• 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 |OT15| Beta-tested, GAF approved

Omni

Member
If its purely gameplay related, is that fair on the map at all? I think any of these maps would be great for swat, throwdown or most non-infinity gametypes.
Probably not, but it's all part of the experience that 343i is giving us with these maps. They don't appear in any other playlist (and if they did, I'd never get them just like the Crimson maps) so it's all I can base my opinion on. In the games tonight, all I've played is Infinity this or Infinity that (though admittedly I played a game of KoTH which was alright... until people started going for achievements...)

Yes, the gameplay argument has been brought up time and time again, but it is still an issue. The maps don't feel any different to the others when you've got people running around with boltshots, rockets and whatever else they got in an ordnance drop.
 

Woorloog

Banned
Dumb AAs which can be easily abused were used often, weapons which require a good portion of skill not.


Who would have thought.

My point was, they're in because they're used, not because anyone thought whether they require skill or not... Popularity matters, at least nowadays in AAA game design.
Which is no good of course, not always.
 

IHaveIce

Banned
If its purely gameplay related, is that fair on the map at all? I think any of these maps would be great for swat, throwdown or most non-infinity gametypes.

Of course the score for the maps is affected by the provided gameplay of the game. The map could be a well designed map and could be working perfectly in Halo 3 or anywhere else but if it is in Halo 4 with all their shit added of course you have to mind that.

343 didn't, I mean they designed some maps without even thinking about their sandbox (especially the DMR)

My point was, they're in because they're used, not because anyone thought whether they require skill or not... Popularity matters, at least nowadays in AAA game design.
Which is no good of course, not always.

Yeah I know how you meant it, didn't want to sound to say something against your point, but it is sad that this decision was based on that :(
 
Probably not, but it's all part of the experience that 343i is giving us with these maps. They don't appear in any other playlist (and if they did, I'd never get them just like the Crimson maps) so it's all I can base my opinion on. In the games tonight, all I've played is Infinity this or Infinity that (though admittedly I played a game of KoTH which was alright... until people started going for achievements...)

Yes, the gameplay argument has been brought up time and time again, but it is still an issue. The maps don't feel any different to the others when you've got people running around with boltshots, rockets and whatever else they got in an ordnance drop.

While I understand what you're saying, I just think you have to separate them if you want to say they are good or bad maps. The experience 343 give us doesn't make the maps themselves any better or worse.

You'll always have good and bad map/gametype combinations and the chances of a bad one increase dramatically when you put Infinity in the title. Extraction might not work on Haven but that isn't to suggest Haven is a bad map (or even that Extraction is a bad gametype).
 

Havok

Member
Even MLG had radar enabled for their FFA gametypes. As long as the map and weapons on the map are not conducive to camping there should always be radar in FFA.

Bought the 800 points yesterday for the maps, will download either tonight or tomorrow. It's a shame they put these appalling 'achievements' in; instead of allowing playstyles to evolve organically over time in the new maps players are incentivised to behave and play in a really artificial, awkwardly forced manner. Achievements really ought to be '1000 kills on Skyline' etc.
I assume the radar thing is a mistake and will be fixed, since they had the settings in the bulletin and everything.

To the bolded, not only do achievements need to avoid encouraging shitty player behavior, but they need to be map agnostic. Otherwise you're skewing voting towards what might be a crappy map, and when the map comes up you're skewing player behavior toward whatever your achievement requires (the creation of an immediate secondary goal that overrides the primary goal of "lets win this match," made urgent because it requires a specific map). I still don't know what made 343 tie the achievements to the map pack they came with, but a better system would be putting in a bunch of grindy achievements that didn't care what map or mode you were playing. Something like "Get 1000 kills" works, or multikills, or spree medals, or headshots, or points, or whatever. It's the level of specificity both on the behavioral requirements and the map setting requirements that makes Halo multiplayer achievements so bad. Find something that occurs naturally and expand on that instead of forcing crappy behavior like we've seen with MP achievements all the way back to Halo 3.

Here's an idea: instead of having 5 achievements totaling 250 points per map pack, just create one Gears-style "Seriously" achievement per pack. Make it a bit of a grind, though obviously not the same level as Gears does, and make it worth the full 250.

Probably not, but it's all part of the experience that 343i is giving us with these maps. They don't appear in any other playlist (and if they did, I'd never get them just like the Crimson maps) so it's all I can base my opinion on. In the games tonight, all I've played is Infinity this or Infinity that (though admittedly I played a game of KoTH which was alright... until people started going for achievements...)
They do appear in other lists, I believe. From the bulletin:

To start, here’s how these maps will be integrated into existing playlists at launch.

Landfall
Infinity Slayer
SWAT
Team Doubles

Monolith
Infinity Slayer
Capture the Flag
SWAT
Regicide
Team Doubles

Skyline
Infinity Slayer
Capture the Flag
SWAT
Regicide
Team Doubles
On a fundamental level, though, I do think that sometimes you have to take it as a whole and not separate out the extraneous elements. Some maps might not be bad structurally, but add in Global Ordnance and yeah, I would absolutely say the map is a pile of junk. There's often not a clean way to distinguish the two.
 

ZalinKrow

Member
Maps are pretty good. So many power weapons though. Infinity settings etc. Without letting that get in the way the maps seem pretty solid. And the splitscreen framerate was fine, which was great for a change.

Although yeah, achievements blow. Camo sniping guy on Monolith was not fun to deal with.
 
Maps are pretty good. So many power weapons though. Infinity settings etc. Without letting that get in the way the maps seem pretty solid. And the splitscreen framerate was fine, which was great for a change.

Although yeah, achievements blow. Camo sniping guy on Monolith was not fun to deal with.

Define 'fun'.
 

Gui_PT

Member
ZalinKrow

KZphV.gif


Although yeah, achievements blow.

Well why'd you make them like that?!
 
On a fundamental level, though, I do think that sometimes you have to take it as a whole and not separate out the extraneous elements. Some maps might not be bad structurally, but add in Global Ordnance and yeah, I would absolutely say the map is a pile of junk. There's often not a clean way to distinguish the two.

But surely your issue is with what Global Ordnance does to the game and not the map.

If you remove Global Ordnance, or indeed any facet of gameplay, does the game change? Yes. Which is why its ok to say jetpack ruins an otherwise great map.

If you have gameplay elements which don't contribute to a good gameplay experience, how can any map be considered good? You simply cannot say that Skyline is a bad map because of infinity settings. You can say infinity settings on Skyline don't work together. At what point do you stop saying that Infinity settings are bad and instead say the map is bad? When you play that map with more than one gametype.
 

Havok

Member
But surely your issue is with what Global Ordnance does to the game and not the map.

If you remove Global Ordnance, or indeed any facet of gameplay, does the map change? Yes. Which is why its ok to say jetpack ruins an otherwise great map.

If you have gameplay elements which don't contribute to a good gameplay experience, how can any map be considered good? You simply cannot say that Skyline is a bad map because of infinity settings. You can say infinity settings on Skyline don't work together. At what point do you stop saying that Infinity settings are bad and instead say the map is bad? When you play that map with more than one gametype.
Yes, the issue ultimately lies with Global Ordnance in that case, which is why I picked it specifically since it is a gamewide system rather than something specific to a single gametype or set of gametypes (Throwdown being the exception to the rule) - I don't necessarily think that the original example of tying Infinity settings, which are very gametype-specific, to the maps' quality is justified. I think the difference lies in how close to the core design philosophy of the game the offending elements are and whether the map allows for their strengths and mitigates their weaknesses. At a certain point, if a map isn't designed to accomodate something as key as GO was supposed to be, then it's fair to call it bad. That doesn't generalize very well and I realize that, but I'd say the same for stuff like flag and weapon placement (the biggest reason I hated Boardwalk in Reach was because the flag placement was completely asinine, and I wouldn't hesitate to say that the map was bad because of it). Don't take that as me saying that Infinity makes the maps bad, just that sometimes bad things are so core to the gameplay experience that they can't be separated from the merits (or weaknesses) of a map's layout without sounding like someone is creating a caveat-filled fantasy land where the game mechanics are perfect in order to discuss map quality (not to say that's what you or anyone else is doing, just that "well, if this and this and this weren't like they were, then I think it would be good" is fundamentally uninteresting to me).
 
Dumb AAs which can be easily abused were used often, weapons which require a good portion of skill not.


Who would have thought.

I really want to try the maps, but I don't want to play infinity on them :( Aren't they in doubles or Throwdown already?
IDK if someone answered, but they are in doubles, but not throwdown yet.
They will be added to throwdown if the throwdown community playlist managers approve them though!
 

Fuchsdh

Member
Gabo invasion is crap, just deal with it

And thanks for the invite, whoever's playing!
The main problem I had with Invasion was the last phase turned into "die repeatedly trying to inch the objective closer to the finish line." Ten there was the lack of maps (though 343i helped ameliorate that last problem with tr community maps.)

I think Dominion offers a lot of tweaks that could make invasion a whole lot better (faction-locked vehicles for instance) and playing with the same abilities on each team seems a better fit anyway. I'd love for a revamped invasion to come back in a future Halo game (or just give us a true class-based Battlefront spinoff.)
 
Alright HaloGAF, so should I buy Majestic? Impressions seem good reading the thread, but their are also some complaints. Is it worth buying?

I really like the map pack. All 3 maps are great additions to Halo 4. Buying them really depends on whether or not you like the gametypes that are in Halo 4 matchmaking, though, so don't expect that you'll have fun playing Infinity settings on these maps if you already don't like Infinity. I suppose it depends on how much you trust 343 in getting the game all balanced out, I heard there may be another TU coming in hot in a few weeks (perhaps around Castle's launch).
 
Top Bottom