![]() |
![]() |
|||
![]() |
||||
![]() |
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| Re: Interesting Frankie Quote | |
| Posted By: Narcogen <narcogen@rampancy.net> | Date: 6/13/11 1:27 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: Interesting Frankie Quote (Lurono) : I think I can sum up my thoughts without commenting on each individual : point... : I was reading your argument as condemnation of the game based solely on the
That, I think, is very likely. Marty's music was able to provide a great deal of the drama in those trailers, even when very little "action" was going on. The faster pace here may be a recognition of the fact that this element is no longer present. or the new team running the show, or if it's simply
Could be, although I'm actually trying to avoid making predictions about the game based on what I've seen in the trailer. I generally prefer Halo's more deliberate pace compared to other FPS games. A faster pace is not really something I'm looking for. : On the subject of not having an answer to why the Chief has new armor
Yes, I think they could have either done this scene without showing any signficant armor alterations, or they could have done another scene, with whatever alterations they liked, if that scene were to happen in such a manner that indicates there has been an opportunity for such changes to take place. My
Yes, that's all true as well, but for me at least, not sufficient. There's literally not an iota of new information in this trailer, compared to the old Halo 3 legendary ending, that doesn't take place in the questionable action sequence: the jetpacks, the new weapon. The ship is drifting towards the Next New Thing-- we already knew that. The Chief and Cortana are now awake and ready to encounter it. That was fairly predictable. A new gun! Wow, really? A new gun? In a Halo title? Color me shocked. A jet pack? Well, the last one had them, so why not? Jet packs are cool. In other words, this trailer doesn't tell anybody anything about Halo 4 that they couldn't have gotten from rewatching the Legendary ending and making a couple of really safe guesses, and in order to accomplish that, manages to tarnish the emotional impact of the ending of Halo 3 while introducing continuity errors associated with both cinematic and gameplay sequences. That's a lot of currency to spend in a couple of minutes, with very little to show for it, in my opinion. Yes, they could have done things
I think that's inescapable, although I suppose it's possible that, should there be an explanation, I might find it contrived and you might find it acceptable. I still think the smart money is on not addressing it at all. : As I said, I just feel as if people are overreacting. I didn't mean to imply
For me, what it needed to do was convince me that Halo 4 needs to exist-- that I need to play Halo 4 as much as they need to make it. I understand why they want and need to make it. That doesn't create in me a corresponding need to want or need to play it. For me, their story ended, and ended in what I thought was a very appropriate manner. If it is going to continue, and not end, then I need to be told why in a way that convinces me that it needs to happen. This trailer did not do that. It did not take a step towards that. I'd like to say that I remain neutral at this point, but if I had to make a purchase decision based on a trailer 18 months from release, I think with this game, I take a pass. This is the first Halo title I could say that about. : I think I pretty much said what I needed to and answered most of the
You should, it's very entertaining stuff. : -Again from the same post, you asked if I could elaborate on my point about
The problem with that is that given when and where ODST takes place, it's believable that a cruiser is there whether it is shown or not. It is not believable that the Chief's armor gains new functionalities never before seen when we're not looking.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |