An arena shooter

So I guess Wars isn't a "true"Halo game then. There's no exact definition of what a "true" Halo game is.

No it is not The original Halo game. It is like mario cart to mario. A side game.

So CE is the only "true" Halo game then. All others aren't. That's your logic anyway. There's no "true"Halo game as it has changed every time.

No why cant you understand the arena halo experience is the true halo experience. Ce,2, and 3 thats it.

You're a dumbass as well. How many alts do you have anyway? Oh, and PS4 a shit. M$ master race XD XD #swag #yolo [quote]What exactly defines a "true"Halo game?[/quote]Maybe, for a start, something that's not turboshit, and doesn't average less than 20K a day making it a task to find original games in certain playlists. I know you don't like H4 yourself, and even Reach for that matter, so why are you always inclined to start bullshit with people as if you actually like these shitty games?

[quote]Maybe, for a start, something that's not turboshit, and doesn't average less than 20K a day making it a task to find original games in certain playlists.[/quote] that's your subjective criteria. there is still nothing that predicates a universally "true" halo game aside from the halo brand name and licensing. both of which halo 4 has. well, at least you haven't [i]made the claim[/i] that halo 4 isn't objectively a true halo game yet, so i suppose there's some hope... [quote]I know you don't like H4 yourself, and even Reach for that matter, so why are you always inclined to start bullshit with people as if you actually like these shitty games?[/quote] because you're wrong.

[quote] "true" halo[/quote] Every time I hear someone spout off about how X Halo game isn't a '"true" Halo game' or how someone isn't a '"true" Halo fan' all I can think of is untrue Scotsmen.

[quote]You're a dumbass as well. How many alts do you have anyway?[/quote]I'm a dumbass? thats rich coming from you. I could also ask you the same question; and to answer, I have two accounts. My main, and this one. [quote]Oh, and PS4 a shit. M$ master race XD XD #swag #yolo[/quote]Are you some kind of retard or something? [quote]Maybe, for a start, something that's not turboshit, and doesn't average less than 20K a day making it a task to find original games in certain playlists.[/quote]That doesn't define a "true" Halo game. [quote]I know you don't like H4 yourself, and even Reach for that matter, so why are you always inclined to start bullshit with people as if you actually like these shitty games?[/quote]I'm not starting anything. I was legitimately asking what makes a "true" Halo game so I could see what shit would spew from your mouth this time. That has [i]nothing[/i] to do with me not liking Halo Reach or 4.

[quote]Are you some kind of retard or something?[/quote]I'm definitely retarded, diagnosed and all. [quote]That doesn't define a "true" Halo game. [/quote]That's subjective. You're the biggest retard I've encountered on these forums since Bungie.next, and what's worse is that I don't even recognize you from what used to exist prior to Bungie.next.

[quote]Maybe, for a start, something that's not turboshit, and doesn't average less than 20K a day making it a task to find original games in certain playlists.[/quote] Like he said what makes a Halo game a "true" Halo game? Halo CE didn't have an online for the Xbox version so is that still a "true" Halo game? Halo 2 and Halo 3 are not pulling in 20K or above so are those still "true" Halo games?

CE is so -blam!-ing irrelevant, and I still don't know why people bring it up when discussing Halo. Campaign? Sure, it's important, but online multiplayer? Hell no. There was no Xbox Live multiplayer. [quote]a "true" Halo game[/quote]That's subjective, but a large number of people believe it's the simple Halo 2/3 formula that's been used. It's quite obvious that it changed in Reach and 4. That's it. It's nothing complicated. It's just a simple mixture of gameplay elements, settings, and attributes. Halo 2 to Halo 3 is a perfect example of the flawless passing-down of this "true" experience. BannedLemonparty can look at this post if he wants a "real" definition, which is ultimately subjective anyway, because he's a massive asshole and has always been unpleasant to talk to, even on my other alts that have no attribution to the FatMarshall name.

[quote]CE is so -blam!-ing irrelevant, and I still don't know why people bring it up when discussing Halo. Campaign? Sure, it's important, but online multiplayer? Hell no. There was no Xbox Live multiplayer.[/quote] But what happened to this requirement? [i]"And doesn't average less than 20K a day."[/i] Like you said a "true" Halo game has to pull in 20k and above to be considered a true Halo game. The game not having online at the time still doesn't change that it didn't pull in those numbers which means it's not a "true" Halo game.

You're clearly using a strawman here. Wanna know the answer to shut you the -blam!- up? The transition from Halo: CE to Halo 2 was true, successful innovation on core functionality and experience. Let's not even begin to mention other very important considerations like the fact that video games weren't nearly as popular back in 2001 as they were in 2004 and 2007. In addition, don't forget that the FPS genre never shot off until CE introduced what you'll hear a lot of PC elitists who played earlier Quake FPS games say as "regenerating health", which is in EVERY popular shooter on the market today! So you see, CE is incredibly unique in the fact that it revolutionized and defined gameplay, but did [b]not[/b] define multiplayer. Halo 2 did define multiplayer, more specifically in the modern, mainstream FPS category. Oh, and don't forget about system link popularity, which probably did have around 20K people at the time doing with CE. However, the big difference was that it was still swallowing up all the console consumer base it could. It's [i]so[/i] much larger today.

[quote]You're clearly using a strawman here.[/quote] well then he's following in your footsteps. but yes, he is strawmanning you. of course, knowing commando it's probably just another elaborate attempt at rustling your jimmies. [quote]Wanna know the answer to shut you the -blam!- up?[/quote] i'd like to know the answer to shut [i]you[/i] the hell up about this crap. i realize there is none, but still, one can dream. [quote]The transition from Halo: CE to Halo 2 was true, successful innovation on core functionality and experience.[/quote] in your opinion. in my opinion it's a violent, penetrative act that scars what it observes. what you called innovation... i called the -blam!- of the halo world. [quote]So you see, CE is incredibly unique in the fact that it revolutionized and defined gameplay, but did not define multiplayer.[/quote] woah i'm agreeing with you. i've gotta check myself before i wreck myself... oh wait. [quote][b]online[/b] multiplayer.[/quote] fixed. [quote]Halo 2 did define multiplayer, more specifically in the modern, mainstream FPS category.[/quote] online multiplayer. if you mean just regular multiplayer than sure! it casualized the sh1t out of the core gunplay and ushered in a new era of "hold your hand" console fps. [again, i'm not saying that halo 2's multiplayer was "objectively bad," "subjectively bad," or even "unbalanced." just that it didn't redefine gunplay in as... brilliantly a manner as it did online matchmaking.]

I'm gonna have to tip my fedora to you on this one, because you actually understood what I was saying, and you were pretty reasonable. [quote][quote]online multiplayer.[/quote][/quote]Agreed, I guess. On a side note, why do you hate Halo 2 and Halo 3 so much? Halo 2 was certainly not a masterpiece in terms of its developmental design, considering just how flawed it was with bugs, but the overall concept and gameplay mechanics themselves were almost perfect. All it essentially did was do away with visible health, which maybe you liked (I don't know), and offered a more realistic marksman weapon that happened to completely redefine the "go-to" weapon. That's just my take on it. However, I have absolutely no idea why you hate Halo 3. If you think the campaign was mediocre, that's your opinion, and I can see where your coming from, but the multiplayer was a polished version of what Halo 2 offered, with more variety in both the sandbox, and in the gameplay, without harming what fundamentally worked. The replayablility offered with Halo 3 was astounding as well, from campaign skulls, achievements, exploration, etc., to the ranking system giving both competitive and casual audiences a long-term incentive to keep playing. That's not even mentioning what Forge and Theater offered. Understand that I used to play around 8 hours a day, in all game modes. I wasn't some MLG neckbeard either.

[quote]I'm gonna have to tip my fedora to you on this one, because you actually understood what I was saying, and you were pretty reasonable.[/quote] i mean, you only said a few things of value at all. [quote]On a side note, why do you hate Halo 2 and Halo 3 so much?[/quote] i don't hate halo 2 and 3 so much. i think halo 2 is a good halo game and i think halo 3 is a "meh" halo game [along with halo reach and 4]. of the trilogy, though? halo 3 is relatively terrible. [quote]Halo 2 was certainly not a masterpiece in terms of its developmental design, considering just how flawed it was with bugs,[/quote] that it wasn't. [quote]but the overall concept and gameplay mechanics themselves were almost perfect.[/quote] A) how the hell are [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFN9Sv2fumI]mountainous hitboxes[/url] [i know the uploader refers to it as auto aim but that's wrong] which counted chest shots as headshots almost perfect? supermagnet bullets [also a factor in the video i sent you, in addition to [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocyYwLCDyCU]this stuff [don't mind the stupid br/pp comparison at the end, just look at the rest of the video][/url]? lock on auto aim [SIX degrees for the smg? i don't even...]? commando pro melee lunges? the gameplay mechanics were the most dumbed down and casualized of the entire series. game breaking glitches [i]saved[/i] the game. B) are we talking about post tu halo 2, or the first ten months or so of halo 2? because while post tu halo 2 still carried over the weird a$$ gunplay mechanics, it wasn't anything [i]near[/i] pre tu halo 2. six melees to kill someone while stationary. hitscan [i]and[/i] spread on the battle rifle [wtf?]. <1 second killtimes on dual pistols in comparison to around 1.4-1.6 [iirc] for the br. fcking what, like 3 grenades to kill someone? no, if we're talking about the first ten months of halo 2, the game was [i]massively[/i] broken. C) you know who's inclined to believe with me? [url=http://www.gamespot.com/articles/bungie-we-screwed-up-on-halo-2/1100-6164579/]bungie.[/url] [quote]All it essentially did was do away with visible health,[/quote] in addition to dumbing down the gunplay and basically making the game hold the player's hand beyond belief in comparison to halo ce, adding dual wielding [url=https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst17113_Halo-4--Sandbox-balance-and-how-it-should-work--three-parts.aspx]which made the weapon sandbox cluttered in comparison to ce,[/url] and ushering in a new era of "3mlg5me" when the core, glitchless gunplay actually takes almost as much skill as getting a kill in modern warfare 2. [i]the battle rifle had [b][u]three[/b][/u] degrees of auto aim.[/i] the smg had [b]twice[/b] that amount. that is more than call of duty ever had. [quote]which maybe you liked[/quote] i didn't mind it, though i hated the new shield flaring visuals in comparison to ce's sparkly flare that slowly died down as you took less damage. halo 2 was just "here's my shield" whenever a bullet hit until the shields popped. [of course i'm just nitpicking here, this isn't a massive flaw by any means]. [quote](I don't know), and offered a more realistic marksman weapon that happened to completely redefine the "go-to" weapon.[/quote] well comparatively more realistic. the battle rifle is still pretty much an anachronism in halo, though pretty much all unsc tech can be classified as such. [quote]That's just my take on it.[/quote] you're sort of wrong, but i appreciate you not just devolving the argument as you've done prior. [quote]However, I have absolutely no idea why you hate Halo 3.[/quote] oh here we go again. [quote]If you think the campaign was mediocre,[/quote] i do, actually. the plot was complete garbage whenever it decided to show up, the gameplay was more constricting and scripted than previous iterations with a few choice exceptions [though to be fair most of halo 2's "non constricting"-ness came from the game's glitches], the length was call of duty-tier [first one to attempt such a short campaign too; it arguably started the trend], and it was easy as hell. [quote]that's your opinion,[/quote] this is [i]all[/i] my opinion. [quote]and I can see where your coming from, but the multiplayer was a polished version of what Halo 2 offered,[/quote] there are halo 2 fans in this very thread who would type up five page text walls proving you wrong. halo 3 managed to take the core gunplay and make it more competitive. okay, that's fine. and [i]then[/i] it managed to further clutter the weapon sandbox, completely destroy gameplay consistency for [b]no bloody reason[/b] considering the same "fixes" that halo 3 used were used in halo 2 and ended up requiring an update to fix themselves, and still not make it anywhere near as competitive as its predecessor. worst of both worlds. [quote]with more variety in both the sandbox,[/quote] read threesixxero's excellent thread about sandbox design in halo. there was variety, but i am not willing to sacrifice satisfying and useful weaponry for it. [quote]and in the gameplay, without harming what fundamentally worked.[/quote] except the return of the br spread from pre tu halo 2 [without hitscan], a ridiculous gib distance on the melee [also featuring the return of , [i]equipment,[/i] automatics that relied on melee usage to be useful [hence ar rush problems], and just an all round pathetic weapon sandbox at times [kill times raised across the board, wtf is this plasma rifle, wtf is this shotgun (the biggest offense, as it was nerfed to hell for the gravity hammer/energy sword), etc.]. oh and map design was [i]nothing near[/i] the perfection of halo 2, and to a lesser extent, halo ce. i laugh my a$$ off whenever people mention guardian or the pit as the "best of all halo maps ever" when lockout, midship, and prisoner are sitting there in the background. [quote]The replayablility offered with Halo 3 was astounding as well,[/quote] lol. from a single player standpoint, it's not even debatable that halo 3 had less replayability than halo 2. it goes like this: if you're a casual campaign fan: 2 > 3 > CE if you're a campaign enthusiast: CE >/= 2 > > > 3 [quote]from campaign skulls,[/quote] which were in halo 2, and were far more rewarding to obtain. [quote]achievements,[/quote] most of which can be obtained in one single playthrough. [quote]exploration,[/quote] no bloody way. halo 3's exploration was not even near halo ce's or halo 2's. far above reach and 4, maybe. but 3's illusion of exploration was scripted in comparison to what people could achieve in halo ce and halo 2. and while i hate appeals to authority, i've been glitching the campaigns for around 6 years now. i know what the hell i'm talking about here. [quote]etc.,[/quote] oh? how about glitches? because ce and 2 have 3 outclassed in every single way regarding them. what about the [i]actual gameplay[/i] where ce opted for aggressive, fun ai to combat against and halo 2 opted for smart, team based enemies? instead of just "i will tear you into bloody ribbons" donkey kong rejects that camped in the background with brute shots? yeah. in terms of actual gameplay, aside from a few massive set pieces that halo 3 is recognized for, halo 3's campaign is far less replayable than ce and 2, as 95% of campaign enthusiasts will tell you. check out ungrumpy1's channel on youtube. do you see any of that happening with halo 3? halo ce and halo 2 may not have the upfront replayability that passing campaign players can recognize, but when you dig deeper into it, they [i]far[/i] outclass halo 3. [quote]to the ranking system giving both competitive and casual audiences a long-term incentive to keep playing.[/quote] irrelevant to me, but okay. [quote]That's not even mentioning what Forge and Theater offered.[/quote] yeah, that's not even worth mentioning either, considering i'm talking about the actual game from a gameplay standpoint and not peripheral features... [quote]Understand that I used to play around 8 hours a day,[/quote] that might be just a bit excessive. [quote]in all game modes.[/quote] even heavies? [quote]I wasn't some MLG neckbeard either.[/quote] oh? could've fooled me.

Jesus -blam!-ing Christ your posting style is so annoying and obnoctious. You make some fair points, especially on campaign, but I have just one more question for you. If you think Halo 2 and 3 had cluttered weapon sandboxes, then how in the [i]hell[/i] could you possibly like Halo 4 more than both those games? In addition, since you're such a campaign enthusiast, how can you possibly think that Halo 4's campaign is any better than previous iterations, considering the exploration of it is almost nonexistent, along with its replayablility?