Halo has "a lot to learn" from COD4

By Ellie Gibson Published 6 August, 2008

So says Bungie's AI boss.

Bungie's lead AI programmer, Damian Isla, has said he's keen to take a few tips from Infinity Ward and Call of Duty 4.

Speaking to GamesIndustry.biz Isla said he's a fan of COD4, adding, "We have a lot to learn from their success... They did some very innovative things to keep people going and their experience-rewards system was something that we paid a lot of attention to. I think it's a great game and single-player is obviously fantastic.

"They did a hell of a job with their set pieces, of scripting certain moments that they were really sure the player was going to actually see and experience first hand. The way that they use those moments to craft the player experience... Halo has a lot to learn from."

Sure, said Isla, there are plenty of scenes in the Halo that are scripted, in-game moments - but, "A lot of time players don't experience it, or they don't see the thing going on, or they maybe don't experience it in quite the same way we expected them to."

Isla went on to explain the "simulation" element can make things tricky when it comes to creating scripted moments. "I think Halo has always been an extremely simulation driven game... Simulation, I think, adds replayability - it adds depth to the game - but it also makes scripting much more difficult and it means designers have a much harder time."

For more from Isla, read the full interview.

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (75) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • seasidebaz #1 4 years ago

    Halo a simulation?


















    LOL

  • bad09 #2 4 years ago

    I dunno I think I enjoyed Halo3 more in single player. H3 hooked me 100% in single player while I STILL have not finished COD4 (yes I know), I never even think of going into SP when COD4 goes in the 360 the MP is just too good!

  • berelain #3 4 years ago

    No, no no, don't do more scripted games. I much prefer the replayability of a title where the individual elements can act indepentendly,. so you get a different battle unfolding each time, not just the same ambush or dramatic moment. Halo 3 outfoxed me so many times by changing the way enemies approached and reacted to things, but CoD4 is just the same game every time.

  • anomagnus #4 4 years ago

    No, they don't!

    COD is great the first time round, on normal difficulty. But once you get it into it, once you start jumping the difficulty up, you can see the whole thing is one massive trick. The constant respawns just blow the reality of the situation out the door, the trickery required to keep the pressure on fails massively as you get deeper into the game.

    Halo, despite some minor flaws, felt far more nature, and contrary to COD, as you went up the difficulty levels became more realistic, and more natural. Everything right up to the first major flood level is an amazing experience.

    I traded COD4 in after 3 weeks. I still have Halo 3.

    As for seasidebaz, all games are simulations.
    Edited by 1 at 06/08/08 @ 09:07

  • Dizzy #5 4 years ago

    To be honest.. I am against scripted set pieces. I prefer AI that creates these "set pieces" by itself because it is smart. Guess we are not there yet ;)

    I prefer the Halo 3 approach actually.. I can play levels again and have fun while in COD4 that doesn't work so well.
    Edited by 1 at 06/08/08 @ 09:13

  • redneon Verified Programmer, SUMO Digital #6 4 years ago

    It's a killing simulator.

  • Lukus #7 4 years ago

    Spot the dumbass. Hint: his name rhymes with beabidesaz.

  • seasidebaz #8 4 years ago

    Yeah, sorry, I missed the bit where Bungie studied real aliens in a distant galaxy in order to create a simulation of intergalactic warfare.

    Also, I don't think I'll be buying any diamonds in a hurry. If Bejewelled is a simulation, that means every time I place 3 or more diamonds together.... POW! gone.

  • seasidebaz #9 4 years ago

    Best get out of this thread now, the Halo Defence Force have picked up on me saying bad things about their big gay leader ;)

  • Evolution #10 4 years ago

    What's wrong with scripted? It doesn't make it any less fun to see and play. Most of the cool stuff in HL2 is scripted.

  • GordonCaladan #11 4 years ago

    At the very worst, COD4īs scripting forces the player into anticipating it in order to get through specific situations. For me, there are some points in the game, especially on Veteran difficulty, where the rigid scripting completely ruined the immersion.

  • Widge #12 4 years ago

    Lukus 0
    Seasidebaz 74398437289432

    he wins

  • The-Bodybuilder #13 4 years ago

    @seasidebaz

    Wow, you really are a dumbass. You still don't get it.
    Hint: It has nothing to do with realism.

  • Zomoniac #14 4 years ago

    Are there ANY games where the set-pieces aren't scripted? I'm sure the enemy wouldn't spontaneously think to jump in a couple of Scarabs, fly in and take out the surrounding environment in any one place more than another. If they just randomly decided to upgrade to heavy artillery and tanks because it seemed a good idea then judging the difficulty curve would be impossible.

  • MrMarbles #15 4 years ago

    I can't wait for plasma grenades spawning at my feet from out of nowhere.

    And bottlenecks of never-ending Covenant.

  • t8yman #16 4 years ago

    for me, the perfect game would be a combo of H3 SP and COD4 MP.


    now that I would buy on day one.

  • lambtron #17 4 years ago

    "Sure, said Isla, there are plenty of scenes in the Halo that are scripted, in-game moments - but, "A lot of time players don't experience it, or they don't see the thing going on, or they maybe don't experience it in quite the same way we expected them to.""

    Surely this is what is great about Halo? I like COD4 but it's scripted to buggery and beyond. I'd much rather games moved in the direction of Halo than COD4 (although Halo1 was probably stronger in this regard than the sequels).

  • Zomoniac #18 4 years ago

    for me, the perfect game would be a combo of H3 SP and COD4 MP.

    For me, the forge and Duck Hunt and theatre is better than a perks system which means anyone who hasn't been playing for hours a day since the beginning doesn't have a hope in hell.

  • seasidebaz #19 4 years ago

    I think Halo has always been an extremely simulation driven game... Simulation, I think, adds replayability

    So apparently I'm a dumbass for reading this line here. Simulation was a very silly word to say, as it implies a computer representation of a physical system. PHYSICAL being the operative word. Last time I checked, there were no physical aliens, no physical Spartan armour, no physical ecosystems on other planets... No intergalactic struggle for power... In fact nothing that would imply simulation of any kind. I think what he meant to say is that everything is AI driven, so scripting screws everything up.

    So no, it's not a simulation. It's just some very good AI, and that's all. (not even that good, in some cases... When I played it, there were quite a few times the enemy would just be hanging around waiting for me to step in the right spot to set off their AI...)

  • muscleblade #20 4 years ago

    I hated COD4 singleplayer (the grenades sucks). I did finish it on veteran but in order to do so you had to memorise where all the spawning enemies would pop up. Halo 3 on Legendary was a much better experience imo.

  • DrR0b3rts #21 4 years ago

    I was thinking the exact opposite (edit: to the Bungie guy). If COD could have the Halo approach - just put all the elements in a landscape and let a situation evolve - it would be a much better game.
    Edited by 1 at 06/08/08 @ 09:47

  • mcmonkeyplc #22 4 years ago

    What the hell are you on about?! Halo is fine the way it is.

  • des #23 4 years ago

    As long as they don't turn Halo into scripted spawn fest with magical lines to cross known as COD4 i am fine with "learning".

  • Widge #24 4 years ago

    but, you know, COD4 was GOTY... so all games have to be like that now

  • Darren #25 4 years ago

    Having played both games, I thought CoD 4 was a better and more memorable game than Halo 3 and in the former's favour I did actually complete it, something I still haven't got round to doing with the latter!

    I don't play these kinds of games online normally, stripped of the storylines, I find most FPSs insanely repetitive and bordering on pointless unless they're fast and pack in loads of different maps and game types like Unreal Tournament III, which is about the only FPS I do enjoy online but even that isn't something I'd play for hours on end.

    I do feel that the FPS genre desperately needs some new ideas though as moving from one setpiece to another killing things does get wearing once you've played X number of similar games. I'd like to see a mix of adventuring/exploring, puzzle-solving and shooting in equal measures in these kinds of games instead of just endless shooting while following a linear path through the game. In other words I'd like to see the FPS genre evolve in a First Person Adventure one which combines elements other than mindless shooting.

  • Pulsar_t #26 4 years ago

    Well it wasn't my GOTY nor many other self-respecting gamers!

  • BooMMooB #27 4 years ago

    I found COD4 extremly 90'ish in its core design. When I can stop the spawning of enemies by simply pushing forward to reach a invisible goal, then the design is flawed. COD4 had some great moments (the first sniping mission springs to mind, and the escort mission in the ruins of tjernobyl too) but at the same time I reckon Halo3 will have a place in my gaming hearth that COD4 could only dream of reaching.

    That said, I think it is obvious that Halo3 is not the 'perfect' game, and thus Bungie can and should learn from other great games.

    Seasidebaz - I'm sure he didn't mean 'simulation' in the same narrowminded fashion as you do.

  • seasidebaz #28 4 years ago

    Well if he didn't mean that kind of simulation,will someone please enlighten me? Cos so far all that's happening is everyone seems to be agreeing with him.... Or does "simulation" in this context mean "some things moving around under the power of the CPU"? Oh no, wait, scripting does that as well...

  • Widge #29 4 years ago

    I found Halo 2 more fun than COD4's single player... and I'm starting to come around to the same way of thinking for its multiplayer.
    I think part of COD4's mp draw is appealing to the WOW stat grinding fanatic in us all.

  • Spiral #30 4 years ago

    He's an AI programmer. Simulation in that context means that the AI's are designed to only be aware of things that a real person would be aware of in that situation, and make decisions accordingly, as opposed to an omniscient AI that knows your position even if nothing could have spotted you.

  • kangarootoo #31 4 years ago

    @seasidebaz

    I'm not jumping on your case here. Some posters on here are just peeved 'cos you insulted their first love (though tbh, you kind of asked for it).

    Anyway, you said "as it implies a computer representation of a physical system. PHYSICAL being the operative word". Physical in that sense does not mean "actual physical object of the type named", i.e. an alien, but rather it refers to a system that appears to behave according to the laws of physics.

    It doesn't really matter whether aliens or goblins or space marines are the subjects involved, rather it is more important whether things like gravity and inertia are realistically simulated. Something like Halo is more of a physical simulation in that sense than a 2D shooter might be.

    HOWEVER, Damian Isla didn't use the term "physical simulation". He just said simulation, which leaves the definition unqualified. You could simulate brainwaves, or emotions, or surface texture, or lighting (admitedly, some of those things still fall under the mantle of a physical simulation). So you were strawmanning a little when you decided to state that Halo was not a "physical simulation".

  • kangarootoo #32 4 years ago

    On the subject at hand, I would be very wary of looking at CoD4 and drawing too many comparisons. Halo and CoD4 are really quite different games and what works well in one may not work as well in another.

    It is interesting and relevant I think (at the risk of sounding a little patronising) that the guy making the statement about how Halo could learn from COD4's heavy use of scripting is the lead AI programmer, and not one of the lead designers.

  • MaxiSleep #33 4 years ago

    The set pieces in COD4 were in fairness brilliant, particularly the Chernobyl level.

  • Lukus #34 4 years ago

    Seaside, if you can't understand what the developer means when he says simulation with regards to the AI then you must lack basic reasoning skills. Or you're purposefully misunderstanding his interpretation for the sake of a crap troll attempt. Well done. And well done for the "big gay leader" comment too. That was truly pitiful.

  • seasidebaz #35 4 years ago

    I still don't agree that there's a real simulation of anything in particular going on, and I can honestly say that during level 3 of halo 3 (was that the one where there was lots of driving?) I could predict exactly where the enemies would come from, what they would do, and in which order to dispatch them. In fact, pretty much every level up to there too, but that was the one I kept dying on and so it made it all the more obvious. The entire thing felt scripted.

    I just really don't get where this simulation business comes from. Unless it's directly related to Bungie's ethos of "30 seconds of fun... repeated", and if it really IS fun they're trying to simulate, then it's one simulation that's failed for me.

  • BrokenSymmetry #36 4 years ago

    The way that Isla uses the term "simulation" here, is not meaning "as close to the real world as possible", but the way it is used in physics and mathematical simulations: You set some rules and initial conditions, and then let it play out by itself. That's exactly what Halo (for the most part) does in its battles.

  • seasidebaz #37 4 years ago

    @Lukus: seems you don't understand either or you'd have told me.

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #38 4 years ago

    I think by "simulation" he meant that objects in the world behave roughly as you'd expect them to, so if you shoot a barrel, it falls down and rolls across the floor.

    Halo 3 succeeded by basically throwing elements against each other (AI, physics, objects, etc), and the "simulation" of their behaviour and the world worked out the outcome. So battles might be different if you play through twice.

    Kinda thought that was obvious, to be honest...

  • kangarootoo #39 4 years ago

    @seasidebaz

    "I still don't agree that there's a real simulation of anything in particular going on"

    I think the problem here is that you just don't understand what a simulation really is. Either that, or you are just pretending to misunderstand so that you can continue to insult Halo. If you didn't enjoy Halo, fair enough, but are you interested in a proper discussion about it or do you just want to fling poo?


    "I could predict exactly where the enemies would come from, what they would do, and in which order to dispatch them"

    Honestly, that is completely irrelevant. A simulation can be entirely predictable, just like real life. For example, physics is very predictable, so I wouldn't expect a realistic physics simulation to be any different.

  • Dizzy #40 4 years ago

    >Kinda thought that was obvious, to be honest...

    Yeah I think we have fallen for seasidebaz trap and are wasting time replying to his posts.

  • t8yman #41 4 years ago

    @Zomoniac, I disagree, the perks system doesnt make it unplayable for noobs. My mate is poor at shooters, he started playing COD4 3 months ago, and he now loves it.

  • andywilkie35 #42 4 years ago

    All I know is that as a one player game i didn't enjoy Halo at all, but enjoyed playing it co-op, whilst CoD4 I loved one player. so they could learn from CoD4 in that they should make the one player mode actually playable

  • Azazel #43 4 years ago

    /applauds all the people who actually understand what the guys talking about

  • seasidebaz #44 4 years ago

    @kangarootoo:

    Part of the reason I didn't like Halo is because it is predictable. Bungie were saying pre-release that the enemy is super intelligent, and can get you with a pincer movement, and can do this that and the other, then when it came to me playing they did none of that. They stood there until you got close enough or shot at them then the AI would kick in exactly the same routines as it had done before. Yeah there were variations, and enemies aren't completely on rails, but why make such a complex AI model when scripting would have worked just as well?

    Another reason I didn't like Halo was the godawful freezing on Level 3. Thought my xbox was broken it froze up that many times. And the Flood levels were terrible. And the absolute arse of a story. But apart from that, Halo IS quite a good game. In multiplayer. As long as shotty snipers doesn't exist anymore ;)

  • GamesConnoisseur #45 4 years ago

    I believe Seaside misunderstood what simulation was meant in the article (look at his first post - LOL that says it all), then just stuck to his guns stubbornly or if it is truly his view that Halo doesnt do 'simulation' very well, then he is entiled to the view but would be quite a minority!

    I second that we would not want see MORE scripted battles, as would degrade the gaming experience on successive playthroughs as other have said. Simulated based AI is far more fun and challenging if done well, that what I always loved about Halo nevermind the story, characters, weapons etc. It the simulated AI that made the game for me, as you can approach it differently to get the different results. Some moments are truly unique and difficult to repeat!

    Other games does AI, but Bungie did it in a way that others want to emulate them. Still it is great for them to look at other games and say yes we would want to do scripted combats as well as they can. Scripted can be great, especially if you was only planning to play the game once!

    Afterall war/combat is never that predictable!

  • teajay #46 4 years ago

    I like Halo 3 and COD 4 but I thought the AI in Halo 3 was far superior.

  • AHiFi #47 4 years ago

    Silly comment to make. I like Halo's lack of major scripting...I like Call of Duty's scripted nature. That's what both of them have always been to me and, from what I can tell, many others. While I'm well aware that change can be good, I think that a Call of Duty without scripting and a Halo with major scripting would be bizarre.

  • anomagnus #48 4 years ago

    @ seasidebaz

    definition of simulation

    1. imitation or enactment, as of something anticipated or in testing.
    2. the act or process of pretending; feigning.
    3. an assumption or imitation of a particular appearance or form; counterfeit; sham.
    4. Psychiatry. a conscious attempt to feign some mental or physical disorder to escape punishment or to gain a desired objective.
    5. the representation of the behavior or characteristics of one system through the use of another system, esp. a computer program designed for the purpose.

    Clearly, point 4 has no value here. However, the fact remains, that Halo is simulated representation of a theorized alien conflict on theorized alien planets. The fact that we have no quantitative evidence on alien eco systems or aliens themselves does not mean that it is not a simulation. Simulations are MEANT to simulate events that may not occur naturally, in order to test events, people, places, and products

    You've backed yourself into a corner here, and you're refusing to admit. You look like a dick.

    This game is a shooter, its an FPS, but its also a simulator of humans would combat a hostile entity, on an intergalactic level. Bungie could be wrong on every single detail, but its still a simulator because they've used the best information they have at hand.

  • seasidebaz #49 4 years ago

    @anomagnus:

    That's not my point. My point is that, during my playthroughs, the AI acted as though it was scripted. So what he's saying is that Halo is different to CoD4 because they used a "simulation" instead of scripting. But why? There is no discernable difference bar the enemies spawning in CoD4 until you cross a magical invisible line. Halo just has enemies that once dead don't come back. Does that make it any more simulated warfare? No. Can the Arbiter be killed? No. Can the Arbiter take out all the enemies on the level? No. Can the Arbiter go off on his own free will under simulated thought? No. Even the Warthog drivers are morons who can't get round a tiny bit of debris. That's why I don't get where this simulation element comes from.

    I agree with squarejaw, there really is no alternative in a console FPS, and I'm not badmouthing anyone who does like the single player mode. But to badmouth me because I dispute the Bungie guy's comments? That's just childish.

  • berelain #50 4 years ago

    @Seasidebaz - Well, i don't know what happened when you played it then. Did you try it on higher difficulty settings? When I was going through it on co-op on the highest difficulty setting the enemies were absolutely insane, outflanking us, taking different routes each time, and the AI squadmates were the same. Some of the pitched battle areas played out completey differntly each time we tried a section.

    In CoD4, you can't get that, because the movements of the enemies and AI are predetermined, ie, scripted, so theres no room for variation here at all. it'll always play out the same way.

    Halo 3 simulates the reactions of the various parties on the fly, according to what the various parties, players, AI characters, etc, do. Hence simulation.

  • kangarootoo #51 4 years ago

    Look, can I press a bit fat reset button on this thread. Clearly Halo makes people emotional, meaning that even when people write a well structured and convincing response, they can't help but end it with something like "You look like a dick. "

    seasidebaz, you clearly didn't enjoy some aspects of Halo (almost everyone can agree, the flood levels were bobbins, even Bungie admit it in trusted circles). But by your own voice you enjoyed other parts of it. Your first catty comment has opened a pandora's box full of fanlove, and its made everyone get a bit stroppy. You clearly misunderstood the definition of "simulation", but have now been provided with plenty of information and clarity, and I'm sure you are man enough to admit to the misunderstanding and be delighted to have expanded your vocabulary :)

    So can we all just get back onto the subject at hand. Halo and CoD4 both did ludicrously well in the shops, so we have plenty of material to compare, contrast and discuss like adults. Seriously, threads where everyone just calls everyone else a cock in uppercase letters are SO damn boring.

    Tell you what. If you are all really good, we can pop back over to the C&C thread later and make more comments about Gemma Atkinson's tits. Can't say fairer than that.

  • kangarootoo #52 4 years ago

    @seasidebaz

    berelain raises a good question. I also found that on the harder settings, the AI in Halo behaved noticeably differently. It wasn't just a matter of bigger health bars and more damaging guns. They moved and coordinated differently, and reacted to the player's movements and actions much more intelligently.

  • bad09 #53 4 years ago

    Yeah I have to agree with berelain and kangarootoo, stick it in legendary and it's a different animal. It really changes the way you play.

  • anomagnus #54 4 years ago

    @ seasidebaz

    did you even play halo 3?

    I have yet to play the game and not discover something new.

    Just last night, i watched several of the marines take down a scarab, and one of them crash their mongoose into the back of it, dropping the marines on the platform.

    Can the arbiter take down all the enemies on a level? Well, hes certainly more than capable of it, as long as you move from check point to check point. If you hold back, he can destroy plenty of enemies.

    As for the drivers of the warthogs, yea, some times they get stuck, but thats about the only point of poor ai you can focus on. Certainly, when i'm driving the warthog, they're more than capable of handling themselves, and are excellent shots.

    The fact is, you're into semantics now. Now you're complaining because the ai cocks up once in a while. Play the game on heroic or legendary, watch the large set pieces with vehicles, and do it five times, you'll see every time, something different, as the game simulates the marines and covenant.

    COD would have the same respawn over and over and over.

    I notice from your gamer card for example, that you haven't really dived to far into the game, yet you feel qualified to come on here, declare your opinion, without having anything other than a cursory play of the game as evidence of your dislike.

    I imagine you've finished it once on normal. Bungie themselves says the game is meant to be played on harder difficulties.

  • seasidebaz #55 4 years ago

    To be fair, my first comment got posted exactly the same time I read that it was a "simulation"

    I can't account for co-op, but in single player on all difficulties (bar the hardest - didn't play that very long) there is a very predictable movement pattern to the enemies based on player input, which is quite easy to exploit. Between difficulties it does vary massively, but there's always a pattern. Thus probably why what I saw the AI do could be construed as a highly scripted pattern, to the point that when death occurs, all that needs to be changed is where you stand ever so slightly, or shoot a different enemy first, or whatever, and that will usually allow you to avoid bullets etc.

    I think there has been some misunderstanding all round, I can accept that my view of a simulation is probably a lot stricter than most people's, and I need to open my mind a bit more, but that comes from being a developer where a simulation is everything or nothing ;)

    Also, I may join you in the C&C thread. For some reason I've not been this interested in a C&C game since the first one... ;)

  • seasidebaz #56 4 years ago

    @anomagnus: Moved house so didn't have broadband then sold xbox about a month before I got back online, hence lack of updates. There's a few more points on my gamerscore, not sure how many. I can really understand that Halo is a personal experience, but from my personal experience, the single player was lacking. MP was where it was at ;)

  • subtlesnake #57 4 years ago

    I think when Bungie says simulation, they mean 'simulated decision process'. So rather than telling the enemies what to do, which equipment to use, etc. in a given situation, the 'sandbox' nature of their gameplay means they have to leave all that largely up to the A.I. I recall listening to one of the gameplay designers talk about how he could only give 'hints' to the A.I, and even he was often surprised by how it reacted.

    That doesn't mean the A.I's reactions are themselves realistic, or that they don't fall into patterns of behaviour, only that the game designers have necessarily limited control of them, which makes scripting difficult (because they can't be completely certain that an enemy will react in the same way 100% of the time).
    Edited by 1 at 06/08/08 @ 12:42

  • Thalanos #58 4 years ago

    I think subtlesnake pretty much nailed it with his description there.

    Bungie have explained in the past that the AI behaviours are less obvious at lower difficulties, not because they tone them down, but because the enemies have less health and get killed before they can move very far from their starting location which is always the same.

    There has to be a sweet spot between COD/HL2 scripting, Halo's sim and Left 4 Dead's random spawns to create the ultimate replayable campaign.

  • BobsUncle #59 4 years ago

    I found Halo tedious and boring personally.

    I played the (rather dull) campaign once, tried the multiplayer and hated all the jumping idiots, then went back to CoD multiplayer which was much more enjoyable.

    One reason I hated the Halo 3 Campaign was because they copied the single worst bit from Halo 1, the final buggy race. And the Flood are quite simply the most uninspired and boring enemy ever created.

    Master Chief is still fucking awesome though.

  • AphoticCosmos #60 4 years ago

    COD4's multiplayer is horrifically overhyped. I still pop in on Halo 3 now and again for a blast in MP, almost a year on.

    And seriously, don't say this to appease the whiners, Bungie. COD4's SP campaign is good for one run, that's it, finito. I would still enjoy playing through the Halo 3 campaign again now.

  • afghan_jones #61 4 years ago

    NONONONONONO!

    please dont take the delightfully emergent gameplay of halo and replace it with the piss weak scripted shite of COD4.

    Ive played Halo's campaign through about 10 times on various difficulties and each time it was different experience with different tactics needed. Eveyr time there was something new that surprised me.

    COD4 has none of that. You play it once, youve seen all it can possibly offer. The higher difficulties dont change enemy intelligence or how they act, just make the whoel thing a frustrating tedium of trial and error until you know exactly where enemies pop out every single time. In a way its like Time Crisis in that to beat it on the higher difficulties you dont need actual skill, just ak nowledge of where people pop up.

  • patchbox360 #62 4 years ago

    completing these games on their highest difficulty settings makes you age... horribly

  • BobsUncle #63 4 years ago

    Just my opinion people. I didn't like it and much prefer CoD MP. I prefer the fact you only need to shoot people a few times to kill them, not empty entire clips and still need to run up and punch them in the face!

    Of course, my favourite MP ever is GRAW. You simply can't beat the ablilty of one shot kills with any weapon.

  • kangarootoo #64 4 years ago

    @
    seasidebaz

    "Between difficulties it does vary massively, but there's always a pattern"

    But there SHOULD always be a pattern. That is good game design. If there was never a pattern, the player would never be able to form a strategy or improve through practice.

    Halo isn't (shouldn't be) just about being good at putting the corss hair over things. It is also about combat strategy and flanking. Without a pattern in enemy behaviour, that element of the game would be missing.

    I would dispute that the behaviour patterns are as easy to recognise and exploit as you suggest. I know several ludricrously hardcore players of Halo, and they still consider playing through on Legendary to be quite a challenge.

  • Fab4 #65 4 years ago

    Lets hope it never learns CoD4 lousy hit-detection and matchmaking.

  • funkyd #66 4 years ago

    +1 at Fab4.

    The thing is seasidebaz, the AI isn't predictable or scripted at all, well in comparison to CoD4 anyway, so I've come to the conclusion that you're just lying to try and make your point.

  • seasidebaz #67 4 years ago

    @funkyd:

    Thing is, I know it's not scripted, I know the thing's completely AI-driven, I'm just stating my observations. Similar thing happened with Gears of War, when I pointed out that Dom doesn't know how to use cover / stay alive / shoot / anything, I just get blasted because "it doesn't happen to anyone else", apparently. Anyway, argument about that closed. I found out how to exploit it, go me, roll on next Halo cos I'm hoping for some INCREDIBLY good things from it.

  • JasonB81 #68 4 years ago

    well i hope bungie isn't serious. I loved al the ingame cutscenes, especially the one when MC found Cortana, that's all i need from scripted events (that scene is so memorable to me.) i can't stand CoD4's constantly respawning enemies. I played through on normal, and thought hey, why don't i try and get some more achievements on veteran, because that is how i play games. Beat on normal, and if it's good, beat it on hardest difficulty. Cod4 with it's constant respawn makes the game almost un-enjoyable. If i take out my enemies like clockwork and feel good about it, but only to have those same batch of enemies come running back and not even have moved yet, that is rather frustrating. Cod4's design is very backwards as far as game generations go.

    Please bungie do not go backwards in game development, because of the competition, let IW be good at scripted games, i love the sandbox form of Halo. Just improve the AI (which i thought was great by the way.)

  • Freek #69 4 years ago

    So as long you don't learn to putt the player behind botllenecks of infinite enemy spawn points!

  • QotSAfan #70 4 years ago

    You would think some people would realise that he is talking about creating a bit more scripted scenes into Halo, so you get some kind of memorable moment in the game. I can remember nearly the whole CoD4 campaign. In Halo 3 the campaign sucks after one playthrough. Can't remember any of it and thats coming from somebody who put god knows how many hours into exploring every single little piece of Halo 2's campaign, running tanks up mountains ftw!

  • seasidebaz #71 4 years ago

    I tell you what is very interesting, if you read the full interview he goes on to mention they have loads of assets for a new Myth game, which they can make now they're seperate from Microsoft...

  • bonker #72 4 years ago

    I thought COD4 was terrific although ultimately I preferred COD2. I was shocked at what a crock H3 was, to look at and to play. OK, I'm hardly a FPS fan buy my God I really was shocked to see how bad it looked and the (to me) utter lack of a coherent storyline (I have no previous H experience) killed it for me after an hour ...

  • subtlesnake #73 4 years ago

    The storyline is perfectly coherent, if you've played the previous games. If not, then it's like watching the Matrix sequels without having seen the original.
    Edited by 1 at 06/08/08 @ 20:02

  • AtomicBanana #74 4 years ago

    The scripting in CoD 4 sucked frankly. Sure, it made sure you always saw what they wanted you to see, but it played the same every time you played it. It was too easy to abuse the scripting, you constantly felt railroaded and limited by it. Halo has none of these problems with it's single player. MP, well that's a different kettle of fish. Unlocks are addictive but they really aren't my cup of tea either.

    Guess I'm just a halo fag huh? :p

  • stallion185 #75 4 years ago

    I have one question which is loosley related to this thread but I think I might get a good response judging from the comments all of you have already made.

    My situation is this... I absolutely loved the single player campaign for COD4, and I have never played any of the Halo games... reasons being that I have never been interested, never owned an xbox of any kind and I can't stand playing FPS's wish a console controller (I have COD4 on PC). I'll admit that there may be a few instances in COD4 that are a bit too scripted, but I think that the scripting is part of the style of the game which makes it so immersive. Anyways, that is off topic. I have been becoming more and more curious about Halo and this thread in particular has really got me interested in the style of the game.

    For a while now I have been contemplating getting Halo 1 and 2 on PC (getting an xbox is out of the question for me since I prefer PC and simply cant afford a new console) so that I can catch up on the story and then hope that they port Halo 3 to PC aswell. I just want to know if the PC versions are actually any good at all and if all of you guys think this would be a good way for me to get into Halo. Any advice is welome. Cheers

    Edited by 2 at 07/08/08 @ 02:04