Support NeoGAF

[Sikamikanico]

Source?

He put "I think"...

 

[Swarmerr]

I think they add stuff like specialization's to make up for not having a ranking system. People kept coming back to play Halo 3 for the 1-50. It was a huge goal to shoot for. Goals in a game keep people playing. The goal is no longer a rank Its the abliltiy to get specialization's. That is your rank. The problem its all XP based. Any BK can achieve this and be rewarded with perks. The logic is the more goals we put in the game. The less player's will bitch about no ranking system. Keeping player's playing the game is what its all about.

I hope not. The fact that 343 has not addressed fully whether there will be a skill based rank system in halo 4 is disheartening as so many players are constantly asking for it.

I was gonna bitch about something, but I think Over and Ghal(and earlier Shake Appeal's) post pretty much cover it.

No, we haven't played the game. No, this won't be in EVERY playlist. No, we don't even have the full context to think about this. But on a purely conceptual level, looking at what these things are, with the foreknowledge of all the Halos we've played(including the similar Reach)...I don't like it. It's definitely, conceptually, undeniably NOT Halo.

This.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

I was gonna bitch about something, but I think Over and Ghal(and earlier Shake Appeal's) post pretty much cover it.

No, we haven't played the game. No, this won't be in EVERY playlist. No, we don't even have the full context to think about this. But on a purely conceptual level, looking at what these things are, with the foreknowledge of all the Halos we've played(including the similar Reach)...I don't like it. It's definitely, conceptually, undeniably NOT Halo.

 

[Hitmonchan107]

Another concern I have is the possibility of low population numbers in a Classic playlist, should we have one. The Modern Halo playlists will likely be first and foremost meaning less visibility from casuals who just want to hop in and play. Hopefully it won't take long to get into a match.

 

[Sikamikanico]

But on a purely conceptual level, looking at what these things are, with the foreknowledge of all the Halos we've played(including the similar Reach)...I don't like it. It's definitely, conceptually, undeniably NOT Halo.

I could agree with that...but while it may not be the Halo we know, it could be a great game. We can but hope.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I don't remember a play in chess that allows to to move the pieces off the board and attack from the table.

We should play chess some time, I'm really good at that move.

Are you Dean Dodrill, creator of Dust: An Elysian Tale - a game by Dean Dodrill?

Noggy is his GAF handle; it's an amazing XBLA game made by one guy, and a regular GAFer. Check it out.

At this risk of posting this too early (7:00 EDT), and not getting as many responses as I'd like, I'm going to do it anyway.

And this is open to ALL fans who think Halo 3 has the best multiplayer, and don't like what they're seeing in Halo 4 with specializations and AAs.

I want to play devil's advocate for a moment. This post makes the case against the concept of not knowing all the cards in a player's hand until you meet him or her in a fight. Firefights aren't only decided by player skill and what happens over the course of the match, but what players select in a menu, too. If a player is playing a Halo game in the mold of Halo 1 or 2 – and, to an extent, Halo 3, and we'll get to that in a moment – every player knows and can see all the pieces on the board before the match starts. There's a predictability to it, and it was very much like a game of chess, as Shake implied.

However, this was not true at all times within Halo 3. During the events of the match players would pick up equipment, like a bubble shield or a regenerator, and not deploy them until they were at a disadvantage in a firefight. You didn't know a player had a bubble shield until you dropped his or her shields and that person deployed it to try to alter the outcome of a battle. This is very similar to fighting someone and not knowing they have jetpack, or camo, Promethean vision, and the like until you engage them on a map.

So, my questions is this: What specifically is the most troublesome? Is it the concept you don't like, or is it the degree to which it is applied? Or is it the implementation of the concept? Were the other factors in the game good enough to cause you to overlook the concept?

Others have addressed this, but as you quoted me:

1) Equipment was on the battlefield, and had to be picked up. Teams fought for them. In this way, they were no different from power weapons in previous Halo games - you couldn't see if someone had rockets in Halo 1 or 2 until they pulled them out. But you knew someone on their team did because the item had been picked up.

2) Equipment was designed so that once deployed, anyone could use them. Successful use of them was situation dependent.

3) Equipment was one-time use.

4) Equipment was not common.

5) Equipment didn't alter a player's base traits. If I saw someone from a small distance, and chose to engage them with the BR, 99% of the time the fight was settled by how well we responded to one another. Sometimes, on some maps, a bubble or regen came into play. But again, we'd have known their team had them, and forcing the team to use it was a good thing.

Halo 4 gives players a host of passive advantages over other players, which we cannot predict. I don't know if that Warthog coming our way will be stopped by an EMP, or if its health will return at a normal or accelerated rate. I don't know if the team of dudes DMRing us are all rocking stability mods, granting them an advantage over us. I don't know if the guy I've spotted and am about to shoot is rocking a faster shield respawn time or other perk to tip things in his favor against me.

And EVERYONE will be using these, all the time.

Halo 3 set us down this path, but there's a clear distinction between sparse equipment to be fought over on the map and selecting multiple passive traits on spawn.

 

[Hydranockz]

He put "I think"...

I think they add stuff like specialization's to make up for not having a ranking system.

It was that bit in particular. "I think" was referring to the reason for adding stuff like specilizations.

People seem to think we're not getting a ranking system. Didn't Frankie and Ellis saay ages ago that they're looking at a few options, none of which are 1-50, but all of which will not only reflect the time put in but also the skill? We just don't know which one of many options they've gone with. They just have yet to announce the system and not the presence of a system right?

 

[willow ve]

So did the "Feels Like Halo" goodness only apply to early builds that didn't have all the new perks/customizations/specializations implemented?

Serious question.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

I'm not saying it can't be fun. For a lot of people, CoD is a great game. They LOVE not knowing what the hell is going on with every firefight. They love all the perks, the individuality, the customization, etc. It's "dynamic". To them, unpredictability is a GOOD thing. They eat that shit up.

Well, I don't. That's kinda why I don't play CoD. I was hoping I could play Halo.

 

[Poker Face]

It was that bit in particular. "I think" was referring to the reason for adding stuff like specilizations.

People seem to think we're not getting a ranking system. Didn't Frankie and Ellis saay ages ago that they're looking at a few options, none of which are 1-50, but all of which will not only reflect the time put in but also the skill? We just don't know which one of many options they've gone with. They just have yet to announce the system and not the presence of a system right?

I don't remember them confirming there would be a skill-based system.

I know they've said it's not finalized and they're looking into it, but no concrete info.

 

[Myyke]

I was gonna bitch about something, but I think Over and Ghal(and earlier Shake Appeal's) post pretty much cover it.

No, we haven't played the game. No, this won't be in EVERY playlist. No, we don't even have the full context to think about this. But on a purely conceptual level, looking at what these things are, with the foreknowledge of all the Halos we've played(including the similar Reach)...I don't like it. It's definitely, conceptually, undeniably NOT Halo.

Not by your definition perhaps, but I've found every Halo game I've played to be thoroughly "Halo" (in my intepretation), including Halo wars. "Halo" does not have a single definition.

Another concern I have is the possibility of low population numbers in a Classic playlist, should we have one. The Modern Halo playlists will likely be first and foremost meaning less visibility from casuals who just want to hop in and play. Hopefully it won't take long to get into a match.

But surely if it is what everyone wants to play (which is what many on here seem to try to put across), then it will keep a healthy population?

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

So did the "Feels Like Halo" goodness only apply to early builds that didn't have all the new perks/customizations/specializations implemented?

Serious question.

I doubt it. The game still looks like Halo, and should still feel like Halo. "Perks" don't change the way a DMR feels to shoot, or the way your plasma grenade flies. It's still Halo at the core, nothing else. It just has more added onto it now.

 

[Hydranockz]

I don't remember them confirming there would be a skill-based system.

I know they've said it's not finalized and they're looking into it, but no concrete info.

What isn't finalised, exactly?

 

[ViewtifulJC]

Not by your definition perhaps, but I've found every Halo game I've played to be thoroughly "Halo" (in my intepretation), including Halo wars. "Halo" does not have a single definition.

Then in your case, there is no definition. It's meaningless. It's just a title you put on a game that has Spartans and Warthogs.

 

[heckfu]

I doubt it. The game still looks like Halo, and should still feel like Halo. "Perks" don't change the way a DMR feels to shoot, or the way your plasma grenade flies. It's still Halo at the core, nothing else. It just has more added onto it now.

What? It literally changes how it shoots by lowering recoil or in the case of whatever it was that causes you to not drop out of zoom.

I'm all for being cautiously optimistic but I'm also not about throwing out phrases that are directly contradictory to the truth.

 

[Poker Face]

What isn't finalised, exactly?

Some kind of skill based system. Unless I missed something, I don't think we've gotten any real info on a competitive ranking system.

 

[willow ve]

Not by your definition perhaps, but I've found every Halo game I've played to be thoroughly "Halo" (in my intepretation), including Halo wars. "Halo" does not have a single definition.

I doubt it. The game still looks like Halo, and should still feel like Halo. "Perks" don't change the way a DMR feels to shoot, or the way your plasma grenade flies. It's still Halo at the core, nothing else. It just has more added onto it now.

Tweaked an earlier post I made that was buried in the post IGN avalanche...

It was a sad sad day when Reach was revealed and it was shown that Halo was no longer a true arena shooter. I'm not entirely sure who they are trying to cater to with Halo 4, but it isn't really the fans of the "old Halo" or "feels like Halo" kids. That type of Halo is dead and buried in our nostalgia, our Gamer Fuel dreams, and our push to keep a game at the top of the most played list for three full years.

Maybe what they're doing with 4 will work out splendidly. Maybe it will turn into an also ran that fails to compete with COD, FIFA, Minecraft, etc. At one point I had great hope that 343 was going to turn the tide and head back to the true arena shooter roots that is the core of what a Halo game is supposed to be. Now I'm growing more afraid that Reach simply opened Pandora's box and it was filled with continuous progression, unlockable abilities, perks, weapon drops, and every other design decision that lends itself to rock paper scissors gameplay and full class based shooters. These systems work fine in games like BF3 or Team Fortress 2, but in my opinion they do not "feel like Halo".

All of these changes don't feel like Halo to me. Halo was a game where all soldiers entered equally and the outcome was determined by skill, strategy, and team work (or host advantage). That should be the "golden tripod" that Halo is built around. Instead it feels like we're getting roll the dice gameplay where the only way I'll be able to counter an opposing player is by dieing and respawning as something else. This is what happened in Reach, and it looks like it will be happening again in 4.

 

[Myyke]

Then in your case, there is no definition. It's meaningless. It's just a title you put on a game that has Spartans and Warthogs.

Wow, you sure told me. I guess I'll go back to my Xbox for some more meaningless enjoyment then.

 

[Hydranockz]

Some kind of skill based system. Unless I missed something, I don't think we've gotten any real info on a competitive ranking system.

But there is a skill based system. That's my point. We know there is one. We ust don't know what it is.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

What? It literally changes how it shoots by lowering recoil or in the case of whatever it was that causes you to not drop out of zoom.

I'm all for being cautiously optimistic but I'm also not about throwing out phrases that are directly contradictory to the truth.

I guess the DMR was a bad example. What I meant to say is, when you play the game you should still know you're playing Halo. From the videos we've seen and the MLG feedback this appears to still be the case. We'll see what is said when they use all the "perks" but the game isn't going to feel like CoD or something. You'll still have the longer kill times, and the other things underneath that make Halo Halo.

 

[Swarmerr]

But there is a skill based system. That's my point. We know there is one. We ust don't know what it is.

I don't even know if there is one to be honest. Frankie has talked about looking into it, doesn't mean it is going to be in the game. I hope I am wrong though and somewhere it is confirmed it will be in the game.

 

[_Computer_]

Things in the IGN article that sound really bad:

"you get your gameplay modifying perk" That sounds really OP.

"but the only thing that shows up is your outline" A perk that counters a perk. I saw this coming. The only thing that means is Promethean Vision is OP.

"Yep, this one is almost straight out of Call of Duty" WTF you went there? What dose 343 think of this comment?

Feel free to add..

 

[Sikamikanico]

I don't even know if there is one to be honest. Frankie has talked about looking into it, doesn't mean it is going to be in the game. I hope I am wrong though and somewhere it is confirmed it will be in the game.

To clear a point of confusion - there will definitely be a skill-based matchmaking system. The question you are asking is will there be a skill based visual rank to go with it. Thats the part we don't know yet.

 

[Mister Negative]

If you don't think that some of these specializations have the potential to be OP, I just want you to sit there and think about going up against a sniper that uses the perk that allows you to stay in zoom while being shot at.

 

[ElzarTheBam]

I mentioned this a long time, a wish list from OXM dated 2002.

Read the scans, pretty funny looking back now.

Edit: Another one, more 'accurate' also dated 2002.

 

[Poker Face]

But there is a skill based system. That's my point. We know there is one. We ust don't know what it is.

Are you sure? I thought we've just gotten "we're trying a lot of different things" as opposed to "yes there will definitely be competitive playlists where you will be able to level both up and down"

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

If you don't think that some of these specializations have the potential to be OP, I just want you to sit there and think about going up against a sniper that uses the perk that allows you to stay in zoom while being shot at.

They never said the perk allows you to stay in zoom. They talked around it a bit. Who knows what it does.

 

[Myyke]

I mentioned this a long time, a wish list from OXM dated 2002.

Read the scans, pretty funny looking back now.

Edit: Another one, more 'accurate' also dated 2002.

hehehehe "vibro sword".

 

[_Computer_]

I mentioned this a long time, a wish list from OXM dated 2002.

Read the scans, pretty funny looking back now.

Wow its like the Halo Reach/4 strategy guide haha.

 

[Mister Negative]

I mentioned this a long time, a wish list from OXM dated 2002.

Read the scans, pretty funny looking back now.

Edit: Another one, more 'accurate' also dated 2002.

>Specialties

oxm pls

 

[Hydranockz]

Are you sure? I thought we've just gotten "we're trying a lot of different things" as opposed to "yes there will definitely be competitive playlists where you will be able to level both up and down"

I am sure it was a combination of both. They are trying many things which will ultimately satisfy those who want to be rewarded for their skill as well as how long they've been playing.

 

[Portugeezer]

I mentioned this a long time, a wish list from OXM dated 2002.

Read the scans, pretty funny looking back now.

Edit: Another one, more 'accurate' also dated 2002.

Lol, that's pretty funny.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

Others have addressed this, but as you quoted me:

1) Equipment was on the battlefield, and had to be picked up. Teams fought for them. In this way, they were no different from power weapons in previous Halo games - you couldn't see if someone had rockets in Halo 1 or 2 until they pulled them out. But you knew someone on their team did because the item had been picked up.

2) Equipment was designed so that once deployed, anyone could use them. Successful use of them was situation dependent.

3) Equipment was one-time use.

4) Equipment was not common.

5) Equipment didn't alter a player's base traits. If I saw someone from a small distance, and chose to engage them with the BR, 99% of the time the fight was settled by how well we responded to one another. Sometimes, on some maps, a bubble or regen came into play. But again, we'd have known their team had them, and forcing the team to use it was a good thing.

Halo 4 gives players a host of passive advantages over other players, which we cannot predict. I don't know if that Warthog coming our way will be stopped by an EMP, or if its health will return at a normal or accelerated rate. I don't know if the team of dudes DMRing us are all rocking stability mods, granting them an advantage over us. I don't know if the guy I've spotted and am about to shoot is rocking a faster shield respawn time or other perk to tip things in his favor against me.

And EVERYONE will be using these, all the time.

Halo 3 set us down this path, but there's a clear distinction between sparse equipment to be fought over on the map and selecting multiple passive traits on spawn.

Pretty much my thinking too. At this point I'd rather go back to the Halo 3 equipment. At least as you mentioned it had to be fought over. I wasn't so quick to jump on the hate wagon this time around. However having had a couple of days to think about these additions I can honestly say it's not Halo to me now. It really comes off more like Call of Duty with a futuristic coat of paint to me. Keep in mind there is nothing wrong with that if you like the gameplay of those types of games. I simply don't. So at this rate I'm back to a rental first because I don't like perks, I don't like all these "specializations" etc. I just don't. So I think I'll rent the game first and judge. I might still buy it if after renting it if the campaign holds up to the previous games but if it don't then I'll simply move on because Halo will have become something I don't like anymore.

I will say this though. If 343 were to have a team slayer playlist that would disable specializations etc and strip it down to it's core Halo gameplay then I can be won over again because physics wise and how everything behaved I did like what I saw. The warthog looked strong again and grenades looked to be back to Halo 1 type level when it came to throwing distance etc. So if 343 does that then I'll be a firm buy again but if they don't it's going to be very very hard to win me over.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Man, OXM pretty much called specializations and the hologram AA.

 

[Dug]

I mentioned this a long time, a wish list from OXM dated 2002.

Read the scans, pretty funny looking back now.

Edit: Another one, more 'accurate' also dated 2002.

They called Holograms, Evade, and specializations!

 

[Hydranockz]

They called Holograms, Evade, and specializations!

Someone even called out the jetpack and grenade launcher.

 

[DopeyFish]

Psst. Frankie was working at OXM at the time that article came out.

 

[User 73706]

Just thinking out loud here: maybe "levels" 1-50 are a standard ranking trek like reach up to General Grade 4, and then the 10 levels to get your Specialization are more equivalent to Field Marshall through Inheritor or whatever. Just streamlined/compressed, hopefully.

Do we have a confirmed list of the Tactical/Support packages excluding Specializations and do we know if they're the only ones?

Only skill based system that I have heard of is "Trueskill" and a statement that it will actually be turned on this time, but to what degree we don't know.

All other systems are for speculation as no information has been provided for a "skill" based system.

This refers to a casual progression system in my eyes.

Yeah, levels make me think more of Pokemon in this case than Halo 2.

 

[Gunnerdude]

But there is a skill based system. That's my point. We know there is one. We ust don't know what it is.

Only skill based system that I have heard of is "Trueskill" and a statement that it will actually be turned on this time, but to what degree we don't know.

All other systems are for speculation as no information has been provided for a "skill" based system.

This refers to a casual progression system in my eyes.

 

[TheOddOne]

Psst. Frankie was working at OXM at the time that article came out.

*Inception horn*

 

[IHaveIce]

After bitching about Halo 4, I have to go back to bitch about Reach.

Pinnacle with Jetpacks- 2 quitters on my team.


Love the playlist handling.

 

[TheOddOne]

After bitching about Halo 4, I have to go back to bitch about Reach.

Pinnacle with Jetpacks- 2 quitters on my team.

Love the playlist handling.

More like terrible people then playlist problems.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

Yeah, levels make me think more of Pokemon in this case than Halo 2.

Actually reminds me more of an mmo like say WOW. You level to 50 and then you start the grind for the goodies aka the epics.

You could even think of Spartan Ops like content patches. See first the is the Early Spartan Ops dungeons missons. The last patch season would be an epic raid assault on the heart of the forerunner operations on that shield world with you and 10 and/or 25 3 of your friends.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

After bitching about Halo 4, I have to go back to bitch about Reach.

Pinnacle with Jetpacks- 2 quitters on my team.


Love the playlist handling.

Played Monday, BTB Anniversary. Grab sniper, shoot a guy, get betrayed for said sniper. Needless to say I spent the rest of the match terrorizing the guy until he betrayed me again and I booted him.

 

[Hydranockz]

Only skill based system that I have heard of is "Trueskill" and a statement that it will actually be turned on this time, but to what degree we don't know.

All other systems are for speculation as no information has been provided for a "skill" based system.

This refers to a casual progression system in my eyes.

So there is TruSkill being used... but you're telling me we can't assume that that TruSkill applis to some kind of skill based ranking system?

I mean, Halo 3 used TruSkill in Social Slayer, it just wasn't a visible number like in Ranked.

I should just assume whenever someone says "There's no ranking system in Halo 4", they really mean there isn't any visual indicator next to the rank they actually have. Some will tell me that should be obvious, meh.

 

[Karl2177]

So there is TruSkill being used... but you're telling me we can't assume that that TruSkill applis to some kind of skill based ranking system?

I mean, Halo 3 used TruSkill in Social Slayer, it just wasn't a visible number like in Ranked.

I should just assume whenever someone says "There's no ranking system in Halo 4", they really mean there isn't any visual indicator next to the rank they actually have. Some will tell me that should be obvious, meh.

You people really need to learn and/or use the term "progression system" correctly. At this point I know it is an argument of semantics.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

The fuck you mean "You people"

 

[Hydranockz]

You people really need to learn and/or use the term "progression system" correctly. At this point I know it is an argument of semantics.

"You people"?

What is a progression system? Is it where someone can go from level 1 to level 50 in Halo 3 if it's skill based? Is it also where someone can go from Recruit to Inheritor in Reach if it was Exp/Time based?

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

The fuck you mean "You people"

 

[Orochinagis]

less than 30 mins to BO2 stream