{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/15/2013 9:07:03 PM
3
You know what makes Naughty Dog so great?
That when making a series, they keep what's good and throw out what's bad.
For example, the Crash Bandicoot series. For the second one, they took what people liked about it, but toned down the difficulty, what people seemed to be against, then added new things which offered a better and different experience, but not too drastically different.
And for the third one, they took what made Crash 2 fun and successful, kept them all for Crash 3 and added things which offered a different experience, but didn't change it that much it made it into like a different game.
Let's compare that with Halo. Halo 1, was a large success. Halo 2, they took Halo 1, and seemed to change a hell of a lot in it. Then for Halo 3 they took it, changed some of the mechanics and added equipment. Then they just went derp for Reach.
-
2 回复
-
1 回复
-
The gameplay progression from Halo CE-2-3-ODST felt extremely natural, I agree. They gradually stepped it up by bringing in new mechanics which enhanced and improved gameplay - vehicle boarding, for example, was a fantastic move after Halo CE's [i]ridiculous[/i] one-nudge splatter kills. I really liked Equipment too because it added another dynamic to gameplay, as well as an extra strategic element when you toss in things like the Bubble Shield, Power Drain and Trip Mine (man, dat H3 Beta Trip Mine!). But AAs never felt like they should have been a part of the formula. Halo 4 toned some of them down a bit and integrated them better because of the greater focus on gunplay, and Sprint [i]does[/i] feel like a natural evolution of gameplay in Halo 4, but AAs just don't feel like they play well in Halo. derp indeed
