Fata1moose
Banned
They thought if they doubled down and only let us play as Chief 3 times we'd like it.
-
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 5: Guardians |OT5| Is HaloGAF irrelevant now?
- Thread starter sir_dany12
- Start date
They thought if they doubled down and only let us play as Chief 3 times we'd like it.
VincentMatts
Member
I mean, there are ways to do it i suppose. Gears4 did it right imo. Markus was there the whole time so it was familiar but new.
Im even ok with playing as "other characters" in spin off Halo games. But man, we wait YEARS for a Chief Halo game....A main Halo game. Why would anyone think id enjoy not seeing him 75% of the time in a main Halo? Just crazy to me.
That's something I have an issue with. While it is true originally there was a vocal group of fans who disliked having the Arbiter as a playable character, alot of people warmed up to him though well before Halo 3's release. But because of a vocal minority of users Bungie downgraded him to a co-op side kick in Halo 3 and in turn nerfed what could have been an epic ending to the trilogy and instead we were given a game that had a story that was mostly comprised of filler missions and plotholes.
I was shocked by Arbiter missions, but never felt they were bad. 'The schism' would have been nearly impossible to portray effectively without getting an elites perspective. The juxtaposition of chief and Arby was well done from the opening to the very end.
In the build up to H5, I was really excited about Locke. I thought he'd sorta be ONIs Arby- blindley following orders, thinking he was doing the right thing. But chasing a rebellious Chief would show him that ONI couldn't be trusted.
I also expected an ODST-esque mission structure. We'd play as Osiris, wading through some Blue Team wreckage, until we used Artemis on a clue. Then we'd get a play through the Blue Team flashback and earn a badass Blue Team cutscene.
In the build up to H5, I was really excited about Locke. I thought he'd sorta be ONIs Arby- blindley following orders, thinking he was doing the right thing. But chasing a rebellious Chief would show him that ONI couldn't be trusted.
I also expected an ODST-esque mission structure. We'd play as Osiris, wading through some Blue Team wreckage, until we used Artemis on a clue. Then we'd get a play through the Blue Team flashback and earn a badass Blue Team cutscene.
BizzyBum
Member
YourExWife
Member
BTB is easier because nobody uses Warthogs in Warzone, and the Warthog turret is the easiest way to get Buckle Ups.
I've been playing this last few days after some time off. Man, this multiplayer is AMAZING! The feel of the weapons, the utter amazing control you have of your Spartan, you think it, you can do it. It is just so much fun and at the same time manages to completely satisfy my competitive side. The weapon balance is top notch, the time to kill is perfect, it just feels soooo good. It is the one game I can play online and always know what the oponent did better than me, it just makes me say to my self "git gud", and encorouges me to keep getting better. I can safely say this is my favorite online multiplayer so far of this generation.
See you out there Halo Gaf, and Stinkles, Frank, I truly appreciate the work your team did here, looking forward to your plans with Scorpio and Halo 6.
See you out there Halo Gaf, and Stinkles, Frank, I truly appreciate the work your team did here, looking forward to your plans with Scorpio and Halo 6.
jizzlobber
Member
Hey... that guy is being positive!!!
Let's get him!!!!
Let's get him!!!!
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
Agreed, for me it really does water down other games. If the aiming or movement or mechanics aren't up to Halo 5 par then I'm out. To this day I'm still buying games and playing H5 instead.
Can't wait for Halo on Scorpio.
Masterz1337
Neo Member
See I've always seen these missions as inherently bad. Despite the (many in some cases) good things these missions do, they are always held back by the fact you are fighting against a smaller selection of enemies than the Chief missions, with roughly half as many weapons. But more importantly than the low amount of weapons is the fact every automatic is a Covenant weapon, and the interesting dynamics and differences between the 2 factions in H1 is all but gone for roughly half the game.
I mean take a look at the gas mine where you fight Elites (90% who use carbines), Grunts (90% who use needlers), Sentinels and then Flood for the entire mission, or Uprising where it's Brutes, Jackals and maybe one encounter of Drones. Or even worse, the Quarantine Zone missions where it's all Flood and Sentinels. I'm of the belief that the Chief missions are more moved not because of the Chief, but because they are just inherently more fun and more interesting.
Samurai G0SU
Member
Had some amazing games last night. I felt in the zone performing some 'save my life' jumps/thrusts/stalls/fake outs with random team mates able to clean up.
Of course i didnt win each game, but they felt a lot more even than some games i've had recently.
Of course i didnt win each game, but they felt a lot more even than some games i've had recently.
Fighting the good fight.
Yeah the Arbiter missions are just not as interesting partially because they never have you fight humans. On one hand I understand it, but the fact that you spend Quarantine Zone/Sacred Icon chasing humans right next to you but you never engage them is just weird.
Most Halo games since CE have forgotten that multi-faction battles are one of the best parts of the original game and well-designed encounters with multiple ways to play can add up to a whole much better than the constituent parts (because yeah, the Sentinels were never a very interesting enemy, and the Flood were mostly designed to be dealt with one way.)
Fahzgoolin
Banned
Having all your marketing hype for Halo 5 setting up on HTT and trailers/interviews saying chief might be a traitor etc and just saying it was just a "subplot" not meant to mislead tells me that the teams involved with Halo's marketing/writing/etc are either boneheaded amateurs or are disingenuous. In fact in your very own vidoc you have Josh Holmes talking about grabbing our attention by calling into question Chiefs integrity. This isn't some subplot to compliment the main game, this has been presented and communicated as the questions fans should be asking and what the audience should expect when booting up H5 for the first time.
Also constantly hearing that Chief is the main character in H5 and that it's primarily "his story", but it ends up clearly not being the case is just another example of how absurd this all is. You have to consciously say that knowing you are completely full of it and trying to dodge bad pre-launch reception...Which makes me question why on earth did you go this route with H5 in the first place? You all tried so hard to make us relate to Chief more as a broken, yet strong human being with an existential crisis in H4 and ending that game with a burden of loss. Let's go setup a follow up campaign that ditches those aspects and have you play as a new spartan for most of the game!
After the absolute tone deafness of H4 multiplayer, the broken MCC, poorly handled HCS stuff (especially leading into Halo 5 with H2A), everything with H5's marketing and PR speak, and H5's woefully incomplete package at launch... Why on earth would we trust what you say before the launch of your games?
Edit: I say this despite really enjoying some level design and weapons and combat in the campaign.
Also constantly hearing that Chief is the main character in H5 and that it's primarily "his story", but it ends up clearly not being the case is just another example of how absurd this all is. You have to consciously say that knowing you are completely full of it and trying to dodge bad pre-launch reception...Which makes me question why on earth did you go this route with H5 in the first place? You all tried so hard to make us relate to Chief more as a broken, yet strong human being with an existential crisis in H4 and ending that game with a burden of loss. Let's go setup a follow up campaign that ditches those aspects and have you play as a new spartan for most of the game!
After the absolute tone deafness of H4 multiplayer, the broken MCC, poorly handled HCS stuff (especially leading into Halo 5 with H2A), everything with H5's marketing and PR speak, and H5's woefully incomplete package at launch... Why on earth would we trust what you say before the launch of your games?
Edit: I say this despite really enjoying some level design and weapons and combat in the campaign.
I probably should have been more clear. I was not talking about the gameplay of the missions, but on the narrative presentation.
If the Arbiter missions weren't fun, it wasn't BECAUSE you were the arbiter, it's because of the game didn't provide interesting gamplay scenarios. That can be an issue regardless of who the player is controlling.
From a narrative standpoint i think the Arbiter missions were a success. The same can't be said for Osiris. There was no value in playing in the wake of Blue Team. We didn't learn anything that couldn't have been learned playing AS Blue Team.
There's a fundamental difference between doubling down on the brutal physical assault of a customer and someone making a design choice you disagree with.
one is a subjective artistic debate and the other was objective physical assault
tl;dr what TCKaos said
BizzyBum
Member
Holy shit, Splyce is going to be super legit.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
Is there though? Is there?
Fahzgoolin
Banned
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
One man being assaulted and receiving compensation vs millions being assaulted by the Camo AA and receiving TMCC.
Beat me up and throw me off a plane with a paycheck any day.
Beat me up and throw me off a plane with a paycheck any day.
VincentMatts
Member
it's almost like he said it merely reminded him.
He's an idiot if adding a sprint to a video game reminds him of someone catching a beating on a plane.
FATstronaut
Member
Tbf, he didn't say that the addition of sprint reminded him of the beating of a passenger.
He suggested that one case of corporate leadership ignoring valid criticsm reminded him of another case of corporate leadership ignoring valid criticism.
Obviously the personal toll of these two scenarios are incomparable. But that wasn't the comparison made.
Going forward I think it will be hard to please all fans. I personally like the abilities, in Halo 4 and Reach people could choose, which led to some fights feeling unfair. Some people might prefer not having sprint, dash, shoulder charge and ground pound, because to them Halo is better off without them. But I personally, even though I love classic Halo, believe that this feels like the natural evolution of Halo. To me Halo is all about even starts and balance. Shoulder charge, ground pound and even sprint can be either countered or will severely hinder you if you spam them. I get very rarely killed by shoulder charge, in fact, a lot of people force it and it only leaves them vulnerable. I honestly think it is the best implementation of them so far compared to Halo 4 and Reach.
To be fair, I completely understand some people wanting a more classic Halo, maybe add a classic playlist without any of these abilities? That might please some fans, but there are surely a lot of people like me that enjoy this, and surely would be disappointed if they are eliminated. I think they have a tough challenge ahead, winming over back the conservatists fans while keeping the progressist fans of Halo. And I say this without meaning any offense to either, it just is a somewhat divided community, and I don't pretend to be on the right side, just the one I like more.
Edit: And, honestly, it just feels great to be able to play, move and counter like a Spartan would, I suppose.
To be fair, I completely understand some people wanting a more classic Halo, maybe add a classic playlist without any of these abilities? That might please some fans, but there are surely a lot of people like me that enjoy this, and surely would be disappointed if they are eliminated. I think they have a tough challenge ahead, winming over back the conservatists fans while keeping the progressist fans of Halo. And I say this without meaning any offense to either, it just is a somewhat divided community, and I don't pretend to be on the right side, just the one I like more.
Edit: And, honestly, it just feels great to be able to play, move and counter like a Spartan would, I suppose.
Fata1moose
Banned
Also Spartan abilities and armor abilities are fundamentally different. To say they doubled down on armor abilities is false.
Spartan abilities: Everyone has them and you know they can employ them. Decision making is consistent as the abilities are consistent.
Armor abilities: Unbalanced loadout choice, the ability isn't readily telegraphed. You don't know what ability they have at their disposal until they use it, inhibiting player strategy.
Plus the abilities themselves are different, compare armor lock, camo and bubble shields to ground pound, Spartan charge and stabilize. No overlap.
Spartan abilities: Everyone has them and you know they can employ them. Decision making is consistent as the abilities are consistent.
Armor abilities: Unbalanced loadout choice, the ability isn't readily telegraphed. You don't know what ability they have at their disposal until they use it, inhibiting player strategy.
Plus the abilities themselves are different, compare armor lock, camo and bubble shields to ground pound, Spartan charge and stabilize. No overlap.
Totally agree with this.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
.
Reach -> Halo 4
They doubled down on Armor Abilities despite the negative feedback towards them.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
Yeah, I really want a dedicated playlist with just classic Halo style. Let the pro's choose what is most competitive as well. To be honest, while I still prefer the classic style, in campaign the spartan abilities can be quite fun.
If we are so "niche" as 343 claims or acts, then it won't harm their precious playlists
If we are so "niche" as 343 claims or acts, then it won't harm their precious playlists
Fata1moose
Banned
Even better with the new motion tracker as players are detoured from sprinting.
Poodlestrike
Banned
I mean... it works much, much better than it had in the past, but fine?
People are right, making you choose between speed and shooting (without adding a vehicle) is just not great design.
Zeus The Dino
Member
this is funny to hear, when Halo 5 has the most problems with aiming compared to any other Halo
Fahzgoolin
Banned
At least for Halo. In COD (military shooters in general) it can work quite well because the TTK is so darn fast.
I understand why some people like it or even consistently defend it (ex: Jem), but bar none this is something that has had legitimate complaints and fair points made against it ever since Reach.
Like you said, Halo 5 certainly does it better, but the same complaints and valid criticisms still stand against a tried and true formula established by the original trilogy. Doing something unfavorable, but better and more refined, still doesn't justify its existence to many of us in the first place.
You can do all you want with sprint, but with the Halo shield system itself, it will always be a problem and the same criticisms remain. That's not even going into how sprint changes (imo very negatively) map design, flow, spawns, etc.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
It works better. But it can never work "just fine" because it's an inherently flawed concept. The maps are stretched such that you have to sprint to play the objective. And when you are sprinting you can't shoot. This inevitably leaves "deadman zones" throughout the map.
I think this gif says it all https://gfycat.com/DizzyNegativeAmethystsunbird
Just compare the two vids on the left hand side. It H3 you can navigate from base to P 2 and be combat ready the whole time, faster than you can in H5 sprinting with you gun down.
Yeah, I think it's fine.
I'm fairly neutral about sprint. I understand the arguments against it and I agree that it significantly changes how the game plays. However, I don't think that one gameplay style is inherently better than the other, I enjoy both of them for different reasons. I think SA radar Halo 5 is my favourite iteration of competitive Halo multiplayer though. I think it's a fantastic blend of the new aggressive and high action Halo with the more methodical and considered style of classic Halo.
One argument I definitely disagree with though is that it ruins map design, I really prefer larger scaled maps. I find a number of maps in the original trilogy to be too claustrophobic and constrained. I actually prefer Halo 5's maps for the most part.
I can understand why you and others dislike that, however it's not an inherent flaw.
Nothing wrong with larger scaled maps. But this maps are scaled for sprinting despite the fact that you aren't sprinting all the time.
In order to shoot you have to travel at a speed slower than the maps are designed for. Which means that there is inherently a bunch of negative space in the arena.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
Better yet, we should have a gif where someone in Halo 2/Halo 3 walks from red/blue base to top mid compared to Halo 5's sprint+thrust+clamber to top mid...That's where it gets even worse.
Fata1moose
Banned
I'm pretty neutral towards sprint. I wouldn't mind it being removed at all. If they do though, the base movement speed has to be fast, no returning to Halo 3 molasses. One reason I would like to see it removed is map design. With sprints removal we could have classic maps like Lockout again, that map is totally broken with sprint. Ground pound and thruster stays though, that's the hill I'll die on.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S4PJ0tFVI8
Great commentary and thoughts on why classic Halo is so desirable, not just a nostalgic emotional knee-jerk response to how 343 has approached Halo.
One thing I think this commentary is spot on about and has been echoed here, is that while Halo 5 isn't a "bad game", it doesn't feel like a proper Halo game. Enhanced mobility just seems like a trend that 343 has been chasing after (and many other developers too). People are getting sick of it.
It always delights me when I can find some common ground with you lol
Great commentary and thoughts on why classic Halo is so desirable, not just a nostalgic emotional knee-jerk response to how 343 has approached Halo.
One thing I think this commentary is spot on about and has been echoed here, is that while Halo 5 isn't a "bad game", it doesn't feel like a proper Halo game. Enhanced mobility just seems like a trend that 343 has been chasing after (and many other developers too). People are getting sick of it.
It always delights me when I can find some common ground with you lol
Again true and again, not an inherent negative.
You should never use lore as an argument in the context of multiplayer. Gameplay is the number one consideration in multiplayer, lore should be an afterthought.