-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo 4 |OT2| TURBO
- Thread starter Tashi
- Start date
Prinz Eugn
Member
Um, disparaging gaming side was explicitly discouraged when HaloGAF got shut down... and we're going OT, so get pumped for getting shut down again.
Anyway, I messaged Tashi yesterday but apparently I wasn't in dire need of coordination so he didn't want to play Halo 4 with me (presumably).
In other news Titanfall makes me appreciate Halo 4 for not being 10,000% babbified. Pretty fun game though. It makes me want to give thruster pack another go instead of my normal regen loadout, too.
Anyway, I messaged Tashi yesterday but apparently I wasn't in dire need of coordination so he didn't want to play Halo 4 with me (presumably).
In other news Titanfall makes me appreciate Halo 4 for not being 10,000% babbified. Pretty fun game though. It makes me want to give thruster pack another go instead of my normal regen loadout, too.
Orochinagis
Member
Not exactly. There were certainly considerations because you didn't want a massive long reel, but the 24 fps standard (and, for that matter, the Edison-perf 35mm) is more a general consensus that emerged because you couldn't crank the film at whatever speed you wanted ex post facto if you needed to sync sound; lots of films were shot at lower frame rates and then cranked at higher rates in projection. That it happens to match up with Edison's shutter speed suggestion may or may not be a happy coincidence or something more planned.
Obviously, with digital an issue of "weight of reels we need to truck around" is no longer an issue, but we still face similar, if abstract, technical constraints. Hand-drawn animation is never going to graduate from shooting on twos because you're going to kill yourself trying to do a 60fps animation by hand, let alone a 24 or 30 fps animation; roughly 8-12 fps is what's required for persistence of vision so 12fps is what people can get away with. Virtually all my web video animation projects are done at 24fps for the client, for the simple reason that at 24 fps they're getting their projects done 20% faster when taking into account renders and encodes. The higher resolution your video, the more space it's going to take up at high frame rates. When my animations need to get integrated with video they're getting output at a lossless codec that can each up 2-3GBs per minute. For motion pictures or video games, there's a massive technical downside to going for higher frame rates. So the question is, is that worth it? For me, it isn't. For others it is in games but not in movies (which perhaps may be the biggest denomination; certainly no one is rushing to ape Peter Jackson's foray into 48p.) But to call an aesthetic choice "stone age" is asinine NeoGAF-grade bull. I'd be happy with Halo remaining 30fps in the future, many people wouldn't. Either way Halo 5 will be 60fps according to previous statements. C'est la vie, end of the off-topic stuff.
Sorry about that! I had a full party for a while, lost a couple games and then got off. I'll be on tonight though!
Wouldn't typical halo require this game to be completely different?
Orochinagis
Member
Computer
Member
It is the dumbest thing to care about. I watched the side by side of metal gear solid and you can barely tell a difference. Its not worth all the bitching that's for sure. I do think MS is going to try their ass off to get the next Halo to run at 1080p just to avoid the bad PR.
Another note the Halo one pistol should be a mandatory 3rd weapon that all players must carry something like the anti titan gun in Titanfall. I think this would please everyone.
Another note the American Dad episode that is about to come on is ripping off Halo BIG time.
Thruster pack is the only AA that should survive the AA purge.
The Librarian
Banned
That's exactly right. It was the cheapest way to get sound on film properly. However, it does, randomly, have the benefits (I've heard sets look cheap in 48FPS and above). Plus it might not be dizzy for some people.
TheOhrenberger.
Banned
I actually liked the throwdown system where there was a choice of thruster, hard light, and hologram. You earned them as your ordnance and had to pic between one of the three, and all three had their uses. I seriously wouldn't mind if that's how halo 5 did AAs.
Just get rid of them all would be the best and have better movement like it should be in the first place. Treating the symptom instead of the illness is AA's in a nutshell.
Prinz Eugn
Member
No worries! I figured, I was only going to play a couple games anyway. Probably won't be on tonight, though, trying to do work for Wahurer
Yeah, I hate that it seems to change the hitbox though, I'd like it to be more like an extension of movement instead of sprint as a button-press AA.
It would be way better, and add much more depth, than sprint ever could.
Hey maybe you could also wall run and stuff with thruster pack
It would be way better, and add much more depth, than sprint ever could.
Hey maybe you could also wall run and stuff with thruster pack
What about instead of introducing a wall run mechanic they just allowed thruster packs to ricochet? So you could use it to bounce yourself off of walls for more height or to suddenly change direction.
Why should the thruster pack return when it takes the negative of sprint and makes it worse?
Not to mention it's a lot like Halo 2's way overpowered lung but even more overpowered. I mean yeah, just get a sword and a thruster pack. Not as easy, but it can be done. I thought that was a bad thing...
----
About the 24 fps thing. It's a lot easier for me and most people I know to look at. Even games can make 48/60 uncomfortable compartively. It just doesn't look natural and looks unrealistically smooth, like everybody has oiled joints or something.
In a game however, 60 fps' pros way outweigh the cons. In a movie, you're just sitting back and watching. Since the experience is just watching, it works. It's fine. In a game, you yourself are moving around, looking around quickly, so 60 fps really helps with that, and doesn't restrict you as much.
Not to mention it's a lot like Halo 2's way overpowered lung but even more overpowered. I mean yeah, just get a sword and a thruster pack. Not as easy, but it can be done. I thought that was a bad thing...
----
About the 24 fps thing. It's a lot easier for me and most people I know to look at. Even games can make 48/60 uncomfortable compartively. It just doesn't look natural and looks unrealistically smooth, like everybody has oiled joints or something.
In a game however, 60 fps' pros way outweigh the cons. In a movie, you're just sitting back and watching. Since the experience is just watching, it works. It's fine. In a game, you yourself are moving around, looking around quickly, so 60 fps really helps with that, and doesn't restrict you as much.
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
Talk of 30 vs. 60 fps is for the most part redundant when online. Once again anything online in terms of fps is negated by latency, generally for between approx. 60-90% of the time/game mechanics used during online games.
If you're talking about LAN events sure 60fps makes a solid difference in terms of gameplay but online 30fps is far more sufficient than you think. Take your average ping time of say 30-90ms and look at 60fps as 16.67ms where 30fps is 33.33ms. Now factor in fps, two way communication and server/peer response times as well as human response times which for gamers average around 18-23ms. What are you left with? An average latency that simply doesn't matter in terms of gameplay itself with relation to the fps.
Oh hitscan you say...hmm there are thresholds to hitscan as well, sure with hitscan your bullet detection benefits from 60fps but what about movement, melee, weapon pick ups, shields recharging, weapons that aren't hitscan, grenade throwing, network prediction, dropped packets, host decisions for multiple hitscan timings, getting into vehicles, boarding vehicles...blah blah. Again the approx. stat of 60-90% of time/mechanics translates to fps online meaning less than you're lead to believe.
My personal issue is NO Halo game has been locked 30fps, for the most part they haven't even been close to that. I'd prefer to see a locked 30fps and 1080p native with the resources being available for improved graphics or AI etc or simply ensuring 30fps all the time. There have been games dipping from 60fps down to 48fps or weird fps and it has lead to dire perceived results.
Take another perspective and have gamer A with say 15ms response to the servers (yeah sure) playing gamer B-G with 35-120ms response to the servers, why should gamer A once again dominate gameplay with their 60fps benefits e.g. host dominance? A locked 30fps in my opinion is a fairer framework online for the masses than 60fps could hope to be.
As for LAN, tournaments or solo campaign, 60fps all the way for fps.
If you're objectively and technically looking at playing online 60fps then for the most part it is a waste of console resources. It's a marketing tag for the fps crowd and little more IMO.
If you're talking about LAN events sure 60fps makes a solid difference in terms of gameplay but online 30fps is far more sufficient than you think. Take your average ping time of say 30-90ms and look at 60fps as 16.67ms where 30fps is 33.33ms. Now factor in fps, two way communication and server/peer response times as well as human response times which for gamers average around 18-23ms. What are you left with? An average latency that simply doesn't matter in terms of gameplay itself with relation to the fps.
Oh hitscan you say...hmm there are thresholds to hitscan as well, sure with hitscan your bullet detection benefits from 60fps but what about movement, melee, weapon pick ups, shields recharging, weapons that aren't hitscan, grenade throwing, network prediction, dropped packets, host decisions for multiple hitscan timings, getting into vehicles, boarding vehicles...blah blah. Again the approx. stat of 60-90% of time/mechanics translates to fps online meaning less than you're lead to believe.
My personal issue is NO Halo game has been locked 30fps, for the most part they haven't even been close to that. I'd prefer to see a locked 30fps and 1080p native with the resources being available for improved graphics or AI etc or simply ensuring 30fps all the time. There have been games dipping from 60fps down to 48fps or weird fps and it has lead to dire perceived results.
Take another perspective and have gamer A with say 15ms response to the servers (yeah sure) playing gamer B-G with 35-120ms response to the servers, why should gamer A once again dominate gameplay with their 60fps benefits e.g. host dominance? A locked 30fps in my opinion is a fairer framework online for the masses than 60fps could hope to be.
As for LAN, tournaments or solo campaign, 60fps all the way for fps.
If you're objectively and technically looking at playing online 60fps then for the most part it is a waste of console resources. It's a marketing tag for the fps crowd and little more IMO.
Orochinagis
Member
Make sure to put dedicated servers outside USA in the process.
I swear that would break all the maps so hard.
They should re-implement the Halo 2 Sword Glitch.
Not if everyone has it. And if you can only use it so and so amount per charge.
Steal from Titanfall. Halo could use some cool mobility options. I just want to be able to shoot accuratley while doing them which is the only thing disappointing about Titanfall wallrunning
We're in forum-land. Everything sounds awesome on paper
The most interesting thing for me would be the animations. Halo 4 was a massive step forward in making the characters feel like they were--well, characters, as opposed to remote-controlled maquettes. The subtle transitions from walking to sprinting to running were well handled.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
Thrusters were the best and most natural-feeling addition to Halo 4
So to avoid this, I say make default Thrusters along with a better strafe, also allowing for faster kill times since base movement is enhanced.
, so they'll probably scrap it like the Grenade Launcher for Halo 5.
When asked why, 343 will say because it wasn't used often compared to the other AA's and had too high a learning curve to be effective.
And some people will defend it
.. with "stats."
Just kidding.
.. but am I?
So to avoid this, I say make default Thrusters along with a better strafe, also allowing for faster kill times since base movement is enhanced.
TheOhrenberger.
Banned
I think at the very least having a vault mechanic would be cool for Halo 5. Then again maybe I'm just high on Titanfall and it's insane movement right now.
Just went 47-5, with 12 assists. 8 flag carrier kills and 3 flag defences. I spent most of the match playing aggressively in the enemy's half of the map... and yet we still lost.
I mean, I can't do EVERYTHING myself. There's a point where your team has to pull their fingers out. But nope. Hell, in the last two minutes I was the only person on my team to defend our flag at the enemy base. Reason we lost is because I ran out of ammo, effectively losing control over the flag as no one was there to help
I just don't understand how people are so oblivious.
I mean, I can't do EVERYTHING myself. There's a point where your team has to pull their fingers out. But nope. Hell, in the last two minutes I was the only person on my team to defend our flag at the enemy base. Reason we lost is because I ran out of ammo, effectively losing control over the flag as no one was there to help
I just don't understand how people are so oblivious.
/rant
Deputy Moonman
Member
I'm worn out by AA's. There will always be new ideas on how to make existing AA's better and what new things can be added. In the end, I just want traditional power ups that have to be fought over. As long as AA's are in the game, a large percent of the player base will be unhappy. Because, it all comes down to balancing issues and map breaking. Traditional or pure halo is about fighting over power ups and power weapons, imo.
A better solution: no AA's. Take a load off the development team when it's hard enough just balancing weapons. I wish 343i would focus solely on solid weapon balancing and solid maps, where map design enhances the base movement speed of players while also lending itself to team strategy. AA's just screw everything up. Additionally, I've had it with Fiesta mode being the default game-type in Halo 4 - where the entire game is designed around randomness.
They dun neutered themselves with AA's and random ordnance. In hindsight, it's like taking two horrible things you can think of (e.g., diarrhea and rotting carcass) and baking a cake. Happy birthday!
A better solution: no AA's. Take a load off the development team when it's hard enough just balancing weapons. I wish 343i would focus solely on solid weapon balancing and solid maps, where map design enhances the base movement speed of players while also lending itself to team strategy. AA's just screw everything up. Additionally, I've had it with Fiesta mode being the default game-type in Halo 4 - where the entire game is designed around randomness.
They dun neutered themselves with AA's and random ordnance. In hindsight, it's like taking two horrible things you can think of (e.g., diarrhea and rotting carcass) and baking a cake. Happy birthday!
The Real Napsta
Member
AAs are terrible for Halo.
Please return to the roots of Halo for Halo Xbox One.
Golden triangle y'all.
Please return to the roots of Halo for Halo Xbox One.
Golden triangle y'all.
Camera shifting in DS2 is so smooth because of the higher frame rate. This creates better mobility and better control over sensitivity. 60 fps is undoubtably an improvement over 30 (but really 15). It's going to happen, I don't know how people can be so silly. Halo 5 will benefit greatly from this since so much of the game's classic feel stems from movement.
e: DS2 maxes out around 40 and dips to the low 30s. Still twice what Halo 4 can do and that's coming from a major studio.
e: DS2 maxes out around 40 and dips to the low 30s. Still twice what Halo 4 can do and that's coming from a major studio.
FUBAR McDangles
Member
So when I got my X1 I disconnected my 360 to put the X1 on the top shelf of my entertainment center and ever since I have been wanting to reconnect my 360 so I can play Halo with my good buddies (and exwife) but I just haven't gotten around to it.
I'm sitting here with nothing to do for the next hour or so and I have no desire to actually do it.
343 plz put Heavies back in so I can play that
I'm sitting here with nothing to do for the next hour or so and I have no desire to actually do it.
343 plz put Heavies back in so I can play that
I'm writing a little something up at the moment about the future of Halo and the restraints 343i are under in bringing it back into the light. Considering posting it on gaming side when I'm done to generate a bit of discussion but wanted to see if anyone here fancied a brief look at it? Just to assess whether it's worth posting or not; it could well be retreading old ground.
Anyone who's at all interested in reading, plz PM me!
Anyone who's at all interested in reading, plz PM me!
It's not a good mechanic neither are any of the armor abilities, Reach and 4 should be enough evidence that they are fundamental bad ideas that shouldn't be there in the first place. Just have over shield and active camo as on the map power ups instead of them.
Orochinagis
Member
Maybe because it only grants you speed for a limited time and recover your mobility instantly? I dunno
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
It's a one-off that doesn't cover nearly as much distance as sprint, and you can pull off some crazy tricks with it to change your momentum (ie: off lifts).
The mind games are incredible. I play on 10 sensitivity and I like when I'm in the middle of a CQC fight I can just jump and Thrust around the enemy as they flail their reticle to readjust. Tons of uses that don't break the moment-to-moment gameplay nearly as much as sprint, which most people used to just run away from fights. Thrusters don't provide that sort of luxury unless you're more aware of your surroundings and have setups in mind.
Prinz Eugn
Member
Yeah, basically instead of something that lets you move around maps faster and whose usefulness in an encounter is limited to running way instead of ending it decisively, thruster pack is something that gives you more options while actually fighting someone. And it should have less of an impact on map design since spaces don't need to be scaled as aggressively to account for the fact people can sprint to traverse them more quickly.
Thirty frames per second means Spartans move at most 30 times in a second, which sounds like a lot but in actuality barely suffices for a medium paced shooter like Halo. The result is jerky movement leading to undeserved missed shots.
There have been times where I could've sworn I got the snipe headshot. I would then go into theater and see my reticle on the other player's forehead on the frame right before I pull the trigger. I then progress frame-by-frame holding the right trigger as lightly as possible and notice the enemy Spartan almost violently jerk away from my reticle as soon as I fire, making me miss by a hair. It's as if the enemy player teleported away from my shot. If the game ran at double the frame rate (60 fps), the enemy Spartan would've jerked away from my reticle at half the distance, which would not have been far enough to cause a miss; the hit would have registered. I can guarantee everyone here has missed shots due to game's shoddy frame rate and not due to poor aim. If they took a game like Halo 4 and upgraded it to 60 fps with everything else kept the same, the number of undeserved missed shots caused by the game's frame rate would drop by at least half. Hitscan is only as good as the game's frame rate (eg 30 fps would be 1/30th of a second ~ 33 ms)
Do moments like the above even occur often enough to give a shit? I would definitely say so.
As an aside, my personal hypothesis is that Bungie and 343 implemented a concept of movement and strafe acceleration (to the dismay of many competitive players) in Halo to mitigate the problem of jerky movement given a 30 fps game, and/or for the sake of realism. To further point this out, imagine if Bungie and 343 gave us an insta-crouch where there are no intermediate frames between standing and crouching a la Quake? While I would love instant movement for the orgasmic 1:1 mechanical feel and subsequent skill gap provided, the jerkiness would be too much to bear without a high frame rate, causing poor clarity on the battlefield and many undeserved missed shots. This is why a lightning fast game like Quake is simply unplayable at 30 fps while Halo is.
So I encourage any critics of 60 fps -- or anyone who has no idea what I'm talking about -- to enter a man cannon on any map in H3/HR/H4 and then watch the film with the slowest playback speed possible and notice the absurd distance your Spartan jerks with every frame and then imagine what it would be like if the Spartan moved twice as often and at half the distance for every movement. That's the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps.
Halo is an FPS, not a movie. Performance is king.
There have been times where I could've sworn I got the snipe headshot. I would then go into theater and see my reticle on the other player's forehead on the frame right before I pull the trigger. I then progress frame-by-frame holding the right trigger as lightly as possible and notice the enemy Spartan almost violently jerk away from my reticle as soon as I fire, making me miss by a hair. It's as if the enemy player teleported away from my shot. If the game ran at double the frame rate (60 fps), the enemy Spartan would've jerked away from my reticle at half the distance, which would not have been far enough to cause a miss; the hit would have registered. I can guarantee everyone here has missed shots due to game's shoddy frame rate and not due to poor aim. If they took a game like Halo 4 and upgraded it to 60 fps with everything else kept the same, the number of undeserved missed shots caused by the game's frame rate would drop by at least half. Hitscan is only as good as the game's frame rate (eg 30 fps would be 1/30th of a second ~ 33 ms)
Do moments like the above even occur often enough to give a shit? I would definitely say so.
As an aside, my personal hypothesis is that Bungie and 343 implemented a concept of movement and strafe acceleration (to the dismay of many competitive players) in Halo to mitigate the problem of jerky movement given a 30 fps game, and/or for the sake of realism. To further point this out, imagine if Bungie and 343 gave us an insta-crouch where there are no intermediate frames between standing and crouching a la Quake? While I would love instant movement for the orgasmic 1:1 mechanical feel and subsequent skill gap provided, the jerkiness would be too much to bear without a high frame rate, causing poor clarity on the battlefield and many undeserved missed shots. This is why a lightning fast game like Quake is simply unplayable at 30 fps while Halo is.
So I encourage any critics of 60 fps -- or anyone who has no idea what I'm talking about -- to enter a man cannon on any map in H3/HR/H4 and then watch the film with the slowest playback speed possible and notice the absurd distance your Spartan jerks with every frame and then imagine what it would be like if the Spartan moved twice as often and at half the distance for every movement. That's the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps.
Halo is an FPS, not a movie. Performance is king.
Speedy Blue Dude
Banned
I got a 360 again! (Shout out to Francas <3)
Do we still play Halo 4 together on Saturdays, or is that dead like thegame population halo the community thread Cortana after the events of Halo 4?
Holding a 360 controller for the first time in months again feels weird... I don't like it.
Do we still play Halo 4 together on Saturdays, or is that dead like the
Holding a 360 controller for the first time in months again feels weird... I don't like it.
Ok, so definitely better than sprint I agree.
But there are still a couple issues that remain. The first is along the lines of predictability.
See, if you see someone with a sword, yeah, you know they can get you from a greater distance from you than with normal melee. You see a needler, you know you need to strafe. You see a sniper, if you can, get close to them or behind cover as quickly as possible. See a rocket launcher...just get the heck outa there.
With thrust, there's really no way to know they have it. And if you do (say, everybody had them), it still makes things extremely unpredictable. While not legitimate "chance," it still has the a lot of the characteristics of a game ruled by chance. It makes things inconsistent. I can see it having it's place, but overall I think it would disrupt the flow of gameplay as a standard thing across gametypes like default slayer.
Secondly, there's the issue of allowing people to escape fights. Part of what I always liked about Halo was you couldn't run from a fight. It was refreshing after having played a bunch of multiplayer games with sprint before that. Sprint allows you to do that. Thrust allows you to do that.
Thrust is just added mobility/strafe. It's no more random than someone jumping in a strafe or crouching or going the other way. Thrust is just another thing in their arsenal. Fights will be determined by a combination of who has the better ability to throw off enemy aim while having the best aim themselves. Thrust won't change that.
and its just COOL.
Also, lol if anyone seriously thinks we won't have sprint. Best you can hope for is a way to disable it in customs. Sprints here forever now. RIP small maps.
Enter The 36 Chambers
Member
This.
Sprint isn't going anywhere.
Same as regenerating health and 2 weapon limit was brought into cod when halo was king.
Sprint came jnto halo when cod was king.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
Was about to post this very thing.
OR if they make the animations ~instant so when you transition to/from sprint it'll be quick and snappy, removing that jarring sluggish feeling in high action situations.
I want to be able to sprint to a spot, press LT while sprinting to STOP my sprint and to ~instantly throw a grenade, and vice versa. Halo needs to feel faster in every aspect of the game, but that doesn't mean the actual movement speed has to increase drastically. The animations have to be faster, everything from sprint to reloading; it all needs to be faster and feel more responsive.
And why RIP small maps? Murder Miners has wall jumps, sprint, dashing/thrusting and a shit ton else, yet the small maps work just fine. I bolded this because this never made sense to me, the whole "maps need to be bigger for sprint" belief. Many games have small maps and sprint, yet they work fine. Let's not automatically believe what the devs tell us because if you look at previous games, Halo 4's maps are not significantly larger and more spacious than before. In fact, they're probably even more cramped..
Barrow Roll
Member
I doubt this will happen. Isn't that whole risk/reward aspect of sprint? Burst of speed but can't do anything else?
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
You confuse the smoke and mirrors of online game networking/mechanics compensating for latency with 30fps. You're entire post is inaccurate at best.
1. Quite often 60fps is a stitching process not simply double the framerate as you state.
2. Latency and host/server feed authority is generally what causes the skipping.
3. Many Halo games are sub-30fps and not a locked 30fps again another avenue for skipping.
4. Increasing the framerate may help with some histcan but player movement is not hitscan and the host/server will continue to have such jerkiness.
5. Host/server decisions decide many factors around movement e.g. network prediction, rejecting one client over another, re-syncing gameplay etc.
6. In terms of online dedis will create fairer play/mechanics/replays far more than 60fps ever could. LAN is a different kettle of fish.
7. What you see in a reply is your version of the game and not the host version.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
Doesn't have to be. In a game where you have fast kill times and everything feels incredibly responsive, sprint becomes less important. Take CE for example, if that game has sprint and people used it during a firefight to run away, they'd be dead. If you're engaged in that game, your best option is to fight back unless you were aware enough to set up in a position that has cover nearby.
In this setting, sprint is simply a way to get from point A to point B. In a game with a shield+health system where you have that risk/reward (Reach, Halo 4), we see it being used as a means to escape/run away from fights more often than not. I think players have developed in such a way that if they start a sprint, then they have to commit to it because of how long the transition takes. Sometimes you'll start a sprint, get shot and want to fight back but in that moment it feels like an eternity to begin shooting again
(compare this feeling to equipping the Sword or Gravity Hammer in Halo 3; you better have that shit equipped already before getting close to someone or else you're going to be dead because of how long it takes -- this led to players having the Sword/Hammer equipped already whereas in Halo 2 they could just take it out and slice people rather quickly (the way it should be IMO))
Note: I should throw out there that I too want sprint removed, but if it is to return then this is the only way I'd like it.
xxjuicesxx
Member
I'm pretty sure Sprint is going to be removed in Halo 5.
I just have to somehow get hired first...
I just have to somehow get hired first...
I'd say this is more related to networking than framerate. You thought they were there, the host saw them somewhere else, you took a shot and the host corrected the player's position. If you had red reticule, then bullet magnetism should have helped you get the shot.. a non-red sniper across the map has issues with resolution of the screen adding up to more distance than you think, so while it'll look like you're right on them, you can be a bit off. Rewinds will depend on latency, less so framerate.
I'd say the reason acceleration and momentum exist are for two reasons:
acceleration to change direction lends weight to movement, and solves an issue where if you just control the player via raw inputs, you'll end with what's called the "floating gun" problem. It'll suddenly become very apparent that you're a floating gun being pasted over a camera view. Lending weight to movement, much like you would have in real life, has a better feel to it and makes you feel like you're in the world instead of looking at it. Now, you can fine tune this to be faster. You can have acceleration and momentum that's fast.
Another thing is older games tended to have instant state changes - stand to crouch, etc - simply because there was not enough RAM to actually HAVE the animation between them. There's knock on effects to instant animation state changes, such as being able to shove yourself into geometry then 'pop' yourself out of it to get accelerated past your running speed (you can do this in Halo 2 to great effect). It's also not good if someone could just spam crouch in an attempt to frame-dodge any incoming shots.
The largest benefit of 60fps is not movement in-world in terms of actual speed but input latency. The only downside of 60fps is you're no longer competing in the graphics department with 30fps games, but that's an easy trade to make with action games.
Orochinagis
Member
Halo maps need a complete overhaul, I still cant believe we are still traveling with man cannons.
I don't think you get what I meant. I was talking about the fact that game code only allows 30 spartan movements in a second to match the ideal frame rate of 30 fps. Refer to my man cannon example which is to be done on your local console, getting rid of networking factors. I'm not talking about the frame rates we're getting on our TVs. So even if my console chugs at 20 fps during a million explosions, the game code itself is nonetheless running at 30 fps and thus the Spartans are still moving at 30 movements per second. Switching over to 60 fps means they'll have to make it so that there are (at least) at most 60 Spartan movements in a second.
Think of it like a camera pointing at a clock. The camera being our video output and the clock being the game code running. Sometimes our camera drops some frames but this does not affect the clock. I'm saying we need to make the clock tick in a less jerky fashion by making the second hand perhaps move every 0.5 seconds instead of 1 second. This will come naturally if they design the entire game to be 60 fps.
I was just pointing out a minor problem with 30 fps in Halo. I 100% agree that input latency is the biggest problem.