Halo Killer? I think not!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zaff

Well-Known Member
Art Andrews said:
It is certainly an interesting perspective. I suppose I can separate the two, still acknowledging that Halo is a great game/series whether the company who made it is great or not. I look at Assassin's Creed that way. Ubisoft annoys me to no end and their political correctness is absolutely absurd... but, despite those things, they produce a great game and I can love the game for what it is despite the fact that the company who produces it leaves something to be desired.
I'm not so good at separating one from the other. Just ask anyone I have ever spoken to about the Eragon movie (Books: awesome. Movie: Well the character names were accurate but that's where the similarities end). And I will likewise spare you my ranting on Assassin's Creed and simply say from what I've "played," it's not a game in any sense of the word. It is a several hours long Quick Time Event. The buttons, they do NOTHING unless contextually assigned to perform a specific action. That's not a game. But I digress.

Art Andrews said:
Is there some type of documentation on this? I have to believe if the DOA rate was even a fraction of that and 343 took the approach you claim that there would have been a very public Class Action Suit against them.
You could start with the "Halo 4 issues" thread on the Waypoint forums that hit over 300 pages in the first week for starters (before I was banned a year ago that thread had pushed to over 500 pages, many posts still complaining about the same issues that were on page 1). As for the Class Action, refer back to the paragraph on Halo fans.

Art Andrews said:
WHA?!?!? No. no. no. Bungie would never do that! You are thinking of 343... the big evil company. Bungie would NEVER push out an incomplete game and promise to make it whole if you would just wait and pay them more money for the add-ons. Just ask Zaff! ;)
*cough* Spartan Ops "Season 1 part 2." 47 (before I gave up on counting) different TItle Updates to add, replace, or attempt to "fix" issues and discrepancies since day one, many of which added 3 new issues for every one that was allegedly addressed. No file share, no theater mode, they had to be added later. No Beta or even a sizeable Alpha testing so the servers died repeatedly for the first few months causing matchmaking failures and game progress resets across the board. Now THAT is an unfinished product, and yet there are people, like you, who eat it right up and beg for more of the same. You want snark, back it with facts and it will have that much more bite. Yea, Bungie released a game, the first in a new FRANCHISE SERIES of games, that did not, in itself, tell a complete story. You know, just like every single Halo game if taken on their own, and pretty much every other chronologically sequential game franchise in existence. I didn't play CE for the story, it really didn't have one that made any kind of sense in the context of just that one game (right off the opening scene: "Lose who? A blind jump? Why did you have to make a blind jump? And who the heck are you anyway and why are you talking to a purple glowing nude midget?"). I played it because my friend had it and thought it would be more fun to play with someone else. I didn't pick up Destiny expecting that by the end of it I would have restored the Traveler to its full glory, destroyed the "darkness," and whupped every hostile alien species back to the far side of the universe. I mean seriously, Bungie has laid down a ten year commitment to this franchise. It would be one helluva boring decade if you were handed all that there is to do within the first week. That's like expecting to have the full story after reading the first chapter of the first book out of a volume of no less than 4. For the love of Grunts can't you people learn to have a little patience? But I forget, this is the generation of instant gratification. They want it all, they don't want to have to work for any of it, and they want the whole thing compressed down to a ten second sound bite so they don't even have to put any effort into comprehending it. And sadly a few of those from the older generations who should know better have regressed and adopted this same mentality. Can't let anything play out, can't just sit back, get comfortable, and see where it goes. Nope. "I bought this game and by thunder it had better give me the most fulfilling entertainment I have ever experienced before the 7 day return policy runs out or I am going to be PISSED."

Master Builder said:
Zaff
Wow, why so much hate on 343?

I never heard of a "75% "Dead on Arrival" rate at launch!" problem. Also 15GB of data on your hard drive? thats not right. I don't even have a hard drive, so I installed it on a flash drive with a 8GB partition just for the 360, I'll have to check but I know it is taking up about 4-5 GB of data and thats all. Map packs will only take up an additional 300 or so MB. You have to keep in mind that games nowadays are running about 30 or so gigs and thats for PC, you try jamming that onto 2 dvds, and then only install one which can not contain more than around 8 gigs. And I know that Halo 4 is not using that much data.
I don't mean to sound so incredulously snarky here, but seriously? "Why the hate?" Have we not been following the train here?

And yes, 15GB. WEll, actually, 15.1 to be exact, from the installation of disc 1 and 2 , plus the mountain of Title Updates, plus three map packs, the Champions bundle, Forge Islands, Spartan Ops part 2, and all totaled maybe a collective dozen "personal files" including forged maps, custom game types, and a couple screenshots (no videos) . I tried playing with only disc 2 installed, but the UI was agonizingly slow and within ten minutes the game, and all too often the console with it, would crash. And this would happen on the old White console, the black Elite console, and even the Halo 4 Edition slim console. Once I installed disc 1, it was (relatively) stable. Still a broken game for the numerous reasons mentioned in previous posts, but it was as good as it was getting.

I don't see what PC harddrive usage has to do with any of this. We're not talking about PCs, we're talking about consoles. Just about every 360 game I get, I install from the disc. In Soulcalibur, Skyrim, Fable, and the WWE games that significantly reduces the loading time for inventory/customization menus For the Halo games that reduces time (and strain on your machine) for loading maps, matchmaking, missions, etc.. And with Destiny, as you all may remember, installation was a necessity due to the nature of the "persistent world" environment. Out of all of those games, with multiple save files and, in the case of Halo 3 and Reach, several maps, screenshots, videos, gametypes, and other such personal content, the HIGHEST amount of space used by any of them WITH the game installed, was around 8GB. Halo 4 took 15.1, nearly double the highest pulling competitor. The majority of those games sat somewhere between 5 and 7 GB. So Halo takes up double, in some cases even triple the hard drive real estate, and the game isn't even worth playing any more because there is absolutely nothing left to it except grinding for commendations that unlock quite frankly some of the most hideous and unappealing armor that has ever graced the video game industry. I mean just look at the Pioneer. What the blue blazes IS that monstrosity on your head? Now, form a costuming standpoint, yea, Halo 4's approach to the armor in terms of hard to soft ratio is far more practical. A person can actually wear a full set of armor and be able to do more than shuffle and waddle, and until it was reintroduced via the Champions bundle, no more gonad crushing "space diaper." Granted some have had to resort to the "space apron" approach to get the two-toned undersuit effect, but even that still allows for a more practical range of motion. But as far as aesthetic appeal, Halo 4's armor was decidedly lacking, and most certainly not worth wasting several months grinding the exact same actions ad nauseum just to unlock a second skin for armor I wouldn't be caught dead in to begin with.
 

WandererTJ

Well-Known Member
What makes a good modern FPS/3PS/OTSPS?
(The Personal Opinion of WandererTJ)​

• Story / Plot → Including but not limited to the following:
→ Good Dialogue
→ Memorable Characters
→ Characters with depth and/or have development to their character as the story progresses
→ Cut-Scenes
→ Backstory, defined and coherent​
• Local Co-op (Minimum 2 Players)
• Local Versus (Minimum 2 Players)
• Online Co-op / Versus
• Fully Customizable Controls, not just preset configurations

When it comes to Multiplayer Matchmaking, you need...
• Player Customization (visual Appearance)
• Alternate Player Classes to switch between
• Different Perks and Abilities for each of the classes
• Carried/Starting Weapon Upgrades & Customization
• Custom Map Loadouts → Ability to apply modifiers to a map and have different sets of weapons on the field, pre-set options and customizable options
• Custom Match Settings → Score to Win, Player Handicaps, etc...
• Custom Match Modifiers and Enhancements → Instagib kills, Player Speed, Player Health, Infinite Jumps, Gravity, No HUD, etc...
• Special Game Types → Slayer (FFA & Team) / CTF / Domination (3 Hills) / KOTH / Infection, etc...
• BOTS, BOTS, & MOAR BOTS
• Custom AI Bot Profiles and Settings (Appearance, Difficulty Level, Intelligence, Tactics)
• ...did I mention Bots? Companion bots or enemy bots, both are awesome. I'm not referring to campaign either, I'm talking about ones that fill in slots in matchmaking
• Benefits for reaching certain streaks (OPTIONAL)
• Vehicles (Great, but optional... if I get vehicles but no story, the game sucks, end of story)
• Custom Map Design (OPTIONAL)

If you want a great FPS, go play the original Unreal Tournament or play Perfect Dark 64. They both had some of the best upgrades you could do in regards to matchmaking. Humorously, both titles had sequels that never captured the greatness of the originals.
Games these days can't even compare to them.

Now, who does or has done those things above the best?
• Story / Plot → Metal Gear Solid 4
• Local Co-op → Perfect Dark 64
• Local Versus → Perfect Dark 64
• Online Co-op / Versus → Unreal Tournament
• Fully Customizable Controls, not just preset configurations → Virtual-On
• Player Customization (Appearance) → Halo Reach, Reach had the most depth in regards to appearance modification
• Alternate Player Classes to switch between → Transformers WFC / FOC
• Different Perks and Abilities for each of the classes → Borderlands
• Carried Weapon Upgrades & Customization → Call of Duty: World at War (or MW2)
• Custom Map Loadouts → Perfect Dark 64 - Halo is a close 2nd
• Custom Match Settings → Perfect Dark 64
• Custom Match Modifiers and Enhancements → Unreal Tournament
• Special Game Types → Halo 3
• BOTS, BOTS, & MOAR BOTS → Tied between Perfect Dark 64 and Unreal Tournament
• Custom AI Bot Profiles and Settings → See above
• Bots in regards to filling in slots in matchmaking and how they do it → Gears of War 3
• Benefits for reaching certain streaks → Call of Duty: World at War (or MW2)
• Vehicles (Great, but optional) → Halo Combat Evolved
• Custom Map Design → Counterstrike (PC), Halo Reach (Console)



EDIT: I thought I left out a few things that I could have listed, so here they are:

• Gameplay →
If it is fun enough and unique enough, it can replace many of the aspects above and you'll still have a good game, but there are certain things it CANNOT replace and/or it still needs in addition to itself. Story and Customizable Controls.​
• Graphics
• Loading Times & Loading Screens → If I'm forced to stare at loading screens constantly, at least make them interactive, k?
• Easter Eggs, Outside References, Fan Service and Campy Goodness (OPTIONAL and it depends on the game)
• Cheats, Glitches, & Exploits →
Anyone who considers Pokemon Fire Red/Leaf Green to be better than Red/Blue purely because the Cinnabar Island glitch was removed is a total troll.
With Skyrim, I have had hours upon hours of fun working on making use of the Restoration Potion exploit as well as trying to min/max my character as much as possible without using it. It's fun both ways.​
• Different Sensitivity settings based on what you are doing at the time →
I'm honestly not sure if there are any games that do this, but I would rather have an extremely high sensitivity while running around and shooting from the hip, but the second I aim down the sights I want the sensitivity to be lowered. If I'm using a sniper rifle, I'd like it to be lowered even more. Being able to fine-tune when and where I get the sensitivity I would like would dynamically change FPS games for me for the better.​
• Explanations of the stupid gimmicks in a game and what you need to do to make progress → Destiny fails really really hard with this one. I've had to read up so much in order to get any progress.
 

Zaff

Well-Known Member
Looking over TJ's breakdown, there is certainly one point in which Destiny absolutely MUST concede defeat to Halo, or really just about every FPS in existence: the local game. Namely, that there is none. No local/custom competitive multiplayer, no split-screen co-op or competitive, no "local" support whatsoever.

But neither does WoW, or any other MMORPG for that matter. Why? Because in a "persistent world" game you need to be connected to an independent server in order to get the full experience (or really, any experience at all). Halo doesn't have this because Halo is not an MMO by any stretch, nor is it in any way a "persistent world" game. Am I happy with the lack in Destiny? No. Did I expect anything else? Not really. Am I disappointed that BOTH Bungie and Activision (the "top dogs" in both cooperative and competitive multiplayer shooter arenas) overlooked the appeal of this aspect of gaming and didn't bother to include a secondary (or rather tertiary) game mode that catered specifically to the "local" gamer crowd? Well quite frankly, yes. I didn't expect to be earning any experience, currency, or really anything at all from it, but I did expect there to be some form of "offline" play. In this, yes, Destiny certainly did fail, and shame on both Bungie and Activision for dropping the ball there.

So aside from the persistent world needs, why the lack of split-screen? Well honestly it quite likely does come down to money. Microsoft wants to move consoles. Bungie and Activision want to move discs (and who can blame them, they dropped half a BILLION dollars on this venture. Yea, that's right, look it up if you haven't heard it already). So they want to make back at least what they put into it (successful business 101: if you don't get back what you put in, quit now). Even with the "one game per player" approach, and even with Destiny being the largest and most successful franchise launch in the history of gaming, the last figure I heard was $350 million. Not quite yet a profit, technically, but still an impressive number.
 

Master Builder

Member
But neither does WoW, or any other MMORPG for that matter. Why? Because in a "persistent world" game you need to be connected to an independent server in order to get the full experience (or really, any experience at all). Halo doesn't have this because Halo is not an MMO by any stretch, nor is it in any way a "persistent world" game. Am I happy with the lack in Destiny? No. Did I expect anything else? Not really. Am I disappointed that BOTH Bungie and Activision (the "top dogs" in both cooperative and competitive multiplayer shooter arenas) overlooked the appeal of this aspect of gaming and didn't bother to include a secondary (or rather tertiary) game mode that catered specifically to the "local" gamer crowd? Well quite frankly, yes. I didn't expect to be earning any experience, currency, or really anything at all from it, but I did expect there to be some form of "offline" play. In this, yes, Destiny certainly did fail, and shame on both Bungie and Activision for dropping the ball there.
This is a next gen game running on next gen and current gen consoles, and a completely new engine build for very new consoles. You can not expect Bungie to just "add" a second player. Theres is not enough hardware power to run a not so completely tuned engine with not just one, but two cameras running around the world at the same time.

First release for next gen hardware will most likely not have a split screen compatibility. Now once they tune their engine to make it a lot more efficient, and not have to make it run on old consoles, then a split screen option is more possible.

It's not an issue of money, I'm sure.

I don't see what PC harddrive usage has to do with any of this. We're not talking about PCs, we're talking about consoles.
Please tell me one thing that is different. The new consoles are even running on the same architecture as the PC you are on right now. Yes a game like Skyrim is only about 7 GB, but hey look at each game and tell me what one looks twice as good on a tech scale? Textures take up some of the most data. And when you only have 512mb of ram on your console, how do you expect it to keep up with decompressing and loading them onto what little ram you have, and still have a playable experience (loading)? Thats why you install games onto your hard drive. Your harddrive is much faster than your DVD reader. Almost 100 times.

Your CPU can decompress faster than it take to load the files off the DVD, and your ram is lightning fast. So the disc drive becomes the slow link and must be eliminated.

I strongly suggest you learn some more about game design on a tech level.
 

Zaff

Well-Known Member
Master Builder said:
This is a next gen game running on next gen and current gen consoles, and a completely new engine build for very new consoles. You can not expect Bungie to just "add" a second player. Theres is not enough hardware power to run a not so completely tuned engine with not just one, but two cameras running around the world at the same time.

First release for next gen hardware will most likely not have a split screen compatibility. Now once they tune their engine to make it a lot more efficient, and not have to make it run on old consoles, then a split screen option is more possible.
Yea, the PS4 and the XB1 are rather new consoles, but neither Bungie nor Activision are greenhorns. And having a tertiary offline competitive multiplayer isn't asking them to do anything they have not already done many times before. I get why the "campaign" can't support split screen, but the Crucible is a whole different animal, and a rather familiar one at that for both developers.

Master Builder said:
It's not an issue of money, I'm sure.
No matter how great they are or how well they deliver to their fans, at the end it is always about the money, because if they don't make money, they can't make games. It's not a matter of cynicism or skepticism, it's the simple fundamentals of business. If you can't turn a profit, you can't justify your product. If you can't make a significant profit, you can't even think about putting out another product.



Master Builder said:
Please tell me one thing that is different. The new consoles are even running on the same architecture as the PC you are on right now.
I'm sorry, but if the xbox/playstation is running on Windows Vista, we're all boned. But as for what's different, I can do better than just one. Hard drive capacity, processor speed, RAM capabilities, the simple fact that any PC can be tweaked, modded, upgraded, and custom tailored on terms of both hard and soft ware. My 360 has 120 GB of storage. There are laptops wit hover a terabyte of storage space. The processor, "RAM," and "operating system" of the 360 will never change, never improve, never be tweaked or modded (and if you even try, your gamertag and the console itself are both permanently banned). The XB1 has better hardware and software, certainly, but in the same. You won't find the shelves of Staples, Radioshack, or even Gamestop lined with XB1 processor upgrades, RAM boosters, discs with a streamlined OS, the only thing you might find are larger hard drives for storage.

Oh, and let's not forget the more "subtle" differences. PCs can download games off Steam. PCs get features that consoles will NEVER see (using Skyrim as an example, the literally thousands of user-generated mods and the Creation Kit itself will NEVER bee seen on the console versions). PCs give you a much wider selection of brands, operating systems, styles, configurations, and so on and so forth, and new ones are coming out every few months (if not weeks). So yea, the differences are a lot more complex than just "this one has an Xbox logo on it and that one has Windows 8 stamped on the side."

Master Builder said:
Yes a game like Skyrim is only about 7 GB, but hey look at each game and tell me what one looks twice as good on a tech scale? Textures take up some of the most data. And when you only have 512mb of ram on your console, how do you expect it to keep up with decompressing and loading them onto what little ram you have, and still have a playable experience (loading)? Thats why you install games onto your hard drive. Your harddrive is much faster than your DVD reader. Almost 100 times.

Your CPU can decompress faster than it take to load the files off the DVD, and your ram is lightning fast. So the disc drive becomes the slow link and must be eliminated.

I strongly suggest you learn some more about game design on a tech level.
And this is relevant to Halo 4 taking 15 GB of space while every other game only takes a bout 6 despite Halo 4 not delivering better graphics or a more expansive offering of content...how? And putting all that aside and getting back the main point of this thread, what exactly does "PC vs Console" have to do with "Is Destiny the death toll of Halo?"


Oh, and foxleader, chillax bro. Yea, I'm fired up and passionate about what I'm saying, but that's all it is. Fire and passion, not hatred, anger, or aggression. I'm not here to "tear anyone a new one," I'm just here to state my piece and discuss/debate the points and counterpoints presented by everyone who joins in this discussion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Master Builder

Member
I'm sorry, but if the xbox/playstation is running on Windows Vista, we're all boned. But as for what's different, I can do better than just one. Hard drive capacity, processor speed, RAM capabilities, the simple fact that any PC can be tweaked, modded, upgraded, and custom tailored on terms of both hard and soft ware. My 360 has 120 GB of storage. There are laptops wit hover a terabyte of storage space. The processor, "RAM," and "operating system" of the 360 will never change, never improve, never be tweaked or modded (and if you even try, your gamertag and the console itself are both permanently banned). The XB1 has better hardware and software, certainly, but in the same. You won't find the shelves of Staples, Radioshack, or even Gamestop lined with XB1 processor upgrades, RAM boosters, discs with a streamlined OS, the only thing you might find are larger hard drives for storage.

Oh, and let's not forget the more "subtle" differences. PCs can download games off Steam. PCs get features that consoles will NEVER see (using Skyrim as an example, the literally thousands of user-generated mods and the Creation Kit itself will NEVER bee seen on the console versions). PCs give you a much wider selection of brands, operating systems, styles, configurations, and so on and so forth, and new ones are coming out every few months (if not weeks). So yea, the differences are a lot more complex than just "this one has an Xbox logo on it and that one has Windows 8 stamped on the side."
Thats not what I meant with that question. I gave a poor example of how much data games are with a PC game and then you say we are talking about consoles and saying they are different from PC's. and I ask how.

A game is a game no matter what it's made for. The exact same methods, programs, tools, engines, and such are used regardless if it's a PC or console game. And what I meant by they're all running the same architecture, is that is a lot easier to code for all system with no difference at their core. Unlike E.G. the Ps3 which was very hard to code for, because they had a very powerful but complicated custom CPU. Which still does not change a thing if you are only interfacing with an engine already made for all systems.

The xbone and Ps4 are very matched in their hardware specs.

What I meant was consoles are basically just tuned, specially design for games, computers that run their own OS and can be mass produced.

Your OS doesn't mean squat about your hardware. If you don't like vista, install an OS you do like (I recomend 7).

Sorry this is all typed up poorly. I bring up the question again. Why can't you compare the size of a PC game to that of a console? Look at Watch dogs: 20gb, Titanfall xbone 18gb (48gb PC). So 15gb is no big deal, sure is could be compressed smaller, but that would also run slower. It's not like they throw in a bunch of junk assets to make it bigger.

But seriously, I don't want to sound rude, but you should learn some more about computers. I recommend you start at binary.
This is very off topic and unprofessional. So I will stop posting.
 

Zaff

Well-Known Member
Master Builder said:
A game is a game no matter what it's made for.
Yes, but what that game is capable of depends entirely on what it's made for. If Halo came out on the Nintendo DS, sure it would still look good, but it would not be anywhere near the fidelity that it is on the Xbox, whether it's the original, 360, or One. Hardware matters. But that's irrelevant to the point at hand.

Master Builder said:
What I meant was consoles are basically just tuned, specially design for games, computers that run their own OS and can be mass produced.
And the standardization that comes with being mass produced is precisely why a console is not comparable to a PC. This is not apples to oranges, this is apples to ground beef.

Master Builder said:
Your OS doesn't mean squat about your hardware. If you don't like vista, install an OS you do like (I recomend 7).
You buying? Didn't think so.

Master Builder said:
Sorry this is all typed up poorly. I bring up the question again. Why can't you compare the size of a PC game to that of a console? Look at Watch dogs: 20gb, Titanfall xbone 18gb (48gb PC). So 15gb is no big deal, sure is could be compressed smaller, but that would also run slower. It's not like they throw in a bunch of junk assets to make it bigger.
15 GB is more than 10% of my console's storage capacity, which means it takes up the same amount of space that could be occupied by 2-3 games rather than just one. So yea, that's kind of a big deal when a game takes up that much space but delivers so little. Secondly, computers in general have much larger storage capacities than consoles AND that storage can be easily expanded with as many external hard drives as your unit has USB ports, adding Terabytes of space, something that no console yet can boast and yet PCs have been doing it for years now. So why do I say the two can't be compared? If a game takes up 15 GB of a PC's 500+ GB capacity, it's a drop in the bucket. If that same game takes up 15 GB of a console's 20, 60, or 120 GB capacity, that's a significant chunk of your limited space taken up by one game.

And yes, this is very off topic. Which makes me wonder why you brought it up in the first place.
 

RYNO 666

Well-Known Member
Yea, the PS4 and the XB1 are rather new consoles, but neither Bungie nor Activision are greenhorns. And having a tertiary offline competitive multiplayer isn't asking them to do anything they have not already done many times before. I get why the "campaign" can't support split screen, but the Crucible is a whole different animal, and a rather familiar one at that for both developers.


No matter how great they are or how well they deliver to their fans, at the end it is always about the money, because if they don't make money, they can't make games. It's not a matter of cynicism or skepticism, it's the simple fundamentals of business. If you can't turn a profit, you can't justify your product. If you can't make a significant profit, you can't even think about putting out another product.
Looking over TJ's breakdown, there is certainly one point in which Destiny absolutely MUST concede defeat to Halo, or really just about every FPS in existence: the local game. Namely, that there is none. No local/custom competitive multiplayer, no split-screen co-op or competitive, no "local" support whatsoever.


I can relate. https://www.bungie.net/en/Forum/Post/66729577/0/0

uploadfromtaptalk1411220961907.jpg

This is my world until they make a TV that can broadcast two separate inputs on one screen.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk




Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk
 

Zaff

Well-Known Member
RYNO_666 said:
I can relate.

This is my world until they make a TV that can broadcast two separate inputs on one screen.
Indeed. In that regard, Bungie and Activision really blew a golden opportunity. If Destiny had split screen or custom/local Crucible, it hands down would have buried Halo. But it doesn't, so it didn't. Halo will still be the go-to game for gathering a small group of friends around the same console for some FPS fun without having to log onto the net to get it.
 

WandererTJ

Well-Known Member
I guess expecting split screen on a new-gen platform might be a bit much to ask for; looking back to when I got my N64 right after it came out, what game did I get? Mario 64. Did it have co-op? Nope. Is Nintendo known for co-op games? Yep.
So why am I complaining?
Because now days, it seems like a money-grabbing tactic to include online multiplayer but not local. Versus is one thing, but it is more upsetting to be able to play a story mode and only be able to play it with other people who are exclusively online.
Want to play with your girlfriend? Tough luck buddy, it's time to buy a 2nd copy of the game, and a 2nd console. I'm sure there might be a way to stream 2 inputs through a HTPC to your TV. HTPCs are always a great project to try with your old busted-up laptops with screens that don't even work anymore.
Interjection aside, the game already has to load the environment around you once, it doesn't need to do it a 2nd time, you just have to bring in a 2nd camera and then limit the distance you can be separated from your local co-op partner, and if they stray too far away, teleport them to your location. Halo was great about this when you reached a checkpoint, why they couldn't have done that in Destiny is beyond me.

Zaff and anyone else who have been talking about hard drive space...

I remember wondering why Halo 3 took up so much of my HDD space one day and then I finally decided to check why.
Do you save games? Videos? Screenshots? Game types? Maps?
I do.
Well, for those of you who have Halo 4 taking up so much space, THAT is probably why.
...and if it isn't, you don't need to keep your disc constantly installed on your HDD. Keep all your screenshots and videos, but delete your Install of the game. You can add it back later, it only takes 10 minutes... do some pushups or cook a TV dinner.
As far the Spartan Ops taking up space, the reason is because of all the cutscenes that the have. All of them are lengthy and are 720p. You can reduce the polygons of models in the game and map sizes and whatever, but a video is a video, you can try to compress it as much as possible, but in the end, it still takes up a lot of space.

I guess with that I can understand the lack of cutscenes in some games (Destiny), but that kind of content really steps up a story, and is necessary in my opinion.

I'm honestly surprised when I see a 7GB install from a disc. I've tried to make some legit DVDs in the past with menus and everything, rather than just making a media disc that contains a bunch of videos, and formatting the disc just for the DVD menu seemed to cut the storage capacity in half. So instead of 10 episodes on one disc, I only get to have 3? What.....?
Moving on from this interjecting ramble....

In terms of modding, hacking, or whatever... really, there is only 1 thing that you should be able to successfully modify without being console-banned, and that is upgrading your HDD.
I'm not sure how successfully you can do it on the Xbox360-Slim, but on the standard Xbox360, there was simply a 2.5-inch HDD resting within the HDD enclosure, waiting to be upgraded. I'm sure you probably had to properly format it beforehand, and you had to make sure you got one with compatible r/w speeds (I think you could go faster, but you couldn't go slower), but on the original 360, it was an easy upgrade most people were unaware of.
I'm sure that the Xbox360-Slim is also just using a 2.5-inch HDD in an enclosure, but I haven't seen a guide or video on how to upgrade them... then again, I haven't bothered to look.

I currently have a 250 GB HDD in my 360-Slim and haven't needed to upgrade it, but I do only have 30 GB of space left. My issue is not Halo 4, or any of the games that I have on disc. If I have installed from a disc and I am not playing that game currently, I DELETE the install.
I always install the active games I'm playing, typically up to about 5 at a time, but no more than that. Installing a game makes it so your console doesn't have to run as hard, it saves some of the energy from the disc tray which only spins in order to check and verify for security/piracy purposes that you do have the correct disc in the tray, and it helps with load times when playing the game. In some games, reducing load time by 1 second can really add up (cough cough Skyrim).

Currently, the only reason I'm so low on space is all those dang Games with Gold games. But is that really an issue? No, not at all. I know that I can re-download ANYTHING that I have "purchased" by going into my Account's Download History. So I could easily free up probably 80 GB by deleting all of those Game-on-Demand titles that I've received from Games with Gold.
The next time I update my massive Backlog, I'll have to add all those into the list and remove them from my HDD until I need them.


If anyone feels like they have the right to complain and they have content that they have installed via license transfer from a friend, well... I'm pretty sure they forfeit any right to complain and trying to tip-toe around the fact that they have all that content from taking advantage of the system while trying to complain just means you probably need to shut up.
Sure, don't delete any of that stuff, but you can free up space by deleting things that you actually paid for since you can re-download those items.


Please, I hope they remake an HD version of Legend of Dragoon. I will gladly install all 4 discs and consume 30 GB of storage space.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Master Builder

Member
I guess with that I can understand the lack of cutscenes in some games (Destiny), but that kind of content really steps up a story, and is necessary in my opinion.
The only data cutscene will take up is in the animations and sound, which is very little. Real cut scenes are not a data hog at all (actual in game engine and not video).

I'm honestly surprised when I see a 7GB install from a disc. I've tried to make some legit DVDs in the past with menus and everything, rather than just making a media disc that contains a bunch of videos, and formatting the disc just for the DVD menu seemed to cut the storage capacity in half. So instead of 10 episodes on one disc, I only get to have 3? What.....?
Moving on from this interjecting ramble....
Thats because all the DVDs you buy with games or movies use dual-layer (DVD-DL) dvds which can hold up to 8.5-8.7 GB. You need a drive capable of burning a DVD-DL, and they burn much slower.

As far the Spartan Ops taking up space, the reason is because of all the cutscenes that the have. All of them are lengthy and are 720p. You can reduce the polygons of models in the game and map sizes and whatever, but a video is a video, you can try to compress it as much as possible, but in the end, it still takes up a lot of space.
I have all the spartan ops cutscenes downloaded in mp4 witch is going to be more compressed than what you get on the console, and their only 580mb or so. Yes all videos are compressed, but they have some really good compression algorithms these days, the only downside to compression is quality loss (if you keep compressing it to make it smaller).

Models/meshes hardly take up anything worth mentioning. It's the textures that get you. You can't lower the tri-count on models, what they use are called LODs (level of detail)(change level based on distance to object) which can be like 3 or 5 quality levels of the same model, some of the model will most likely use a different set of textures, well because they need to in order deal with the different model topology for each level. Nowadays the computing power needed for meshes is not that high at all compared to the other systems like shaders, physics engines, particles, lighting, etc.
 

Zaff

Well-Known Member
WandererT said:
Interjection aside, the game already has to load the environment around you once, it doesn't need to do it a 2nd time, you just have to bring in a 2nd camera and then limit the distance you can be separated from your local co-op partner, and if they stray too far away, teleport them to your location. Halo was great about this when you reached a checkpoint, why they couldn't have done that in Destiny is beyond me.
This actually is exactly why I'm glad Destiny does NOT offer split screen on the campaign. I hated the checkpoint teleporter in Halo when I needed to go back for ammo, a vehicle, etc. and either dragged the other player back with me, or what I wanted was just on the other side of the "wall" so if I tried to get to it, it would port me back to the other player. Destiny is meant to be as much of an open-world, free-roaming experience as possible. If you can't walk 100 yards from your fireteam without dragging them with you or being dragged back to them, that really puts a stake in the heart of open world and free roaming. Now would I like there to be a "quick jump" option if you've wandered too far and want to rejoin your fireteam quickly? That would be great, yes. But a forced limit on how far you can roam on your own? No thank you.

WandererT said:
Zaff and anyone else who have been talking about hard drive space...
Yes, we know screenshots and whatnot take up space. I took note of how much space these things were taking up on Halo 4, and the amount of space they account for on my console is negligible at best. I have more screenshots, more custom maps, more videos, more of every other type of "personal file" on Reach and the sum total of space Reach takes up is still less than half of what Halo 4 takes up.

And when I want to play a game, I want to play a game. I install the games because I don't want to have to wait a few extra seconds for the UI, I don't want to waste 10+ minutes waiting to reinstall the game every time I want to play it.

But all of this is ultimately irrelevant when the topic of discussion is whether Destiny will dethrone Halo. Harddrive breakdowns and PC vs Console debates have nothing to do with it. The only reason harddrive space came up at all was simply to remark on how Halo 4 takes up 2-3 times the space as any other game and yet I felt it delivered so little compared to Destiny's (and every other Halo game's) more modest space requirement merely to make the point that one game delivers more for less. I didn't bring that up to turn this into a discussion about what features take up how much space or whether a console does it better or worse than a PC. Please get back on topic.
 

WandererTJ

Well-Known Member
You can't lower the tri-count on models, what they use are called LODs (level of detail)(change level based on distance to object) which can be like 3 or 5 quality levels of the same model, some of the model will most likely use a different set of textures, well because they need to in order deal with the different model topology for each level. Nowadays the computing power needed for meshes is not that high at all compared to the other systems like shaders, physics engines, particles, lighting, etc.
I think the engine they brought in for Halo Reach in regards to that (referring to Forge World for the most part) was pretty phenomenal.
Not sure if they are continuing to use a similar engine with Destiny.

But yeah, you are right on all points, but 500MB is still 500MB. Now that the XBone has 1080p, I wonder what they could compress those same videos down to.

For that matter, I wonder what all will actually be included on the Master Chief Collection. They've been promoting "1 Disc". Are they going to make you download supplements to the disc in order to play the game? What about all the DLC that was added for each title, are they going to include it on disc too?
I'm curious to see what they do to milk the Collection to get people to pay more.
 

Master Builder

Member
I think the engine they brought in for Halo Reach in regards to that (referring to Forge World for the most part) was pretty phenomenal.
Not sure if they are continuing to use a similar engine with Destiny.
Well like most game companies, they build their own game engine, starting from Halo Combat Evolved. And then keep tweaking it here and there, like integrating Havok (physics engine) for Halo 2. And then a complete graphics overhaul plus others for Halo 3. But Reach............They really went over all their systems and hired more codders to really max it out in spots like how many tris they could compute at once, how many particles they could have at once, huge sky rocket fro Halo 3's 100 max particles to thousands in Reach. Which in turn made a lot of there old assets not compatible with the engine any more, like animations. So they had to recreate almost everything. Which is probably why I like the game a ton, not just because it was a good game but also because of how much work they put into it, and it really shows. but if you get four players on one console on forge world you will really see how maxed out it is, is has to display mipaps at closer distances than normal, and has to hide a any geometry thats not close to players view just to make it run smooth.

Destiny does not use the same engine. All the assets and engine were passed on to 343. Destiny uses a new homemade engine by bungie.

For that matter, I wonder what all will actually be included on the Master Chief Collection. They've been promoting "1 Disc". Are they going to make you download supplements to the disc in order to play the game? What about all the DLC that was added for each title, are they going to include it on disc too?
I'm curious to see what they do to milk the Collection to get people to pay more.
I was thinking the same when they announced it will be on one disc. But after thinking about it, it's very possible, Blu-ray dual layer disc (standard) hold 50gb, and that might just be enough. But if not, they could put it on a triple layered Blu-ray (100gb) our quadruple layered (125gb), but those require a BDXL drive witch I don't think the xbone or ps4 has.
 

WandererTJ

Well-Known Member
But Reach............ [snip]

I was thinking the same when they announced it will be on one disc. But after thinking about it, it's very possible, Blu-ray dual layer disc (standard) hold 50gb, and that might just be enough. But if not, they could put it on a triple layered Blu-ray (100gb) our quadruple layered (125gb), but those require a BDXL drive witch I don't think the xbone or ps4 has.
Yeah, honestly I have Reach up in my Top 10 Games of All Time (that I've played), and that is only part of the reason why. Great game all around.

I didn't know that kind of tech existed honestly. I've completely dismissed Blu-Ray and haven't ever taken the time to look up the specs. It's like Beta and VHS, surely there will be a new form of hardware soon, but maybe the next step is just cloud based exclusively.


For those who are curious as to which games land in my top 10, open the spoiler below:
The following games have all received up to a 9.5/10. I do not give perfect scores, because I feel as though I have yet to see perfection, so 9.5/10 is near the best in my opinion.
Please note that these are not in any particular order since some of them could be moved around or are tied for a particular position.
There is a cutoff for the top 3 and a cutoff for the top 8.
• Halo Reach (Xbox360)
• Transformers Fall of Cybertron (Xbox360)
• Mortal Kombat 2011 (Xbox360)
• Perfect Dark 64 (Nintendo 64)
• Diablo 2 (PC)
• Legend of Dragoon (Playstation)
• Super Mario World (Super Nintendo)
• Pokemon Yellow/Gen1 (Gameboy Color)
• Gran Turismo 3 A-SPEC (Playstation 2)
• [Reserved]​

Honorable Mentions:
• Unreal Tournament '99 (PC)
• Captain America and the Avengers (Super Nintendo)
• Super Smash Bros. (Nintendo 64)
• Top Gear Rally 2 (Nintendo 64)
• SSX Tricky (Playstation 2)
• X-Men Legends 1 & 2 (Xbox)
• Zoids Legacy (Gameboy Advance)

EDIT:
Oh yeah... I totally forgot this when I first posted.
I feel like Destiny could completely and utterly redeem itself if it added a crafting system.
Give me a Mitternacht stat-distribution Scout Rifle (highest rate of fire of all Scout Rifles) with a circular iron sight and stability boosting perks. SOLD.

Scout Rifle - Rapid Archetype
Website Stats:
Rate of Fire = 100
Impact = 0
Range = 18
Stability = 25
Reload = 27
Magazine = 42

Hidden Stats:
Damage = 0
Optical Zoom = 20
Inventory Size = 39
Equip Speed = 19
Aim assistance = 59
Recoil direction = 60

Perks:
Damage Type = Kinectic
Sights on Weapon = Fastdraw IS / Red Dot OAS / Focus Lens FLAS10
Ability Mod 1 = Third Eye
Upgrade Damage
Stat Mod = Perfect Balance / Single Point Sling / Fitted Stock
Ability Mod 2 = Explosive Rounds
Upgrade Damage
Upgrade Damage, Upgrade Damage, Upgrade Damage

Guide Stats (Rapid Archetype Scout Rifle):
Rounds Per Minute: 257
Damage: 22
Range: 32.50 - 35.00
Stability: 22.0 - 38.0 Base (Fitted Stock = 46.0 - 63.0)
Reload: 2.65s - 2.95s
Magazine Size: 15 - 19

Handling Time:
ADS = 0.335s - 0.370s (Snapshot = 0.235s - 0.260s) (Time it takes to Aim Down the Sights)
Ready Time = 0.95s - 1.05s (Time it takes to ready weapon after switching or recovering from running)
Away Time = 0.335s - 0.370s (Time it takes to switch away from weapon)

Inventory Ammo:
Initial @ Spawn = 60 - 95
Total / Max Possible = 105 - 152

Possible Noteworthy Sights:
Iron:
Fastdraw IS = +4 Stability, +10 Reload, +10 Handling
Steadyhand IS = +6 Stability, +8 Reload, +8 Handling
Quickshot IS = +15 Reload, +15 Handling

Red Dot:
Red Dot OAS = +0.2x Optics, +14 Stability
Red Dot ORES = +0.3x Optics, +6 Range, +9 Stability, +4 Reload, +4 Handling

Long Range:
Focus Lens FLS2 = +0.4x Optics, +8 Range, +2 Stability
Focus Lens FLAS10 = +0.8x Optics, +10 Range, +10 Stability, -5 Reload, -12 Handling

Possible Modifiers:
Glass Half Full = Bottom half of magazine does more damage.
Snapshot = +30% ADS speed
Single Point Sling = +50% Ready and Away, +10% movement speed
Perfect Balance = +35 Stability, -20 Range.
Speed Reload = +50 Reload
Flared Magwell = +100 Reload, -10 Stability.
Fitted Stock = +25 Stability (Legendary Scout Rifles Exclusive)
Counterbalance = Stabilizes recoil. 9% bonus to recoil control on top of Stability Stat
Third Eye = Grants radar while in ADS (Legendary Exclusive)
Firefly = Precision kills cause a 50-damage Solar explosion 5-meters wide (Legendary Scout and Sniper Rifles Exclusive)
High Caliber Rounds = Boosts flinch effect of your shots
Outlaw = Extremely fast reload after a precision kill.
Grenadier = Kills add 10% to grenade energy




Destiny Maps from Best to Worst:
Firebase Delphi
Shores of Time
Twilight Gap
Blind Watch
First Light
Rusted Lands
Bastion
Anomaly???
Asylum???
Burning Shrine???

Anyone agree?
 

Remraf

Active Member
I must like Destiny. Otherwise, I wouldn't have put over 64 hours in already.

But I must say: it is severely lacking. Mostly in the story. I felt like Dinkleghost's personal army. He's the only one who knows anything and has to to tell me everything to do. All the information is gained from him hacking computers, which he could have floated around doing on his own if there weren't aliens that would try and shoot him. I don't learn anything about the nature of the Traveler or the Darkness. I know there is the Grimoire, which I have been reading, but it's only a glimpse of the info I want.

The most interesting thing in the story was that the Hive had a shard of the Traveller, but thats all we really learn. I thought it was a really cool plot point that could have been used to impact the story. Nope. It was never mentioned again. I kept waiting for a twist or revelation to send the story from "Jump around between these locations to clear out the enemy" to a consistent story thread. It kind of tried to accomplish this as you headed towards the Black Garden, but I never felt like I had a clear purpose besides "there are enemies here so we should kill them."

It doesn't help that some of Dinkleghost's delivery sounds like he is reading a children's book to 3 year olds, and the writing is frustratingly vague with grandiose jargon that is intended to sound like it came from a Golden Age but mostly sounds like couplings of words picked at random from the dictionary.

So why have I played it so much? Because the gameplay is fun. I love the melee, grenade, and super abilities. I won't forget the first time I fired a heavy machine gun; that sound was glorious. I love the customization options, both cosmetic and in terms of the abilities. I want to get my faction rep up to buy awesome gear. And I believe the gameplay is good enough to sustain all that. People have complained about repetitiveness, but I switch up my loadout every few runs and tackle it differently.

When compared to Halo, I think the gameplay stands up fine. I didn't play Halo 4 nearly this much (I do need to play the story again. It usually sticks better the second time for me). The gameplay was ok, but a lot of the cosmetic design rubbed me the wrong way. I hated most of the armor designs; they completely threw the functional look of the other games out the window and went for the far future, hard sci-if look. The sounds of a lot of the guns felt off to me (except for the Saw. Guess I have a thing for HMGs). The campaign suffered from a lot of the same design problems Destiny does: go to this area, plug your AI in, and defend the area until they are done.

I don't think Destiny will kill Halo, but until this thread I had never heard that it was supposed to. It's a totally different kind of game with a different structure, and I think they will both coexist fine.
 

Zaff

Well-Known Member
I think an important point to keep in mind for the story (well, two points actually) is 1) this is only the first game in what is projected to be at least a 10 year franchise, and 2) this game isn't even "complete" yet. There's still at least two expansions that are said to add new story missions (as well as Crucible maps and other such stuff) and who knows if there will be more expansions before the next game rolls out. I hear a lot of complaints about the storyline lacking and missing so much information, but really, how complete a picture of the Halo universes did we have after CE? Here's this random ship that made a blind jump from God only knows where and run into a group of aliens (they don't even know if it's the same group they were running from) by this giant ring that somehow in this age of "simple" faster than light travel nobody has ever seen or heard anything about, and by the end of the game all we really know about it is "it's a weapon, and we done blowed it up." The array, the shield world, the Ark, Requiem, the DIdact, the Prometheans, the Forerunners themselves, the Brutes, the Skirmishers, the entire culture and purpose behind the covenant, the Gravemind and true nature of the Flood, we didn't know ANY of that by the end of CE. FInally, after half a dozen more games, over a dozen novels,dozens more comic books/graphic novels, a visual guide, all over the course of more than a decade's worth of storytelling, do we start to feel like we have some idea of what's going on in that universe, and there are still numerous questions left unanswered. Destiny has been out a grand total of 17 days now. Who would want a game you could get everything out of in less than a month after its releases?

And to the ones who say that the "story" just feels like a repetition of "find these enemies, kill them, go back home, repeat," think about the firsts real plot point you encounter in the game, you conversation with the Speaker. "The Darkness is returning. We will not survive it this time." And then, "Go, join your fellow Guardians. Push back the Darkness with your Light." If you really think about it, "read between the lines" so to speak, the guy's basically telling you the world is doomed, it's only a matter of time, and your purpose in this life is to prolong the inevitable for as long as you are able to. So yea, you go out, mop up some bad guys, and then report back so the people of the city know they can live another day. It's a bleak story, yes, but it's not "no story at all." And this is what I've gleaned from only getting as far as the first couple missions on Venus. I haven't even been to Mars yet, and this "Black Garden" is something I've only heard vague references to by the Exo stranger and the Awoken royal siblings. In fact I think I've only done one mission and a Strike since first meeting the Awoken in the Reef, and yet I still seem to have pulled more of a story out of this game than people who have already "finished" it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top