-
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 |OT9| One Final Effort Is All That Remains
- Thread starter GhaleonEB
- Start date
"O'Connor replied by saying 343i has done its due diligence, keeping abreast of the genre's evolution and a keen eye on peers. He went on to reveal former Treyarch and Infinity Ward devs are working on the sequel and 'bringing some of their habits to the game.'"
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/370186/343i-halo-4-isnt-chasing-call-of-dutys-tail/
Dem CoD elements.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/370186/343i-halo-4-isnt-chasing-call-of-dutys-tail/
Dem CoD elements.
Rickenslacker
Banned
I just hope they hammer out things like AAs disappearing after a host migration.
shocking
Good point. I don't know how host selection works and how it uses its history, but I have way way better internet than I did when Reach first came out. Its good enough that I should get host often, but rarely do. It can go the other way too, what happens when someone's internet gets worse or they change services? Does the game know to recheck that? Does it really rely on a history, or does it check it at the present time too?
Having a better host selection and black screen handling (reconnecting faster or whatever) would go a long way for me.
NullPointer
Member
Halo 4 on rails confirmed.
Could be those crazy flood things, right?
Considering that drop in drop out is in the game, black screen handling has to be improved.
A big problem recently is the lack of people playing. When there's only a few hundred or less in a gametype what are the odds that 1 of those 8 people (or 1 of the 16) is going to have a) fast enough connection to handle the back and forth communication and b) geographically central to the other 7-15 players to average out ping times, etc.
In a bigger (much bigger) population size and with potentially longer lobby times maybe all that could be sorted before lobbies are even populated.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
He mentioned that the Banshee's plasma cannons got a damage boost. I can't remember if he commented on the fuel rod cannon, but from what I saw, it seemed to have a much longer cool down rate than Reach's.
I know no Kinect controls were confirmed a while ago, but the elaboration on the philosophy is encouraging. Exactly the right approach, very glad to read.
I would be ok with the current damage rate from Reach if they fixed the spamming of backflips. Give the banshee one backflip that deletes the entire ability and make them charge it 100% to do another maneuver. They can boost whenever they have at least 5% or more of the energy meter filled up, but backflips only happen at 100%.
I hope that's the case, but it's been happening even in well-populated playlists. At least for me, that is. Three of my four games in Invasion last night, a playlist that hovers at 2k players regularly, everybody was in yellow bar the entire game, which in Reach translates to "shit is totally fucked, this is unplayable."
Halo 4 over ambitious, confirmed.
I do love Moly though. I could listen to him talk all day.
I was thinking about that, but then, in normal Infection games, zombies aren't actually chosen until the game starts, right?
It does show your SR rank to the right, so maybe it just shows your current specialization rank, or Spartan-IV before you go into one?
Um... so how many people will just drop out of a game when they're put on the infection side? I predict a lot of games that stall out as all 2 or 3
B&W, Fable and Fable 2 are some of my favorite games of all time. If you ignore the incredible hype machine that is his mouth, you'll enjoy everything much more.
Populous was a pretty great series too, although my favorite game (The Beginning) was technically made after he left Bullfrog. That game is awesome and still holds up pretty well (a fully 3D world at the same time as StarCraft.)
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
That doesn't happen in Reach, and I don't see why it would in Halo 4. Being a Flood Spartan might actually make people want to be a zombie.
That happens even now, choosing in the pregame lobby would be a disaster. People will currently just idle until the next round in hopes that they get to be the side actually having fun.
Really? My experience might not be the norm, but man, I've seen a bunch of people try to just hide as a zombie once the humans get a setup going.
I wonder how they're gonna mix it up. I think it'd do a lot to make it less one sided to have the initial zombies be immune to headshots, then the last three or so humans could get a damage boost to balance out the increased numbers. As long as they don't do the whole "Overshield for last man standing" thing that Reach had. Not a fan of that.
Then maybe it's just for a differentiation between multiplayer, spops, and campaign? Could say the team members in spartan ops, etc.
There's nothing "ariibtrary" about it, it's just that the reasons are rather complex.
There are definite features of recent Halo games that force an overreliance on teamshot, and I'll do my best to break them down and what effect they have. There are two overarching "problems" that create an environment where teamshot becames too necessary, with several components to each. They are: slow kill times and easy aiming.
Whether intentional or not, the increasingly slower kill times combined with relatively easy aiming have forced a greater and greater reliance on teamshot above all else.
Slow Kill Times
This one is pretty easy to measure and guage; one need only look at any of the numerous measurements Halo players have done to see that kill times with the utility weapons have gotten slower. They seem to have settled around 1.5 seconds with the past couple of games and now with Halo 4.
Why does kill-speed matter? The most important reason is that slower kill times allow multiple enemies to react before a single player can have much impact.
The average human reaction time is somewhere around 215 milliseconds; keep in mind that is average time to react, not necessarily to get a bead on your opponent. Lets say it takes about 400 milliseconds for your average player to react, turn and aim in the general direction of an attacking enemy.
In that period of time an individual player, assuming they land every shot, can do 26.7% damage with a weapon that takes 1.5 seconds to kill (400/1500 = .267). They still need 1100 miliseconds of time to kill just one opponent, assuming they don't miss at all.
So, after about 400 milliseconds, a player who is being attacked, as well as any teammates around, have turned and are now shooting at the individual player. Lets assume there are 2 enemies now shooting at the player. Those two enemies require only 750 milliseconds to kill the player (1500/2 = 750). That's less time than it will take the individual player to kill just one of the two opponents.
Essentially, a player who flanks two enemies and gets the drop on them cannot physically kill even one of them before being taken out. Even if they do manage to kill one of the two enemies, they will be so weakened as to make it impossible to survive the second. This issue would be less problematic if landing shots was difficult, allowing the individual player to overcome the numerical advantage if he had a great skill advantage. Unfortunately, that leads us to issue #2....
Ease of Aiming
"Ease of Aiming" isn't technically correct, because its not the act of aiming itself that its easy, its the external features of the game that make it too easy to land shots. Slow movement and strafe speed combined with excessive aim assist and spam-friendly weaponry have significantly lowered the shooting skill-gap.
The easiest way to guage something like this is to look at the average shots to kill vs the to minimun shots to kill. I think anyone who is being honest with themselves would say that the average shots to kill in recent Halo games has been pretty close to the minimum shots to kill for most players; probably somewhere around 1 or 2 shots more than the minimum. Additionally, a lot of this disparity between the two can be attributed to random game mechanics (bloom, spread) rather than players actually missing the shots.
The end result of all this is that individual players cannot be effective players (unless of course they have a power weapon, which is a whole other problem unto itself, but another discussion entirely). In order to be effective, they must stick close to teammates and shoot with teammates. Counterintuitively, this is incredibly restrictive for teamwork because it doesn't allow players to move freely or unexpectedly.
Obviously there are many, many other factors that go into measuring individual effectiveness and whether or not it's adequately rewarded. Additionally, these are pretty basic examples and measurements, and in-game encounters are much more dynamic and involved. However, I believe these still hold-up as examples of why the game has moved to be much too reliant on teamshot. Personal experience has confirmed my assertations as well.
While many of you think I don't want teamwork to be a part of the game, its actually the exact opposite. I want more involved, intelligent, dynamic teamwork, and part of that is allowing individual players to be effective forces on their own. The nullification of the individual is one of the reasons going in alone simply isn't fun in recent Halo games.
Vire
Member
Sorry, we encountered a problem while processing your request.
Trace ID: c934ef9d-6a44-48cf-ab75-4b6b2915c618
Error ID: Unknown
Gotta love Waypoint.
I don't see zombies quit, but I do see them idle, and I can see why--it's a slaughterfest on most maps (in particular, Boardwalk.)
They need to make the zombies either tougher, or Forged maps that force humans into closer quarters. Strengthen the zombies and infection becomes tougher, more exciting, and fun for the zombies, instead of mostly a playlist for getting your commendations and the "double double" challenge.
and here comes 10 post about how they are tablet friendly
Oh my poor neck
Unless there's counter-op in Spartan Ops, or you can select Zombie/human in Infection customs before it starts.
Protip: for a good time, play Infection in Reach matchmaking, save the gametype, then invite someone else to the lobby and turn Teams on and start the game. If you're lucky, you'll get spawned as the Human and witness the horror.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
I think an option to make wins based on time alive as a human and/or kills as a zombie would be pretty useful, along with a clear separation between the infected and humans on the scorecard.
Vire
Member
Grazie.
Bookmarked.
Yes.
Your native resolution isn't high enough on your TV.
It begins in 13 hours? Enough time to sleep, then.
Demoncarnotaur
Member
So, it seems the new vehicle (Mantis) may have been playable in MP (it was a MP only event, correct?):
"The game was great fun! I can't talk about the new map or vehicle, but i'm sure you've found out from leaks now anyway. "
Mech on Valhalla a reality?
"The game was great fun! I can't talk about the new map or vehicle, but i'm sure you've found out from leaks now anyway. "
Mech on Valhalla a reality?
Vire
Member
TUROK
Member
Why are you playing at 1024x768 res? Is that a TV or a computer monitor?
That is an odd monitor resolution/4:3 and not a 16:9 TV. You will have black bars unless you vertically stretch the image.
ArchedThunder
Banned
If you can't read sideways text there is something wrong with the way your brain receives images.
THE ULTIMATE POWER WEAPON. MECHA BEATS ALL +1200
16:10 monitor with a resolution like his is odd no? I played on 1680x1050 when I had my 16:10 monitor. Try that
That's what I'm thinking. I'm not particularly a fan of Infection, and I'm often the zombie to go hide and AFK when I'm chosen during games, however the idea of being a Flood Spartan seems really interesting.
In the current Infection playlist, being a zombie often blows. Hard. Spawn killing, about a 10-1 death to kill ratio, etc., are all contributing factors to why being Infected isn't particularly fun for me. To have any chance as one of the initial zombies, you have to just keep throwing yourself at people in hopes that you catch them off-guard, or camp around a tight corner for a random amount of time in hopes that no one sees you, then wait until the numbers turn in your favor to eventually win the round. That's just not fun for me.
However, being a human is often very fun, especially if you're among the last standing or with a group of friends. It's such a drastic change of fun for me to go from Infected to Human to the point where it's either a really fun time or a really shitty time, depending on what I'm chosen as for that round. Luckily most of the Infection maps I've played have been reasonably balanced (and often very creative), to where there's no cheap spots from humans to camp at.
If Halo 4 were to make it where the zombies-to-human death ratio were closer, or the zombies felt like they had more of a chance of success without the cost of large amounts of deaths, then I'd certainly be more inclined to play.
Not to mention being a Flood Spartan sounds fucking sweet, and something that should have been done a long, long time ago.
BackdoorBeauty
Member
Is this a serious post? GTFO
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
NullPointer
Member
If you didn't have those black bars you'd have to have portions of the image cut off on both sides to fit your screen. The black bars are your friend, since you can still see the entire image.
Assuming non-joke-post, as I'm wont to do.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
I just meant that I don't see people quit out when they get stuck being a zombie. But yeah, I have seen zombies not bother going after humans, especially when the humans are holed up in one of the coveted camping spots.
TUROK
Member
Yeah, do this. You'll still have black bars, but they won't be huge like that.
We should take up a charity to help pay your doctor bills for neck rehabilitation.
Save The Gui 2013
Yes, looking at the shots I thought it was a 16:10, then I saw 1024x768. 4:3 in 2012 smh