The Big Picture: Combat Evolved?

[Ampersand]

Why is everyone always picking on Halo anyways?

I'd imagin it's because it's popular.

 

[AngryFrenchCanadian]

I like the new show, pretty thought-provoking.

 

[Kermi]

EEven if, for example, the Elites join the Humans during Halo 3 and beat the Covenant (I hear that's what happened, I was never able to finish that game)

Apparently what you meant to say was "never played it at all". The Elites have left the covenant and are fighting alongside humans from the very start of Halo 3, the Arbiter having discovered how full of shit the Covenant is during Halo 2.

 

[Aptspire]

I will give you props on the basis that you were able to explain clearly what your main 'beef' against Halo was (unlike all that that TV right-wing 'ban stuff' crap we've always heard)
I must say however, that the point is still, overall, inferior (or perhaps countered) by the fact that most of humanity, (a number of which were neutral to the Inner Colonies, or even Insurrectionists) when facing extinction, chose to set their differences aside for the sake of survival. i.e.: they 'all came together'. (also, i'd like to point out that half of Halo2 had you playing as a member of the Covenant, and also that Halo3 had you fighting side by side with some of your old enemies)

 

[FrueDestruction]

Of course, it's completely impossible that any of that design was created that way for gameplay purposes. Because, you know, it totally wouldn't make any kind of sense for an enemy force with several levels of strength (which is incidentally more interesting to play against) to make each of their types instantly recognizable even in the midst of frenetic combat. Except that it would, and it would require that each enemy type look, sound, and move in extremely different ways, so that the player could say things like "Aha, I can see that this enemy is a grunt, and therefore little threat. I will instead focus my attention on the hunter, who is much more dangerous and likely to kill me." The ability to make judgements of that kind is vital to gameplay and has been around since people started to notice that the mushroom and the turtle did different things if you jumped on them.

Furthermore, it is clearly nonsensical that the spartans (sorry, SPARTANs) all look the same because they grew out of a design for a single character. Master chief needed to do two things design-wise:

1) He needed to look more powerful than a regular human. Thats easy, he's in power armor. The beckground stuff exists to make the player feel empowered and explain that whole "protagonist invicibility" stuff and gameplay mechanics like the shields.

2) As the protagonist of a first person shooter, he needed to be relatively faceless so that the player could more easily project onto him. This has been a consistent design element throughout the history of FPSs and exists because a first-person viewpoint is the most immersive.

"Oh wait, shit" says Bungee. "Now that we've branded such a successful character based around those two principles, we suddenly have to make a game where there's tons of those guys? I guess we'd better diversify their appearance a bit. Except wait, we can't make them crazy different, because A: that would ruin the instantly recognizable 'this is a spartan' branding we have, and B: could potentially confuse players in the midst of the game. In the middle of a hectic firefight a player has to be able to instantly tell the difference between friend and foe, especially since we've made a game so unforgiving that a split second hesitation could mean the difference between getting a beamsword shoved up your ass or not."

Also, its squad-based. Which basically just reinforces everything I just said. Now to balance out my unusually reasonable internet argument - Bob, you're a massive fucking toolbag, and I'm pretty sure they gave you a second, more controversial video is because you troll well enough to significantly increase siteviews. Which I guess is working, so congratulations. Hopefully this means your movie reviews will be a bit less ranty and stupid now and more like the informative ones you used to do.

 

[CHIMP MAGNET]

I think you've missed the point.
your shows called the 'big picture' not 'my opinion'.

 

[CHIMP MAGNET]

Of course, it's completely impossible that any of that design was created that way for gameplay purposes. Because, you know, it totally wouldn't make any kind of sense for an enemy force with several levels of strength (which is incidentally more interesting to play against) to make each of their types instantly recognizable even in the midst of frenetic combat. Except that it would, and it would require that each enemy type look, sound, and move in extremely different ways, so that the player could say things like "Aha, I can see that this enemy is a grunt, and therefore little threat. I will instead focus my attention on the hunter, who is much more dangerous and likely to kill me." The ability to make judgements of that kind is vital to gameplay and has been around since people started to notice that the mushroom and the turtle did different things if you jumped on them.

Furthermore, it is clearly nonsensical that the spartans (sorry, SPARTANs) all look the same because they grew out of a design for a single character. Master chief needed to do two things design-wise:

1) He needed to look more powerful than a regular human. Thats easy, he's in power armor. The beckground stuff exists to make the player feel empowered and explain that whole "protagonist invicibility" stuff and gameplay mechanics like the shields.

2) As the protagonist of a first person shooter, he needed to be relatively faceless so that the player could more easily project onto him. This has been a consistent design element throughout the history of FPSs and exists because a first-person viewpoint is the most immersive.

"Oh wait, shit" says Bungee. "Now that we've branded such a successful character based around those two principles, we suddenly have to make a game where there's tons of those guys? I guess we'd better diversify their appearance a bit. Except wait, we can't make them crazy different, because A: that would ruin the instantly recognizable 'this is a spartan' branding we have, and B: could potentially confuse players in the midst of the game. In the middle of a hectic firefight a player has to be able to instantly tell the difference between friend and foe, especially since we've made a game so unforgiving that a split second hesitation could mean the difference between getting a beamsword shoved up your ass or not."

Also, its squad-based. Which basically just reinforces everything I just said. Now to balance out my unusually reasonable internet argument - Bob, you're a massive fucking toolbag, and I'm pretty sure they gave you a second, more controversial video is because you troll well enough to significantly increase siteviews. Which I guess is working, so congratulations. Hopefully this means your movie reviews will be a bit less ranty and stupid now and more like the informative ones you used to do.

bravo!
i would have that clapping gif going on but I couldn't find it

 

[Tanki]

I love it! I love it! I want more of it!

 

[olfelix]

Nice show, it's basic troll bait masked as deep. I'm not a fan of Halo, but this is beyond reaching.

 

[Robyrt]

Tee hee! I am a big fan, although frankly the video content was totally unnecessary and it would have worked just fine as a podcast.

To haters: Do you know how hard it is to say something new about Halo? Bob just did it. The comparison may be a little thin, but at least it gets you thinking about exactly HOW much of Heinlein got lifted from Starship Troopers.

 

[Justin Turner]

Good to know that Bob is right out of the gates provoking the fanboys with GASP, an argument that actually makes sense. And I've noticed at least once in this comment thread he's gotten the 'Professional Troll' line, as well as the 'I'LL NEVAR WATCH ANYTHING YOU EVER DO'.

What I like about good sir Bob is not only that he will, every few months, stir the pot a little--get people good and pissed off about whatever video. It's always an entertaining show for us cooler heads. But I can't think of a single one that didn't come from a very much legitimate and honest point of view. Good on yeh, Bob. Good on yeh.

EDIT: A serious note, for you folks screaming at Bob. You have a lot to learn about analysis and critical thinking about video games, and Art in general. Even if you do think there are gaping holes in the argument Bob presents, it's a valid point to be brought to attention. Even if, for example, the Elites join the Humans during Halo 3 and beat the Covenant (I hear that's what happened, I was never able to finish that game) that doesn't mean the arguments presented are invalid, it means maybe there's a different conclusion to be reached. Say, that using a homogenized 'Master Race' can only get you so far, that we should embrace diversity to achieve our goals.

I guess what I'm saying is that you can disagree with Bob without declaring him or his arguments worthless, and you can find a way to discuss this without turning it into a You Vs. Bob narrative. And guys, we really need to. We should be discussing the medium of video games as an art form and giving it the respect it deserves, not screaming at each other about how the Master Chief isn't racist.

I have watched and mostly liked everything he has done up to this point, as far as movie reviews and the game overthinker goes. I even voted to make him a regular feature on screwattack. Even when I didn't agree with him, or when he attacked fans of different games to some extent, I still managed to enjoy his videos. This argument of his is completely off base, and he stretches tiny little out of context points so far, that they have no value whatsoever. The facts are irrelevant to his argument. He openly dislikes halo, and he seems to be using this video to argue any point he sees fit without regards to facts, to make wild accusations that could have real world consequences. The people that attack our industry on a regular basis use arguments like this to their advantage. So yes, as far as "The Big Picture" goes, I will not be watching any more of them. He openly states that he has been given the freedom to talk about whatever he wants, however he wants. And his first video is him discussing something with extreme bias and no regard to facts. And he is getting paid. Therefore "The Big Picture"=Professional Trollery. I will continue to watch Game Overthinker, but if these kind of thought processes affect that show, I will stop watching it too.

You are better than this Bob.

 

[Treblaine]

I'm pretty sure the Covenant is less Anti-Multiculturalism and more Anti-Religion.

Evidence:

-The humans are very racially and culturally diverse (Sarge is Black. British Russian and other non-American accents heard from NPCs)
-It centres around New-Mombasa... yes developers decided that an African City should be the pinnacle of this sci-fi future
-The Elites defect from the Covenant, really isolating the common factor is the religious dogma and hierarchy as the antagonist. I mean Halo 3 you fight side by side with an alien for almost the entire thing.
-Not a single racial comment by characters, like "the only good elite is a dead elite". A distinct lack of hatred, mostly mourning
-Enemies talk in religious terms of sacrifice, loyalty, etc.
-It is the Covenant who are racially annihilating humans. Humanity never had a chance to join the Covenant, only death.

Militarism =/= fascism

Remember that. The USSR was highly militaristic, would you call them fascist? No. Extremist, yes, but fascism is more than merley

I don't think you really realise what fascism is. Fascism is:

-highly political, at every level there is extensive political indoctrination
-That politics is EXPLICITLY defined in racial terms and by political I mean troll-logic of lies, "conspiracy theory" type reasoning and propaganda. No discussion on who is to blame, just repeatedly blame the escape goat moving from one lie to exaggeration to another.
-It is not sombre and reserved, it is rousing, bright, lively, band-standing and dramatic... it is SUPPOSED to me seductive and seem lively. That's how it propagated so much.
-It is highly conservative, so forget about things like a high-ranking female officer, minorities giving any orders or a persona like Cortana.

Spartans were Spartans. Fascist were fascists. Not an huge amount of overlap.

Also before you consider that there are so many different alien species to kill simply because it is a game... a shooter... therefore it serves well to have good enemy variety and it's simply convenient to say they are all different species.

In games where you are blatantly fighting (Neo) Fascists (Killzone, Half Life 2, World War 2 games) a problem with the game is how repetitive it can get fighting the same type of enemy over, and over, and over again.

I think MovieBob is detecting fascism more in the audience than the developers. XBL has been a terrible place where hate speech has been allowed unchecked to spread for far too long, and it reflects on the game. But that is Microsoft's fault, and their fault in indifference and incompetence in running an online network.

 

[thublihnk]

EEven if, for example, the Elites join the Humans during Halo 3 and beat the Covenant (I hear that's what happened, I was never able to finish that game)

Apparently what you meant to say was "never played it at all". The Elites have left the covenant and are fighting alongside humans from the very start of Halo 3, the Arbiter having discovered how full of shit the Covenant is during Halo 2.

I knew the elites split off during Halo 2, I just didn't know if they beat the Covenant. Key words there. My argument is still valid. nub.

 

[SatansBestBuddy]

Hmm, movieBob gets another show?

I wonder why they would do that?

*glances at number beside comments link*

Ah, okay, that makes sense.

 

[Treblaine]

Of course, it's completely impossible that any of that design was created that way for gameplay purposes. Because, you know, it totally wouldn't make any kind of sense for an enemy force with several levels of strength (which is incidentally more interesting to play against) to make each of their types instantly recognizable even in the midst of frenetic combat. Except that it would, and it would require that each enemy type look, sound, and move in extremely different ways, so that the player could say things like "Aha, I can see that this enemy is a grunt, and therefore little threat. I will instead focus my attention on the hunter, who is much more dangerous and likely to kill me." The ability to make judgements of that kind is vital to gameplay and has been around since people started to notice that the mushroom and the turtle did different things if you jumped on them.

Furthermore, it is clearly nonsensical that the spartans (sorry, SPARTANs) all look the same because they grew out of a design for a single character. Master chief needed to do two things design-wise:

1) He needed to look more powerful than a regular human. Thats easy, he's in power armor. The beckground stuff exists to make the player feel empowered and explain that whole "protagonist invicibility" stuff and gameplay mechanics like the shields.

2) As the protagonist of a first person shooter, he needed to be relatively faceless so that the player could more easily project onto him. This has been a consistent design element throughout the history of FPSs and exists because a first-person viewpoint is the most immersive.

"Oh wait, shit" says Bungee. "Now that we've branded such a successful character based around those two principles, we suddenly have to make a game where there's tons of those guys? I guess we'd better diversify their appearance a bit. Except wait, we can't make them crazy different, because A: that would ruin the instantly recognizable 'this is a spartan' branding we have, and B: could potentially confuse players in the midst of the game. In the middle of a hectic firefight a player has to be able to instantly tell the difference between friend and foe, especially since we've made a game so unforgiving that a split second hesitation could mean the difference between getting a beamsword shoved up your ass or not."

Also, its squad-based. Which basically just reinforces everything I just said. Now to balance out my unusually reasonable internet argument - Bob, you're a massive fucking toolbag, and I'm pretty sure they gave you a second, more controversial video is because you troll well enough to significantly increase siteviews. Which I guess is working, so congratulations. Hopefully this means your movie reviews will be a bit less ranty and stupid now and more like the informative ones you used to do.

Because each comment doesn't have a "Thumb Up" button:

Bravo! Encore! Encore!

I hope moviebob reads you comment... and if he reads it I hope he REALLY reads it, rather than just skimming over it to try to find holes in your argument (there appear none) rather than simply applying it to his own case and seeing how unreasonable he has been.

If he did that then maybe his next video won't be such a waste of time.

 

[OriginalityImpaired]

You're right, I never noticed that in the slightest,
Then again, I try not to put much thought into the Halo series,
Sure it's a rich universe with alot of great and iconic races/characters,
But Bungie has never really done anything with them, and it's intensely shallow overrall,
I just stick to the Multiplayer and pretend everything else doesn't exist

 

[thublihnk]

Good to know that Bob is right out of the gates provoking the fanboys with GASP, an argument that actually makes sense. And I've noticed at least once in this comment thread he's gotten the 'Professional Troll' line, as well as the 'I'LL NEVAR WATCH ANYTHING YOU EVER DO'.

What I like about good sir Bob is not only that he will, every few months, stir the pot a little--get people good and pissed off about whatever video. It's always an entertaining show for us cooler heads. But I can't think of a single one that didn't come from a very much legitimate and honest point of view. Good on yeh, Bob. Good on yeh.

EDIT: A serious note, for you folks screaming at Bob. You have a lot to learn about analysis and critical thinking about video games, and Art in general. Even if you do think there are gaping holes in the argument Bob presents, it's a valid point to be brought to attention. Even if, for example, the Elites join the Humans during Halo 3 and beat the Covenant (I hear that's what happened, I was never able to finish that game) that doesn't mean the arguments presented are invalid, it means maybe there's a different conclusion to be reached. Say, that using a homogenized 'Master Race' can only get you so far, that we should embrace diversity to achieve our goals.

I guess what I'm saying is that you can disagree with Bob without declaring him or his arguments worthless, and you can find a way to discuss this without turning it into a You Vs. Bob narrative. And guys, we really need to. We should be discussing the medium of video games as an art form and giving it the respect it deserves, not screaming at each other about how the Master Chief isn't racist.

I have watched and mostly liked everything he has done up to this point, as far as movie reviews and the game overthinker goes. I even voted to make him a regular feature on screwattack. Even when I didn't agree with him, or when he attacked fans of different games to some extent, I still managed to enjoy his videos. This argument of his is completely off base, and he stretches tiny little out of context points so far, that they have no value whatsoever. The facts are irrelevant to his argument. He openly dislikes halo, and he seems to be using this video to argue any point he sees fit without regards to facts, to make wild accusations that could have real world consequences. The people that attack our industry on a regular basis use arguments like this to their advantage. So yes, as far as "The Big Picture" goes, I will not be watching any more of them. He openly states that he has been given the freedom to talk about whatever he wants, however he wants. And his first video is him discussing something with extreme bias and no regard to facts. And he is getting paid. Therefore "The Big Picture"=Professional Trollery. I will continue to watch Game Overthinker, but if these kind of thought processes affect that show, I will stop watching it too.

You are better than this Bob.

K, no. His points about the overarching themes of Halo are very much valid, even if you don't agree with them. There is no 100% absolute truth about the interpretation of any art.

Seriously, guys, when we have discussions like these we need to start talking like legitimate appreciators of the arts, not just raging fanboys because THAT is what 'people who attack our industry' can really use to their advantage.

 

[ShadowStar42]

Bob, if you pulled your head out of your ass and thought about it like you seem to be trying to indicate you are, you'd notice that the Spartan program IS intended as the evil, oppressive, over the top militaristic side of humanity in the future war against the covenant armada.

Humanity had to design a 'master race' as you so painstakingly put it, because they were getting their asses whipped. The diversity present in the human race was getting obliterated by the multi-planetary slave army - so the UNSC made their own. Conscripts, stolen babies, genetically engineered for physical perfection and practically brainwashed in their mental programming. They only exist because of the war, they are humanity's dirty little secret.

This is funny since I've never played any of the Halo games and only read one of the books because a friend recommended it (and it was actually pretty good), but for someone so fervent in attacking someone for not knowing about Halo I feel this has to be mentioned. The Spartan program started before humanity ever had alien contact, they were being designed as a master race to kill other humans, that aliens attacked soon after was completely coincidental.

 

[Treblaine]

When chizzled down to the bone, they a a group of people with a vision that they feel strongly about, not evil.

Yah that always perplexed me, is true evil pursuing a goal unpopular with modern society or is it doing something wrong and you think its wrong but you do it anyway? If its the second one then technically the Nazi's weren't evil.

In my opinion, someone who is true evil would be a person who delebrately causes pain and suffering with no reasons or regrets. By this standard the Nazis are not true evil, they religiously believed in the master race and wanted to perfect it. They had a reason for what they did, not a justafieable one but a reason none the less. This makes them and their actions "Vile".

Evil would have to be a person who is on the same page as Satan.
------
Basically:
Bad with out cause = Evil
Bad with Cause = Vile

Well the upper echelon were certainly evil since they were the ones that concocted the lies that millions of Germans believed justified (only vaguely) all of their horrendous acts.

They deserved to hang. But I don't think ever soldier who fought for Germany (Nazi by definition of being in Armed forces) in WWII was "evil" I think we can all agree with you to that extent.

But surely the SS Death Squads who wore out their rifles with the numbers of Jews, Gypsies and Dissidents they executed. So many thousands murdered. They certainly were evil, the propaganda alone was not enough to do that. The SS chose those from their society who had an unjustifiable hatred, and similar with Imperial Japan.

 

[OriginalityImpaired]

Of course, it's completely impossible that any of that design was created that way for gameplay purposes. Because, you know, it totally wouldn't make any kind of sense for an enemy force with several levels of strength (which is incidentally more interesting to play against) to make each of their types instantly recognizable even in the midst of frenetic combat. Except that it would, and it would require that each enemy type look, sound, and move in extremely different ways, so that the player could say things like "Aha, I can see that this enemy is a grunt, and therefore little threat. I will instead focus my attention on the hunter, who is much more dangerous and likely to kill me." The ability to make judgements of that kind is vital to gameplay and has been around since people started to notice that the mushroom and the turtle did different things if you jumped on them.

Furthermore, it is clearly nonsensical that the spartans (sorry, SPARTANs) all look the same because they grew out of a design for a single character. Master chief needed to do two things design-wise:

1) He needed to look more powerful than a regular human. Thats easy, he's in power armor. The beckground stuff exists to make the player feel empowered and explain that whole "protagonist invicibility" stuff and gameplay mechanics like the shields.

2) As the protagonist of a first person shooter, he needed to be relatively faceless so that the player could more easily project onto him. This has been a consistent design element throughout the history of FPSs and exists because a first-person viewpoint is the most immersive.

"Oh wait, shit" says Bungee. "Now that we've branded such a successful character based around those two principles, we suddenly have to make a game where there's tons of those guys? I guess we'd better diversify their appearance a bit. Except wait, we can't make them crazy different, because A: that would ruin the instantly recognizable 'this is a spartan' branding we have, and B: could potentially confuse players in the midst of the game. In the middle of a hectic firefight a player has to be able to instantly tell the difference between friend and foe, especially since we've made a game so unforgiving that a split second hesitation could mean the difference between getting a beamsword shoved up your ass or not."

Also, its squad-based. Which basically just reinforces everything I just said. Now to balance out my unusually reasonable internet argument - Bob, you're a massive fucking toolbag, and I'm pretty sure they gave you a second, more controversial video is because you troll well enough to significantly increase siteviews. Which I guess is working, so congratulations. Hopefully this means your movie reviews will be a bit less ranty and stupid now and more like the informative ones you used to do.

You didn't destroy his arguement, you missed the point entirely,
He stated multiple times in this entire video that this was likely all a coincidence and unintentional,
This was just him idling thinking about philisophy and not him bashing anything or anyone in any way shape or form,
He acknowledged this, outloud I believe rather than just inferring,
He was utterly unconfrontational and didn't actively state he believed it was true, just a possibility and something interesting he wanted to share with people,
Thus your entire "hah I beat Bob" trip was wasted, irrelevant, and childish,
And didn't conflict with his theory in the slightest,
*sigh*