Frequently Asked Forum Questions | ||||
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
Re: Wait, what? | |
Posted By: RC Master | Date: 10/10/11 11:11 a.m. |
In Response To: Wait, what? (uberfoop) : I know 85% was being considered as a common gametype more seriously than ZB, : but I was under the impression that the main Reach playlists were mostly : going to keep using standard settings. Yes, this is how I understand it too. Go back to Fyrewulff's post: I think people missed the point on why [bleed through] was removed from Reach. Bleed through is an element of pre-reach Halo, correct? As in 'classic'. Yet the TU gametype that is closest to current Reach (85%) also features bleed through. The same gametype they say they're considering for more larger-scale adoption than ZB. If Bleed through is NOT part of that 'larger scale adoption' plan, then including it in the 85% gametype messes up both their test data, feedback and impressions of what future-reach will play like. So why is bleedthrough in the 85% gametype? The most obvious answer is that it's because 343i thinks that Reach should have bleed-through, that it plays better with it. Even if it's only a couple of playlists or something type deal, rather than wholesale adoption, they seem to consider 85%, bleed-through Reach a viable gametype. Which, as Fyrewulff said, is just like 'wait, have you forgotten the entire reason it was taken out?'
|
|
Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |