This year I was hoping Microsoft would open with a well thought out apology. They would apologies for all the issues they have had to correct, issues that were of their own doing, the latest of which was selling the Xbox One without Kinect. To my infinite sadness this did not occur. Continue Reading
So I have been playing a bit of Halo this week, A bit too much Halo.
I started off by playing Halo 4 multiplayer and getting annoyed at how bad my team was. I’m not usually competitive on Halo but with Halo 4 I noticed that I seem to take it more ‘seriously’. So after completing my match with Incompe-team (A combination of incompetent and team, obviously) I decided that I should play Halo 3 and see if it was any better and it was.
This made we question why, what’s so different about these game? They are both Halo titles and they have most of the same weapons, so why can I be relaxed when playing Halo 3 but get aggressive with halo 4? I discovered a series of factors that contribute to the competitiveness of the games.
The first difference I will call presentation, when you finish a match in Halo 3 the announcer will tell you that you have won and that’s it but with Halo 4 you are told that you have won then “Victory” will be displayed across the screen and then you are shown how much experience you have received and what you have unlocked. Halo 4 is trying to give you an incentive to keep playing and with some games I understand this feature, but with halo 4 and Halo Reach it’s not like they were the first games, they are built on a successful series. All you had to do was remake the previous games great multiplayer in a new engine with new maps.
The second difference I think is more a matter of opinion, it’s the maps. Most of the Halo 3 maps were relatively small but well structured; most of them have some open space for vehicles but usually something was put in the design to prevent that open space from becoming a massive ‘kill zone’. Most of the Halo 4 maps have tight corridors with multiple paths this means that you have to keep focused since an enemy could be around any corner or could be behind you, the maps also seen to have large ’kill zones’ that you just can’t go to without having everyone shooting at you from every direction..
I finally decided to play the first two Halo games which I have never enjoyed however there is no online multiplayer for them anymore so I was force to play the campaign and I feel that they have terrible design for the levels, most of them seem bland and empty and seem to go on for far too long, I would prefer a short well-made level than a long repetitive, copy and paste level. I have also noticed that some weapons are completely useless, in a game like Call of Duty there are only a few types of weapons and they have slightly different stats so you expect some weapons to be not as good as others but with Halo each weapon is supposed to have its place or have a twist to make it worth using but some weapons I just don’t bother with, there is never a time where I think “Oh, I should use that weapon here”. Finally it shouldn’t take a super soldier three attempts to kill a tiny alien by battering it over the head with a futuristic alien alloy, that grunt should have died on the first hit.
So in conclusion I personally don’t feel like it’s worth playing anything less than Halo 3 and unless you have competent friends it’s not really worth playing Halo 4’s multiplayer, then again that’s just my opinion.
Lots of love Dogflap.