Halo 4 needs to give some info already.

[VoidWanderer]

If a game about interstellar war is boring, I think the problem is not just with me. I enjoyed the original Halo, I found Halo 2 quite fun, but the storyline was going the way of "Indigo Prophecy Syndrome" and I found it really hard to care about investigating the crashed ship in the city.

i didn't say the problem was that you found it boring, that's your business. what i was saying was that the reason why you couldn't recollect the ending to halo 3 was that you never saw the ending to halo 3!

...? I never said I could recollect how the game ended, it's just that when someone said that just because one war had ended doesn't mean all the wars ended, I got very confused by that. But in all honesty I have LONG ago stopped caring about the Halo franchise.

 

[cthulhumythos]

If a game about interstellar war is boring, I think the problem is not just with me. I enjoyed the original Halo, I found Halo 2 quite fun, but the storyline was going the way of "Indigo Prophecy Syndrome" and I found it really hard to care about investigating the crashed ship in the city.

i didn't say the problem was that you found it boring, that's your business. what i was saying was that the reason why you couldn't recollect the ending to halo 3 was that you never saw the ending to halo 3!

...? I never said I could recollect how the game ended, it's just that when someone said that just because one war had ended doesn't mean all the wars ended, I got very confused by that. But in all honesty I have LONG ago stopped caring about the Halo franchise.

oh, okay. anyhoo, i'ma go rant now. not at you, because getting angry at someone's opinion about a video game is silly. ANYWAYS.....

honestly, i did like halo 3 and reach, but even i feel a bit iffy about halo 4. i haven't really seen what 343 is capable of, and i recall reading somewhere that they are going to release 4, 5, 6 in year of each other. there's also the fact that they announced the entire trilogy AT ONCE. I mean, seriously. back when Reach was coming out, some would say things along the lines of "oh, they're making another one? way to beat a dead horse/ halo's a cash cow/ what a bland and mediocre game/ scoffity scoff scoff." and i would just roll my eyes. but even i have a hard time justifying the announcement of three new games at once. i'm also a huge fan of bungie, and without them, will it still even feel like halo? or will it devolve into the generic scifi shooter all the naysayers say it is?

i'm going to keep an eye on it, but i'd be lying if i said i was optimistic.

 

[oZode]

Spoiler

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

When I say skill based I mean gun on gun without bullshit like "Slam your hand on the ground and gain immunity for 10 seconds" thrown in. We dont need Halo to go down the road COD followed.

And why not play it on console? Because PC is my preferred platform and has advantages I consider to be greater than a consoles. Sue me.

Well to be fair while immune you pretty much can't do a thing and are a sitting duck. Armor lock did get nerfed to the point where your shields and health don't regenerate while you are armor locking and sticky grenades still stick to you. And call of duty doesn't have invincibility or anything like that (juggernaut suit tells everyone where you are), just giving people who shoot first more shiny rewards that can be very annoying if it can bark.

What I mean is weighing the game down with useless, unnecessary shit. When you start throwing all this damn bullshit in a game it goes a long way to stiffle any competitive aspect the multiplayer may have had. Perfect example? COD. I want you to play one round of MW3, come back here, and say with a straight face that that game is not broken beyond belief.

I know, I know "But its meant to fun, herp derp!"

Well, yes and no. The point of multiplayer FPS is competition. Plus, remember how great the competitive scene in Halo 3 was? With all the tournaments and streams and thrilling matches? I do. And that all disappeared with Reach. I wonder why. Something to think about.

You bought halo 3 presumably and also presumably halo reach which means you presumably have a console, and while you can argue for days about how weak the processors and whatever are, I am sure halo 4 will run fine on the 360 it is meant to be an exclusive for so the argument now reaches full circle where I ask you "does it matter?".

It does matter. You obviously want some reasons, so here you go:

1) I dont care if it "runs fine" on the 360, it looks better and runs 6 times better on my PC.
2) I prefer M&K to a controller when it comes to FPS games.
3) I dont need Microsoft jewing me for money with bullshit gold memberships only to start the fucking game and find out the whole game runs on P2P connections anyway, thus raising the question where my money went.
4) I like my gaming devices to last longer than a year and the 360 has proven beyond all doubt that you cant expect that from it without getting disappointed.
5) The most fun I ever had with Halo was Halo Custom Edition on the PC, with a bunch of servers that were running all kinds of mods. Console = no mods. On PC? Maybe. I could live without.

I bought Halo 3 and enjoyed it despite it being on a platform I have come to despise. I saw the flashing warning signs before Reach's release and decided to borrow it from a friend, trying before buying, and it was shit, so I did not buy it. Some of the playlists were a lot of fun and the forge was great (although that was in Halo 3 too), so thats that.

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

When I say skill based I mean gun on gun without bullshit like "Slam your hand on the ground and gain immunity for 10 seconds" thrown in. We dont need Halo to go down the road COD followed.

And why not play it on console? Because PC is my preferred platform and has advantages I consider to be greater than a consoles. Sue me.

Isn't Halo a Xbox360 exclusive, and one of the main reasons people buy 360's? No way it gets a port.

Which is highly unfortunate. I fail to see why MS want to keep it exclusive, since everything else they do indicates they see the xbox as a "family machine" and not a traditional console.

Okay, I am sorry for wasting everyone's time with this pointless off-topic whine fest about who's shiny box is better, I should have stayed on topic and not have escalated this.

Im not saying my box is more shiny. (In fact, if you want to get technical, its pretty dusty from the outside.) I just offered some reasons to explain why the PC is MY own personal preferred platform. And as a result of that, of course I think theres a need for Halo 4 on PC.

More like a want, because halo 4 doesn't need to be on the PC, and besides the 360 needs exclusives and halo is one of their most profitable franchises. What matters is weather or not 343i can make a good halo game, not what the platform is and the last thing I wanna debate about is anything PC related.

Here's some info: It'll be exactly like Halo 3 + a new gun and... I dunno... space chocobos or something.

Dude, halo isn't the rehashing game. Yeah they keep some of the guns, but half the armory changes every game and space chocobos were already in halo reach.

He did finish the fight. When one war ends, doesn't mean all wars end.

Also Halo 3 ended with a cliff hanger, and Halo 4 is following up to that.

What other war? Last time I checked the war between Master Chief and the Covenants was put on hold due to the Flood.

and then you kill the covenant leaders and destroy the flood. fight finished.

Was that at the end of Halo 3? I never got around to finishing that game as I found it boring.

Okay since I found halo 3's campaign to be kinda dumb myself I will tell ya.

At the end of lv 5 you go to a thing called the ark which had its portal hidden in earth. The covies and UNSC enter the portal, and they fight on the ark. In the end, the last prophet gets killed and then they have another ring made, since the ark creates rings and they use the ring to destroy the ark (the ark is outside the galaxy, no mass extinctions) and the flood. Master chief escapes through a frigate that gets ripped in half by a subspace portal and master chief goes back into cyro sleep.

Then he wakes up for halo 4 and we have no idea what the giant metal ball is except it is forerunner related.

 

[VoidWanderer]

At the end of lv 5 you go to a thing called the ark which had its portal hidden in earth. The covies and UNSC enter the portal, and they fight on the ark. In the end, the last prophet gets killed and then they have another ring made, since the ark creates rings and they use the ring to destroy the ark (the ark is outside the galaxy, no mass extinctions) and the flood. Master chief escapes through a frigate that gets ripped in half by a subspace portal and master chief goes back into cyro sleep.

Then he wakes up for halo 4 and we have no idea what the giant metal ball is except it is forerunner related.

Wait, what? Didn't they establish in the first game that if one ring activates then every single ring in the galaxy activates causing the entire galaxy to be as populated as a black hole.

And after he escapes in a heavily damaged spaceship, he goes to... sleep? And going by the 'stellar' writing job the ball probably fills the holes of the remaining rings to turn them off, or plug the hole the flood (or whatever you are fighting) uses to keep attacking from

 

[oZode]

At the end of lv 5 you go to a thing called the ark which had its portal hidden in earth. The covies and UNSC enter the portal, and they fight on the ark. In the end, the last prophet gets killed and then they have another ring made, since the ark creates rings and they use the ring to destroy the ark (the ark is outside the galaxy, no mass extinctions) and the flood. Master chief escapes through a frigate that gets ripped in half by a subspace portal and master chief goes back into cyro sleep.

Then he wakes up for halo 4 and we have no idea what the giant metal ball is except it is forerunner related.

Wait, what? Didn't they establish in the first game that if one ring activates then every single ring in the galaxy activates causing the entire galaxy to be as populated as a black hole.

And after he escapes in a heavily damaged spaceship, he goes to... sleep? And going by the 'stellar' writing job the ball probably fills the holes of the remaining rings to turn them off, or plug the hole the flood (or whatever you are fighting) uses to keep attacking from

My telling of it is not the best.

So here is a excerpt from a wikpedia page about the story:

Spoiler

after the events of the comic tie-in Halo: Uprising,[33] the Master Chief crashes in eastern Africa, where he is found by Johnson and the Arbiter. The Chief, Johnson, and company fight Covenant in the jungle and arrive at a UNSC outpost. Here, Keyes and Lord Hood plan a final effort to stop the Covenant leader, the High Prophet of Truth, from activating a Forerunner artifact uncovered outside the ruins of the city of New Mombasa. The Chief clears anti-air Covenant defenses so Hood can lead the last of Earth's ships against the Prophet, but Truth activates the buried artifact, creating a slipspace portal which he and his followers enter. A Flood-infested ship crash-lands nearby; Elite forces arrive and vitrify Flood-infected areas of Earth, stopping the threat. Following a message Cortana left aboard the Flood ship, the Chief, Arbiter, Elites, Johnson, Keyes and their troops follow Truth through the portal. Joining them is 343 Guilty Spark, who aids the Chief as he has no function to fulfill after the destruction of his ringworld.
Traveling through the portal, the humans and Elites discover an immense artificial structure known as the Ark, far beyond the edges of the Milky Way galaxy. Here, Truth can remotely activate all the Halos. The Flood arrive en masse aboard High Charity and begin infesting the installation. Truth captures Johnson, as he needs a human to use Forerunner technology. Keyes is killed attempting a rescue, and Johnson is forced to activate the rings. Gravemind forges a truce with the Chief and Arbiter to stop Truth. The Arbiter, Master Chief, and Flood forces arrive and overwhelm Truth's guards, rescuing Johnson and halting the installations' activation. After the Arbiter kills Truth, Gravemind turns on the Chief and Arbiter.
The Chief, Arbiter and Guilty Spark discover that the Ark is constructing a Halo to replace the one that the Chief previously destroyed. The Chief decides to activate this Halo; the ringworld would eliminate the Flood infestation on the Ark while sparing the galaxy at large from destruction. To activate the ring, the Chief rescues Cortana, who has the Activation Index of the destroyed Halo, from High Charity and destroys the city. Arriving on the new Halo, Cortana warns that Gravemind is trying to rebuild itself on the ring. The Chief, Arbiter, and Johnson travel to Halo's control room to activate the ring. Guilty Spark explains that because the ring is not yet complete, a premature activation will destroy it and the Ark. When Johnson ignores his warning, Guilty Spark kills him to protect "his" ring. The Chief and Arbiter destroy Guilty Spark, activate the ring, and escape the ring's self-destruction on the UNSC frigate Forward Unto Dawn. However, the force of Halo's blast causes the slipspace portal to collapse, resulting in only the front half of Forward Unto Dawn, carrying the Arbiter, making it back to Earth.
Believing the Chief to have perished, a memorial service is held on Earth for the fallen heroes of the Human-Covenant war. After the memorial service, the Arbiter and his Elite brethren departs for their home planet. Meanwhile, the rear half of Forward Unto Dawn floats in unknown space. Cortana drops a distress beacon, but realizes it may be years before they are rescued. The Chief enters cryonic sleep, telling Cortana to "wake me, when you need me." If the game is completed at the Legendary difficulty level, the scene continues to show the piece of Forward Unto Dawn drifting towards a planet.

 

[Dethenger]

Isn't Halo a Xbox360 exclusive, and one of the main reasons people buy 360's? No way it gets a port.

*ahem*

Halo CE (PC) [http://www.amazon.co.uk/Halo-Combat-Evolved-PC-CD/dp/B00006IQVI/ref=sr_1_2?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1328989563&sr=1-2]

Halo 2 (PC) [http://www.amazon.co.uk/Microsoft-6378-Halo-PC-DVD/dp/B000F6W8AE/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1328989563&sr=1-1]

Halo CE (Mac) [http://www.amazon.co.uk/Macsoft-Halo-Combat-Evolved-Mac/dp/B00006IQTH/ref=sr_1_3?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1328989563&sr=1-3]

None of those came out on the 360. What he said was essentially true: Halo has been 360 exclusive since Halo 3, when Microsoft needed to give people a reason to buy the 360. They still do, ergo Halo 4 will most likely be an exclusive.

Anyway, I'm torn about Halo 4 at this point. Reach soured my opinion of Halo in general, for reasons I believe SmashLovesTitanQuest has done a good job of compiling. I spent a lot of time arguing about in on the B.net forums, don't feel like doing it again here. However, Halo 4 gets a new developer, and if I see any evidence that they've moved back to a more Halo 3-like multiplayer (and some good goddamn maps, not shit and Forge World) and a solid campaign, I might get it.

 

[Woodsey]

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

It matters when the only control input is inherently not very good for accurate aiming.

 

[cthulhumythos]

Spoiler

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

When I say skill based I mean gun on gun without bullshit like "Slam your hand on the ground and gain immunity for 10 seconds" thrown in. We dont need Halo to go down the road COD followed.

And why not play it on console? Because PC is my preferred platform and has advantages I consider to be greater than a consoles. Sue me.

Well to be fair while immune you pretty much can't do a thing and are a sitting duck. Armor lock did get nerfed to the point where your shields and health don't regenerate while you are armor locking and sticky grenades still stick to you. And call of duty doesn't have invincibility or anything like that (juggernaut suit tells everyone where you are), just giving people who shoot first more shiny rewards that can be very annoying if it can bark.

What I mean is weighing the game down with useless, unnecessary shit. When you start throwing all this damn bullshit in a game it goes a long way to stiffle any competitive aspect the multiplayer may have had. Perfect example? COD. I want you to play one round of MW3, come back here, and say with a straight face that that game is not broken beyond belief.

I know, I know "But its meant to fun, herp derp!"

Well, yes and no. The point of multiplayer FPS is competition. Plus, remember how great the competitive scene in Halo 3 was? With all the tournaments and streams and thrilling matches? I do. And that all disappeared with Reach. I wonder why. Something to think about.

You bought halo 3 presumably and also presumably halo reach which means you presumably have a console, and while you can argue for days about how weak the processors and whatever are, I am sure halo 4 will run fine on the 360 it is meant to be an exclusive for so the argument now reaches full circle where I ask you "does it matter?".

It does matter. You obviously want some reasons, so here you go:

1) I dont care if it "runs fine" on the 360, it looks better and runs 6 times better on my PC.
2) I prefer M&K to a controller when it comes to FPS games.
3) I dont need Microsoft jewing me for money with bullshit gold memberships only to start the fucking game and find out the whole game runs on P2P connections anyway, thus raising the question where my money went.
4) I like my gaming devices to last longer than a year and the 360 has proven beyond all doubt that you cant expect that from it without getting disappointed.
5) The most fun I ever had with Halo was Halo Custom Edition on the PC, with a bunch of servers that were running all kinds of mods. Console = no mods. On PC? Maybe. I could live without.

I bought Halo 3 and enjoyed it despite it being on a platform I have come to despise. I saw the flashing warning signs before Reach's release and decided to borrow it from a friend, trying before buying, and it was shit, so I did not buy it. Some of the playlists were a lot of fun and the forge was great (although that was in Halo 3 too), so thats that.

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

When I say skill based I mean gun on gun without bullshit like "Slam your hand on the ground and gain immunity for 10 seconds" thrown in. We dont need Halo to go down the road COD followed.

And why not play it on console? Because PC is my preferred platform and has advantages I consider to be greater than a consoles. Sue me.

Isn't Halo a Xbox360 exclusive, and one of the main reasons people buy 360's? No way it gets a port.

Which is highly unfortunate. I fail to see why MS want to keep it exclusive, since everything else they do indicates they see the xbox as a "family machine" and not a traditional console.

Okay, I am sorry for wasting everyone's time with this pointless off-topic whine fest about who's shiny box is better, I should have stayed on topic and not have escalated this.

Im not saying my box is more shiny. (In fact, if you want to get technical, its pretty dusty from the outside.) I just offered some reasons to explain why the PC is MY own personal preferred platform. And as a result of that, of course I think theres a need for Halo 4 on PC.

More like a want, because halo 4 doesn't need to be on the PC, and besides the 360 needs exclusives and halo is one of their most profitable franchises. What matters is weather or not 343i can make a good halo game, not what the platform is and the last thing I wanna debate about is anything PC related.

Its incredible how defensive xbox fans get when someone suggests Halo on PC.

But of course Halo doesnt need to be on PC. It doesnt "need" to exist at all. But go ahead. Give me some good reasons as to why Halo should not be on the PC, apart from all this "B-b-b-but its the last exclusive! I have to justify my purchase somehow! Waaahhhhhh the games are MINE I dont want them on PC wahhhhhh" bullshit.

Man, I dont want to start stereotyping people based on their choice of platform, but damn... Witcher 2 gets ported to xbox, everyones fine with it. Halo fan suggests PC port, all xbox fans collectively shit their pants.

dude, don't generalize. it's not cool. even if it seems that there's a bunch of people disagreeing with you, that doesn't mean EVERYONE in that group is that way. people just like to be conflicting sometimes.

 

[oZode]

But of course Halo doesnt need to be on PC. It doesnt "need" to exist at all. But go ahead. Give me some good reasons as to why Halo should not be on the PC, apart from all this "B-b-b-but its the last exclusive! I have to justify my purchase somehow! Waaahhhhhh the games are MINE I dont want them on PC wahhhhhh" bullshit.

Man, I dont want to start stereotyping people based on their choice of platform, but damn... Witcher 2 gets ported to xbox, everyones fine with it. Halo fan suggests PC port, all xbox fans collectively shit their pants.

What I am saying is that I see no way microsoft is going to do a PC port, because you know, Microsoft. I am not saying there shouldn't be a port, but unless microsoft says they are making a halo 4 port, I wouldn't count on it.

 

[repeating integers]

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

It matters when the only control input is inherently not very good for accurate aiming.

Speak for yourself. You're not universally terrible at aiming with every control system known to man... /sad and bitter

 

[Scorpid]

I just wish they wouldn't bring back Mr.Faceless protagonist himself Masterchief. I would much rather have the broad brush character archetypes of Reach then Masterchief come back with his underwhelming one liners and lack of any real conflict.

 

[Azuaron]

Do we care? Are we caring about specific details? It's a Halo game. If you liked the previous Halo games, you will like Halo 4. If you didn't, you won't like Halo 4. There's not much to explain in the Halo franchise. It's like asking for specific details of Modern Warfare; they're all just updated versions of the same game.

 

[oZode]

Do we care? Are we caring about specific details? It's a Halo game. If you liked the previous Halo games, you will like Halo 4. If you didn't, you won't like Halo 4. There's not much to explain in the Halo franchise. It's like asking for specific details of Modern Warfare; they're all just updated versions of the same game.

Halo changes much more in comparison to call of duty.

Let's see!

Halo 3:
-Power up abilities with one-time deploy
-You play as a spartan II
-Dual wielding
-1 to 50 rank system
-Armor is unlocked through achievements
-regenerating shields and health
-Elites have no difference from spartans

Halo reach:
-Armor Abilities that can be reused
-Loadouts
-Cr is used to buy armor
-Your rank goes up depending on how much you play
-Elites only appear in some gametypes and play differently (sort of) from spartans
-Spartan health doesn't regenerate with shields
-Arena divisions you are set in to determine skill

And I think I am missing quite a few more differences. Halo 4 is most likely going to be quite different, well except for "you shoot each other with guns" of course.

 

[Awexsome]

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

It matters when the only control input is inherently not very good for accurate aiming.

Oh get off that PC elitist talking point.

Ever since Halo FPS controls for consoles have been perfectly viable and was one of the biggest reasons why the series took off in the first place. Preference of a mouse and keyboard is one thing but neither is fundamentally better.

RTS's are fundamentally better for PC because of the control's demands, FPS's haven't been for a long time now. Precision with a controller creates a skill gap just like precision with a mouse does.

If aiming is inherently bad on consoles then moving is inherently bad on a keyboard.

 

[Woodsey]

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

It matters when the only control input is inherently not very good for accurate aiming.

Oh get off that PC elitist talking point.

Ever since Halo FPS controls for consoles have been perfectly viable and was one of the biggest reasons why the series took off in the first place. Preference of a mouse and keyboard is one thing but neither is fundamentally better.

RTS's are fundamentally better for PC because of the control's demands, FPS's haven't been for a long time now. Precision with a controller creates a skill gap just like precision with a mouse does.

If aiming is inherently bad on consoles then moving is inherently bad on a keyboard.

An analogue stick has a mechanical limit to how fast it can turn; its viable, but its not particularly well-suited.

I'm not sure why moving would be inherently bad. I can spin around in a second, you can strafe, sprinting is usually easier (tends to be bound to clicking the analogue on a pad), etc.

 

[ablac]

I look forward to seeing the new enemies and storyline and world. Because of the timeskip they can do whatever they want and now that its in the hands of a new studio they can make it their own. Having said that i still want halo to stay halo. I wonder why they are holding back on info though. Maybe because this stuff is totally new they dont want to alienate people or they want to have things sorted before they show anything. With other halo games you at least had an idea of what was coming but here its almost limitless in where they could take things. But seriously i hope they dont bring back covenant or flood cause they have been done to death by this point.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

It matters when the only control input is inherently not very good for accurate aiming.

Oh get off that PC elitist talking point.

Ever since Halo FPS controls for consoles have been perfectly viable and was one of the biggest reasons why the series took off in the first place. Preference of a mouse and keyboard is one thing but neither is fundamentally better.

RTS's are fundamentally better for PC because of the control's demands, FPS's haven't been for a long time now. Precision with a controller creates a skill gap just like precision with a mouse does.

If aiming is inherently bad on consoles then moving is inherently bad on a keyboard.

Yes both points are right and it would be a bit foolish to suggest movement on a keyboard is decent. I don't see why I can say an analog is better for moving than ESDF/WASD but I can't say a mouse is better for aiming? From a technological standpoint my mouse is better than any analog stick for aiming.

No one complains if I were to say an Arcade pad is better for Fighters so why should this be any different? I mean really why should it?

Both systems have flaws and yes a keyboard is inherently bad for movement just as analog is for aiming in comparison. This is shown by how aim assist has mostly fallen by the way side in PC gaming on FPS titles but is still alive and well on consoles.

That last sentence you made is a perfectly logical statement.

No I am not saying that aiming or FPS games are not viable on consoles. What I am saying is that preference aside when it comes to actually aiming a virtual gun in a game an anyway decent mouse let alone a gaming mouse outperforms the analog stick.

The sooner kinks are worked out of systems like this and they become mainstream and have adequate extra input option we will all be better for it. If we can get that and the ability to completely remap controls on consoles and drop stuff like Pick up weapon and Defuse bomb on the same key we will all have a superior experience.

snip

I would like to say for a lot of people myself included if I had a choice I would pick PC not for power but for KB + M. There a couple of options for that on certain consoles but are hard to acquire.

Now you can argue they are equal all you want and subjective as a preference that would be a fair point (technologically aiming wise is a bit different given options on certain mice). After being a console gamer for 12ish then having been playing on the PC as well for the last 6 I will say that I find it very hard to go back to a gamepad for FPS games. At least when it comes to aiming.

That and some people such as myself do not want to pay for XBL membership when we don't even have proper dedicated server support which is a deal breaker for me for online play for something like a FPS.

This isn't a really mine is better than yours rather I prefer mine to yours. I know this has already been resolved so I am just throwing in my 2 cents on a preference for a PC version of Halo.

 

[ablac]

Do we care? Are we caring about specific details? It's a Halo game. If you liked the previous Halo games, you will like Halo 4. If you didn't, you won't like Halo 4. There's not much to explain in the Halo franchise. It's like asking for specific details of Modern Warfare; they're all just updated versions of the same game.

Woah woah hold up missy. They have claimed that the story is totally new and it would have to be as they wrapped up everything that has come so far with master chief in halo 3. Halo has a huge universe and mythology and whether you think its goo or not effort has been put into it. The multiplayer has advanced quite a bit every game and so has the single player. It is not similar to call of duty for these rerasons and the fact that halo's single player is actually worth playing still.

 

[oZode]

And do a PC port half a year after release.

Why not just play it on the console? Does it really matter? What matters is the game itself and not what platform it is on.

It should be good and skill based, while not making the game impossible to play unless you play for years to be able to kill anyone.

It matters when the only control input is inherently not very good for accurate aiming.

Oh get off that PC elitist talking point.

Ever since Halo FPS controls for consoles have been perfectly viable and was one of the biggest reasons why the series took off in the first place. Preference of a mouse and keyboard is one thing but neither is fundamentally better.

RTS's are fundamentally better for PC because of the control's demands, FPS's haven't been for a long time now. Precision with a controller creates a skill gap just like precision with a mouse does.

If aiming is inherently bad on consoles then moving is inherently bad on a keyboard.

Yes both points are right and it would be a bit foolish to suggest movement on a keyboard is decent. I don't see why I can say an analog is better for moving than ESDF/WASD but I can't say a mouse is better for aiming? From a technological standpoint my mouse is better than any analog stick for aiming.

No one complains if I were to say an Arcade pad is better for Fighters so why should this be any different? I mean really why should it?

Both systems have flaws and yes a keyboard is inherently bad for movement just as analog is for aiming in comparison. This is shown by how aim assist has mostly fallen by the way side in PC gaming on FPS titles but is still alive and well on consoles.

That last sentence you made is a perfectly logical statement.

No I am not saying that aiming or FPS games are not viable on consoles. What I am saying is that preference aside when it comes to actually aiming a virtual gun in a game an anyway decent mouse let alone a gaming mouse outperforms the analog stick.

The sooner kinks are worked out of systems like this and they become mainstream and have adequate extra input option we will all be better for it. If we can get that and the ability to completely remap controls on consoles and drop stuff like Pick up weapon and Defuse bomb on the same key we will all have a superior experience.

snip

I would like to say for a lot of people myself included if I had a choice I would pick PC not for power but for KB + M. There a couple of options for that on certain consoles but are hard to acquire.

Now you can argue they are equal all you want and subjective as a preference that would be a fair point (technologically aiming wise is a bit different given options on certain mice). After being a console gamer for 12ish then having been playing on the PC as well for the last 6 I will say that I find it very hard to go back to a gamepad for FPS games. At least when it comes to aiming.

That and some people such as myself do not want to pay for XBL membership when we don't even have proper dedicated server support which is a deal breaker for me for online play for something like a FPS.

This isn't a really mine is better than yours rather I prefer mine to yours. I know this has already been resolved so I am just throwing in my 2 cents on a preference for a PC version of Halo.

So because something like "no dedicated servers" (ignoring gears 3 here) is a deal breaker? Xbox live costs 1/3 the price of most MMO games per year (I get the one year card once a year, I see the ones with shorter time redundant) and allows access not just to one, but tones of online modes for games and tons of other benefits that I won't list because I don't want to sound like a Microsoft salesman. Don't you think that is kinda silly?

I personally hope we get to see some gameplay. I mean they totally by now must have some working levels.