-
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
Demoncarnotaur
Member
Agreed that the real geometry goes A LONG way for Destiny, though I don't want to discount all of Halo 5's vistas - some were certainly pretty vast with real rendering.
Deputy Moonman
Member
So I'm watching halo legends on Netflix lol. I'm on episode 3 I think "1337." What the hell am I watching rofl?
Yeah it was definitely a step up from Halo 4. A lot more 2D stuff there, and some that was low-res enough you didn't even need to zoom in to see it was iffy. While Halo 5 has its graphics faults those aren't among them. The battles over Kamchaka are pretty fun to watch... spiritual successor to those battles in Reach on Tip of the Spear
that we never fought in, still salty about that cocktease cinematic...
The only redeeming thing about Legends.
the deliberately non-canon episode
Deputy Moonman
Member
Ha yes! I was like this isn't supposed to be serious right?
So it looks like Halo youtuber The Act Man is a Gamergate supporter. Of course alot of his recent opinions are trash so I kind of saw it coming.
So i just got around to checking out motion controls on Splatoon.
Wow, what an improvement on twin-sticks! I'd love for next gen xbox hardware to adopt this feature so that i can play halo with it! I feel like this is the next step for console FPS and shooters in general. It's crazy to think that Nintendo is at the forefront on this.
Wow, what an improvement on twin-sticks! I'd love for next gen xbox hardware to adopt this feature so that i can play halo with it! I feel like this is the next step for console FPS and shooters in general. It's crazy to think that Nintendo is at the forefront on this.
Who cares what either of those guys have to say?
Going by some posters here on neogaf quite a lot.
Prinz Eugn
Member
Forza hasn't until now with Forza 7 (due to scorpio) been visually impressive, Forza 5 or 6 aren't visually impressive next to GT sport they are technically impressive because they push for framerate over graphical fidelity. Even if you look at last gen Forza compared to Gran Turismo, like F4 doesn't look visually impressive next to GT6. But a good example would be that Halo 5 is F4 visually not the best but a locked 60fps, were as GT6 is BF1 visually better but worse framerate (far worse in BF1's case.) Likewise Halo on base hardware can never hope to be visually best in class so long as it has technical goals and certain design goals, similarly Forza on base hardware can't hope to look better than drive club. But with the jump we have seen from Forza 6 to Forza 7 on scorpio, I would hope we would see a similar jump with Halo (fully fledged scalable PC version will help with that.)
"pretty good" from a purely technical point of view is a understatement, I think what needs to be pointed out is while Halo 4's version of the engine was on level with foundation, 4a and ND engine. The difference is that what are considered concessions with Halo 4 aren't concessions with a foundation, 4a or ND engine game, if Halo 4 wasn't called Halo these wouldn't be called concessions. It doesn't take away from the fact it is technically best of the best.
These aren't excuses they are technical challenges, to call these excuses is a straw man. The number of games released has a clear effect on what the engine is capable of, that is even further shown due to the fact that the whole of EA uses and works on frostbite. Are you saying that for example ND's experience with LOU on PS4 didn't technically help them get their engine ready for UC4, or that their experience with UC4 hasn't allowed them to further improve with LOU2. You don't rip apart and rebuild different areas of your engine or implement different elements during mid or late development, so if you are dice and between each game you get to do so of course your engine will be further head. Given the fact they have multiple teams all working on the engine to improve it between multiple iterations and learnings compared to 343's one team, including the fact that EA have the equivalent of a studio dedicated to solely developing frostbite alongside every single one of their other studios doing the same. One of the reasons Halo 4 is easily the most technically advanced game on 360 is because they had a year or more before production even started to tear apart the Halo engine, bringing it up to the highest standard (which Halo had not been at since halo 1.) If you want to bring up Sony first party studios, well guess what they work just like frostbite were they are all managed by ICE team and each engine is upgraded and improved upon based on another Sony first party release (this is everything from a GOW lighting system being put in LOU2 or UC4 mo-cap tech being used in GOW.) The Turn10 team are unique in the fact that they share a live engine build between two studios who each year get to implement, rebuild and optimise the engine due to their release schedule. Thats what allows them to be at the forefront, but even then due to Turn10's technical goals they are slow to implement features. BF1 also definitely does not spend most of it time at 60fps, the game spends most of it's time at low 50's mid 40's dropping as low as the high 20's during the most intense scenarios. Players doesn't make a difference when you are dealing with a ton of AI, in terms of textures that is due to the benefits of photogrammetry. LOD is not better especially in multiplayer were there is a lot of pop-in, shaders and effects again are due to the benefits of photogrammetry. Nothing is taking away from the fact that BF1 during worst case scenarios is hitting 28fps at 720p, were as Halo 5 during similar worst case scenarios during warzone is still a locked 60fps. You can't expect Halo to visually be comparable to BF1 when they both have wildy different technical goals. If 343 let there framerates lowest threshold go as low as 28 fps they could give a equally as visually impressive game.
I think you just skipped over this point of my last post:
A large overhead while also not sacrificing framerate means you have less resources you can put forward towards visuals, not to mention that BF1 sacrifices framerate as well as resolution.
It's not an argument, the issue is you took one of the points out of the eight and chose to ignore the rest. A collective Point which is lost if you focus on one, "update the engine for current generation" isn't brought up as a point but as leveller. Updating an engine to current generation is already an undertaking in it's self for every other studio as you mentioned, it's the problem that all these other points on top of the rare event of a new generation that only happens every 6-10 years that further enhances the issues. What other current gen developer had to take an engine so intrinsically tied to 30fps, which had then been streamlined into a linear shooter and have it run at a locked 60 at all times (which I don't think you understand how hard of a technical goal that is) while also having it be capable enough to render a Halo 3 level of sandbox. Not to mention as they had serious development trouble as we now know (not related to the engine.) But the whole point of my "point" was that a new engine is a waste of money, time and resources in the end due to the very reasons I put forward.
If you ditch dynamic res you also have to ditch a locked 60fps because the overhead isn't that large, or you make the overhead a lot larger in which case the graphical fidelity gets pulled back far further. Dynamic res is one of the best ways to use game consoles nowadays their is a reason why more and more developers are using it, 343's implementation is easily one of the most advanced. I do agree higher texture filtering at the cost of slightly lower dynamic resolution would be a good trade off, mostly due to texture filtering in Halo 5 having more of an effect on IQ than lower resolution. To push the half rate rendering further back you will need to free up some resources which would again further affect visuals, they could have figured this out for Halo 6 by pushing AI to the cloud or implementing a more dynamic version of the system. Rather than a hard lock 30 once you hit a static border you have a uncapped framerate that scale based on distance (ie 23yrds = 53fps/ 21yrds = 48fps.) There is nothing "weird" about the dynamic shadows they are there to avoid highly resource intensive scenarios, just like alpha effects and LOD which can all scale just as high as any other engine. It's the fact that there isn't the technical resources available to allow them, due to technical goals like a locked 60fps. "return of over-the-top physics" is something I would also like but is also a personal preference rather than a technical one, but nowadays they only have Halo fans left to cater to rather the majority of non-Halo fans who somehow hate how the warthog drives. "Dynamic AI" would ruin the Halo sandbox not to mention have a large performance hit, the Halo engine still uses Bungie's tree system. The issue with 343's AI is the lack of complexity in them especially the forerunners, and the fact that level design and the new sandbox elements have messed with the balance (also depending how a tree is designed it can result in AI appearing stupid or a lack/overload in difficulty.) PBR can definitely be improved, some areas look really good like Sanghelio's while others look like plastic. They have already confirmed splitscreen and P2P would be a massive step backwards, they are better of letting you pick the server you want to run of and improving the coverage of their servers. If they can't do that then depending on the distance from the server it switches to P2P. "with enough overhead" I don't think this is the right term for what you are trying to describe, because if it is it doesn't make any sense.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
I enjoy Favyn, Act Man, and Late Night Gaming videos on occasion. They have some well thought out Halo videos.
*shrug*
*shrug*
Disagree... Forza has always been visually impressive. it's always been a technical showpiece for whatever hardware it's coded for.
But is called halo - it's a halo game so it should be contrasted with halo standards.
Question: If Studio A releases 3 games in 3 year on engine A, and Studio B releases 1 game in 3 years in engine B, which studio has more experience with their respective engine?
Answer: both studios have the same amount of experience with their respective engine.
I'm sorry man, halo4 upped visual tech, but it was a downgrade in many other ways in order to compensate.
I
[/quote]
I think you just skipped over this point of my last post:
A large overhead while also not sacrificing framerate means you have less resources you can put forward towards visuals, not to mention that BF1 sacrifices framerate as well as resolution.
It's not an argument, the issue is you took one of the points out of the eight and chose to ignore the rest. A collective Point which is lost if you focus on one, "update the engine for current generation" isn't brought up as a point but as leveller. Updating an engine to current generation is already an undertaking in it's self for every other studio as you mentioned, it's the problem that all these other points on top of the rare event of a new generation that only happens every 6-10 years that further enhances the issues. What other current gen developer had to take an engine so intrinsically tied to 30fps, which had then been streamlined into a linear shooter and have it run at a locked 60 at all times (which I don't think you understand how hard of a technical goal that is) while also having it be capable enough to render a Halo 3 level of sandbox. Not to mention as they had serious development trouble as we now know (not related to the engine.) But the whole point of my "point" was that a new engine is a waste of money, time and resources in the end due to the very reasons I put forward.
[/quote]
I'm sorry, I'm always on mobile, so addressing things point for point is cumbersome for me.
But the end of this quote is my point. they didn't HAVE to try to get this intrinsically 30fps engine, stream line it into a linear shooter, then push it to sixty... that the approach the DECIDED to take when they formed the company.
Nah man. They could just settle on a lower native resolution and a better upscaling technique.
As far as split screen and P2P (for the sake of LAN) confirmed being a "step back", I'm not sure what you are talking about. All signs point to both returning in future installements as they are both staples of the franchise. And one is essential to their esport ( unless they want to keep having embarrassing events)
By the way, by overhead I meant reserving resources for hosting duties.
Any, horse is dead, we have what we have. Hopefully we gen a masterpiece of a halo game out of it next time.
Late Night Gaming has gotten better recently. The Act Man though is very ignorant lately and HaloFollower is just shit for the most part.Fahz continues to be the worst
but not as bad as Late Night Gaming
VincentMatts
Member
I liked act man, but at one point, being reminded of the games problems in every video just gets depressing
EvilChameleon
Member
Do you folks think the whole "Cortana was cured of rampancy by the Domain" thing to be 343 writing rampancy out of the series, and thus being able to have popular AIs (such as Cortana and Isabel) stick around forever?
The Henery
Member
Strongholds Empire is almost guaranteed quit outs in the pre game lobby every time now. Take the hint 343.
curiouscharles
Member
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
You see, where I'm coming from is I've been living with that depression for ~11 years since Halo 2 multiplayer released lol, and it wasn't until Halo 5 where I felt comfortable with the direction of this franchise. I played the shit out of every Halo game, loved each as their own and appreciated the new features/additions with each new entry, but there was always this feeling of "Damn.. one step forward, two steps back."
Halo 5 is the first Halo game that is unequivocally better than its predecessor, something that has never been done before with any sequel, and its arguable that H5 multiplayer is the best Halo has been for a decade+. Halo 3 gameplay was worse than Halo 2, Reach was worse than Halo 3, Halo 4 worse than Reach, but finally that cycle broke with Halo 5. Of course there are some parts that have been improved from title to title, like hit registration from Halo 3 to Reach etc., but I don't think you'll see many people say Halo 4 is better than Halo 5.
That's why I'd be alright with Halo 6 being a sequel to Halo 5; the gameplay deserves its sequel. This is not a perspective you see with these Halo YouTubers as most of them seem to not agree on a middle ground between Halo 5 and classic Halo without Spartan Abilities. As of right now it seems it's either we get a sequel to Halo 3 or these content creators and their communities will be upset, and that's not an ideal mentality going into Halo 6 in my opinion.
I just hope people are open minded when it's finally revealed, and the same goes for 343 over criticisms. I'm sure it's difficult to sift through the mountains of complaints to find constructive feedback, but that comes with the package of being at the helm of this behemoth of a franchise.
Ehh, people quit out of everything, so that's hardly an indicator. Strongholds Empire is pretty fun in my opinion, but if you're not a fan of that chaos then I can understand the distaste towards it. I'm a fan of crazy gametypes like 4v4 KOTH on Chiron, so Strongholds is hardly that wild in comparison lol.
curiouscharles
Member
précisement.
as i said, lurrrrrrve it.
was also always a huge fan of 4v4 koth on chiron, so...
Good post
The hilarious thing about The Act Man is that he is dead set convinced 343i could feasibly remove REQs and microtransactions from Halo 6 all while keeping free DLC/Content Updates for the game (because in his mind their is a massive conspiracy as to why the REQ system was added). He ignores the fact that Halo 5's DLC was partly free because of the REQ system as it paid for the DLC content and is probably also why the Xbox 360 Halo games are having their DLC's become free.
He basically not only wants his cake, he wants to not pay for it and eat it too.
He basically not only wants his cake, he wants to not pay for it and eat it too.
curiouscharles
Member
yeah seriously couldn't agree more with EVERY single point in that post.
where's the "save post" feature when you need it, hey?
Fahzgoolin
Banned
Fahz continues to be the worst
but not as bad as Late Night Gaming
Just ignore me already... =/
EvilChameleon
Member
Halo 5 is indeed better that Halo 4.
The maps, however, are horrendous. I can't think of even one that I enjoy playing on, or look forward to playing on.
No big team maps.
Remixed map system is a nonsense cop-out for making actual new maps.
Actually, I lied, I enjoy playing on Mercy, because that's from Halo 4, and every single map in that game was an A+.
The maps, however, are horrendous. I can't think of even one that I enjoy playing on, or look forward to playing on.
No big team maps.
Remixed map system is a nonsense cop-out for making actual new maps.
Actually, I lied, I enjoy playing on Mercy, because that's from Halo 4, and every single map in that game was an A+.
curiouscharles
Member
what modes do you play mostly?
out of curiosity...
Yeah, I quite liked the BTB maps in Halo 4... mostly just played BTB during that game, didn't even touch arena really so don't even know what them maps were like!
Now I just play team arena / slayer, /sadface about BTB honestly. [and i don't play warzone]
Fata1moose
Banned
Favyn is good, the others...
Truth, Fathom, Stasis, Coliseum, Eden, Plaza and Mercy are all great 4v4 maps.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
Granted, I haven't followed them recently. I love Act Man's critique of Halo 5. I liked Late Night Gaming's commentary on 343 art styles. I just like Favyn in general lol.
Halo 5 is unique in that it's the only Halo game to be an improvement on the game that came before it, but....
Halo 4 was BY FAR the worst game in the series. So besting it isn't some amazing milestone. And even that is questionable. H5 has better core gameplay and Forge, but the campaign, aiming system, QA, and content suite are all major steps back. So I can imagine their are plenty who disagree with the idea that H5 is better, depending on where their priorities lie.
From where I sit, H5 is a much better game. I've put in hundreds of hrs vs about 20 in H4. But is H5 'deserving of its sequel'? Moreso than Halo 3- the record breaking juggernaut that sat atop the most played list for 3 years dispite stiff competition? I dunno, man.
I hope that whatever they do, they choose to include/cut things based not on industry trends, but what is actually best for the gameplay loop. Personally, I think that would mean bringing in and improving upon some concepts from every game in the series (H4 excluded).
CEs approach to weapon balancing(empowered individual, niche map pickups) , H2s streamlined mechanics, H3s breadth of content and rewarding MM system, Reach's progression, H5s Forge, Warzone and (some) mobility enhancements.
Halo 4 was BY FAR the worst game in the series. So besting it isn't some amazing milestone. And even that is questionable. H5 has better core gameplay and Forge, but the campaign, aiming system, QA, and content suite are all major steps back. So I can imagine their are plenty who disagree with the idea that H5 is better, depending on where their priorities lie.
From where I sit, H5 is a much better game. I've put in hundreds of hrs vs about 20 in H4. But is H5 'deserving of its sequel'? Moreso than Halo 3- the record breaking juggernaut that sat atop the most played list for 3 years dispite stiff competition? I dunno, man.
I hope that whatever they do, they choose to include/cut things based not on industry trends, but what is actually best for the gameplay loop. Personally, I think that would mean bringing in and improving upon some concepts from every game in the series (H4 excluded).
CEs approach to weapon balancing(empowered individual, niche map pickups) , H2s streamlined mechanics, H3s breadth of content and rewarding MM system, Reach's progression, H5s Forge, Warzone and (some) mobility enhancements.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
That is significant, though.
Campaign gameplay in Halo 5 is better than Halo 4, but the story is what you're talking about. Both have many issues, to be fair.
Halo 5 has its issues, but Halo 4's reticle wasn't centered, there was a lot of aim assist, there was flinching and no descoping, so H5 wins there imo.
Halo 4 also shipped without a File Browser and I think it paled in comparison to Halo 5's offerings. Halo 4 may have had BTB, but it didn't have anything that felt like classic Halo outside of that single "Slayer Pro" playlist at launch lol, and I'm being generous with that. H4 also had paid DLC with Mk. V behind a paywall. H5 had a good amount of content at launch, maybe not compared to some previous games, but Warzone was a huge undertaking and there were added modes/gametypes not long after launch, whereas the best we got with Halo 4 was Legendary BR starts and Spartans Ops, which was a miss for a lot of people.
There can be plenty of people who like Halo 4 more than Halo 5, but the point still stands. Those numbers are not dissimilar to the plenty of people who enjoyed Reach over Halo 3.
Hard to argue what's "more deserving." There are strong arguments to support both.
Halo 4s reticle went were it was supposed to. It felt good. No heavy aim, no weird acceleration curves , no need to separate he x & y axis in response to complaints.
Halo 5 has a ton of magnetism, despite the reduction is assists. I can't say Halo 5 wins here.
halo 4 had a ton game modes on day one. Including slayer, ctf, oddball, KOTH, regicide, dominion, flood and extraction. OH and BTB.
H5 had slayer, strongholds, ctf and Warzone.
(Edit- oh and breakout)
Only 2 OG classic gametypes!
If none of the H4 felt like classic halo, it's because the game itself didn't feel like classic halo, which is a separate issue from the amount and availability of content.
Halo 5 had a laughable amount of content at launch in comparison. While the free updates are an amazing concept (that I should have mentioned earlier and I hope continue) most of what we got was 1) bad maps 2) content that should have been in at launch 3) ugly customization option. 4) the need to build missing game modes in Forge w/o announcers. As a consumer it's not my duty to care if Warzone was a massive undertaking, that's the developer's problem. was losing classic game modes worth it? Depends on who you ask. Many will say no. I know many 4v4 and BTB fans are unsatisfied with the shift in focus.
Sure H4 had maps and items behind a paywall, but you need an xbl subscription to play any sort of MP in H5. you can't even forge without one. Can't even run around a map by yourself without one. talk about a paywall.
I don't know, hard to judge because many more people felt compelled to actually buy H4 vs H5. But a larger percentage of those who bought H5 felt compelled to continue to play it. But are we to ignore the sentiments of those who skipped H5 altogether?
Right. I don't even know if it's worth arguing. 343 should make the best Halo game possible. Borrowing from the past when it suits the game. Adding new things when it suits the game. Taking things out that hurt the game. They shouldn't be beholden exclusively to the sensibilities of any specific game in the series (nor that of other games) , IMO. They should just be be concerned with the gameplay loop.
EvilChameleon
Member
I play every mode in the game. Whenever there is a new season, I get a ranking in at least one mode. This season, I got a ranking in all 8 modes.
Warzone with RP boosts.
VincentMatts
Member
Yeah i think 5 is the best the game has ever been MP wise. I wouldnt change too much in terms of gameplay there. I would focus on much better map design and aesthetics and have all the classic halo gametypes built into the game from day 1.
What gives me hope for 6 is that 343 did listen to feedback after halo4 for the MP so im hoping they make that same effort for the SP in 6.
if halo6 launches with all the classic gametypes, better maps and a real BTB, ill be happy.
VincentMatts
Member
This games success is absolutely crucial. They need to hit it out of the park on all fronts or else i get the feeling that there will be no coming back from this.
