Why the tech of the Halo Universe is a step backward. - Games

I blame BmB for that.

Pity, there actually were some interesting debates on this thread. [editline]18th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=CakeMaster7;27491537]As we all know, if he was really worshiping him he'd be like BmB in earlier posts about Master Chief, "MASTER CHEEF WOOD OWN SHPARD BECUZ YUR OPINONS SUK AND MINE ROCK"[/QUOTE] Not to be a fanboy, but to even suggest that Master Chief would defeat Shepard in combat is ludicrous on so many levels.

I love reading the thread on the Bungie forum. Seeing all the Halofan boys blindly defend the Covenant and their technology, acting like they know EXACTLY how a fiction race of aliens work.

Mr Glass101 is probably the only mature person on the thread. [QUOTE] Im amazed at how many times someone mentions glassing or space ships when the thread starting saying they are better in space lets disucss land. Every third post is someone with no reading comprehension "tanks may be better but glass us" "just glass the planet no ground war". [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27509747]Pity, there actually were some interesting debates on this thread. [editline]18th January 2011[/editline] Not to be a fanboy, but to even suggest that Master Chief would defeat Shepard in combat is ludicrous on so many levels.[/QUOTE] It's debatable. Shepard seems to be affected by punches in game and Master Chief has the strength to flip a tank so he'd probably kill him in hand to hand. However I am unsure about the weapons. Shepard's armor (and shields) seem to be affected by explosives. So we know that explosives can knock Shepard out of commission but how can Shepard maim/kill Chief? He has a wide arsenal of explosives at hand, which can obviously kill the Chief but the other weapons, the energy weapons, can they affect Chief? I'd say the argument of Chief vs Shepard is very stupid because it does nothing but incite biased opinions and flame wars (see BmB) and the fact that Chief is a horribly written character. He can do anything he wants except find a good personality. Just my 2 cents.

Yeah people dislike reading the first post of a thread instead merely focusing on the titles. That said the combine supression is fairly interesting as it is. Does it only work on humans? Most mammals? Does it affect only females or males as well. It obviously doesn't work on all terran species as pidgeons are possible more plentiful than ever. When I think about it, the only purely terran species that seem to have survived the alien species are ravens, pidgeons and possibly some kinds of insects. One wonders if there are more.

[QUOTE=Erebus.;27511533]It's debatable. Shepard seems to be affected by punches in game and Master Chief has the strength to flip a tank so he'd probably kill him in hand to hand. However I am unsure about the weapons. Shepard's armor (and shields) seem to be affected by explosives. So we know that explosives can knock Shepard out of commission but how can Shepard maim/kill Chief? He has a wide arsenal of explosives at hand, which can obviously kill the Chief but the other weapons, the energy weapons, can they affect Chief? I'd say the argument of Chief vs Shepard is very stupid because it does nothing but incite biased opinions and flame wars (see BmB) and the fact that Chief is a horribly written character. He can do anything he wants except find a good personality. Just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.factpile.com/master-chief-vs-commander-shepard/comment-page-1/#comments[/url] The argument is basically settled on that page, so I will just post the important points. Shepard's shields are much stronger than Master Chief's, and the weapons of Mass Effect are infinitely better than Master Chief, and Shepard has the ability to have multiple energy shields up at once. Shepard is a super-human also, with bullet-proof skin, regenerating flesh etc; while he may not be superior to the Chief in that regard, he is definitely not just an average Joe. Shepard also has very powerful biotic abilities, which would give an a huge variety of attack options, which Master Chief definitely can't match. Summary: [QUOTE] shielding=shephard,(he can have up to 4 times shielding of mass effect quality) weapons=shephard(infinite ammo *not literally* customisable rounds and far better range) skill=shephards(thanks to all the genetic engineering stuff mass effect is so fond of) computer systems=shephard (auto targeting whoops cortanas arse when it comes to a gun fight) magic= shephard everything in this fight says shephard….you could give mc a covenant ship and shephard would still be able to take it down…..(stasis) and i havent even played me2 yet. god knows what kind of upgrades he has received [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27511754][url]http://www.factpile.com/master-chief-vs-commander-shepard/comment-page-1/#comments[/url] The argument is basically settled on that page, so I will just post the important points. Shepard's shields are much stronger than Master Chief's, and the weapons of Mass Effect are infinitely better than Master Chief, and Shepard has the ability to have multiple energy shields up at once. Shepard is a super-human also, with bullet-proof skin, regenerating flesh etc; while he may not be superior to the Chief in that regard, he is definitely not just an average Joe. Shepard also has very powerful biotic abilities, which would give an a huge variety of attack options, which Master Chief definitely can't match. Summary:[/QUOTE] Biotic powers are really dependent on the Shepard you choose but a great counter none the less. And how would Shepard be able to use stasis on an entire ship? Not to mention your summary reeks of extreme bias. No real evidence for Master Chief being better (or worse). Skill? Chief can pilot ships, drive tanks that require more than one person to operate, use alien weapons which are not commonly stumbled upon, not to mention he pretty much has "bullet-time". Shielding, yeah, Shepard probably has better shielding and weapons too, I will say that. Also the comments on that page are nothing more than people flinging their shit around (in a respectable way surprisingly) without any evidence to support it.

[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;27466244]If the Spartan's suits require electricity (I suspect they do) then wouldn't an EMP make them totally defenseless?[/QUOTE] i don't think you're supposed to read that much into it :| but seeing as it is the future they could be powered by something else entirely

While pitting two game characters against each other is usually stupid due to the inevitable "durr, ur gaem char suckz!" logic or whatever, I find them fascinating. When someone manage to leave bias out of it, it becomes even more interesting. Let me try :buddy: John against Shepard. As a huge fan of both Halo and Mass Effect, I have to say this is a close one. Going by what I remember from both game series, as well as playing ME2 at the moment. - Shields. Shepard has stronger shields, as far a I can tell. Of course, this is after a lot of upgrades. John uses the same shields all the time, and they are stronger than the ones I have now in ME2 (about ten hours in). I think Shepard would win the shield contest, solely based on the fact that he can have a chance of instantly regenerating them once they go out etc. - Weapons. In the conventional weapon category, Shepard wins. It is true that the weapon tech in Halo seems backwards. But if John uses Covenant weaponry... The plasma shots work perfectly on shields, then melts whatever it hits. But not knowing how the shields of John and Shepard are different, there is no knowing whether the Coventant weapons work as well on Shepards shields. But even though Johns weapons are weaker, they are still deadly. - Skill. Yeah, Shepard has a lot of implants, tech to help him etc. But John has an armored suit that react to his nervous system [url=http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Reactive_Metal_Liquid_Crystal_Layer]making it damn fast[/url]. In addition to that, he has an AI hooked directly into both his brain, and his suit. As far as I am concerned, the only reason you don't snap to a headshot on every enemy in Halo is because that would be damned boring in an FPS. John is also a bit older. His age is about 40 years, while Shepard is 31-32. Shepard enlisted around the age of 18, while John was kidnapped at the age of six to be turned into a Spartan. At the age of 8 he showed as much leadership and forward thinking as you see Shepard do, and he was augmented heavily at the age of 14. While Shepard is heavily modified by the time ME2 ends (not there yet, but I can only imagine), John is practically a tank. Not going to list all his advancements, but reading the [url=http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/SPARTAN-II_augmentation_procedures]results portion of this article[/url] might shed some light on why John is better than Shepard when it comes to bodily skill. So this is won by John. - Computer Systems. John has an AI that can hack into more or less everything. But Shepard also have an AI in ME2, although not with him it seems it can do a lot of remote hacking and stuff. Cortana seems like the better AI, but since I haven't beaten ME2 yet I cannot with good conscience give this to John. Which means Shepard get this point due to him being able to hack stuff without help. - Magic. Shepard, obviously. The biotics give Shepard an upper hand, since John has nothing similar. So, who would win? Based on what I know of both characters, John has a slightly larger chance of winning. But that is so slight it could almost be considered a tie. While Shepard could incapacitate John with Stasis for instance, he still have to hit him with it. John is a masterful tactician, and contrary to what the games tell, would not barge in blindly. Besides [url=http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Stasis]stasis would only slow[/url] John down. He would take no damage, and the time in stasis would be used to analyse the situation. All in all, I would put my money on John getting out alive. Now, all this writing has made me want to play ME2. So I'll just do that :buddy:

what if chef had an overshield? o__O

[QUOTE=brenosaurusrex;27517728]what if [B]chef[/B] had an overshield? o__O[/QUOTE] Then he'd make the best god damn pasta ever.

I'd say that, were a fight ever to erupt between 117 and Shepard, Shepard would end up pulling rank. Hero of the generic space federation or not, Master Chief is still a Petty Officer.

[QUOTE=eatdembeanz;27518452]I'd say that, were a fight ever to erupt between 117 and Shepard, Shepard would end up pulling rank. Hero of the generic space federation or not, Master Chief is still a Petty Officer.[/QUOTE] That is true. John is a good soldier, so he would follow rank. Unless Shepard told him to stand still, take of his helmet and take a bullet to the face... But my Shepard would never do that :3:

I still really don't see how Master Chief could win. We've already established that Shepard has much stronger armour, weapons, and shields. It's also been established that Shepard's super human abilities can at least match those of Master Chief. Master Chief may take the cake in pure combat experience, but that doesn't really count for much when you are outmatched in every way.

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27519251]I still really don't see how Master Chief could win. We've already established that Shepard has much stronger armour, weapons, and shields. It's also been established that Shepard's super human abilities can at least match those of Master Chief. Master Chief may take the cake in pure combat experience, but that doesn't really count for much when you are outmatched in every way.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say much stronger shields and weapons, but they are stronger. And I doubt his armor is stronger than the Mjolnir armor. From the specs I have seen the Mjolnir armor is at least a bit more effective. And while Shepard has super human abilities of the biotic kind, his other enhancements does not stand up to what has been done to John. Shepard still looks like a normal human. John is huge and heavy, yet fast as hell. His bones are nigh unbreakable, and his muscles are The slowdown you get when using snipers as an Infiltrator Shepard? John has that in combat situations per default it seems. His fight right after being augmented showed that, and the data on the augmentations say that reflexes showed a 300% increase. I think it would all come down to which weapons they carried, where the fight happens, and which biotic powers Shepard has. Some Shepards could beat John, some would lose. So all in all I would probably go for a tie, after thinking a bit more about it, and playing ME2 for a few hours. Which is a great way to spend a morning by the way. I do wish Halo was more like ME in a way, having more of the info of the universe in the game, like the Codex. Having to read the books to get all of that info make the games worse to me, because all the backstory is very cool. My opinion anyway.

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27511164]Mr Glass101 is probably the only mature person on the thread.[/QUOTE] Your not contributing to this discussion in anyway. [editline]19th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27519251]I still really don't see how Master Chief could win. We've already established that Shepard has much stronger armour, weapons, and shields. It's also been established that Shepard's super human abilities can at least match those of Master Chief. Master Chief may take the cake in pure combat experience, but that doesn't really count for much when you are outmatched in every way.[/QUOTE] No we haven't "established" because we dont own either canon so we cant offcially conclude. Opinions thats all this thread is, it will never get a real answer just fanboys who take insult to people criticizing a game series that they enjoy so they splurt out as much shit as they can to prove the opposition wrong. Until 2 companies both come out and say "X would beat Y in the fight" you cant conclude. Better to let this trainwreck die.

[QUOTE=P1X3L N1NJA;27520193]Your not contributing to this discussion in anyway.[/QUOTE] Which discussion are you referring to? Are are you simply talking about this thread in general?

[QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27520290]Which discussion are you referring to? Are are you simply talking about this thread in general?[/QUOTE] By stating that one person is mature isn't a contribution so there wasn't needed.

[QUOTE=P1X3L N1NJA;27520319]By stating that one person is mature isn't a contribution so there wasn't needed.[/QUOTE] It really isn't that off topic, as I am simply posting a quote from this thread's Bungie.net equivalent. If you look back a few pages, you will find several similar comments. [QUOTE=P1X3L N1NJA;27520193] No we haven't "established" because we dont own either canon so we cant offcially conclude. Opinions thats all this thread is, it will never get a real answer just fanboys who take insult to people criticizing a game series that they enjoy so they splurt out as much shit as they can to prove the opposition wrong. Until 2 companies both come out and say "X would beat Y in the fight" you cant conclude. Better to let this trainwreck die.[/QUOTE] Of course, it's impossible to determine the outcome of a battle perfectly. However, by observing the major strengths and weaknesses of either side, you can get a good idea of who would win. I really can't see Master Chief taking out a Shepard with fully upgraded tech armour and biotic powers.

[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;27521489]I can't be arsed to look through 41 pages, but what do you guys think of the ME2 weapon system? I've always though of the thermal "clips" as a heat absorbing rag. Do the guns take energy from the clips or is it in the gun? Does the clips just absorb heat and then you have to "reload"?[/QUOTE] The clips absorb heat.

[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;27521542]As in you have an MG with unlimited ammo but you'd have to change a barrel that took 200 shots before you had to change it?[/QUOTE] Yeah. Any gun with unlimited ammo could never fire for ever, it would start getting faults and continous fire will damage the barrel.

[QUOTE=P1X3L N1NJA;27521562]Yeah. Any gun with unlimited ammo could never fire for ever, it would start getting faults and continous fire will damage the barrel.[/QUOTE] Plus corrosion and the always possible mechanical error. [editline]19th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=brenosaurusrex;27513004]i don't think you're supposed to read that much into it :| but seeing as it is the future they could be powered by something else entirely[/QUOTE] I can assure you that humanity still uses electricity, but the power source itself might change. Do you guys think that humanity is still using electricity in Halo? [editline]19th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Durandir;27518840]Shepard told him to stand still, take of his helmet and take a bullet to the face... But my Shepard would never do that :3:[/QUOTE] I don't know, people of higher rank have asked others to do some pretty crazy stuff in the past, and it was actually followed. (Soldiers being told to do a bayonet charge in WW1 towards an enemy trench, right after watching your buddies get mowed down by machine gun fire, for example)

R.i.P

[QUOTE=Erebus.;27512143]Biotic powers are really dependent on the Shepard you choose but a great counter none the less. [/QUOTE] Exactly. [QUOTE] And how would Shepard be able to use stasis on an entire ship? Not to mention your summary reeks of extreme bias. No real evidence for Master Chief being better (or worse). [/QUOTE] That wasn't by summary, that was simply a quote from the thread. If you read further, you will find people posting legitimate reasons and evidence for why Shepard wins. [QUOTE] Skill? Chief can pilot ships, drive tanks that require more than one person to operate, use alien weapons which are not commonly stumbled upon, not to mention he pretty much has "bullet-time". [/QUOTE] Master Chief may have better reflexes and experience, but they won't help that much because Shepard has much better tech and weapons, not to mention biotic powers. And Shepard is a super soldier also. Maybe he wouldn't be able to completely compare to Master Chief in that regard, but he definitely is much better than an average human. [editline]19th January 2011[/editline] I can't see Shepard as a sentinel having much trouble putting down Master Chief. [url]http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Sentinel[/url] [url]http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Tech_Armor[/url]

I think people really underestimate Shepard's strength. In the Lair of the Shadow Broker DLC, he engages a creature far larger than himself (about the size of a Halo hunter, with a similar shield) in hand-to-hand combat and knocks the shit out of it. Master Chief may be stronger/faster, but not as much as you might think. Also, Turians are pretty tough cookies, right? Shepard incapacitates two Turians with only one hit each during Samara's loyalty mission if you are taking a renegade approach to it.

It's nice to see that the thread is getting a new lease on life through a more civilized version of an earlier debate.

Most people I know say they hate Halo simply because they can't ADS. How ignorant can you get? Anything that isn't CoD nowadays gets flamed on. Not good [sp]If you can't read I'm not saying I like CoD. I hate it. I'm saying my friends hate Halo because it isn't CoD which is idiotic, and I'm sure most people I've met on PSN hate everything but CoD too[/sp]

[QUOTE=RubberFruit;27526937]Most people I know say they hate Halo simply because they can't ADS. How ignorant can you get? Anything that isn't CoD nowadays gets flamed on. Not good[/QUOTE] What're you talking about? CoD is a fail series, it's unrealistic and needs to get a new development team. The entire thread, everyone's been insulting CoD so where'd you get this dumb idea?

[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;27527240]What're you talking about? CoD is a fail series, it's unrealistic and needs to get a new development team. The entire thread, everyone's been insulting CoD so where'd you get this dumb idea?[/QUOTE] What? I'm not saying CoD is amazing, I'm contrary to this theory. I'm saying my friends say it is, and I disagree with them. Learn2read