Aye, all public games are run and gun spam fests. It's hard enough getting decent teamplay with a dedicated team of good players - no chance with a bunch of randoms.
I don't think I'm the ultimate master. Far from it. If you had read my posts beforehand you'd of seen that I'm not a fan of the Hardcore, BR and MLG games. I prefer the casual, laid back 4 v 4's and 6 v 6's. Whether or not you have seen them being used is void - you can't dismiss the entire whatever-million amount of players the games get as all being run and gun games. That's ignorant. Qonfused is right. It can be any game - ANY at all - and it's the ways they get used that really count to how the outcome will surface. I've seen games of TF2 played out as mindless as a game as CS or Halo. Guess what? The team didn't win. As I said before, if you can get the flag out from underneath a defended base guarded by me and my close mates without any use of tactics then I'll be amazed. There's nothing more to it - you come against a team of people coordinating movement and communications then you will need to stop and think about how the next move will be played. This is a must for all games.
I don't remember much about RTCW except mortar-spamming and fragfests all-around. To be fair, this was in public servers and it was still good fun. Although if I were to vote about the FPS with the best system for teamwork, I'd say it would have to go with BF2 (haven't played 2142 and honestly, don't have any interest to). Granted it has it's fair share of idiots, but I think the system it has in place is the best I've seen so far.
i guess thats strategy. movement in games really don't do shit. what do you mean stop and think about the next move?? wtf do we have war rooms now? i do agree that really cant have a good game with random people, it is much better with people you know.
I had a really good 2v2 once- We were in a small map, and managed to secure all the good weapons [even if we don't use them] so the other team just had the normal guns. We stuck together, one of us on the top section and one on the bottom, and watched each other's backs. It was a great, tactical game. The other team attempted to just spam and likely weren't even talking to each other... it was a slaughter, I tell you.
That's ET. The motar was another genius idea that probably sounded good on paper but turned out to be poo. Good fun tho I never really got into BF and found the scale of the maps and vehicles encouraged quite a hectic battle.
Well what else is there in CS. You spawn, you choose a weapon and you run around on the map killing stuff. If you have a team you organize the way that this happens. In halo it is so much different. You spawn, you choose which power weapons to push for, what parts of the map you want to keep control of. You also choose where to position yourselves so you can use team fire to actually kill an enemy or else they will take cover and their shields will recharge and they will kill you. Or they will let their team know where you are and they will kill you. Halo is so much more about team work and tactics than it is shooting. If you watch the MLG players they have everything down so well. You will often notice the guy who gets the kill only shot once. That's because another guy was shooting him and he took cover and the guy who got the kill happened to be in a spot where he could shoot the guy taking cover. Halo is only run and gun when your playing with n00bs online. That's equivalent to saying all you do in CS is run around and running into groups of enemies and spray/pray. You might get a kill every once in a while...but your an idiot for playing that way. Halo also has more than just shooting. The grenades offer a lot to halo. They take a lot of practice to get good with, and can make a huge difference. In halo if someone sneaks up behind you then you have a huge disadvantage. Chances are they are close, which means their assault rifle will kill you first because your battle rifle is a mid range weapon so shooting them outright is worthless. You could throw a grenade at the wall to take their shields off and headshot them with your BR. You could deploy a shield or power drainer if you had one of those, you could stick him with a grenade or you could also use your map knowledge to out run him and make difficult jumps to get distance on him so your team mates can kill him. Or if you were smart you would pull out your second gun which hopefully is something close range and kill him. In halo you have so many more options than just shoot back and hope to win. Not to mention once you make a game variant that's non slayer it adds a whole lot more. Take for instance land grab. Yeah sure you could stand at the point and wait to cap it, but chances are you will either get grenade spammed/sniped or they will simply charge in and kill you. A smart player would grab the bubble shield and shotgun and would then be able to mow down hordes of enemies that try to stop you. However a smart player on the other team would either grab a shotgun as well or run in and stick you, or at least try to. Point being Halo is hardly a run and gun game for good players. It is so much more about team work and your "plan" for the map and game type. Do you want to lock down a part of the map and hold power weapons or do you want to keep moving? Do you want to stick together as a team or spread out and cover each other? Are you all going to focus fire or do your own thing? Are you going to rush in there and try to ninja take the flag/plant the bomb or are you going to go in slowly and kill them all off and then plant/take the flag? Halo is such a situational game, you can't compare it to CS or many games out there. What you do really depends on what the enemy is doing. If they get in a warthog your gonna get decimated. However smart players will grab a power drain/plasma pistol/rocket pods or laser and try to take them out with it. Smart warthog drivers/gunners will know this and either take them before hand or make sure they aren't up or even just kill some idiot that tries to grab them. If the enemy plants the bomb in your base are you going to try to rush over and stand on it to disarm it? Chances are they will blow you up with grenades and rockets if they are smart. You should either kill them first or grab a bubble shield and shotgun and disarm it. If the enemy is sniping you are you gonna be an idiot and keep running or are you gonna dodge his shots then pin him down with long range accurate BR fire and tell your team mates so they can grenade/kill him? I could go on all day like this, Halo is far more than run and gun. I play a lot of social games with my twin brother, both of us are ranked very high in the game and when we go in we always face the people with the run and gun mentality. We usually end up with a +30 or so spread in our k/d ratio. The people with the run/gun mentality are usually negative. Yeah they get some kills but obviously that doesn't work in this game.
*sigh* some of you halo people dont understand the differences in maps. halo's maps are spanned out so far. so you can do all of that shit. cs on the other hand is close quarters combat, but depending on the map then it can be very tactical. you deciding on the weapon you want at the beginning of the game may decide who will win the game.
i swear there needs to be a rule on halo related threads on this forum. they all end the same way and it doesnt do anything. so im not going to bother arguing with you ignorant fanboys who play a kiddie game.
You realise that any half decent CS clan has a different buy strat for each round of the game, that changes depending on whether they are winning/losing? CS is far more punishing. If your team isn't covering one angle with the right type of firepower, you could lose every subsequent round because of a cash shortfall. In Halo you control parts of the map, you say? In CS you control cash flow. Whichever team can perform consistently keeps access to kevlar, flashes, smokes and AWPs. And yet flashbangs and smokes give just as many if not more tactical options. In fact, tossing them at the right angles and nooks itself is an art. Again, CS is far more punishing. You don't cover an angle well, you die along with your team. Every single one of those points applies to every other team FPS, especially CS. CS rewards teams on a round by round basis, so if a team cannot bounce back from one bad round, they are f***ed. It doesn't start out symmetrically like other games - one team is certain to win the pistol round on a given map, and both teams have to take that into account. It's more punishing, it needs teamthink right from the buy screen, it requires more precise teamwork where you need to know the present and future locations of EVERY friend at any instant; on top of that it requires better reflexes and gunning skills. It's not only a more competitive team game, but a game in which individual skill can shine through. EDIT: Have you even played competitive CS? What your frag minded brethren may not understand is that while the sniper gets the most kills guarding chokepoints, the rest of the team has to be right there to back him up. That's why it's called a team game.
Hey, it's not our fault you can't construct an argument that doesn't fall apart halfway through the first paragraph.
So all of CS's maps are close quarters and halo doesnt't have anything that has close quarters combat? Have you played guardian? You obviously haven't played a majority of the maps in halo as almost every map has a lot of close quarter combat. Also, so in CS what weapon you choose in the beginning determins who wins? Not teamwork or individual skill or anything? And this doesn't apply to Halo how? I am pretty sure what you do in the beginning matters an awful lot in both games. Ignorant fanboys who play a kiddie game? Are you kidding, I listed so many reasons that the gameplay in halo is more than run and gun and I am the ignorant one? You are the one saying that Halo sucks because it's Halo and anyone who likes it is an ignorant fanboy. I am pretty sure that generalizations are far more ignorant than constructed arguments. You are the ignorant one here. I am not saying CS is a mindless run and gun game. I am saying that it's more gun oriented than Halo. CS is a very competitive game, however it is in a far different sense than Halo. I haven't played CS competitively and I don't want to compare the games because they really are very opposite. I was merely using it as something to compare to since people are familiar with CS. All I am saying is that Halo has a lot more depth than run and gun. Heck, on a lot of maps people even time the powerup/weapon respawns. Halo has so much more than run and gun it's ridiculous to say that it's a mindless shooter, same with CS. Any game that has a competition level is far more than a mindless run and gun shooter so it's really stupid to pass them off as just that. I wish a lot of the people here would come up with good reasons for hating halo and not jumping on the ignorant bandwagon. I don't know why anyone would hate a game for the sake of hating games, your only losing out on potential fun of not playing those games.
It's all good. I'm just saying that HL2.net needs to lose the fad of hating CS because of it's popularity. It's a solid tactical game, and most of it's appeal lies in competitive play.
CS gets a lot of slack on HL2.net? Shit, this thread is a perfect example of how a topic about Halo goes out of control. I'll admit I'm a part of the argument but I just can't stand, or understand, some people pointless arguments against it. Halo gets a hell of a lot more flak then CS because of popularity reasons. Easily. Not to mention that in this thread no one does poke fun at CS. Do you know what strategy means? It's right up there, alongside teamwork and tactics, as an essential for any combat situation. Hell, I'd use strategy as the general term to lump teamwork and tactics under. The rest of your post... urgh, it's kind of in the sentence as it is. Stopping to think about the next move is, y'know, stopping to think about how you are going to do this, that and the other. If you haven't heard of ANY of these things then I'm afriad I can't take you seriously when you blither on about what's run and gun and what's tactical. Also, threads declining when it comes to Halo? Yeah, no shit - you just put more wood on the fire by then declaring players are ignorant and playing a kiddie game. Good work. vikram: all your points are just a matter of an opinion that you don't seem to be being very opened minded about. One could say that having money in CS to buy kevlar is similar to being able to push across the map and getting access to the enemies vehicles so you have even more of an advantage. Flashbangs and smoke grenades to clear a room =/= sticking the guy in the corner with a shotgun with a plasma grenade, planting the bomb then using a power drainer to make sure that whoever tries to disarm the bomb loses their sheild and is then easy pickings to the bomb planters. Controlling angles... shit, why are you trying to make it seem that this doesn't happen in Halo? If you don't watch the left hand side of the map someone might slip through... this applies to any game. :S Either way, your missing the point. Forget CS for a minute - stop comparing two very different games. The point is that no matter which way you slice it, games in Halo have a lot of depth to them to fully come out the other side as the winner. Hell, if you've got a 360 with Halo 3 I'll send you some Theater videos of me and my mates getting our arses kicked by better teams just to show you where we went wrong, what they did, where they went, where they controlled, how many of us focuses our attention on a gunner of such and such vehicle, who lost the Banshee to a missile pod that a sniper didn't take down in time... or vice versa to us scoring 3 flags on a different game.
The moment you typed you ****ed up. Those hostages are there for a reason, and so are the bomb sites. But I degress, for once I've got to agree with a Halo fan; on public servers of pretty much any game, your going to have spam fests. The teamplay is only really on the clan matches, and not all of us see those, so I must therefore step down from any argument including those. As for teamplay in a Counter Strike match, each player gets to choose his weapon (if he has enough money for it anyway) and ,if they are working as a team, his "role". Most people don't do this, but that's in clan matches; if you've never been in one, then don't bother fighting this argument, I'm just making a point of the fact that the game's clan matches are a totally different game than the regular pubs. As for Halo matches, as said earlier, I've never been in one, therefore I can't fight against one or give my opinion on one. Thank you for taking the time to read this post/argument.
Now it's you who sounds ignorant. Us 'fanboys' also play pc fps (I play clanned pc shooters much more than Halo 3), know full well what they offer and what the main differences are, but also appreciate what Halo 3 does well. It sounds like you have no experience of playing Halo 3 at a decent level and have absolutely no idea how tactical a game it can be. Make a point worth responding to and i'll give it a shot
When I said that I didn't mean to flame CS and say theres nothing more to CS than running around like an idiot shooting. I meant that CS is all about weapons. Halo has focus on more than just what guns you use. People need to stop comparing Halo to CS as they are very different games, that's all I really meant.
The only real thing I liked about Halo3 was Forge and the Theater ( I make machinimas and this made it a hell of a lot easier)
It's their opinion, and to them it may be the best game ever. What if Civ 4 doesn't appeal to them? Then it's shit to them.
Pfft. That graph is CLEARLY one half of a parabola. This thread will now scale the heights of awesomeness.
Blending that disc looked a lot like some of the neat particle effects you get in next gen games. Sorry, do I need to mud-sling to post here? Halo sucks. In moderation.
I sometimes wonder if it's impossible for anti-Halo fanboys to post something constructive, rather than randomly slander a game that they've played for a total of fifteen minutes.
I don't like Counter-Strike - I really, really don't like it - but I can admit that in clan and tournament play it turns into a very strategic game.
What are you trying to prove? That someone that plays a game for 15 minutes and decides that for some reason they don't like it all of a sudden means that anyone who does like it is ignorant and doesn't know what they really like? Honestly, you haven't come up with a single intellectual argument against halo yet. In fact you haven't come up with any sort of argument other than "It sucks, and if you like it your stupid". We understand you don't like it, but a lot of us do. It isn't popular just because it's popular. It's popular because it's one of the best designed games out there. It caters to casual gamers who enjoy running around running and gunning as theres a lot of fun stuff for them to do(mostly big team battle) and the competetive players. It's a very well balanced game in both respects and very few games offer a lot to both casual and hardcore players. It's a very easy game to pick up yet very hard to master. Also there is a huge community for it, and it's also incredibly easy to play with friends which attracts a lot of people as well. Really, Halo may not "master" any one aspect, but it appeals to most everyone and does a lot of things very well which is why it's a very popular game.
i never said i didnt like it. an opinion is still an argument no matter how it is said. whoopdedoo if you can spread more info about an over-hyped game.
ORLY? Halo 3, like any other game, is flawed. But it's design is especially flawed. It's as if Bungie never learns from past mistakes - the library style levels have haunted us throughout the series. The flood, despite being a universally hated foe, is present to almost the same extent in Halo 3 as in Halo 1. The dialogue ranges between good and atrocious, while many other FPSes released in 2007 got it right (Bioshock, COD4, Episode 2). The graphics are good, but not groundbreaking. To laud Halo's design is to spit in the face of developers who do learn from mistakes, take feedback and experiment. The Halo series stays alive because of a challenging, replayable SP campaign and a good MP.
What? How are those at all design flaws? The characters and dialogue sound more like story flaws that you don't like and the graphics are actually rather good. Your comparing the Halo SP to Bioshock and episode 2? Those are story driven games, of course that is what makes them great. I am talking about gameplay design, as that is what really makes a game replayable. I challenge you to point out these gameplay flaws that make the game especially flawed. I really don't see any. Mind you I could care less about the SP in Halo, it's cool to play through but I didn't find it very fun. It's multiplayer that has me hooked.
halo 1 - when you die you can spawn and have a good chance of killing someone with a pistol halo 3 - when you die you HAVE to run and find a over powered weapon to deffend your self.