StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Thoughts on the armor abilities? The only ones I tended to use on my initial playthrough (Normal difficulty) were the hologram and the bubble shield since it healed you and seemed to last reasonably long under fire, save fuel rods cannons and hunters. The armor lock seemed to be too short in duration (or my timing needs lots of work) and sprint was all but useless. I don't recall ever seeing the evade or whatever it was called mentioned in the manual.

All said, I enjoyed it and am rather surprized they managed to pull off what they did with 360's aging hardware. Mind you I only noticed slow frame rates in the ending cutscene, though It's not something I specifically looked for either. The redesigned engine certainly seems to handle gameplay smoothly enough.

DPDarkPrimus, I agree that would have been awesome. Wasn't Peter Jackson's game company going to do something with the Elites before the idea fell through? Maybe that's what you were thinking of?

What impressed you hardware wise? The game looks inferior to Gears 2 and generally shows less and uses terrain/s-bend corridors to hide loading. The cutscenes are lousy with the dropped frames of hilarity.

Hardware wise, its more about what developers in general have been able to pull out of the current generation of 360 games compared to earlier ones utilizing the same hardware, mind you thats to be expected. I'm not certain I've payed enough attention to compare the two titles directly at this point. Reach certainly is graphically superior to Halo 3 at least.

Now if anyone has some hard data regarding graphics between the two games/game engine implementations such as avg. polygons/frame, avg. textures/frame, texture resolutions, avg. light sources/frame, etc. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing it. Mind you it's what you do with them is what counts, but it might be interesting to compare them from a technical aspect. I however have a feeling that kind of information won't be readily accessible.

Reach uses serious LODing on everything; if you look for it you can see textured details turning into dot-textures then becoming polygons as you move forward. It never really has many people onscreen either, and it obviously dropping frames all over the place (watching the MA7's ammo counter as you move is an adventure in horrible). It's clearly cutting a lot of corners to get the performance, and still looks similar or worse to UE3.

Wing Commander MAD wrote:Thoughts on the armor abilities? The only ones I tended to use on my initial playthrough (Normal difficulty) were the hologram and the bubble shield since it healed you and seemed to last reasonably long under fire, save fuel rods cannons and hunters. The armor lock seemed to be too short in duration (or my timing needs lots of work) and sprint was all but useless. I don't recall ever seeing the evade or whatever it was called mentioned in the manual.

I found that most of the armor abilities were useless in campaign. Armor lock especially, every time I used it, all the enemies would back off and wait for it to end, and about half the time, they threw plasma grenades at me as it was ending so that I died as soon as ended.

Drop shield was semi useful, although if I used it when there were plenty of enemies around it didn't do squat.

Hologram was pretty good, very rarely did they not fall for it.

AFAIK Evade is multiplayer only.



Why is it that the enemy AI is smart enough to kill me half a second after armor lock ends, but the ally AI is stupid enough to throw a grenade, have it bounce off a wall and kill me.

Armour-lock is great against things like hunters with slow, powerful guns; you can 'blink' into lock for a second to be immune to damage and then turn it off again. The Hologram was just a 'hijack tank' button. I seriously think it was a missed opportunity to have armour customisation and armour abilities and not link these things at all.

The absurdity of someone having a giant sight-camera on their helmet and needing a stupid artillery gun to call in off-map is great stuff, though. If only 'hard utility case' = 'can actually carry a backup pistol'? It terrifies me that just by using the d-pad as inventory and moving NVG to Y, they could have had a decent setup for 2+1 guns, more abilities, etc.

I watched a video walkthrough of the game, it seems like they got pretty enthusiastic with the Hunters. The AI's performance was pretty lackluster from what I saw, dude took on a Hunter by himself inside the AAA platform and the female SPARTAN just stood outside not doing shit. I'm also disappointed to see the pistol has a zoom again despite the only sighting apparatus being a night sights.

Stark wrote:I seriously think it was a missed opportunity to have armour customisation and armour abilities and not link these things at all.

What, so you're stuck with one armor ability as long as you wear a certain piece of visual flair? How is that a missed opportunity?

Character build system > 5 options most of which suck or are useless. No reason to only have one, either; Crysis 2 will again do Spartans better than Halo.

So I'm on the 7th mission right now. . . so far it seems they've improved a lot of the combat balance stuff, but I've gotta say they really don't know jack about tension and I couldn't give two shits about any of the characters. Who did they pay to write the script, Uwe Boll?

I'm having fun blowing shit up. I think you guys are way overthinking this, I mean Gears didn't need some deep bullshit story penned by fucking Plutarch or whatever to be fun, and neither does Halo.

The only armor abilities I am finding useful are Jetpack and Sprint. The rest are pretty much one trick ponies useful in only very specific situations.

aieeegrunt wrote:I'm having fun blowing shit up. I think you guys are way overthinking this, I mean Gears didn't need some deep bullshit story penned by fucking Plutarch or whatever to be fun, and neither does Halo.

The only armor abilities I am finding useful are Jetpack and Sprint. The rest are pretty much one trick ponies useful in only very specific situations.

Since when did you need a "deep" story to have characters that you actually give a shit about?

Yeah, the story is a complete failure. Once you finish it, you'll laugh at how much a complete failure at eliciting any kind of emotion it was. And lol at 'Gears doesn't need a deep story', since Gears effortlessly sells drama and characters and conflict far better than Reach (or indeed any Halo game). The sad anticlimax of Noble 1's exit is the gold standard of 'fucking up effortlessly dramatic events'.

Its also a shame they stuck with MP respawning for firefight, because it means firefight has zero tension and is just a rambofest. Someone dies, it doesn't matter if they're far away or behind enemy lines, because they'll respawn anyway. It's just MP with really stupid bots.

Stark wrote:Character build system > 5 options most of which suck or are useless.

What you implied was that you wanted certain abilities tied to certain pieces of armor. Which means that everyone would end up looking the same, as optimal builds were discovered. You can't see how that is counter to the intention of the unlockable armor, which is to let you make a character that is unique to you?

Have Elites always been able to take 4 sniper bullets to the head on Legendary, or is that new?

Oscar Wilde wrote:Have Elites always been able to take 4 sniper bullets to the head on Legendary, or is that new?

Legendary is a demonstration of the many uses of the plasma pistol. Sniper rifles are OK for dealing with grunts, jackals, and brutes, but elites will usually be able to tank one or two shots if they have their shields on.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:What you implied was that you wanted certain abilities tied to certain pieces of armor. Which means that everyone would end up looking the same, as optimal builds were discovered. You can't see how that is counter to the intention of the unlockable armor, which is to let you make a character that is unique to you?

I'm real glad that 'tactical wristwatch' does nothing, because sure as fuck nobody else is ever going to see it. Using 'up-armoured' helmets = ... fashion statement... ? Good thing the arty designator is a gun when 60% of the helmets have an attachment specifically described as doing the same thing that actually does nothing.

I'm not sure what's more asinine, whinging about 'optimal builds' or having a guy with armour covered in grenades he can't use.

Stark wrote:Yeah, the story is a complete failure. Once you finish it, you'll laugh at how much a complete failure at eliciting any kind of emotion it was. And lol at 'Gears doesn't need a deep story', since Gears effortlessly sells drama and characters and conflict far better than Reach (or indeed any Halo game). The sad anticlimax of Noble 1's exit is the gold standard of 'fucking up effortlessly dramatic events'.

I didn't really see much difference in the depth of either one. They both had essentially the same "Desperate fight for humanity's survival" cliche's going on. You knew from the beggining that there would be no survivors from Reach; they all got good exits except for Kat, but sometimes random bolts happen in war. I think they did that just so they would avoid the cliche of each Noble Team member getting an individually crafted dramatic cinematic death. Chick gets picked off by a sniper, one other dude died offscreen.

One game I'm a super soldier shooting "rar kill all humans" aliens coming up from the ground. The other one I'm a super soldier shooting "rar kill all humans" aliens coming down from the sky.

This is pretty pointless subjective bullshit anyways, I'm not playing either game to watch cutscenes that I will just skip after my first playthrough.

Its also a shame they stuck with MP respawning for firefight, because it means firefight has zero tension and is just a rambofest. Someone dies, it doesn't matter if they're far away or behind enemy lines, because they'll respawn anyway. It's just MP with really stupid bots.

Firefight has a limited number of respawns for the Spartans, so actually it does matter. Having a random idiot on your team in either game is bad; Firefight it's worse because in Horde you just let the idiot bleed out in a corner. In firefight he keeps respawning and wasting lives.

aieeegrunt wrote:I didn't really see much difference in the depth of either one. They both had essentially the same "Desperate fight for humanity's survival" cliche's going on. You knew from the beggining that there would be no survivors from Reach; they all got good exits except for Kat, but sometimes random bolts happen in war. I think they did that just so they would avoid the cliche of each Noble Team member getting an individually crafted dramatic cinematic death. Chick gets picked off by a sniper, one other dude died offscreen.

One game I'm a super soldier shooting "rar kill all humans" aliens coming up from the ground. The other one I'm a super soldier shooting "rar kill all humans" aliens coming down from the sky.

This is pretty pointless subjective bullshit anyways, I'm not playing either game to watch cutscenes that I will just skip after my first playthrough.

Then why the fuck are you even posting? Criticizing the writing is completely separate from criticizing the gameplay. If you're too lazy to figure out what the difference between Gears and Halo's writing is then your opinion is completely worthless.

It's Grunt, you're talking about the guy who complained about how Halo 2 isn't true Halo when the Arbiter's story was probably the most interesting part of all the Halo games.

Respawning in firefight reduces tension because you never have to choose between safety and rescue. Saying the firefight spawns are limited like it's a revealation is both lame and irrelevant.

And Gears can get a more convincing relationship in on scene with no dialogue than Halo managed in 3 games.

All of this basically just extends from the fact that Bungie is a small time developer in a big-time developer's shoes. They run purely on street cred left over from their one hit wonder ages ago. They're afraid of losing that, so they won't change or try to get better. They can't because they have no idea how to. They have tons of money and resources now and no idea how to use them.

To be honest, Bungies ineptitude story wise has left me wondering whether future Halo games will get better for another studio developing it.

Gameplay wise it's old fashioned but competent anyone could do it, but I haven't at any point been interested in the Halo plot even back in combat evolved. It's just cliche with shite dialogue and no emotional investment. Or maybe we'll just get Halo: Modern Warfare.

Stark wrote:Respawning in firefight reduces tension because you never have to choose between safety and rescue. Saying the firefight spawns are limited like it's a revealation is both lame and irrelevant.

It's also mostly wrong. 90% of firefight game modes have unlimited spawns anyway.

Invasion is the only really fun game mode.

I like it. Makes me feel like I'm back in high school again.

Things I like:
1) Firefight matchmaking, with included comedy option of "Rocketfight."
2) Gruntpocalypse.
3) Daily and Weekly challenges are pretty neat. They're an interesting way of getting players to try things that they normally wouldn't do or wouldn't get rewarded for, like killing a certain number of people with the needler or getting a bunch of assists.
4) Weapon balance is loooooads better than previous games. The pistol is still silly but it's not some insane death machine like the first game. Assault rifle is actually useful.

Things I don't like:
1) Story is a great example of how to take an epic premise and make it boring as shit.
2) Firefight matchmaking has essentially zero risk whatsoever. I have yet to lose any matches other than generator defense, since that actually requires coordination and pubbies tend to be morons.
3) Ranks are poorly planned out. There's like 4 levels of Warrant Officer, and each one is something around 60,000 credits to get promoted to the next one. It takes a third of that to move up to Captain. Plus, Captain actually unlocks stuff, while the many levels of WO do nothing at all.
4) You should get more than 60 credits for playing custom games. So far I only have one friend who has done anything in Forge, let alone custom matches, because you don't get any money for it.