of sniper^^
Halo2 is inderdaad veels te n00bish, bijna iedereen heeft custom settings dat je met een smg begint. Fights tussen spelers met smg's is puur geluk wie er wint, je hebt geen skill nodig om dat wapen goed te kunnen gebruiken, de grootste n00b kan daar winnen van de beste elite. Echt hopeloos.
Ik heb mij kapot zitten lachen met dat tmf gedoe, al dat genaab met die smg's.
Ik mis een wapen als de pistol in halo2, het mooi in halo1 was dat je altijd met de pistol begon (mits de settings flink waren veranderd), met die pistol had je altijd een goede kans tegen de sniper en rocket boys, nu begin je met de smg of de assault rifle, 2 gigantisch onbruikbare wapens.
Waar ik mij ook aan erger zijn de spelers, ben je een beetje goed met de sniper word je achteraf vol geflamed door de tegenstanders dat je de sniper teveel pakt, terwijl ze zelf altijd in een rechte lijn naar de sword lopen en voor de rest niks anders kunnen dan bashen met die sword. Kijk eerst naar jezelf en dan pas naar andere, skill moet gerespecteerd worden en het is triest als mensen kapot worden gescholden omdat je nogal wat headshots maakt met die sniper.
Geef mij maar halo1 online multiplayer zonder lag.
Ik ben dit stukje tekst meerdere keren tegengekomen en ik ben het er wel mee eens;
I've compiled a listed of all the objections and their respective answers to show where the pistol debate currently stands.
"THE PISTOL IS OVERPOWERED- ITS SUPPOSE TO BE A SIMPLE SIDEARM"
Halo1 fans arent concerned with "what" the weapon technically is but "what" the weapon does... make it a covenant "floogndoop" if you want it to be more "realistic"... nobody cares, its a game.. naturally, all we are concerned with is gamePLAY.
If you continue with this objection, then answer for me: Why isn't anyone complaining about melee attacks? Holy cow... Masterchief can take rounds of smg bullets but cant take a couple punches? Clearly... "realism" is NOT the issue, it's gameplay. If you use this argument and dont condemn melee attacks also (along with half of the game) , logically, you are being a hypocrite. It has nothing to do with "realism".
"IT TAKES NO SKILL TO USE THE PISTOL... THREE SHOTS AND YOU'RE DEAD"
What a twisted and loaded way of saying something... thats just like saying "it takes no skill to golf, just hit the ball into the hole".
If you think the pistol is bad, how about that evil sniper gun! Goodness.. how could bungie forget to take that overpowered thing out!? One shot and the person is dead, with twice the zoom in options of a pistol and infinite range!! How come none of you are dissing on the sniper? Its by far the strongest weapon in the game! Oh right.. the same reason we aren't.. yet.. you continue to hypocritically condemn the pistol? If you use this argument and dont condemn the sniper also, logically, you are being a hypocrite.
I'd like to point out two things:
1. If you put a moderately good pistoler up against an expert pistoler in H1, the expert will literally OWN the moderate. Thats a fact that has been demonstrated time and time again.
2. However, put a moderately good halo2 smg fighter (can hold the rectical on opponants body) up against an expert smg fighter and its a toss up. It could go either way.
Why could it go either way? Simple.. because unlike in Halo1, every single players "improvement limit" (regarding their starting weapon) STOPS the moment they can hold that huge rectical on any part of that huge body during a typical face off. As you can see.. for such a simple task that most anybody can do.. that roof of improvement is ridiculously low. So when you have an smg battle.. both players are going to do the same thing.. hold down the trigger and keep their rectical on that huge target at all times (NOT that hard- even with the moving around).
In Halo1, you had to time your shots and they had to be on a small moving point (the head)- so even after years of practice you would still get misses regularly- yet, the best part of it is, IF you DID become proficient at pistoling.. you always AT LEAST remained a force to be reconed with REGARDLESS of what your opponant had in his hands- you always AT LEAST stood a chance. For that reason Halo1 emphasized skill instead of weapon whoring. You were always reasonably capable of winning a face off from the very second the game starts. Now, provided you arent facing off against a complete noob, who can say that about halo2 and your starting smg? Is it an aiming game anymore?? absolutely not! So then who will almost always win? The person with the best weaponry of course!
Ah! And so the truth is revealed- instead of necessitating skill and aiming precision its all about who gets what gun... which is determined almost always by spawn. Thats why Halo2 is inferior.
- - -
More: The H1 pistol was balanced because not only because everyone had one, but because it was capable in every situation. It was definately NOT the best gun to have in every situation but it remained capable always- you weren't ever helpless. A single smg (your starting gun) is practically incapable in ALL situations- you start out helpless. Your chances against a sniper, long distance battle, with an smg is nada. Likewise, your chances against a shotgun or double-wielder in a close range duel is next to none (again, unless you are playing a complete newb). Don't you see the problem with that? Can we techincally play with it.. of course..but is it better than everyone starting out with a capable weapon with a limitless roof of improvement? Absolutely not!
"THE CARBINE/BAT. RIFLE SUFFICIENTLY FILL THAT VOID"
It does not, the battle rifle takes 4 head shots with a much much slower firing rate. At far distances no matter how fast you try to shoot.. the person will usually find something to hide behind and recharge (or another individiual will reap the fruits of your labor by cleaning up the kill).. in close range it is owned by duel wielders... More importantly, you dont start out with either of those weapons in ranked games.
"HALO2 REQUIRES MORE FACE OFF STRATEGY THAN HALO1"
Heh. What you would like to call strategy isnt strategy at all.. its common sense... I, along with just about everyone else, know what weapons are best to go into battle with given a defined situation.. i learned that in the first hour as did everyone else. What can you teach me now regarding face-off strategy? What "strategy" will i learn in the future that H1 didnt already incorporate? This argument is absolutely weightless. Somebody teach me something. People use the cliche "oh it just came out, theres lots more to learn"... no my friends.. no there isn't. In a face-off battle, all options are instantly available and recognized (to any moderate player).. unless there is some new power via button combination the master chief has.. i dont see any more H2 specific "strategy" in the future. It's done. And if someone disagrees.. dont just call me 'ignorant'.. share something you "learned" and we'll see. Dont say anything like "you could aim better" or "you could learn the map more" because those were both things already utilized in halo1 and they have nothing to do with face-off strategy in the first place.
"HALO2 FORCES YOU TO USE A VARIETY OF WEAPONS INSTEAD OF ALWAYS USING THE PISTOL LIKE IN HALO1"
My first thought is "and?".. although instead of going into that i'll simply say.. thats flat out wrong. In H1 the pistol was just the healthy default that everyone had and stood a good chance with.. we still used the plasma rifle, shotgun, and sniper, (and rockets), all depending on the context of the situation. Why? Because each of these alternative weapons are BETTER than the pistol and were preferred OVER the pistol in their respective environments. The point of the pistol is that you always had a chance to win (and EVERYONE had one). Therefore, it wasnt about the weapon as much as it was about the person- that's not the case anymore... instead of your weaponry simply being A factor.. now its pretty much the ONLY factor that count (again, we are as*uming you are a moderate player).
"HALO2 IS STILL ALOT BETTER AND MORE FAIR IN OTHER WAYS"
... i agree, fall damage, dying by tapping a moving vehical etc. However, the starting weapon remains, by far, the most influential factor- screw that up and you screw up 90% of the game.
"STOP COMPLAINING YOU BABY, ITS USELESS... GO PLAY HALO1 IF YOU DONT LIKE HALO2"
It's not useless, bungie needs to recognize this mistake and address it via downloadable content and incorporate it into the ranked gamies (thereby adjust what defines a "high ranking"). As we've all been saying, if Bungie merely released halo1 on live, its sales would go through the roof! Thats what we want.. is the ability to play online without lag.. and naturally we'd love extra levels and some of those additions mentioned in the objection above... but the unadultered halo1 online would work just fine. Either way, Bungie wont do anything if they dont know people are upset.
The thing about Halo2 that gets under my skin the most is when i win individual battles and when i win whole games.. because, i could tell by the way i played that anybody could have done that.. it was easy and it was more an issue of circumstances then it was my aiming abilities coming to fruition. Its upsetting because i'm no longer proud about my wins.. it's just not exciting for me anymore- and i believe other H1 fans feel the same way.
Blake.
Klik om te vergroten...