ViewtifulJC
Banned
Too bad, that's all anybody is gonna vote for.
-
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 |OT7| You may leave, Juices. And take Team Downer with you.
- Thread starter GhaleonEB
- Start date
- Status
Too bad, that's all anybody is gonna vote for.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Yeah. True. I plan to play in all of the playlists a bit. I like having a "classic" area for when I'm feeling like those types of games though.
It will be very interesting to see how 343 does with 4 playlists. I've been hesitant to call 343 out on Reach's playlists because of the simple fact that they were in crunch for Halo 4 most of the time, but as Kyle likes to remind us, Reach was not managed well.
Slayer in BTB is the only thing 3/4 of your team can do. I find it hilarious when a majority vote for Assault, and the game starts with the bomb sitting at each team's start point for 5 minutes.
Reach BTB is still around 3000-4000 people.
Am surprised...
so you like people being able to see you through walls, you like getting a waypoint placed over your head for the person you just killed, you like not knowing if someone's shields will recharge at a faster rate, you like someone being able to pop a shield to save them even though you have won an altercation by better positioning and aim, you like not knowing if someone is out shooting you because of a stability armor mod or their skill, you like that someone may know an the time and location of an ordinance drop before you simply because of an option in a menu, and more...
Point being... apart from social fun, all of that stuff is not competitively balanced Halo and traditionally might as well be found in Team Fiesta. It's as far from Halo as Halo could be and still have the title.
I think you may be over-stating.
I like builds and customization more than I like everyone starting with the same guns and being exactly the same.
This is kind of like comparing Chess to Warhammer 40k. Chess is and always will be a more skillful game, but fuck is it boring. Now 40k has some random shit thrown in(some of them I don't like, imagine that), but it is a hell of a lot more fun to play.
I'm sure there will be things I don't like in the regular game, but I'd rather put up with those things for more variation.
Both, but mostly the latter. Beams instead of "bullets" is more canonically consistent and helps to differentiate fire.
Agreed. I never vote objective in BTB when I'm playing with randoms. No one works together in any kind of coordinated fashion and most people don't have mics so why choose objective?
I'm still a little annoyed that Anni BTB was removed. I tried going into the default BTB playlist alone this week. Played two games. Both against teams of 8 on Hemorrhage. Never again.
BTB is either Hemorrhage or Heavies 75% of the time. So...bad....
Fortunately people who want to play chess can play it whenever they want. They don't have to hope one person on the west coast allows them to play chess that day.
User 73706
Banned
Would you guys be happy if Social playlists consisted of Infinity gamtypes and Ranked consisted of Classic ones?
Please let The Halo Council have a playlist where they can upload proper map remakes with proper settings.
Zero interest in playing a half baked version of COD with BRs or playing on enormous maps made by 343 with "classic" settings. Having Walshy, Bravo, and other MLG people in prior to release is my beacon of hope for Halo 4 multiplayer.
Zero interest in playing a half baked version of COD with BRs or playing on enormous maps made by 343 with "classic" settings. Having Walshy, Bravo, and other MLG people in prior to release is my beacon of hope for Halo 4 multiplayer.
That's... basically what I was saying, yep.
I don't particularly find chess exciting, however that isn't to say its not "the most celebrated strategy game in history". I certainly don't hear you talking about playing it all the time!
Your statement here... and mine above essentially say the same thing. I have had a ton of fun playing Team Fiesta beating bad kids senseless in a random environment. I can have a ton of fun in Call of Duty with interactions based on what is picked in a menu, and will be able to have fun in a Halo game with the same philosophy.
But I've never played Halo for that style of play. I've played it because it was the one game that offered a certain degree of competitive balance in an online shooter and I loved the story line in campaigns to boot.
The evolution of Halo in it's default form means my reason for playing it is cut in half unless there is a pretty specific classic offering that is competitively balanced. I get that some people find that competitive balance boring to both watch and play, but for those that love it... they really love it.
I think with the current "Build A Spartan" class system in Halo 4, the best game modes will be round based one sided objective gametypes.
The meta game of counter picking classes and picking classes better suited for attacking/defending will flow much better in these types of games.
Single sided Assault and Flag would play awesome. I think Assault should be played with 1 life as well, or at least tested. Something like "Hardcore 1 Bomb." The Flag variant would differ with respawns then and be based on capping in X amount of minutes.
I think Halo 4 might just require us to rethink how we play the game.
The meta game of counter picking classes and picking classes better suited for attacking/defending will flow much better in these types of games.
Single sided Assault and Flag would play awesome. I think Assault should be played with 1 life as well, or at least tested. Something like "Hardcore 1 Bomb." The Flag variant would differ with respawns then and be based on capping in X amount of minutes.
I think Halo 4 might just require us to rethink how we play the game.
Yes, but it's highly unlikely to happen that way IMO.
Hydranockz
Member
m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dkxx55e1ZQCY&v=kxx55e1ZQCY&gl=IE
Perhaps this link works. I'm on mobile so it isn't easy to tell. I thought it was a nice topic to think about.
Perhaps this link works. I'm on mobile so it isn't easy to tell. I thought it was a nice topic to think about.
I think I agree... it would certainly be more structured.
I want to see a Halo Search and Destroy for grins.
All objective, barely any slayer? Yea, that'd be pretty great. 1-sided objectives are alot of fun, just some of the ways they have been done in past Halos... needs more time-based wins, instead of just wins.
Also more 3 plots.
Hydranockz
Member
First, I think your perception of specializations and building a Spartan is heavy handed. 343 has said, that the specializations don't really determine winners or losers in a firefight, skill is still the factor, but who knows till we play it. To me the only specialization that looks like it will effect skilled players in a 1v1 is the flinch Rogue one.
Secondly, the "meta" game you speak of isn't suppose to exist till "late game", and might not exist at all. I don't believe classes will exist, just people building spartans to their playstyles.
Navidson REC
Member
So, I just read the Bulletin...
And I'm also not sure about this. I like that we finally got some exposition on new features. They also seem kinda cool, in a way. I'm sure they can make the gameplay more interesting and more rewarding for you. I think it's neat that they are (at least partially, it seems) designed to suit certain Halo-specific play styles: The "long-distance player", the gunner, the driver, etc.
That's neat.
But I'm also afraid that the gameplay might end up too... messy and chaotic.
Really, that's kind of what comes to my mind when I think of the recent CoD games and its near infinite perks and stuff. It's messy.
I don't mind unexpected situations. They can make for extremely interesting and fun encounters and are actually something that Halo was known for since the very beginning, at least to me.
But I'm afraid that the balance between predictability and unpredictability (when it comes to the games' tools and how gamers may use them) is "in danger".
It doesn't help that, apparently, you won't be able to tell what Specialization others are using from their outer appearance:
I really like that I won't be tied to a certain look to enjoy a certain ability. But it would help making the gameplay much clearer and more understandable.
Maybe something in between, as mentioned by others, would be best? Small attachments, but not entire armor pieces?
Oh well... In the end, I'm still as eager to get my hands on Halo 4 as before and will wait with passing judgement until after I have actually played it. I'm open for something new and simply have to see for myself how it pans out in actual gameplay.
Edit:
As for a related topic: Those armor pieces actually look pretty cool, for the most part. I was weirded out by the lack of actual visors on lots of helmets though...
And I'm also not sure about this. I like that we finally got some exposition on new features. They also seem kinda cool, in a way. I'm sure they can make the gameplay more interesting and more rewarding for you. I think it's neat that they are (at least partially, it seems) designed to suit certain Halo-specific play styles: The "long-distance player", the gunner, the driver, etc.
That's neat.
But I'm also afraid that the gameplay might end up too... messy and chaotic.
Really, that's kind of what comes to my mind when I think of the recent CoD games and its near infinite perks and stuff. It's messy.
I don't mind unexpected situations. They can make for extremely interesting and fun encounters and are actually something that Halo was known for since the very beginning, at least to me.
But I'm afraid that the balance between predictability and unpredictability (when it comes to the games' tools and how gamers may use them) is "in danger".
It doesn't help that, apparently, you won't be able to tell what Specialization others are using from their outer appearance:
Bulletin said:
I really like that I won't be tied to a certain look to enjoy a certain ability. But it would help making the gameplay much clearer and more understandable.
Maybe something in between, as mentioned by others, would be best? Small attachments, but not entire armor pieces?
Oh well... In the end, I'm still as eager to get my hands on Halo 4 as before and will wait with passing judgement until after I have actually played it. I'm open for something new and simply have to see for myself how it pans out in actual gameplay.
Edit:
As for a related topic: Those armor pieces actually look pretty cool, for the most part. I was weirded out by the lack of actual visors on lots of helmets though...
I forgot how much more fun Halo is with ranks. Winning actually matters. Just now I was playing a BR match on The Pit. We were a few kills behind practically the entire match but right towards the end we took the lead and won by a handful of kills. Winning that game was probably more satisfying than any of the games in Reach that I've played in the past 2 years. It actually meant something because if we had lost I would've probably gone down a rank, instead I only improved my ranking.
In Reach if you win (which happens a lot without the tight trueskill restrictions that Halo 3 has) you go "yay...." and move on to the next match. In Halo 3 ranked you have a much higher chance of actually getting a close match and if you win you go "Fuck yeah!". Hell, even 5 years after launch I get better match ups in Halo 3 than I get now in Reach, it's sad really.
There are definitely still problems with the system. Every now and then I run into a deranker which sucks for the team that he's on. And there are people who will cheat to win their games or buy their 50's and all that jazz. Honestly, if 343 can't find a way to prevent this sort of behavior they should just implement an easy-to-use report system which allows you to report players quickly. Having to bring up the xbox menu and go through a number of menus can be cumbersome and slow so having a fast system build into the game would help tremendously. Just imagine if derankers got reported several times and 343 looked at the player's rank history only to notice that he used to be a high rank and suddenly lost a lot of levels, that would be incredibly suspicious. A high amount of reports would never result in an automatic ban but it would just alert 343 about a player's actions. They could then decide what to do.
I think a good measurement against people buying 50's is to have ranks go down one level if the player hasn't played in that playlist for a month. (this is just an example) This means that in order to keep his 50 he has to keep playing but if he's not good enough to actually be a 50 he'll lose his rank eventually. This would make it less appealing to actually but accounts with high ranks. I really dislike the idea ranks being reset after a season because it makes it feel like all you did was for nothing. It also discourages people to start playing ranked matches right before the season ends. Let's say someone wants to play some ranked matches for the first time but he notices that the ranks will be reset in a week, why would he bother?
In the end I think the 1-50 system really adds a lot to the game and I don't think it's worth removing because of people who abuse the system. With some changes in the system and some heavy monitoring it could work out great.
In Reach if you win (which happens a lot without the tight trueskill restrictions that Halo 3 has) you go "yay...." and move on to the next match. In Halo 3 ranked you have a much higher chance of actually getting a close match and if you win you go "Fuck yeah!". Hell, even 5 years after launch I get better match ups in Halo 3 than I get now in Reach, it's sad really.
There are definitely still problems with the system. Every now and then I run into a deranker which sucks for the team that he's on. And there are people who will cheat to win their games or buy their 50's and all that jazz. Honestly, if 343 can't find a way to prevent this sort of behavior they should just implement an easy-to-use report system which allows you to report players quickly. Having to bring up the xbox menu and go through a number of menus can be cumbersome and slow so having a fast system build into the game would help tremendously. Just imagine if derankers got reported several times and 343 looked at the player's rank history only to notice that he used to be a high rank and suddenly lost a lot of levels, that would be incredibly suspicious. A high amount of reports would never result in an automatic ban but it would just alert 343 about a player's actions. They could then decide what to do.
I think a good measurement against people buying 50's is to have ranks go down one level if the player hasn't played in that playlist for a month. (this is just an example) This means that in order to keep his 50 he has to keep playing but if he's not good enough to actually be a 50 he'll lose his rank eventually. This would make it less appealing to actually but accounts with high ranks. I really dislike the idea ranks being reset after a season because it makes it feel like all you did was for nothing. It also discourages people to start playing ranked matches right before the season ends. Let's say someone wants to play some ranked matches for the first time but he notices that the ranks will be reset in a week, why would he bother?
In the end I think the 1-50 system really adds a lot to the game and I don't think it's worth removing because of people who abuse the system. With some changes in the system and some heavy monitoring it could work out great.
Thought so. Got the magazine right here!
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Don't worry Over, we got 50 ranks. And you never lose them, either!
It's literally win-win!
It's literally win-win!
Garrett 2U
Member
When I'm playing with a team in MLG on Reach, I stil am super pumped when we win (or lose) a close game.
The problem is without a skill based matchmaking system, we are paired against terrible kids and also pros way out of our league.
When you wreck or get wrecked the game becomes an unenjoyable, tedious grind.
With Over talking about 1-50...I don't think I could do another 2-3 years without ranks, I stop playing Reach after a few months and returned when NB came out because I just had no reason to get on, it wasn't enjoyable. Granted it could have been because of no bloom and a lack of maps too. Now I'm bored again with Reach, give me incentive to play, I don't care about daily challenges, jackpots, or getting my character up in experience. I want to play the best and lose to the best with visual representation into what I've accomplished online. It isn't about shit talking, bragging, or trying to sell accounts. Without it you've lost a lot of fans that already sold off or stop playing Reach already and decided to give Halo another shot with Halo 4. I just hope there's something there. I <3 you all.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
I personally think that having it take ages to unlock everything (like Reach) would be a horrible idea because think about it, what rank are you guys? All of us are some of the most hardcore Halo fans and I'm sure many of us aren't even close to unlocking everything in Reach (armor, Firefight voices). The reason many of us don't really care how it's handled in Reach is because they're just cosmetic, but it's different in Halo 4 because these things influence gameplay. Having it take ages to unlock all the mods, weapons, etc. would only cause frustration in the community..
I wouldn't even doubt if people would leave Halo and go back to their other games that take ages to unlock shit like CoD because why would they invest such heavy amounts of time into Halo when that time can be split between other games they play? That's how it is these days guys, people don't only play ONE game forever.. Having a system that requires such is completely outlandish and unfair for your fanbase. We should let the game dictate how long we play it for, not unlocking mods or weapons in which most people won't be able to reach.
Didn't Frankie say that it wouldn't take ages to unlock things anyway? And for anyone who's ready to say "but it gives good incentive for the diehard Halo fans to get rewarded for their dedication" they could just reward them with other things like Gears/CoD does with the different colors/ranks or heck even give them more armor, but not gameplay features.
Ehh so much more can be said about this, but it's probably one of those personal taste things since everyone can see the positives/negatives to this type of system.. just depends on what you like, so I digress..
'Twas thinking that same thing and how Objective games just got more intense, especially if they make the OBJ gametypes flow better with things like throwing the OB and hopefully not running like a damn slug with the flag..
For Assault, I think it would be cool if they did that one life thing, but only until the rest of your team dies, then everyone respawns. That would be a pretty sweet variant me thinks :]
Great post +1
This Halo release:
Ranks scare people away. Ranking systems don't work, they can be exploited. Ranks are not important to the experience.
It was revealed that Call of Duty now has ranks
Next Halo release:
We are thrilled to introduce a revolutionary new ranking system that lets you frag your friends at your own skill level.
Ranks scare people away. Ranking systems don't work, they can be exploited. Ranks are not important to the experience.
It was revealed that Call of Duty now has ranks
Next Halo release:
We are thrilled to introduce a revolutionary new ranking system that lets you frag your friends at your own skill level.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Eh, to each his/her own.
I still want to win no matter if I have a number beside my name or not. It's not like you take that visual rank away and suddenly I want to lose every game, or just don't care. Winning is winning. As a very competitive person I want to win whether I have a visual rank, or just a win/loss ratio in stats somewhere.
I get why people like the visual rank, but not having it certainly does not cause me to stop playing a game. I still have that drive to win (my own skill at Halo aside
) so an experience system in place of a ranking system doesn't bother me. The incentive to play for me is not seeing a number beside my name tick up, it's winning, having fun, playing with friends, etc. As soon as a number rank becomes the only reason you play a game, it might be time for a break.
The one thing they do need to get right is skill-based matchmaking though. Visual rank or not I want to be matched with people my own level.
Just my two cents.
I still want to win no matter if I have a number beside my name or not. It's not like you take that visual rank away and suddenly I want to lose every game, or just don't care. Winning is winning. As a very competitive person I want to win whether I have a visual rank, or just a win/loss ratio in stats somewhere.
I get why people like the visual rank, but not having it certainly does not cause me to stop playing a game. I still have that drive to win (my own skill at Halo aside
) so an experience system in place of a ranking system doesn't bother me. The incentive to play for me is not seeing a number beside my name tick up, it's winning, having fun, playing with friends, etc. As soon as a number rank becomes the only reason you play a game, it might be time for a break. The one thing they do need to get right is skill-based matchmaking though. Visual rank or not I want to be matched with people my own level.
Just my two cents.
Well said... I approve.
Exactly
That's just it... winning is not winning. Winning with something on the line... a little juice, is better than just winning. Winning 40 games in a row against terrible kids, walking over them game after game after game is not the same as winning a closely contested match that gets you another step closer to your goal of a 50 in a playlist.
Poker Face
Member
But people cheated in 1-50! No one would even think to boost for points so they could unlock weapons faster!
Week one of halo 4 is going to be a giant mess of boosters trying to get their BRs. Cant wait for my XBL inbox to be filled with boosting invites.
Week one of halo 4 is going to be a giant mess of boosters trying to get their BRs. Cant wait for my XBL inbox to be filled with boosting invites.
squidhands
Member
I would say that the lack of quality maps is just as big a problem in Reach as some of the gameplay mechanics like bloom, bad Armor Abilities, or the virtually meaningless ranking system. There isn't a single map in Reach I'd ever feel nostalgia to play again, which is really depressing when I consider how much (alleged) effort and care were put into the game by the seasoned staff at Bungie.
Over's comments lately have been spot on and great. Bravo, dude.
I think a good parallel is to when Halo 3 added the visual representation of our secondary weapons, on the hip or back of player models. No more surprises when that dude pulls out rockets, we can see someone has sniper on his back, etc.
My concern if there is there will be either no visual representation of the armor mods, or the visuals are too small and we ultimately have no way asses our opponents in combat.
Example: I'm approaching a sniper from the rear, and I know he's scoped and firing on distant targets. But I can see an antenna on his helmet that tells me he has the mod that lets him have radar while scoped. I'll try to take him down differently than if I did not know this.
Another example is if the same sniper is using the stabilizing armor mod to make it harder to knock their reticule around. If I scope in with my BR or DMR, I should be able to see something about that sniper's profile that indicates their choice of mod. This way a team getting sniped will know how effective their return fire is.
There are a large number of armor mods, so this won't be easy. And since 343 is not using armor to signal armor mods, I'm not sure how visible small attachments will be to signal armor mods, if they are used. Little pouches or doo dads on an arm are not immediately visible. We need something that alters the player's profile in a clearly identifiable way, such as antenna, shoulder pads, back pack attachments, etc. so we can immediately asses what they are using.
So far there has been no mention of a visual representation of the armor mods, so this is all speculation. But if they're not visually represented, I think that would be an unfortunate decision.
Letting players mix and match armor and armor mods lets everyone have fun dressing up their virtual Barbie Spartan, but gameplay should be king. I would rather tie armor - at least part of the armor - to the armor mod and restrict the visual customization options at bit so that player abilities are visually signaled to others in-game. It's a trade off that would be more than worth it. If 343 hasn't done this in some way, I think it's a pretty big design miss. Hopefully it's something they considered.
It's not a question of needing it in order to motivate you... it's that if it's there, it provides a little more juice, and makes it more enjoyable for competitive people who like that juice.
I get this argument (the HiredN00bs argument), and I certainly do want to win all the games I play as well. But, in Reach, I don't give two shits if I lose a game if I personally performed well... Because I get my stats and there's no "punishment" for losing. I chalk it up to "well my teammates just sucked... Oh well.. Next game..."Eh, to each his/her own.
I still want to win no matter if I have a number beside my name or not. It's not like you take that visual rank away and suddenly I want to lose every game, or just don't care. Winning is winning. As a very competitive person I want to win whether I have a visual rank, or just a win/loss ratio in stats somewhere.
I get why people like the visual rank, but not having it certainly does not cause me to stop playing a game. I still have that drive to win (my own skill at Halo aside
The one thing they do need to get right is skill-based matchmaking though. Visual rank or not I want to be matched with people my own level.
Just my two cents.
Like Over mentioned, in Halo 3 if my team lost it sucked. I got punished. We got punished. This motivates people to play better individually and as a team, take games more seriously, and is what really creates the intense games that Reach doesn't. In 3, if I know we're down to our last death, I'm doing everything I can to get the upperhand on our enemies to not allow us to lose. Putting everything on the line to be that hero for our team that pulls out the miracle, and I know my teammates want to do the same. I can tell you I have never ever put any careful thought into my playstyle at that point in a game in Reach. Other team has 49? Ok... I continue playing as usual because the loss means nothing. Hey, I had a good game... You guys just sucked. It's all good though... No harm, no foul.
To be fair, I'm not near as competitive as some of you guys are with these games, but I can say Halo 3's ranks brought out that competitive side of me that's been completely untapped in my career with Reach.
Hydranockz
Member
It's the difference between any league/championship and a friendly match. You could get the two best teams and pit them together. While neither team will throw the game, the fact that every result counts will impact how they play and how people feel when involved.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
This is my biggest problem with Reach. The maps are just horrible and you play the same crap over and over and over again (Searchable Custom Games would've fixed this, but we're obviously never getting that so..).. Bad maps mixed with bad playlists is a recipe for disaster, game mechanics aside. If you threw Reach's mechanics (TU/ZB) into Halo 2's maps, Reach would've been more well-received than what it is right now. Now imagine a revised 1-50 skill-based system with that too? I seriously doubt as many people would be hating on Reach than what they are right now..
Not a Jellyfish
but I am a sheep
This xINFINITY. Needs to be here now, this wait is killing me.
Leave it to Halo though to make me excited for a new game release this ahead of time.
New visual ranks: Hearts, stars, horseshoes, clovers and blue moons. Pots of gold and rainbows and the red balloons! That's yer lucky ranks!
Can't hurt peoples feelings with with delicious marshmallow placement.
ship it
Garrett 2U
Member
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Don't take my post the wrong way, I do like ranking systems. I was just noting that to me the difference between having one and not having one is smaller than to others.
I know and love the feeling (especially in halo 2) of playing all those matches at 42 (or whatever) and being in a very close match where you know you'll hit 43 if you win, and pulling it out in the last seconds. It's very satisfying. That being said, I've had matches like that in Reach (albeit less) and they've been just as satisfying without the number. I think it more lies in the game's ability to match based on skill. Something Reach does poorly.
I'd be all for ranks in 4, but it won't kill me if they aren't there.
EDIT: If they could do in-game tournaments that would be awesome. Wasn't MS working on a tournament system for Live? Would be cool if there were weekly tourneys in 4.
I know and love the feeling (especially in halo 2) of playing all those matches at 42 (or whatever) and being in a very close match where you know you'll hit 43 if you win, and pulling it out in the last seconds. It's very satisfying. That being said, I've had matches like that in Reach (albeit less) and they've been just as satisfying without the number. I think it more lies in the game's ability to match based on skill. Something Reach does poorly.
I'd be all for ranks in 4, but it won't kill me if they aren't there.
EDIT: If they could do in-game tournaments that would be awesome. Wasn't MS working on a tournament system for Live? Would be cool if there were weekly tourneys in 4.
Hydranockz
Member
I'd love that. PGR3 had national and international tournaments every week I think. Never tried so hard for a time trial in a long time!
- Status