what I hear about where the story is going, and now this stuff about it now being one of the last examples of a big name FPS that doesn't try to mimic Call of Duty, color me interested.

 

[Kolby Jack]

I'm not about to decapitate someone over a 7.0 score or a preference for iron-sights, but I do see where TC is coming from. No iron-sights, huge environments, and methodical pacing have been staples of the Halo series and will likely continue to be so. I certainly wouldn't go as far as the writer said and call it "old-fashioned" but rather that's just how Halo is. It's fine if he doesn't like it, though it's unfortunate that he doesn't realize why. I for one am glad they are staying true to the feel of the series, because I've always preferred Halo to CoD, though I hate snipers pretty equally in both. Fucking snipers.

 

[xDarc]

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.

I'm just curious. Have you ever even played a console version of a shooter? Or is this just hearsay and hyperbole.

Yes, and shuffling thumbsticks around is no substitute for a mouse and keyboard; unless you take movement out of the equation with AimDownSight. This makes so everyone can play, everyone can get kills, and everyone is happy.

The last game I played that had arena style rules with powerups on the map, bullet dodging, was FEAR Combat. This is when people were still in transition to consoles, but new players were cropping up out of the woodwork and they were horrible.

I remember I had some rounds where I would go 90 in 5 or 110 in 10. Before 2006, shooters were mostly for PC gamers who were classically educated with Quake, UT, and the like. Shooters also did not beat the Titantic movie for raw dollars on opening weekend, in fact it took years for a game to sell several million copies.

What the last gen of consoles did is made gaming a household item for everybody, it brought people back who hadn't touched a game since nintendo stopped being cool in jr. high. It brought people in, and they had to water it down for them.

No one wanted to play OUR games, and no one wanted to play with US, it was simply too humiliating for them and devs/publishers quickly put a stop to it with the Modern Military Shooter, where everybody wins.

 

[Erttheking]

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.

I'm just curious. Have you ever even played a console version of a shooter? Or is this just hearsay and hyperbole.

Yes, and shuffling thumbsticks around is no substitute for a mouse and keyboard; unless you take movement out of the equation with AimDownSight. This makes so everyone can play, everyone can get kills, and everyone is happy.

The last game I played that had arena style rules with powerups on the map, bullet dodging, was FEAR Combat. This is when people were still in transition to consoles, but new players were cropping up out of the woodwork and they were horrible.

I remember I had some rounds where I would go 90 in 5 or 110 in 10. Before 2006, shooters were mostly for PC gamers who were classically educated with Quake, UT, and the like. Shooters also did not beat the Titantic movie for raw dollars on opening weekend, in fact it took years for a game to sell several million copies.

What the last gen of consoles did is made gaming a household item for everybody, it brought people back who hadn't touched a game since nintendo stopped being cool in jr. high. It brought people in, and they had to water it down for them.

No one wanted to play OUR games, and no one wanted to play with US, it was simply too humiliating for them and devs/publishers quickly put a stop to it with the Modern Military Shooter, where everybody wins.

Did this thread really go down the route of console vs PC? Can we please not do that? I find that Halo works just fine with a controller, ok can we please stop?

 

[KissmahArceus]

I have enjoyed all the Halo campaigns, Reach may have fiddled with the canon a wee bit but I didn't mind, I respect the reviewer's opinion about iron sights but I don't feel that Halo needs this particular mechanic.

Honestly, my favourite Halo campaigns are: 3>Reach>ODST>1>2.

I have high hopes for 4, if I get some interesting battles, with variations on situations and combinations of enemies and toys to deal with them and if the story is enjoyable then I'm there.

I see Halo's encounters as puzzles to solve whereas COD and MOH.... they are more like whack-a-mole in their campaigns.

Anyway, no need to get butt hurt about a reviewer's opinion, that is all it is. An opinion.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...

But what? Their opinion is wrong if you don't agree? Their opinion is wrong if they criticise something you like? Maybe Halo 4 would be better with iron sights? Who knows? Question mark???

 

[Erttheking]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...

But what? Their opinion is wrong if you don't agree? Their opinion is wrong if they criticise something you like? Maybe Halo 4 would be better with iron sights? Who knows? Question mark???

Uh...no, I just find it rather bizarre that a game series I liked is being criticized for not confirming to do everything COD style...why so hostile?

 

[CardinalPiggles]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...

But what? Their opinion is wrong if you don't agree? Their opinion is wrong if they criticise something you like? Maybe Halo 4 would be better with iron sights? Who knows? Question mark???

Uh...no, I just find it rather bizarre that a game series I liked is being criticized for not confirming to do everything COD style...why so hostile?

Why so defensive? It's just an opinion from this reviewer. If reviewers weren't allowed to give their opinions then reviews would be awfully boring, albeit informative.

 

[Erttheking]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...

But what? Their opinion is wrong if you don't agree? Their opinion is wrong if they criticise something you like? Maybe Halo 4 would be better with iron sights? Who knows? Question mark???

Uh...no, I just find it rather bizarre that a game series I liked is being criticized for not confirming to do everything COD style...why so hostile?

Why so defensive? It's just an opinion from this reviewer. If reviewers weren't allowed to give their opinions then reviews would be awfully boring, albeit informative.

Uh...how am I being defensive? I'm just pointing this completely bizarre review.

 

[snowbear]

I remember when CS:GO came out a couple of months ago, and everyone and their pet hamster was moaning that It hadn't got with the time and included iron sights. These were people that had never even played the other games in the series. This complaint baffled me then and its baffling me now. Now its Halo that being criticized for the same issue there seems to be a lot more defense for staying true to your origins.

Oh how the gaming community can be absurdly fickle sometimes.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...

But what? Their opinion is wrong if you don't agree? Their opinion is wrong if they criticise something you like? Maybe Halo 4 would be better with iron sights? Who knows? Question mark???

Uh...no, I just find it rather bizarre that a game series I liked is being criticized for not confirming to do everything COD style...why so hostile?

Why so defensive? It's just an opinion from this reviewer. If reviewers weren't allowed to give their opinions then reviews would be awfully boring, albeit informative.

Uh...how am I being defensive? I'm just pointing this completely bizarre review.

You're defending this game from the reviewers opinion saying that his opinion is bizarre simply because you disagree with him, or because you don't want Halo to change into something akin to CoD.

If there is a rating system that'll let you down vote him or something, then use that. But preaching about how he is wrong is simply taking too far I think.

 

[Erttheking]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...

But what? Their opinion is wrong if you don't agree? Their opinion is wrong if they criticise something you like? Maybe Halo 4 would be better with iron sights? Who knows? Question mark???

Uh...no, I just find it rather bizarre that a game series I liked is being criticized for not confirming to do everything COD style...why so hostile?

Why so defensive? It's just an opinion from this reviewer. If reviewers weren't allowed to give their opinions then reviews would be awfully boring, albeit informative.

Uh...how am I being defensive? I'm just pointing this completely bizarre review.

You're defending this game from the reviewers opinion saying that his opinion is bizarre simply because you disagree with him, or because you don't want Halo to change into something akin to CoD.

If there is a rating system that'll let you down vote him or something, then use that. But preaching about how he is wrong is simply taking too far I think.

Um...I'm not preaching...at all. And I'm not defending this game either. Have I made any comments about the overall quality of Halo 4? No I have not, I haven't said it's good, I haven't said that it's bad. I'm just saying that his complaints are freaking weird.

 

[Treblaine]

I liked Halo ODST as you had an open world city, that was fun, that was not a locked linear path. Shame the same team that supposedly worked on ODST abandoned that for Halo 4.

Well yeah... ODST was Bungie, and Halo 4 is 343i. Plus 343i has a whole Shield World, ODST was a City. One is very large the other is very small compared to the other, an open world wouldn't work for Halo 4. Unless the Forerunners built a giant shield world and just placed everything in a very small vicinity.

Also to your Low speed, you have Sprint now in Halo 4 at all times.

Well it's good to know there is a sprint feature, but not necessarily the same as for Doom where you move VERY fast at no cost.

The sprint in Halo 4:
-how much faster (twice as fast?)
-For what duration or over what distance
-at what cost (stamina or energy bar that is used for other things?)
-How long after sprint ends till it is fully recharged.

This is my problem with sprint, it's too often used as just a short distance dash with no appreciable difference on time in traversing large areas. And appreciability is what matters.

Ideally, sprint should be something sustainable but something you wouldn't want to do all the time as a matter of control. Like walking near ledges and timing jumps near pitfalls or you want to change direction quicker.

I just feel games are constantly limiting me.

What's really needed is a run speed as fast as sprint, then a walk-mode for when you want control.

 

[Something Amyss]

This makes so everyone can play, everyone can get kills, and everyone is happy.

If you think that's true, you really haven't played many console shooters.

 

[xDarc]

This makes so everyone can play, everyone can get kills, and everyone is happy.

If you think that's true, you really haven't played many console shooters.

I don't need to play on consoles, it's the same experience on PC because the mechanics are the same. Xbox360 ushered in ADS; before 360 it was in a handful of games, yes- you could literally count them on your fingers.

There was the 90s PC shooter, the real shooters in which you MOVE and SHOOT.

Then there's the post 360 console shooters which are mostly about cover, positioning, and shooting people in the back. Gone are the days of the circle staffe or any kind of magical bullet dodging dances. The hardware dictates the game mechanics across all platforms. The platform is console, and PCs are an afterthought- i'm playing essentially the same games.

Halo is somewhat unique as it arrived in between the old and the new and has a foot in both; and if people weren't so used to console shooters and iron sights, we wouldn't even be having this thread because in 2001 when Halo first came out- iron sights were rare and were relegated to ultra-realistic niche games like Delta Force. Have you ever met anyone who played delta force? There's something off about those folks.

Anyhow, if it weren't such a part of FPS games now- we wouldn't even be having this thread because it would be OK to not have the ADS mechanic.

All modern shooters are console shooters; you wait until someone moves, then you aim down sight and shoot that person- and hope no one sees you do it because the will be aiming down their sight and shooting you... but don't worry someone else will see the person aiming down sight to shoot you after you aimed down sight to shoot the first guy- and it'll be one big shoot everyone in the back circle jerk. Console FPS. Good times. *sarcasm*

 

[Erttheking]

This makes so everyone can play, everyone can get kills, and everyone is happy.

If you think that's true, you really haven't played many console shooters.

I don't need to play on consoles, it's the same experience on PC because the mechanics are the same. Xbox360 ushered in ADS; before 360 it was in a handful of games, yes- you could literally count them on your fingers.

There was the 90s PC shooter, the real shooters in which you MOVE and SHOOT.

Then there's the post 360 console shooters which are mostly about cover, positioning, and shooting people in the back. Gone are the days of the circle staffe or any kind of magical bullet dodging dances. The hardware dictates the game mechanics across all platforms. The platform is console, and PCs are an afterthought- i'm playing essentially the same games.

Halo is somewhat unique as it arrived in between the old and the new and has a foot in both; and if people weren't so used to console shooters and iron sights, we wouldn't even be having this thread because in 2001 when Halo first came out- iron sights were rare and were relegated to ultra-realistic niche games like Delta Force. Have you ever met anyone who played delta force? There's something off about those folks.

Anyhow, if it weren't such a part of FPS games now- we wouldn't even be having this thread because it would be OK to not have the ADS mechanic.

All modern shooters are console shooters; you wait until someone moves, then you aim down sight and shoot that person- and hope no one sees you do it because the will be aiming down their sight and shooting you... but don't worry someone else will see the person aiming down sight to shoot you after you aimed down sight to shoot the first guy- and it'll be one big shoot everyone in the back circle jerk. Console FPS. Good times. *sarcasm*

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?