NullPointer
Member
Ain't that the truth. Halo 4 needed more time, and a beta, and a demo. I can only hope the next game gets all three.
-
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 |OT13|
- Thread starter kylej
- Start date
- Status
I guess casual's would find it fun, the problem is though that CoD is the ultimate casual FPS. Most of the casual's flood to that and don't return to Halo.
Which is a large part of their problem, just like Bungie. They always talk about looking at the numbers, or how they have all these metrics in place to analyze data and what the player numbers are saying. They look at who goes where on a map, how they're dying, where they're dying, how much time they spend in this menu. It's a terrible way to create and measure a game. It's like they have certain statistical data and checkboxes they're crossing off rather than actually designing the game around a solid gameplay philosophy.
How is it any more "casual" than Halo at this point? I would argue that Halo 4 does way more to hold the hand of new/"casual" players than CoD does. Maybe CoD is just more fun for all groups of players at this point.
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
Talk down? What mate? I just posted what you asked for, statistical facts source that contain no opinion either way. You want to jump on me for helping you out now? Ok vendetta received
joking mate
I didn't say 50K, I said 100-150K on average. Take the available numbers from the Wayback Machine and over the 18 months period the cross section at differing times of the day and you get 90,345 on average. Not much of a difference from Halo 4 or Reach.
To the forum in general, attack me for wanting to find factual numbers all you like I could care less if hugely popular or not I like the game. But I like truth and facts more than my own opinion, that's all these numbers are about, not you, not me but the actual numbers.
Using real world data is a bad way to inform decisions on a game? Wut?
He's trying to argue that you can't base your game design decisons solely on focus groups - which is what he felt 343 did.
It's useful to a point. However, that was always their default response when dealing with potential gameplay alterations: "We'll look at the data." I'd rather they address whether or not the feature is actually contributing to the core gameplay philosophy than how much or how little it's used.
It's not limited to 343 either; they were merely picking up where Bungie left off.
Talk down? What mate? I just posted what you asked for, statistical facts source that contain no opinion either way. You want to jump on me for helping you out now? Ok vendetta receivedjoking mate
Could you please address what you meant by Halo 3 having 50k online, but also having data that showed two years after Halo 3, it had 167k online? I'd much prefer that discussion to occur opposed to your back pedaling once I mentioned getting a moderator involved.
Two years after Halo 3's release, Halo 3 had more UU's than Halo 4 two months after release. That's how I'm interpreting that data.
How does the population size at the time you are playing not 'mean shit'? I wanted to play Crimson DLC last night, it was hovering around 140 players total. Now that's basically around 12 lobbies to get me the perfect connection, the perfect skill selection, the perfect teammates. I am getting more and more laggy games in objective gametypes. I cannot play with these phantom users from 12 hours ago, UU doesn't mean anything for my experience at any one time
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
See my edited reply above mate. I never said 50K, check my posts and the above edited one. I said approx. 100K-150K. Then I sourced the accuracy of the numbers, quoted Ghost and calculated the average of approx. 90K for Halo 3 from the best Wayback Machine source we have today.
I'm answering your questions, PM a mod all you like I have nothing to hide or regret at all. I'm genuinely helping you out by getting old posts and answering your questions even when you recall someone else's 50K as my words...
Bungie design the same way, even backed by the same insanely detailed MS test labs. Different game, different developer but same test labs I'm sure. They both also use internal beta/alpha for MS employees to play/test the game.
I agree having a larger population helps with all the matching parameters. I've found Halo 4 in the last 1-1.5 months doing a far better job for me as an Aussie objective player than at launch. I guess I am now accustomed to objective having low numbers. At least with a hitscan BR/DMR and radar I can play through the latency for the most part. Halo 3 ranked taught me to adjust my game accordingly. It's frustrating but no game is going to eradicate the online issues, sure I'd like as much population as possible but I don't loose sleep over what others like to play.
Reagan's BR
Banned
90k average over the course of 2 years is different from 90k daily two months from launch.
Two very different statistics.
Two very different statistics.
Thank you for clarifying.
Do you see no correlation though? 150k+ two years after release compared to an average of 100k two months after release?
I suppose it depends on how you measure the success of a game, but the fact remains that Halo 4 will not retain the audience Halo 3 did.
That speaks volumes on how the majority of the population feels about Halo 4. Id est, it's not worth their time to keep playing, or they simply don't enjoy playing.
xxjuicesxx
Member
Their whole saying of "We make games we want to play" kinda says thats not true. As far as I recall they make the game anyways way before test labs do anything. Then they test the game to look for pretty simple things like user frustration.
The numbers we have for Halo 3 are cumulative UUs over a 24 hour period (as collected by people with access to the actual backend).
The numbers we have for Halo 4 are peak values in a 24 hour period (collected at 15 minute increments by someone with zero access to backend values).
They're not comparable.
Which is why Bungie's Halo games got consistently more shitty. They got away from; "Here are the core Halo principles" and went to "we need to make sure these numbers even out."
Prime example: Oh no, this weapon is being used too much, lets make it weaker. Oh no, its still being used too much, lets add spread. Oh no, it's still being used too much lets add bloom. What seems to be missing from that whole logical progression is the fact that Halo worked best when it was balanced around a core utility weapon. It's okay for your utility weapon to be used more than other weapons.
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
Halo 3 released on November 20, 2007, the first Halo 3 statistic we have access to was February 12th, 2008 and the second on December 11th, 2008. That is not 2 years after release. Having 167K two years later on July 24th, 2009 is a testament to how good halo 3 or ranked/social was as well as the industry at that time. I loved that game but I love Halo 2 as well. Halo 4 I'm more liking it very much and if she treats me right I might grow to love her.
No, I don't see the huge "OMG Halo is dead" that others do.
Yes, I agree Halo 4 would struggle to hold the population Halo 2 or 3 did. Different time, different industry, so many similar games now and the COD juggernaut etc.
Yes, I agree with Wu about comparable statistics.
Steelyuhas
Member
Well we do have congruent numbers for Halo 3 as well, although they were reported every 30 minutes, which makes comparing them to Reach's (reporting every 60 seconds) irrelevant.
Barrow Roll
Member
Are you here to fulfill Bungie's Destiny?
Why would we care about a number like that? There's absolutely nothing to compare it to in any previous game - it's useless as a measure of comparative popularity.
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
I'm very keen on Destiny that's for sure, hope it delivers. Maybe you've seen my hot topic thread over at B.net about Destiny speculation? (Bungie's New Game in the old universe forum).
Against popular opinion I do NOT like the new B.net, the forums/tags are just horrible and the search feature is even slower that Waypoint used to be. LOL. It has been over 14 minutes to search 3 keywords to find my topic above so I could link it, yes I know beta something. Also I can't sign in at all to B.net this morning, got in once and then nothing now. Further the white and layout feels more Microsoft than Bungie ever has
You are probably right. Seems with Halo 4 343i tried to keep the mantra of "developer decisions are paramount over statistics or community requests" like Bungie did with say CE or for the most part Halo 2. Ever since it seems most game developers in general have kind of been chasing the second or third lightning strike.
Interesting. From what I've seen there's nothing wrong with the new Bungie forums. Compared to their old one, the activity is holding steady.
MaximumFlipFlop
Banned
Actually, it's a good way of developing a game. The problem is that they didn't execute it properly.
Their stats become near useless when other factors are considered. Mainly the play testing (or lack thereof) that is done. You need to have skilled players to play test the game because they are willing to do anything to win, even if it means breaking the game. Have you seen the Sword Base heatmap? How the heck did that make it past the design phase? The only reason I can think of is that the heatmap they generated from in-house play testing was probably a lot different than what Sword Base turned out to be.
Look at the top 1% Onyx Sword Base gameplay and try not to kill yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRkT6OnRd5Q
Now watch some random dude play Sword Base (this is probably what the play testing looked like).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htiR-Jy9S7g
343 needs to look at what Blizzard is doing in terms of designing a balanced game -- basing it on how the best players play. Look at how competitive the StarCraft games are. Those games have ginormous skill gaps.
And for the record, I do agree with you on the point that they should prioritize building a solid game with good core gameplay mechanics.
I'm not comparing it to anything, was just in response to "90,345 on average. Not much of a difference from Halo 4 or Reach." Peace
Devolution
Member
It was the same for me dude. Halo was an excuse to have fun with y'all but the game at this point just infuriates me too much.
Tha Robbertster
Member
Did you have to post that
I didn't know about that game yet and now I'm hyped for it.Focal points of the maps are in the lifts. There's radar. Power weapons all around. A big giant turd is the result.
Stop making maps like this, please.
Silly.Mikey
Banned
I agree with this. This is a huge part of the problem and ironically, the best Halo game to me SP wise (CE) is the one that got the least of that. It gave the game a lot more randomness which i find great. By following playtest too strictly, it makes the games much more predictable and thats no good.
Ya sure, play-test is important. I did that for a long time and even founded a play-test department. But to base decisions purely on the "numbers" is the wrong way to do it.
Edit: That being said, i love Halo4 SP and MP even tho small issues do bug me (like the lack of an X when people die, etc..). What frankie says is spot on too. This might be Halo4, but its the first one made by a new studio. People need to learn to be patient.
Enter The 36 Chambers
Member
EagleBurnn
Banned
Anybody watching the speed run stream right now? Octodad is one fucked up game
Zeouterlimits
Member
To change the topic for a moment, what were 343I/Kenneth Scott going for with the Didact's/Forerunner design?
What are they trying to evoke here?
The bulbous, ugly face is far from what I imagined the Forerunners to look like.
Is it a Mass Effect, he's renegade, err.. evil so his face must reflect that mantra?
What are they trying to evoke here?
The bulbous, ugly face is far from what I imagined the Forerunners to look like.
Is it a Mass Effect, he's renegade, err.. evil so his face must reflect that mantra?
To change the topic for a moment, what were 343I/Kenneth Scott going for with the Didact's/Forerunner design?
What are they trying to evoke here?
The bulbous, ugly face is far from what I imagined the Forerunners to look like.
Is it a Mass Effect, he's renegade, err.. evil so his face must reflect that mantra?
He looks like something out of GoW.
Right, I agree on that. They were using poor data and they also allowed it to drive design, at least thats how it appeared from the outside. Cold hard numbers are valuable tools, but they need to be looked at in context.
You need good players otherwise the stats are useless.
I wish, at least then I could fix up his face with some liberal application of BoomShot.
EagleBurnn
Banned
The Didact was the first character I've see in the Halo universe that didn't feel like it belonged. It was just out of place, they should have made him look older/wiser, not a creep.
What you're describing isn't a focus group, but regardless, nobody develops a game based solely or primarily on research data. It's one of many tools that we have at our disposal, and research can have clear value when used properly, but is never has been nor will be the driver behind design decisions.
I don't have the data to determine whether or not the amount of beer being depicted in that shot is an accurate representation of our studio's average consumption rate. If I were to monitor the beer fridge, and keep an accurate count of beers being consumed, I'd be much better informed. It doesn't really matter to me, though. I'm only interested in the beers that I drink.
By contrast, our admin knows exactly how much beer we drink, and orders cases and kegs and barrels of beer accordingly. Therefore, we do not run out of beer, save days when there are atypical consumption rates. Even then, we are getting better at predicting the peaks and valleys as time goes on and as more data can be analyzed.
BEER
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
I guess that scare factor for evil intent? Make them look humanoid for familiarity but dracula-esque (due to Vampire craze everywhere these days), malformed for effect and having been in the Cryptum a somewhat "uncooked" aspect. I think in the canon the muscles and all that are supposed to have deteriorated and require rebuilding or something.
OT: Dyson Reckons Video Games Development Sucks Up Too Much Talent (yes the vacuum Dyson guy)
@urk
Well played, yet again sir.
And here I though you guys'n'gals had a brewery hidden behind all those servers for "research purposes". Also I heard a rumour Achronos has a USB beer IV drip, always
I would have liked something more along this design.
That concept art makes him look a bit too much like skirmisher from Halo: Reach.
I still feel bad for paying full price for Gears 3 then never playing it. Fuck.
PS Holy shit Great Balls of Fire came out for Rock Band
I feel like Halo 4 went the space magic route in campaign. While I liked the campaign, it really didn't feel like a Halo one.
NullPointer
Member
Silly.Mikey
Banned
It doesn't matter. To me less play-test can turn out to be better in the end. Just look at Halo CE. Im pretty sure they had very little professional play-testing (other than them playing builds whenever they were ready) and it gave a lot of randomness in the engine and such. Like people blowing warthogs in the air with stickies and posting videos of it online. That, today, would be probably caught and removed from the game since technically, its not intended. But it wasnt intended then either, and yet made the engine more interesting for some. Even turned that into a game of "how high can you get it".
Those little things seems kinda stupid, but its those little things that a lot of people find fun and fascinating about an engine. Play-testing , too often, removes that "randomness" of a game and that to me is not good.
Gabotron ES
Member
Didact's design (specially the armor) is freaking badass.
- Status