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

[Nihlus2]

No Iron Sights? Open Enviroments? BLASPHEMY!!!

It is almost as if some people are trying to innovate and give players bloody freedom and allowing us to think. How cruel and evil of them.

Why can they not just be lazy like the rest of developers and copy paste the current fps formular? If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin'! Until the money drain starts pumping at half its usual speed.

In all seriousness - never really cared much for Halo, but I will give them credit for not taking shortcuts and getting lazy with what they have in their hands. Of course it is yet to be seen, but hey - anything that tries to break the CoD / Battlefield norm, is gonna get a cheer on.

 

[MPerce]

The iron sights comment is a little strange. I've never found iron sights to be particularly more effective than Halo's aiming system. It's just different.

The rest of his review is pretty legit, though. Basically, it's the same old Halo game we know and love/hate. This guy wishes it would change. I haven't played it yet, but this seems like a realistic opinion to have.

 

[Tryforlive]

Maybe they were just grasping at straws in order to give it a lower score

 

[Exius Xavarus]

They're attempting to criticize Halo for being Halo and not, say...Call of Duty. That's how Halo's always been. And that's why I enjoy Halo much more than any other FPS you'll see lying around. Problem is, Halo: Combat Evolved is the only good Halo, as far as I'm concerned. Hated the rest of the series.

 

[mysecondlife]

So I skimmed through the review. What I got was that his main problem is

"Halo 4 doesn?t seem interested in moving into modern storytelling via integrated objectives, causing the campaign to quickly degenerate into a rinse-repeat relay of pumping way too many bullets into the same half-dozen enemies over and over "

If that problem warrants a score of 7/10, then so be it.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

That's stupid because it shows how ignorant they are of the Halo franchise which has never had iron sight aiming and has always had relatively large levels. Then again my criticisms of the game are pretty petty so who am I to talk...unlike the reviewer though I don't get paid for my opinion so I'll just continue on complaining.

 

[Vivi22]

I don't understand why he's being declared stupid for stating a preference. He's a games journalist.

There's a difference between stating a preference and stating, quite objectively, that adding iron sights and big-ticket action sequences are "enhancements" over slow methodical combat. Or heavily implying that somehow, Halo 4 is poorly designed because it doesn't follow these modern trends.

He didn't say he liked those and would have liked to see them in Halo. He outright said that he thinks any game without them is an objectively worse game for it, which is a blatantly retarded statement for anyone to make.

 

[Aft3rShock]

I saw people complaining about the same thing on the CS:GO forums, wanting a refund! If you wanna buy CoD, buy CoD. More power to you, but don't complain because it doesn't have some feature that wouldn't fit the game well in the first place.

 

[RedDeadFred]

I saw this earlier when I was looking at Metacritic. He gave it the lowest score by a full 10 points. At first I just assumed that he did this so that his review could get more hits (he's the only one who gave the game a mixed review so naturally more people are going to click on it). However, when I actually read his review, I'm more inclined to believe that he's just another one of those mindless CoD drones and this really is his opinion.

 

[MisterGobbles]

What I got from that review, was that the reviewer thinks that Halo's basic formula has become extremely dated compared to the modern shooter environment, and that the game doesn't make enough changes to keep up. He's simply using bad examples of things that should be implemented to make it superficially more modern, and ignoring actual things that would help the experience.

Basically, his complaints are legitimate, but the things he suggests to help the problems he raises are stupid. Full Disclosure: I'm going to the midnight release of this thing.

 

[MisterGobbles]

CQC??? Either we have completely other definitions of that or you ignore that this is one of the things that defines an assault rifle :

And it should at least have a firing range of 300 meters (1000 feet)

Was that clear enough?

Clearer, definitely

Halo's Assault Rifle is not really like an actual Assault Rifle, it has much shorter range and higher spread, with no real place for iron sights at all since I guess all marines have the same aim assists that Master Chief does. It's more like an SMG with more punch and a slightly higher range. The DMR and Battle Rifle fit the traditional role for AR's more closely, although neither of them are fully automatic.

 

[RagTagBand]

As quickly as "Forward unto dawn" made me want to buy Halo 4, this thread has made me reconsider.

Halo really has just the most idiotic, in-denial fan-base that would make defending the Dreamcast look downright justified.

 

[Korten12]

As quickly as "Forward unto dawn" made me want to buy Halo 4, this thread has made me reconsider.

Halo really has just the most idiotic, in-denial fan-base that would make defending the Dreamcast look downright justified.

Wait... Because of this thread? You clearly weren't going to buying that if this thread which hasn't even been that bad convinced you not to. Plus why the fuck does a fanbase make you consider?

Also Halo does? Really? No other fanbase? Not Call of Duty, or even Valve? Just Halo? You clearly haven't seen them then.

Please do give examples oh how we're in denial? What that we like Halo's formula and that Halo should stick to it's formula rather then becoming CoD?

 

[Mikeyfell]

Huh?
Lack of Iron Sites and Cover is literally the only reason I think Halo deserves a place in the gaming universe.

343 has tried to rip off CoD in every other way already. I feel sorry for Halo 5. or Modern Warfare 4 or what ever they're going to call it.

 

[Korten12]

Huh?
Lack of Iron Sites and Cover is literally the only reason I think Halo deserves a place in the gaming universe.

343 has tried to rip off CoD in every other way already. I feel sorry for Halo 5. or Modern Warfare 4 or what ever they're going to call it.

Please do give examples of how it's like CoD, aside from: IT HAZ PERKS! Because Call of Duty invented Loadouts, Perks, and so on. Am I right? No other games ever had them. In fact let's just say Call of Duty invented shooters while we're at it.

:/

 

[Lunar Templar]

snip

don't bother Kor.

one smells like a CoD fan boy that hasn't looked in the mirror ... well, both actually but the one more then the other, and both are just as misinformed as the 'reviewer'.

and you know how i feel about the Halo games

 

[Korten12]

snip

don't bother Kor.

one smells like a CoD fan boy that hasn't looked in the mirror ... well, both actually but the one more then the other, and both are just as misinformed as the 'reviewer'.

and you know how i feel about the Halo games

Yeah, I sort of bit the bullet there instead of dodged it. :/ Well I can only now wait to see how they respond, I probably will try not to respond if it's blatant flame bait.

 

[Norrdicus]

Halo's Assault Rifle is not really like an actual Assault Rifle, it has much shorter range and higher spread, with no real place for iron sights at all since I guess all marines have the same aim assists that Master Chief does. It's more like an SMG with more punch and a slightly higher range. The DMR and Battle Rifle fit the traditional role for AR's more closely, although neither of them are fully automatic.

I guess my long comment was largely pointless, as Halo redefines already existing gun types if what you say is true.

Captcha: "mea culpa" - fitting

 

[Gearhead mk2]

Halo was the series that got me into shooters. And I honestly think it's the best shooter series on the market. In a world where the vast majority of shooters are part of the linear modern war pro-right-wing-america "realistic" gunwank movement, Halo's good characters, satysfing sci-fi guns, cliched but still fun storyline, great sandbox level design and freaking amazing soundtrack really won me over. I'm hesitent to call it one of my favourite games of all time, but Reach is easily my favourite FPS. I was cautiously optomistic for 4, as while I still love the series and I think 343 can do things right if they try, I was afrai that it would start copying the linear modern war pro-right-wing-america "realistic" gunwank movement. Given this review bassically says that it doesn't copy the linear modern war pro-right-wing-america "realistic" gunwank movement enough, my fear is gone and I'm now confident Halo 4 will turn out well. That said, the fact the Call of Duty, the very heart of the linear modern war pro-right-wing-america "realistic" gunwank movement, is the standard by which we judge all other games that even bear a passing resemblance to an FPS, scares the hell outta me.