Will COD-ifying Halo 4's multiplayer make it better? (Positive spin article)
#1
Fri, 04/13/2012 - 08:34
Will COD-ifying Halo 4's multiplayer make it better? (Positive spin article)
This is rather well written in my opinion.
http://oxcgn.com/2012/04/13/will-cod-ifying-halo-4s-multiplayer-make-it-better/
Yes and no. I have no problem with them introducing more carrots. Call Of Duty is all carrot, no string in my estimation. Halo's been quite the opposite. Sure, you have some titles to strive for, the more you play, and I suppose there's a carrot there. I think what they're trying to do, by MLG-ifying this is to try and flush folks out of custom rooms all the time and into the general population. That's a worthy goal, to have more folks to choose from in matchmaking, for skill's and for connection's sake. The one thing that Halo still does better than anyone is LAN setup, and I can't see them COD-ifying that.
I like the changes they are introducing with Halo 4. I was a little upset that there will be no Firefight but Spartan Ops looks pretty cool so I'm will to give it a chance.
I do not like the fact that they are going along with the "COD-ifying" label. I dont see it that way at all. We all know that Halo and COD are really nothing alike when it comes to MP. Just because we can take credits or points that we earn and use them to upgrade our character doesnt mean that its COD-ifying the game. That idea itself isnt even a COD exclusive idea. People just insist on comparing the two games because of their popularity.
H4 will be better than anything with a CoD label on it.
Yes and no!
Both of these companies will continue to "copy" off of each other until there isn't anything left. Keep in mind I haven't played every game in the COD series so my timeline may be off or wrong here but:
H2 had numeric levels showing your skill level.
COD starts off with earning XP to progress through varios "ranks" giving you something to strive for.
H3 continues with numerical skill levels, and adds to that "ranks" based on certain levels.
REACH takes the idea of earning XP and lets you purchase armor pieces with it. Reach also has you progress through ranks like the COD series. Reach takes the sprinting idea and invents AAs.
COD takes the purchasing idea in BLOPs so you can buy things with your Cash.
REACH invents daily and weekly challenges.
COD replicates the idea in MW3.
What's next?! :)
Consolidation. Two gametypes and two gametypes only: griffball and rocket race. Halo 5: The n00b Beginning
[img]http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/163/032/Abandon+thread+...
None of these borrowed features are that big of a deal IMHO.
weird, I heard CoD was Halo-fying Blops 2
Call of Duty: Space Ops
Halo of Duty: Future Space Warfare 4
To be honest, I was a little miffed to learn that all the armor upgrades in Reach were cosmetic only. I think my incentive to keep playing dropped by 50%.
See I think the opposite. I really do not like the idea of someone playing more than I do getting better equipment. Halo all about skill and map control, not power boosting for better goodies.
True story.
We are going to have to wait for more details and then some of us will make the jump and offer up experience. The details will forewarn us but putting it all into practice is the ultimate proof. Some REACH AA were loved by the masses during and after the Beta but their tune changed over time.
Weapon and body skins that liik different but don't actually impact play are fine. I don't care about an imaginary sticker collection.
I really liked earning new weapons and abilities in CoD. The custom classes you start with always worked fine for me. Trying to earn new weapons and stuff kept me playing alot longer than I would of, plus there is a greater sense of accomplishment achieving things that matter.
Latest Gameinformer info:
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/04/16/the-changes-to-halo-39-s-competitive-multiplayer.aspx
OOPS! Missed the sticky above. Never mind.