Forum:Halo 4 discussion

Forums: Index → General Discussion → Halo 4 discussion

Since Halo 4 is around the corner, I guess it is fitting to have a formal discussion page for things related to the game. Feel free to share your opinion/criticism about the game!

Have fun discussing about the game! — subtank 04:50, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Other threads

• Forum:Halo 4 Celebration - Want a countdown timer for the launch of Halo 4? Check out this thread.
• Forum:Halo 4 armor opinions - Put your opinions about the armor design in this thread.
• Forum:Forward Unto Dawn Impressions - Saw it yet? We want your insight. Check out this thread.

About the weapon sandbox

Still finding it odd (and disappointed) that the Forerunners, more specifically the Prometheans, use such archaic weapon designs considering that they are described being so advanced in the Bear's Forerunner Trilogy. Was expecting something like the Republic Commando's DC-17m blaster that can be configured to three different weapon setups.— subtank 04:50, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Yeah, indeed. Weak weapon strength also seems off. If you're going to use light as a weapon, why use hard light bullets when it'd be cheaper to use lasers? But hey, that's been as far as Halo 2 when they gave Enforcers a shield that only covers part of their body.

While I'm unsure as to how 4's plot will turn out (though I expect to be alright), I'm more excited for Forward Unto Dawn. The Halo movie has finally come! Take that, Harvey Weinstein! Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 11:27, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

I guess it has something to do with 343i wanting the weapons to look "familar" and function similarily, which explains why the Lightrifle performs like the BR & DMR in one. However this causes some redundancy; 4 different weapons that essentially function the same. It may also have something to do with balancing. Nonetheless I do like the way they sound and "form" in the player's hands. Also I love the ARC-920, Sticky Detonator, & SAW, and how we have both the BR and DMR in the game. Really spices up the gameplay. Although one of my wishes wasn't fullfilled...a UNSC energy weapon other than the Spartan Laser. :(--Killamint [Comm|Files] 12:45, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

To be honest, I think I'm more hyped for the FuD than the game itself! But about Halo 4, I really hope they bring back Arbiter. At least a honorable mention. Something like "I thought the Arbiter resolved the conflict" would be nice. Also, anyone else find it interesting that the Storm uses a color scheme of both the Brutes and Elites (purple + green)? I think gameplay will be something really new and foreign to me, considering that the Promethean weapons having different firing modes and . The fact that Promethean weapons resemble human weapons is somewhat weird and disappointing to me. We never had a human counterpart of the Sentinel beam, and I think that's one thing 343i didn't do right: Forerunner weapons should be less "human". —S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 12:52, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

@Killamint: The direction for the weapon design is not focused; they are more of "How can we make a shotgun futuristic and sci-fi?" (as stated in the latest dev-podcast) than "How can we nail down this ancient alien close-quarter weapon?". ^{The latter is more of how Bungie normally approach things: For example, when asked to Marty for a music sample for the Halo announcement at Macworld 1999, they simply wanted "an ancient, epic alien" feel).} I am worried about the franchise... too many similar gameplay elements.

This is out of topic but a fun read: click! — subtank 13:11, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Not sure how the weapons seem "human", but I guess that's your opinion. As for the change in multiplayer, I am excited for the change, as multiplayer hasn't had much change over the years. I think it will be a nice refresher to multiplayer.--Spartacus, Halopedia Administrator ^Talk 13:21, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Not sure how to word it out correctly but I think what Killamint meant was the using the Forerunner weapons feel more human, albeit more futuristic/sci-fi ish, than being Forerunner weapons. Prior to Halo 4, most would imagine the weapons would be alien to them based on what they read and saw throughout the Halo franchise (like me for example, hoping for a one weapon configurable into various roles since they use one source of energy/ammunition).— subtank 13:29, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Yup, you nailed it. Familar meaning "Human-like" (adaptable), both in function and aesthetics. The Scattershot is essentially a shotgun, both in looks & function (including the reticule & reload action). I like it but I was hoping for something more unique that, like S331 said, was alien & not familar, but still adaptable. However the weapons do resemble Forerunner design to a degree w/ those sharp angles and whatnot.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 16:58, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Yep, I was hoping that weapon we saw in Origins would appear for the sake of continuity, but I guess 343i didn't want to add a weapon that operates like the Power Rangers. @Spartacus: Forerunner weapons operate like human weapons (what's the difference between the AR and Suppressor other than different clip size?), hence the term "human". @Subtank: It does worry me about the gameplay. They included grenade indicator, different weapons that operate in the same way (I miss the good old days with the Sentinel beam), sprint part of gameplay. Next thing you know, we are gonna get the annoying bloody screens, and that would suck. —S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 04:45, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

Another factor to consider is that the Forerunners were so advanced that they would routinely alter their very shapes to better perform the many tasks required by their Rates. Therefore, it makes sense that the tools (and weapons) they used would be equally capable of adapting themselves to the user. Based on what we've seen in the videos, it seems logical to me that a Scattershot would have looked a lot different in the hands of a Builder than it did in the hands of a Promethean or other Warrior-Servant... Therefore it's not altogether surprising to me that, in the hands of a human, it would configure itself into a shape more familiar to us... It's just doing what it was designed to do. How hard could that be for a race that considered moving stars around to be a routine activity? In the hands of a Forerunner, it probably wouldn't have had limited ammo, because it would have integrated itself directly into their Combat Skin, but we're not advanced enough to ceate a sufficiently powerful source of energy on the fly, so it makes sense that the weapon would self-assemble some sort of limited-use capacitor when it detects no available power supply to tap into. As for the weapon in Origins, if you squint real hard and suspend disbelief a little, you can imagine that the Boltshot might look like that in the hands of a Forerunner... Maybe...? DJenser 09:20, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

Nitpicker alert: Spartan331, ARs do not use clips. Smoke^{Sound off!} 19:13, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

If what you say is true than why do the Promethean weapons look and perform the same when in the hands of a Knight? @S331: I do see what you mean, too many changes can make the game feel not so original but honestly I don't think 343i will stray that far or they will catch alot of heat. Although I'm fine with the grenade indicator (although it seems unnecessary) & sprint. Regardless of those features, its still gonna require skill to kill (or live). I'm still getting Halo 4 regardless because my primary concern is Campaign and Spartan Ops, I'm more story driven than anything. Wargames comes last for me mainly because its intimidating playing against other people who have more skill than you.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 12:29, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

They perform the same because the weapon has a basic function regardless of who uses it. The difference lies in how the weapon behaves when grafted to the arm of a Knight or, say, a Forerunner wearing a Combat Skin. Granted, I haven't played War Games or Spartan Ops yet, but I'm pretty sure that Knights don't have reload animations when they use their weapons, because they don't have to reload. The Scattershot is still going to fire a bunch of bouncy projectiles that incinerate, the Suppressor is still going to fire a silly number of hardlight rounds & the Binary Rifle is still going to disintegrate you if it hits the tip of your big toe, but when they're attached to a Knight, they don't run out of ammo. When a player picks it up, it automatically reconfigures itself to allow the same sort of basic function, while making allowance for the obvious limitations of the wielder (ie: no power supply to tap into means that it runs off of its onboard capacitors until they run out, and it configures itself in a manner that will allow these to be replaced/reloaded) DJenser 16:01, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

The problem is that all AI units in the games do not have any reload animation because they are given bottomless clip. While they do have infinite ammunition, they are programmed to fire their shots at a specific rate to avoid being overpowered. There's a nifty dialogue of allies shouting the need to reload but they don't really do it. This won't change in Halo 4, safe to say. Nice theory but I'm not sure if it holds any water. — subtank 10:33, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

Sorry, I was attempting to offer an in-game (and, apparently, less cynical) explanation, whereas I now realize that you were looking at it from a strictly gampeplay/mechanics perspective. In that case, you're right: the "advanced" Forerunner weapons have been nerfed all to h311 and back in order to balance gameplay, much like any of the weapons/powers/spells/etc that have been introduced in every other game out there with a multiplayer component. It's a sad fact of the gaming industry that, if there's even the slightest bit of imbalance or an exploit, someone's going to spam it... After all, written into the genes of every living thing on Earth is an evolutionary imperative to take the quickest path to advancement. Besides, speaking from a strictly gameplay/mechanics perspective, if there were a truly advanced Forerunner weapon in the game that could convert itself to a number of other weapons, it would make weapon drops kinda pointless. Situations like that force the designers to compromise between real creativity and balanced play, which I'm sure has frustrated them to no end, going back to the early days of 8-bit Atari... DJenser 12:12, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

Well, you mentioned "reload animation" which caught my "gameplay" attention. :P

Your theory on "adaptable configuration" sounds plausible, but surely the Forerunners, being advanced as they are, would include a safe-option (or an off-switch) to prevent the weapon from being used by the enemy (since they are made to fight off the Flood) or any Reclaimers should they become unruly.— subtank 13:01, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

Touché... I did walk right into that one.

As to the safety option, this is exactly what I was referring to regarding the tightrope that the designers have to walk between "cool" and "balanced". If they don't allow the players to use the new toys, then "the game sucks because it teases us with stuff we can't have". However, if they allow it in-game in a manner that truly represents the advanced nature of Forerunner tech then "teh g@m3 $uxx0rz cuz the ubern00bs are sp@mmin teh OP gunz"... Their solution is to make the new stuff look different (self-assembly & orange glowy bits), but generally perform at the same level as the rest of the gear. Sure, logic dictates that it should be a LOT more powerful than it is, & it should disintegrate upon the death of its user like the Plasma Sword did in HCE, but they also know that making the multiplayer content unbalanced & holding back the new toys will likely drive down sales, so they must overlook "logic" to a certain extent in order to try and please as many people as possible. Like anything that markets to the public, video game design involves a fair amount of butt-kissing and crow-eating. DJenser 13:57, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

@S331 Different weapons that operate the same way aren't only found in CoD, but in a lot of other competitive games, like Counter Strike. Why does everybody compare everything to CoD these days? Also, the grenade indicator is incredibly useful when used with the thruster pack (don't diss it just because it's similar to something in CoD...), and sprint makes the game much more dynamic (and is actually balanced this time around since you can't just get away while getting shot). 92.84.48.50 12:35, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

No one mentioned about CoD or even compared anything to it specifically. :/ — subtank 10:33, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

I quote "They included grenade indicator, different weapons that operate in the same way (I miss the good old days with the Sentinel beam), sprint part of gameplay. Next thing you know, we are gonna get the annoying bloody screens, and that would suck." So yeah, he did mention CoD...92.84.44.25 13:19, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

You obviously missed the picture Subtank linked to. —S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 13:29, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Gotta love that strawberry jam filter. --KillerCRS 18:52, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Subtank: Not necessarily. The cheat "bottomless clip" would mean that they never reload. I'm not sure about later games, but I know the Marines did reload their weapons in Combat Evolved. If they had an energy weapon of some sort, then no, you wouldn't see a reload animation; technically speaking, they are not firing magazine-fed weapons. They do, however, have infinite ammo; otherwise, you could simply get behind cover, let them expend all of their ammunition trying to shoot at you, and then move out and kill them with little to no resistance. Smoke^{Sound off!} 19:13, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Just checked out Combat Evolved and you're right. Will try to check out this in Halo 2 but I can say for sure that "bottomless clip" is used for all AIs in Halo 3 and Reach.— subtank 12:20, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

I know the Spartan IIIs in Reach definitely have bottomless clip. Jun fires that sniper rifle like a madman. --KillerCRS 12:29, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

Vehicles

The Mantis is one very interesting addition to the sandbox that kinda changes gameplay, at least for that segment of the campaign. It will be fun to annihilate everything in your path and stomp your enemies. But seriously, I can't wait to see it in action. I also hope the Mammoth is drivable. But I'm still waiting to see what else 343i has in store for us. I'm sure there's a Forerunner vehicle waiting to be revealed.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 16:58, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Saw some Ragnorak (Valhalla remake) gameplay. Apparently, the Mantis is also a multiplayer vehicle. Dammit Frankie, stop telling us lies! Missing Mandible 19:52, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Please list the link to that if you can. I want to see that.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 21:18, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Sure. [1]. This was at the Eurogamer Expo (Or whatever they call it).Missing Mandible 10:24, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

WTF??! So the Mantis will be useable on that map? let alone War Games?? That should be interesting. I honestly don't remember Frankie saying that the Mantis is a campaign exclusive vehicle. I wonder what other "exclusives" will be in War Games.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 12:29, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

Is it just me or is anyone else dying for the Elephant 2.0, er excuse I totally meant to say "Mammoth", to be in War games? Weeping Angel 12:13, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

Nope! It looks awesome. As long as I can drive it! Having a larger vehicle than an elephant, and having missile pods on the sides is definitely going to have its advantages! :D --TentacleTornado 13:34, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

Forward Unto Wrong

I'm sorry but this is a good opportunity to bring this up. I love 343i and the progress they've made with Halo 4 but I have one small problem. Why in the world did they change the look of the Forward Unto Dawn? I know everything else in the game has pretty much recieved a facelift including MC's armor, and I have no problems with that, but the FuD is beyond that by a long shot. It has pretty much been turned into an axed up UNSC Destroyer, more so the Heracles in my opinion. Did they do this because of the Dawn mission layout? Or just because they wanted it to look better? It kinda messes up canon- both visual & regular. For instance, we saw the Arbitor take a ride in the bridge that, now all of sudden, still exist attached to ship. It just doesn't make any sense to me. I understand retcon but this is kinda pushing it in my opinion.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 17:23, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

If I had to guess, it would be more gameplay and artistic license rather than canonical.--Spartacus, Halopedia Administrator ^Talk 19:38, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Gameplay indeed, hence why the cryo chamber was also changed. Likely the original frigate design could have been too cramped and lack the room for wider battles. Looks like they're going more this as opposed to this. Let's just pretend a Precursor changed it for the funnies. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 19:45, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Looking at the end cutscene of Halo 3, I didn't see the bridge falling down to Earth. I can only see the MAC and a small portion of the side parts.Missing Mandible 19:49, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Looking at some images, I believe that Arby would not have been on the bridge. At least, without A) dieing from suffocation, and B) bringing MC back to Earth. File:FUD-04-00.JPG There's one of the images I was looking at. Missing Mandible 20:09, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

I just took a look at the cutscene here and if you look carefully at 5:31, you can see the bridge is still attached to the back half. Additionally, this image shows Arby's half didn't have the bridge. He must have moved last minute. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 20:17, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Arby on the bridge.

The bridge isn't there anymore.

@Tuckerscreator: I stand corrected. But now I'm thinking Halo 3 messed up canon by not keeping the bridge on the front half. Arby's in the bridge one minute, the next he's back on Earth w/ the front half but the bridge isn't present on the front half. Talk about inconsistencies in the Halo universe. This should be added to the list. If Arby moved at the last minute, that would've meant the portal closed at a slow rate giving him time to climb several stories to reach the MAC gun section. @Missing Mandible: Okay I don't understand what you mean by B). A) The FuD's doors could have easily been sealed once the ship (or Arby) detected atmospheric leak & vacuum pressure, or may have already been vacuum sealed b4 the ship was cut in half.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 20:46, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

The redesign of the Dawn, as others before me have pointed out, is essentially for gameplay purpose. The Dawn's width, in canon, is no more than ~150 meters but as seen in this image, the width has been exaggerated to accommodate the gameplay space. It would be an easier (and better) design choice by having John/Cortana waking up and invade into a CSS-class from the Fud as Storm forces inspect the ship, commandeer a working Seraph from the hangar bay and crash land that into Requiem. Would be more dramatic, not to mention fun to revisit the insides of a CSS-class. — subtank 02:37, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

That mission design would have been very cool, Subtank. Talk about double déjà vu. Anyway, I'm glad that Halo 4 begins with a thematic tribute to The Pillar of Autumn and Cairo Station. Despite looking so much different from frigates in previous games, I like the new design; as Killamint has mentioned, it reminds me quite a bit of the Heracles. I do wonder, however, whether 343 will treat the Charon class' nearly doubled size as a retcon or simply keep it ambiguous. The aft half alone looks as big as the entire ship did in Halo 3, though maybe that's a matter of forced perspective. --Courage never dies. 11:14, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

@Everyone: Thanks for providing a better understanding of this. Let me sum it up in my own words. The change is essentially a "design repurposed for gameplay" on the "Dawn" mission and doesn't serve to be retcon for the Charon class of Frigates, or Frigates in general. That's my conclusion on the matter. If that's the case, I'm gonna assume that 343i will not have an explanation for the Frigates change in the story. That seems like the most plausible way to approach such a drastic change, cause as far as I'm concerned, there is no "realistic" explanation. It does look bigger too. Now the idea Subtank came up with sounds beast. That would really be fun, that would bring the best of both worlds in one mission. And yes, it looks like the Heracles with the latter Destroyers "side wings" and bridge placement.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 12:29, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

By following this conversation and taking all the points into account, I am still reminded of the FuD assembly that will be released by Megabloks. One thing that is notable from most of the images of the wreckage is that it gives no indication of how the front portion of the vessel would appear with the changed ship model, if that vessel was not severed by the Ark's portal.

Another factor that in my opinion should be considered is the FuD's toy, when it is put together as a complete object. From that, the extent of the redesign becomes very apparent. While it maintains some aspects of the original design, such as the angled plates on the sides of the engines, to the parts of the ship containing the MAC gun, as well as that part having another extended structure below it, along with armor plates sloping down on either side of the weapon, it is still a dramatic redesign.

Oddly enough, from the E3 trailer, the Paris-Class Frigates still look the same as they did in 'Halo: Reach', while the Halycon-Class Light Cruisers share the same model for the PoA from Anniversary.

From the facts that I have noted, perhaps the redesign of the FuD is more than just game play and artistic license. The reason I suggest that is because from way things worked in the past, particularly regarding UNSC cruisers and frigates, is this; all vessels look the same as the aesthetically most recent model, regardless of model, class, etc.

That would mean that the In Amber Clad would be identical to the Forward Unto Dawn, which would likely in turn look like the frigates in Reach, despite being entirely different types of frigates. There was even a bit of that in Halo 2; in one of the early cinematics, when the soon-to-be Arbiter is on trial, recalling the PoA's escape from Reach, the model for the ship is the same model for the Marathon-Class heavy cruisers, rather than being designed to indicate the difference between the two respective cruiser classes.

While the above obviously has to do with practicalities, etc., it does bring me to my main suggestion: the redesign could be an effort on 343I's part to show a starker distinction between different classes of frigates. Just as they didn't want John's redesigned armor to be known as mere artistic license for the sake of it, but rather the outcome of a genuine, in-universe change, perhaps they felt it would be appropriate to show that different ship models, even within the same categorical range, can still be physically distinct from one another without being largely identical in shape. --Exalted Obliteration 20:13, 28 September 2012 (EDT)

Forerunner

I found this video today. Its the full mission "Forerunner" played by Frank O' Conner. You will have to listen to the presentation or promptly skip part of it in order to get to the part where he plays the level. Its quite intriguing and also there's a new Forerunner/Promethean turret like unit/structure that fires a beam but it has to charge up between shots. Enjoy & feel free to share your opinions of the level.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 14:25, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

That turret looks strange, similar to the Oculus from Mass Effect. I'm looking forward to learning more about it. I'm not looking at the rest of the level, trying to maintain a spoiler-free policy when it comes to campaign. --TentacleTornado 16:20, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

Absence of flood

The flood will not make an appearance in Halo 4's campaign. Would you prefer to encounter the flood in Halo 4 or it's absence is something good? Generally, would you like to see the flood returning at some point in the new trilogy? Personally, I like that Halo 4 will be flood-free, not because I disliked the flood, but because of the Prometheans. One of the main reasons I love this franchise is the Covenant and the new faction is much similar to the Covenant in many things. --ShadowDancer ^|contribs| 15:22, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

I was done with the Flood after Cortana. So their absence is fine by me.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 15:45, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

I'm really glad Halo 4 is Flood free, they've always scared the hell out of me (And the Flood models in the gametype are bad.. D: ). Plus, like you said, having them appear alongside the Prometheans wouldn't make any sense. I'm pretty sure we'll be seeing them later on, if not 5, then 6. If the Reclaimer trilogy is going to have as good an ending as Halo 3 then we will have to tie up all loose ends, meaning the Flood as well. I'm hoping 343 won't just forget about one of the major factions in the franchise. --TentacleTornado 16:04, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

I'm happy there's no Flood and a bad poetic Gravemind. I had enough of them at the end of Halo 3. However, I've always wanted Infection to be Flood infecting other players, as it makes sense that way. Can't wait to play Infection!--Spartacus, Halopedia Administrator ^Talk 16:55, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

Didn't expect so much hate against the flood xD. Library and Cortana have scarred all of us, apparently.--ShadowDancer ^|contribs| 04:08, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

Actually, at one point of my Halo career, I enjoyed fighting the Flood, and kept playing 343 Guilty Spark, Two Betrayals, Keyes, The Maw, The Oracle, The Sacred Icon, Quarantine Zone, and High Charity (I won't include Halo 3 Flood levels since they were fun in general, and yes, even Cortana was fun for me). But right now, I hate the Flood just like anyone else, so I'm glad they are out of the campaign. Once again, someone making a mention of the Flood would be great, just for the sake of continuity. —S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 04:51, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

Honestly I enjoyed fighting them in Halo: CE more than the other games. They just got too complicated and tacky in the other games.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 11:37, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

Quite surprised at the amount of hate for Library and Cortana. :O
Both have that nice change of pace. Halo 2 remains to be the best game for Flood-environment levels. The atmosphere, the growling/screaming(?), even the deadly rocket-wielding Flood combat form. — subtank 23:01, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

Also, the universal "oh crap" moment when you first see the Flood combat forms driving vehicles. I missed that. Bungie could have done that in Halo 3, but I guess the Warthog Run in the end would be too hard. I don't think the Knights can board our vehicles in Halo 4, but I remember there was a scene in the documentaries in which a Knight swiftly slashed the driver of a Ghost off his vehicle. —S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 05:41, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

The levels are okay, up until you decide to beat the games on Legendary. Cortana is a high level nightmare on Legendary. If the Halo campaigns were a galaxy, then Cortana would be a black hole. Library is better, although the parts where you had to hold your ground until the oracle comes back and the low lighting contribute very negatively to the whole experience.--ShadowDancer ^|contribs| 08:29, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

for me the Halo 2 levels were a nightmare. They all kind of blend together too. just a bunch of flood with Arby, then brutes with M.C. Quarantine Zone was the worst. Scary as HELL to me. But I'm just a big scardy cat, so maybe you guys liked them? Weeping Angel 09:54, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

God, Library was awful.. In a scary way. The way the Flood would come up behind you, jump from any available space really freaked me out (I've still not done it on above normal.. xD ). Cortana was Ok, somehow less of a nightmare than Library. Although Quarantine Zone was awful as well. --TentacleTornado 12:31, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

The Library was the worst Halo levels I have played. There was basically no variation, both in level design and enemy spawning and attacking. Bland level, bland and predictable enemies to fight, huge amounts of them spawning so cheaply...If they had only added a vehicle to the level, or just given you more fun power weapons to use.92.84.79.171 12:47, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

To be honest, Cortana on Legendary was relatively easy for me, until the escaping part that is. It's easy as long as ya take yer time and snipe yer enemies. Out of all the infamous Flood levels, Cortana was the easiest. Library was too linear, you can barely see the combat forms running at you, and if one of them wields a rocket launcher, kiss that achievement good-bye. In Halo 2, Sacred Icon and Quarantine Zone were too dark. The first time I played them, the biggest problem was not running away from the Flood, but navigating. I hope 343i won't mess up designing levels, keep them hard to fight, but easy to navigate.—S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 13:29, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Lack of Sangheili in Multiplayer

The Elites are not playable in multi-player. I know that this affects a small minority within Halo, but for me this is a terrible loss. I have always been a Sangheili since Halo 2, and have carried this on all the way to Reach, without fail. The loss of customization in Reach was bad, but at least I could play as one in Forge and custom games, I was ok with that. But not being able to play as one at all in 4 is really bad, and has tainted my view of 4s multi-player completely.

I must bring up the reasoning for the change; 343 stated (I can't remember when or where) that elites will not be playable to add to the "multi-player canon" 343 so adamantly wants. This is, in my eyes, a load of crap. 343 has added a helmet used only to fulfil its running unicorn gag, grifball (Hmm.. canon grifball?) and playing as a monitor in forge (unless Infinity somehow managed to pick up quite a few monitors to help build environments.. Which I highly doubt), but no elites?

</rant> Anyway, what are your thoughts on the change? Has this affected anyone else? --TentacleTornado 07:54, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

I don't have any problems with the change. It pretty much takes us back to Halo: CE days when we played only as Spartans, just like how they are making the campaign mysterious like it was in Halo: CE. So I'm fine with that classic play style. Also I was never fond of playing as an Elite especially when I discovered I had to do it in Halo 2's campaign. I just preferred being a Spartan. Even my friend said that he played better as John-117 than Arbiter (despite there not being any real differences in gameplay).--Killamint [Comm|Files] 11:37, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

Awww.. But playing as the arbiter was great! Strangely they were my favourite parts in Halo 2, apart from the flood parts D: . --TentacleTornado 11:41, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

I've never liked playing as or against Sangheili, as they had less armor customizations and are hard to snipe in Multiplayer.--Spartacus, Halopedia Administrator ^Talk 17:07, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

Enjoyed it for role-playing ("Wort wort wort?!"). Will miss it. — subtank 23:01, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

I will miss the Elites... Fighting only Spartans in multiplayer is dull. —S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 13:29, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

I gotta agree with you there. Invasion is my all time favorite game type, partly because of how the objectives are done, but mostly because of the elites. If only Bungie had made the repeater a better counterpart to the AR. I hate the plasma repeater, but don't worry I won't rant about that right here.—This unsigned comment was made by Weeping Angel (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Bigger Elites

Noticed a while back that the Elites are larger than their usual size in Halo 2 and Halo 3. Way larger. Seems like the developers are using the same skeleton previously used in Reach, forgot to change it and went along with it since it's late in the process. Either that or I've been spending too much time looking things at a technical perspective. Bigger is menacing though, that's a given.— subtank 23:01, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

I like them bigger because it gives them the feel of a formidable opponent. Certainly an upgrade from their "hunckback" look in Halo 3.--Spartacus, Halopedia Administrator ^Talk 23:07, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

I definitely like them bigger. They should be intimidating like they are in the books. if they're just a little bit taller than the player then meh. they just aren't formidable like that. Weeping Angel 09:58, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

I can't tell if I liked being bigger or not.. It was certainly great for intimidating other players! :D

But from a campaign perspective, It made elites more intimidating, more alien somehow. That made Reach more challenging. But I won't enjoy fighting them anyway. Its a shame 343 didn't create a new skeleton, a half-way between Reach and 3 would have been nice, a conversion if you will. But I understand the reasoning behind the decision. --TentacleTornado 12:18, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Personally I wouldn't have liked them to resemble the Halo 3 Elites in any, shape or form. The Halo 3 models were incredibly ugly.92.84.79.171 12:43, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Racism! xD I preferred 3 Sangheili completely. Probably because of my overall bias, coupled with the fact that they were not menacing in any way. --TentacleTornado 12:46, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Elite in 3 were human, and that's why I liked them best (2 and CE were too lifeless). But since they were so human in 3, Bungie had to make them intimidating and alien again in Reach (and they did a pretty damn good job). I think 343i made them even more alien in 4, and I guess that's fitting. I'm really looking forward to the scene in 4 in which John gets really close to an Elite and throws him down an elevator shaft. I bet that scene will really give us that intimidation feel again. —S331 _{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 13:29, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

I think the Elites in H2+H3 were similar to humans because they were an option in the multiplayer. If Elites were significantly bigger, they would be an easier target in multi and nobody would pick them. Bungie could give them more health/better shields but this would make balance unnecessarily complicated, so they decided to make them smaller. In H4, however, Elites will be exclusive in campaign and that gives the freedom to the devs to make them larger than humans. Personally, I'd like to see larger Elites in the future games, they are supposed to be a warrior more formidable than humans after all. Aside from that, is it just me or 343i has a tendency of making the enemies look more menacing than before?--ShadowDancer ^|contribs| 06:30, 4 October 2012 (EDT)

They do, The grunts used to be great! But don't get me started on jackalzillas. D:

The Elites were larger, had different shield/health, and were playable in Halo: Reach. Your points do not excuse 343's decision (linking to the above section), unfortunately. Personally, I would prefer small elites, we will (as long as kilo-five goes well..) be seeing more allied elites in campaign in later games, so I would prefer elites to look more personal, less intimidating. Larger elites would make the arbiter/any other allied elites more intimidating than likeable. --TentacleTornado 17:58, 4 October 2012 (EDT)

I kinda expected my assumption to be wrong, since I have 0 knowledge on HR aside from the campaign events. I have faith that 343i will be able to introduce new Elite characters who will be interesting while keeping the whole "menacing Elites" thing. Will be interesting to see how much Arbiter will differ from the old one if he reappears in the new trilogy. --ShadowDancer ^|contribs| 04:27, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

The Mantis

In case you haven't seen the new trailer, here's a link: [2]

When I first saw this, I thought the Mantis was overpowered. Upon rewatching it, I've decided that 343I was only showing the mech in a golden light.

Sure, it shows the Mantis demolishing vehicles, but I would like to point out a few things about the enemy vehicles: The Ghost was far too close to a heavy vehicle(It should be only used against other ghosts and infantry, anyways.), the first and the third Banshees were taking a vehicle head on (Which you shouldn't do for anything, really), the second banshee was refusing to do tricks and was following a redictable path, and the Scorpion battle was only in the lat few moments (Who knows what was happening before that).

Further, it doesn't show what would happen when you would fire a heavy weapon (Such as the rocket launcher or Splaser) at it. It does show that it is quite susceptible to Plasma Pistols and boarding, however. Even further is the fact that the video doesn't show what the overheating rate is for the chaingun or the reloading time for the rockets. The high profile can also be quite a disadvantage.

Right now, the Mantis is a wild card for me. It can be overpowered (It has a chaingun and fires rockets), underpowered (Don't know much about its stats), or be balanced. Missing Mandible 13:01, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Okay, found a gameplay vid from the European Expo: [3]

It has energy shielding and is capable of taking a Splaser shot when they are up. Looks like it has to reload its chaingun, and is fairly slow. The energy shielding looks like they take a long tme to fully recharge, but are quite easily taken down. It might very well be a balanced vehicle. Missing Mandible 13:36, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

To me it seems to be the land version of the Hornet. Due to the chaingun and rockets, but mainly due to how overpowered it looks, however this has been proven otherwise. I can't tell whether I like it or not, too similar to many other game franchises for my liking. I would have preferred a more original vehicle. But I'm sure the Mantis will add an interesting new variable to multiplayer. For me, like you say, it will be the wild card for 4s multiplayer. --TentacleTornado 17:37, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

Hot diggity damn. Mechs in Halo.
Never though I'd see the day. --KillerCRS 18:49, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

• Cough* Halo Wars *Cough* *Cough* Missing Mandible 23:15, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

I think he meant in the main FPS Halo games.--Spartacus, Halopedia Administrator ^Talk 23:45, 1 October 2012 (EDT)

This looks like a beast of a vehicle. I think that at close range it will dominate other vehicles, but in a ranged fight against the scorpon of gauess hog, it might lose. Thats just my opinion however. However, as stated ubove, it might be a fairly balenced vehicle. Siphon 117 09:10, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

Got a couple of weird looks from my cube-mates after I laughed out loud at 1:19 on the demo video... Mantis teabag FTW!! DJenser 13:27, 4 October 2012 (EDT)

I saw someone on the youtube trailer comments section mention that he hated it because it was a "cliche", and that cliches shouldn't be in Halo. My response was that Halo is practically built on cliches - the Chief is the most well known example of the Space Marine trope in current popular culture, but nobody complains about that! A cliche doesn't have to be bad, and only becomes so through over-use. Regarding the Mantis itself, I really like the look of it! I liked the original Cyclops, which was accused of looking too "Japanese" at the time, but this looks far less stylised and more practical. And even complaints about legged locomotion are drying up, with machines like BigDog being developed. And lastly, it's science-fiction: a bit of a fantastical element is usually encouraged! -- Qura 'Morhek ^{The Autocrat of Morheka} 18:03, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

Agreed. Its the 26th century, why not have mechs? Anything is possible during this time period; you can't limit your imagination to just one thing. The Mantis looks like it'll be fun to use, especially in that corridor level using the stomp feature to push aside your enemies. It also appears to be a balanced vehicle in war games, so honestly I have no problems with it being in Halo 4.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 19:46, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

I guess. But by the 26th century I was expecting laser guns. ;D

But it does make sense that the UNSC would employ a mech like the mantis. If you can create powerful power armour that layers thinly over the body, a mech would be almost child's play. --TentacleTornado 19:57, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

Yeah I was really hoping for a UNSC energy weapon aside from the Splaser, maybe even an improvement on it. I guess the UNSC is like, "why make lasers when we have spartans".--Killamint [Comm|Files] 20:16, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

Haha, "Oh? You want a laser gun? They're so uncivilised. Here, let me show you a bomb that has 1.2 petatons of power, and a cannon that releases rounds at a fraction of the speed of light". xD

Back on topic though, when I first heard "mantis", I was thinking "Oh yes! A drivable locust!". Did anyone else imagine it as a covenant walker? --TentacleTornado 08:37, 6 October 2012 (EDT)