• 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: Reach |OT4| This Thread is Not Your Grave, But You Are Welcome In It

FyreWulff

Member
Havok said:
There's nothing wrong with how the H2 warthog handled. Having driven around Coag and Relic in the last couple days, it was very refreshing not flipping on every pebble, and bouncing as though it had weight without being out of control. And rifle rounds bring able to flip the thing in subsequent games was duuuuumb.

I'm referring to the fact that online, if you were not the host, you literally did not have physics. At all.

You couldn't grenade jump off host, you couldn't have your hog flipped by a grenade or rocket off-host, etc etc

All that stuff that happens in 3 and Reach was supposed to happen in 2. But due to a bug, it did not. The only way to get a game with full physics was to play splitscreen (the bug was in LAN aswell)

I'm just fine with 3 and Reach's hog, although I kind of miss how it handled in the beta, since it actually felt like you were driving a vehicle with weight on the tires. Retail made it closer to the 3/2 Hog again.

The worst version of the Hog was definitely the Halo 3 beta one, that thing was like a tank. Heavy as shit and near impossible to flip with grenades to stop someone on a chaingun rampage.
 

Ramirez

Member
The Reach hog is similar to 2/3's Hog in handling? WAT

The entire vehicle sandbox is a travesty, the Warthog being the biggest offender, go over a hump and it just randomly flips over, terrible.

PsychoRaven said:
At this point we don't have a clue what will be brought over and what won't. Although it would be a safe bet that bloom will be gone. The rest though who knows.

Common sense tells me that none of that garbage is returning, and if it does, it will be completely revamped. See the thrusters in the reveal trailer as an example of a replacement of jetpacks.
 

Trasher

Member
Ramirez said:
The Reach hog is similar to 2/3's Hog in handling? WAT

The entire vehicle sandbox is a travesty, the Warthog being the biggest offender, go over a hump and it just randomly flips over, terrible.
Good times when a pistol bullet will flip a warthog... How did no one at Bungie not notice something so awful? Boggles my mind lol.

We should make a montage of epic warthog driving fails.
 
I think some of you guys are just not very good at driving the warthog. Don't get me wrong, the warthog certainly handles much lighter than in previous games, but its not that hard to drive. It's not like the Halo 3 'hog where you just hold forward on the stick and you win the game, but I don't have too many issues handling it. (This is not a comment about my opinion of the Reach warthog just the handling of it)
 

Havok

Member
FyreWulff said:
I'm referring to the fact that online, if you were not the host, you literally did not have physics. At all.

You couldn't grenade jump off host, you couldn't have your hog flipped by a grenade or rocket off-host, etc etc

All that stuff that happens in 3 and Reach was supposed to happen in 2. But due to a bug, it did not. The only way to get a game with full physics was to play splitscreen (the bug was in LAN aswell)
I had completely forgotten about that. I guess it's a problem but it'd still be hard for me to choose between a 'Hog that could be flipped by tiny physics impulses than one that couldn't at all.
I'm just fine with 3 and Reach's hog, although I kind of miss how it handled in the beta, since it actually felt like you were driving a vehicle with weight on the tires. Retail made it closer to the 3/2 Hog again..
The Reach 'hog feels orders of magnitude more fragile and bouncy (not in a good way) than the older versions. Just looking at something like Rocket Hog Race, the vehicle flips in a way that it tends to stay belly up, rather than the Halo 2 (perhaps 3, it's been a while) version whose center of gravity seemed to be much lower.
Steelyuhas said:
I think some of you guys are just not very good at driving the warthog. Don't get me wrong, the warthog certainly handles much lighter than in previous games, but its not that hard to drive. It's not like the Halo 3 'hog where you just hold forward on the stick and you win the game, but I don't have too many issues handling it. (This is not a comment about my opinion of the Reach warthog just the handling of it)
It's not that its hard to drive, just that physics impulses have a much larger impact on its momentum than it used to.
FyreWulff said:
You know you can flip the warthog over with BRs in 3, right? You can flip them from the ground. We also constantly flipped over hogs coming in on the mancannons in Avalanche with BR shots.
It was dumb then and it's dumb now. Makes the thing feel like a paperweight, being rolled all over Standoff and Hemorrhage during turns.
 

Trasher

Member
Steelyuhas said:
I think some of you guys are just not very good at driving the warthog. Don't get me wrong, the warthog certainly handles much lighter than in previous games, but its not that hard to drive. It's not like the Halo 3 'hog where you just hold forward on the stick and you win the game, but I don't have too many issues handling it. (This is not a comment about my opinion of the Reach warthog just the handling of it)
The issue isn't whether or not it's hard to drive. The physics surrounding the warthog are just awful. The one example Ram was referencing was how when a warthog in Reach goes over a bump/hill and someone shoots it, the warthog will be pushed or flipped way off course and go careening into walls etc. A bullet should not affect the momentum of a warthog.

Edit: Btw all, you should check out the OT-GAF meltdown right now in response to the new posting rules. It's pretty hilarious.
 

FyreWulff

Member
You know you can flip the warthog over with BRs in 3, right? You can flip them from the ground. We also constantly flipped over hogs coming in on the mancannons in Avalanche with BR shots.

Also, handbrake. Left trigger. Alternately: switch to the god-tier stick configuration for driving vehicles, Legacy. I don't use the right stick at all while driving a hog around.

One of my favorite things to do in 3 is power slide sideways from one basecannon to the other basecannon on Avalanche without stopping.

I can also do it around the ship on Boneyard and am almost able to pull it off from base-to-base on Breakpoint over the drawbridge.

I've literally only had my hog flip over "outta nowhere" during the first couple of weeks Reach was Live. At that point I finally acclimated to the changes from 3 and know how to control my speed with the handbrake/A button (might be RB on default)

I was actually surprised not many people knew you could lock a chopper in place / stop it on a dime in 3 by holding A for super-brakes
 

Trasher

Member
FyreWulff said:
You know you can flip the warthog over with BRs in 3, right? You can flip them from the ground. We also constantly flipped over hogs coming in on the mancannons in Avalanche with BR shots.
This is why the Halo CE warthog will always be king. The physics in that game are god-tier.
 
Trasher said:
The issue isn't whether or not it's hard to drive. The physics surrounding the warthog are just awful. The one example Ram was referencing was how when a warthog in Reach goes over a bump/hill and someone shoots it, the warthog will be pushed or flipped way off course and go careening into walls etc. A bullet should not affect the momentum of a warthog.

Edit: Btw all, you should check out the OT-GAF meltdown right now in response to the new posting rules. It's pretty hilarious.

Yeah I don't know, I don't have too many issues with that, it just doesn't happen to me. Yes, you actually have to pay attention to how you drive the thing, but I don't find myself getting flipped by bullets or little bumps. I feel it has something to do with just being skilled at driving the thing, but I'm not denying that the warthog is a bit light.
 

FyreWulff

Member
Trasher said:
This is why the Halo CE warthog will always be king. The physics in that game are god-tier.

Because it's even easier to flip over because every vehicle in CE is modeled as bouncy spheres in the physics? Or launch another hog 2 miles into the air by driving into it?

You could make them sit on their noses at a standstill because of that with correct grenade placement. People were using that to try and use the hog as a catcher for the Tower2Tower challenge :lol

Trasher said:
Edit: Btw all, you should check out the OT-GAF meltdown right now in response to the new posting rules. It's pretty hilarious.

I like how people are apparently "protesting" by using an extended Unicode character they just found. FIGHT DA MAN WITH UNYCUDZ GUYZ
 

Trasher

Member
FyreWulff said:
Because it's even easier to flip over because every vehicle in CE is modeled as bouncy spheres in the physics? Or launch another hog 2 miles into the air by driving into it?

You could make them sit on their noses at a standstill because of that with correct grenade placement. People were using that to try and use the hog as a catcher for the Tower2Tower challenge :lol
Doing those things in multiplayer most likely meant you were losing though...lol. At least in CE grenades and rockets actually severely affected the course of a warthog like they should. You didn't have to worry about a friggin bullet bumping or flipping your warthog over. Probably my biggest complaint over the course of Halo history is that they changed the physics of how grenades affected warthogs. God I loved flipping hogs with a well placed grenade. It was a fun and skillful way to disable vehicles.

Steelyuhas said:
Yeah I don't know, I don't have too many issues with that, it just doesn't happen to me. Yes, you actually have to pay attention to how you drive the thing, but I don't find myself getting flipped by bullets or little bumps. I feel it has something to do with just being skilled at driving the thing, but I'm not denying that the warthog is a bit light.
Yeah it happens to us frequently in multiplayer. I dunno how you don't notice it. Just watch what happens to your hog the next time someone is shooting rounds at it when you get a little bit of air.
 

Ramirez

Member
Domino Theory said:
Sorry RamyBLock, my internet pooped out on me. :(

We played one riveting game of Team Classic (population of 88) and called it a night, lol.

edit: Man, those new rules are going to make the OT really boring.
 

blamite

Member
Feature I'm betting will be included in the TU: Classic style radar.

During a game on Countdown just now, I realized how much I now rely on the ability to know more or less the exact position of anyone within 25 meters of me. I'd be a nice change to get back that sense of knowing someone s around you, but are they on this floor or the one below? Oh god are the watching me right now!? I'm so scared!

Reach's radar feels like playing on easy mode.
 

FyreWulff

Member
blamite said:
Feature I'm betting will be included in the TU: Classic style radar.

During a game on Countdown just now, I realized how much I now rely on the ability to know more or less the exact position of anyone within 25 meters of me. I'd be a nice change to get back that sense of knowing someone s around you, but are they on this floor or the one below? Oh god are the watching me right now!? I'm so scared!

Reach's radar feels like playing on easy mode.

On the other hand, it always felt silly that the Spartans had no elevation indicators on their radars, which made it stupid on multilevel maps. Even Perfect Dark had elevation indicators on it's radar and it had a screenbuffer of 320x200 to work with on N64.

For me, no radar is easy mode. You don't have to worry about crouching on the radar so you can sprint everywhere and whack people in the back because they don't see you coming. On radar gametypes I actually have to think about crouch walking to not alert the other team to our positioning and have to actually flank and ambush, instead of just constantly running around mindlessly until an encounter occurs. There is no point to being strategic or clever in no-radar gametypes.
 
blamite said:
Feature I'm betting will be included in the TU: Classic style radar.

During a game on Countdown just now, I realized how much I now rely on the ability to know more or less the exact position of anyone within 25 meters of me. I'd be a nice change to get back that sense of knowing someone s around you, but are they on this floor or the one below? Oh god are the watching me right now!? I'm so scared!

Reach's radar feels like playing on easy mode.

Yeah to be honest the radar should not have the height indicators by default. I wonder if that's a change they considered for the TU. I assume that Bungie added height indicators because of the jetpack, they ever directly say why they added the height indicators?
 

FyreWulff

Member
What I want in the radar again is objectives. It was so damn useful in Halo 3, even in Race, and then they aren't in the radar at all in Reach. Wut.
 
FyreWulff said:
On the other hand, it always felt silly that the Spartans had no elevation indicators on their radars, which made it stupid on multilevel maps. Even Perfect Dark had elevation indicators on it's radar and it had a screenbuffer of 320x200 to work with on N64.

For me, no radar is easy mode. You don't have to worry about crouching on the radar so you can sprint everywhere and whack people in the back because they don't see you coming. On radar gametypes I actually have to think about crouch walking to not alert the other team to our positioning and have to actually flank and ambush, instead of just constantly running around mindlessly until an encounter occurs. There is no point to being strategic or clever in no-radar gametypes.

That's not true at all. No radar means you have to use communication more so than in radar games. It's also harder to camp, and players who have better awareness and movement can utilize their skill in those two traits a lot better to give themselves an advantage.

Radar slows the game down, and makes it a lot easier to keep power positions. Sneaky players suffer.
 

Striker

Member
I loved my Halo 2 Warthog. Halo 3's felt too slow in comparison, ignoring the over-powered chaingun. Reach's is fine in speed, but the lightness is noticeable in certain maps. I drive fine with it in Hemorrhage.

No radar made Team Snipers in Halo 2 awesome, especially on Beaver Creek.

:(
 

Kuroyume

Banned
So is cursing banned now? Because that's bullshit. They had a cursing filter a few years ago, then removed it, and now we might not be able to curse anymore? YOU KNOW HOW MUCH I CURSE ON HERE
 
You cater to the 20% playing 80% of the games. Theres about a good chunk of Reach players that are Hero+ in Reach, you listen to them because they all play a lot. The rest make up a shitload of the players but not of the games being played.

Furthermore at the point of amateur status you truly don't care what you play so if you force them into DMR starts they don't care and either switch to the AR or learn to use the DMR quicker than they would have with the old settings.

Cater to the regulars my parents would always say when managing their bar. Most playlists should be AR+DMR starts. Objective, Slayer, Classic(NR is fine here in place of DMR), Squad Slayer, The Premiums, BTB, Arena, Dubs, Multi. It shouldn't for all the other playlists that have specific weapon starts (everything I didn't list just now)

For further reading.
 

kylej

Banned
Ladies and Gentlemen - in the year of our lord 2011 - my Spartan has finally updated its clothes on Bnet. It took nearly 12 months, in which I could not have given less of a shit, but the day has finally arrived. I tip my hat to you Bungie on another job well done.
 

Tawpgun

Member
Ramirez said:
I think you're nuts if you think hardly anything will be brought over to 4 from Reach. Goodbye bloom, goodbye terrible melee system, goodbye AA's, so long, farewell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsaTElBljOE
I think it's a safe bet some form of AA's/equipment will return. Hopefully it's revamped in a way that keeps Halo's everyone on even ground principle intact and makes the game fun to play for everyone, not just the people abusing the AA's.

Devin Olsen said:
lol. "lets see what's better, your sword or my oddball"
*blained*
LOL'd SO hard.


Devin Olsen said:
We are nearing 80,000 posts, and Reach hasn't even been out a year yet.
I always wonder if it's because we are a very passionate and vocal community.... or if the game has so many problems we keep complaining and never play :p
 

Louis Wu

Member
A27 Tawpgun said:
Well this brings up a good point.

Do you cater to the masses who casually play the game. Or do you cater to your dedicated community that's responsible for keeping the game alive?

The most vocal are generally the more passionate. The ones who love Halo the most if I had to say.
I hear this a lot from folks who think they're hardcore because they've been around for a long time. "We're responsible for the success of your game!"

This is bullshit. The hardcore (for EVERY Halo title) is a tiny subset. It's ALWAYS a tiny subset. The VAST majority of Halo players has ALWAYS been more casual than that. And surprise, surprise... lots of 'em come back game after game, even though they're not playing every night! (Or, even bigger surprise, maybe they ARE playing every night - but they're not participating in any online communities, they don't worry about what weapons are on each map, they might not even know the name of the company that makes the game. They just play.)

They're also the ones who LEAVE once a community settles down to 'hardcore mode'. (Look at Halo PC. There's still a community playing that, though it's tiny compared to the number playing, say, Reach. But they're all playing the same thing - Slayer or CTF on Blood Gulch. That's what the 'hardcore' thinks Halo PC multiplayer boils down to - and that's what casuals get bored of.)

If game companies catered specifically to their hardcore fans to the exclusion of everyone else, they'd be out of business. It's really that simple.

You talk about the most vocal ones being the most passionate - but they're also the ones who like what they like. And they don't want it to change. But that's NOT how you sell more games! So while you don't want to piss those people off too much (because they ARE vocal) - you also don't want to focus exclusively on them, because if they had their way, they'd still be playing what made them fall in love in the first place. (Face it - what the hardcore would love more than anything is if someone put in the time and effort to remove the cheating from Halo 2, right? Because that was the best multiplayer ever, right? But the rest of us - and no, I don't count myself among the 'hardcore' in this context, even though I've been in this community longer than almost ALL of you - we'd be bored shitless if that's all Bungie/343 did. And we'd find some other game company to buy stuff from.)

Game companies walk a really fine line when they have a successful title. They have to find a way to make a replacement that's BETTER than what they just did (to convince people to buy more from them) but they have to also make sure they keep the stuff that was great in the first place (because that's what people are now EXPECTING from the franchise). And sometimes, those aren't compatible goals. For a lot of GAFers, Reach went too far with the changes - the 'better' became worse.

But for other people (me, for example), Reach's gameplay is MORE fun than what came before it - at least if you judge by how much time I'm putting into it. And no, it's not because of Armor Lock, or Evade, or ARs, or any of that - I use Sprint 95% of the time, and my tool of destruction is the DMR. But I can LIVE with all that stuff that makes you guys crazy - and that's the difference, I think.

I'm getting away from the original point - the original point is that the hardcore are NOT responsible for the success of the game - by the simple fact that they're a minority. Most copies are bought by people who don't care about most of what you care about. Also, the idea of allowing your 'hardcore' fans decide the direction of your game development is a bad one, from a business standpoint. You can certainly let them INFLUENCE you - but letting them run the ship would lead to ending up on the shoals.
 
Game, Set and Match

Louis Wu said:
I hear this a lot from folks who think they're hardcore because they've been around for a long time. "We're responsible for the success of your game!"

This is bullshit. The hardcore (for EVERY Halo title) is a tiny subset. It's ALWAYS a tiny subset. The VAST majority of Halo players has ALWAYS been more casual than that. And surprise, surprise... lots of 'em come back game after game, even though they're not playing every night! (Or, even bigger surprise, maybe they ARE playing every night - but they're not participating in any online communities, they don't worry about what weapons are on each map, they might not even know the name of the company that makes the game. They just play.)

They're also the ones who LEAVE once a community settles down to 'hardcore mode'. (Look at Halo PC. There's still a community playing that, though it's tiny compared to the number playing, say, Reach. But they're all playing the same thing - Slayer or CTF on Blood Gulch. That's what the 'hardcore' thinks Halo PC multiplayer boils down to - and that's what casuals get bored of.)

If game companies catered specifically to their hardcore fans to the exclusion of everyone else, they'd be out of business. It's really that simple.

You talk about the most vocal ones being the most passionate - but they're also the ones who like what they like. And they don't want it to change. But that's NOT how you sell more games! So while you don't want to piss those people off too much (because they ARE vocal) - you also don't want to focus exclusively on them, because if they had their way, they'd still be playing what made them fall in love in the first place. (Face it - what the hardcore would love more than anything is if someone put in the time and effort to remove the cheating from Halo 2, right? Because that was the best multiplayer ever, right? But the rest of us - and no, I don't count myself among the 'hardcore' in this context, even though I've been in this community longer than almost ALL of you - we'd be bored shitless if that's all Bungie/343 did. And we'd find some other game company to buy stuff from.)

Game companies walk a really fine line when they have a successful title. They have to find a way to make a replacement that's BETTER than what they just did (to convince people to buy more from them) but they have to also make sure they keep the stuff that was great in the first place (because that's what people are now EXPECTING from the franchise). And sometimes, those aren't compatible goals. For a lot of GAFers, Reach went too far with the changes - the 'better' became worse.

But for other people (me, for example), Reach's gameplay is MORE fun than what came before it - at least if you judge by how much time I'm putting into it. And no, it's not because of Armor Lock, or Evade, or ARs, or any of that - I use Sprint 95% of the time, and my tool of destruction is the DMR. But I can LIVE with all that stuff that makes you guys crazy - and that's the difference, I think.

I'm getting away from the original point - the original point is that the hardcore are NOT responsible for the success of the game - by the simple fact that they're a minority. Most copies are bought by people who don't care about most of what you care about. Also, the idea of allowing your 'hardcore' fans decide the direction of your game development is a bad one, from a business standpoint. You can certainly let them INFLUENCE you - but letting them run the ship would lead to ending up on the shoals.
 
Not exactly it depends how you measure the success of a game.
-Sales
-Games played
-Players killed
-Net Profit
-Amount of Fun in some quantifiable unit

Its no one's place to say. Or at least no one will be completely right.

and no offense but the people who come back to the game ARE the people playing every night. Me as 1 person has played about 200 casuals worth of games. The casuals lose a few games of MP maybe beat the campaign once, and then go buy CoD and then go somewhere else quickly after that.

You say a lot of stuff in that post Wu. I'm not saying you're completely wrong either but you provide absolutely no evidence to prove it either.

Yes hardcore players obviously make up a little percentage but they probably play the most # of games. Create the most posts online, fanfare, and public outcry.

You speak way too much of the games success being purely business. Well that's not what makes a game great in the players eyes. Its what makes it great in greedy fucks eyes.
 
FyreWulff said:
I'm referring to the fact that online, if you were not the host, you literally did not have physics. At all.

You couldn't grenade jump off host, you couldn't have your hog flipped by a grenade or rocket off-host, etc etc

All that stuff that happens in 3 and Reach was supposed to happen in 2. But due to a bug, it did not. The only way to get a game with full physics was to play splitscreen (the bug was in LAN aswell)

How do you figure it's a bug? I always thought it was intentional to save bandwidth. You couldn't nade jump off-host in Halo CE either.
 

FyreWulff

Member
The Real Napsta said:
How do you figure it's a bug? I always thought it was intentional to save bandwidth. You couldn't nade jump off-host in Halo CE either.

Confirmed as a bug by a Bungie employee. I'd try to source it but I'm too lazy.

I distinctly remember being able to nade jump off-host in Halo CE, considering all they were networking was controller inputs just like Firefight and Campaign Co-Op. There's no reason off-host jumping shouldn't have worked, otherwise there would have been hella desync.

We had a LAN once where we all got on top of Damnation, which requires grenade jumping to work, so..

Unless you're talking about Halo PC. I never really played multiplayer much in that.
 

Louis Wu

Member
xxjuicesxx said:
You speak way too much of the games success being purely business. Well that's not what makes a game great in the players eyes. Its what makes it great in greedy fucks eyes.
A game's success IS purely business. If a company makes a game that's more fun than any other game in the world, but nobody buys it... it's not a success.

Bungie, for all the shit they get from you guys, LOVE playing games, and love making great games. And they've been doing a pretty damned good job of it for a long, long time. (It's not even the same people any more, for the most part - but they've set up an internal culture that helps hire people who have the same goals as the company as a whole. This is actually something they do better than most gaming companies, in my opinion.)

But if the games they made weren't selling - they'd either make different games, or go out of business. Everyone who works there has to eat, has to go home to a place where their stuff is, lots of them have families to support. They can't make games that rock if nobody buys them.

So at the end of the day, it IS all about how well they sell.

I'm not saying for a second that the two aren't related - that usually, when you make a really good game, it WILL sell. Because that's true. But I AM saying that when decisions have to be made where the desires of the 'hardcore' conflict with the desires of the market in general... usually, the hardcore are gonna lose. Because in the end... baby needs a new pair of shoes.
 

FyreWulff

Member
The Real Napsta said:
Huh, what about Halo CE? Intentional or bug?

See post edit, I don't remember grenade jumping not working off-host in Halo CE LAN. Halo CE used frame-relay from what I remember which essentially meant every box passed around the controller state in a loop on the network, so technically nobody was really "host", which is also why games completely dropped when any box left the game.

I wish I could go test this now, but I'm the only one with a working copy of Halo: CE in this apartment :x

If it isn't in CE though, I imagine it would have been a performance issue. It MIGHT be related the amount of people in a game, Halo 2 shut off ragdolls after 8 people were in a game from what I remember.
 

Ken

Member
Louis Wu said:
A game's success IS purely business. If a company makes a game that's more fun than any other game in the world, but nobody buys it... it's not a success.

So at the end of the day, it IS all about how well they sell.

But I AM saying that when decisions have to be made where the desires of the 'hardcore' conflict with the desires of the market in general... usually, the hardcore are gonna lose. Because in the end... baby needs a new pair of shoes.
Agreed with this, which is unfortunate for a ton of great games that sell poorly and never receive a sequel because they don't appeal to the majority of consumers which, right now, seems to be the dudebro shooter crowd.
 
FyreWulff said:
See post edit, I don't remember grenade jumping not working off-host in Halo CE LAN. Halo CE used frame-relay from what I remember which essentially meant every box passed around the controller state in a loop on the network, so technically nobody was really "host", which is also why games completely dropped when any box left the game.

I wish I could go test this now, but I'm the only one with a working copy of Halo: CE in this apartment :x

If it isn't in CE though, I imagine it would have been a performance issue. It MIGHT be related the amount of people in a game, Halo 2 shut off ragdolls after 8 people were in a game from what I remember.

In a Halo CE 1v1 system link game, off-host can nade jump. I just tested it.
 

Tawpgun

Member
Louis Wu said:
I hear this a lot from folks who think they're hardcore because they've been around for a long time. "We're responsible for the success of your game!"

This is bullshit. The hardcore (for EVERY Halo title) is a tiny subset. It's ALWAYS a tiny subset. The VAST majority of Halo players has ALWAYS been more casual than that. And surprise, surprise... lots of 'em come back game after game, even though they're not playing every night! (Or, even bigger surprise, maybe they ARE playing every night - but they're not participating in any online communities, they don't worry about what weapons are on each map, they might not even know the name of the company that makes the game. They just play.)

They're also the ones who LEAVE once a community settles down to 'hardcore mode'. (Look at Halo PC. There's still a community playing that, though it's tiny compared to the number playing, say, Reach. But they're all playing the same thing - Slayer or CTF on Blood Gulch. That's what the 'hardcore' thinks Halo PC multiplayer boils down to - and that's what casuals get bored of.)

If game companies catered specifically to their hardcore fans to the exclusion of everyone else, they'd be out of business. It's really that simple.

You talk about the most vocal ones being the most passionate - but they're also the ones who like what they like. And they don't want it to change. But that's NOT how you sell more games! So while you don't want to piss those people off too much (because they ARE vocal) - you also don't want to focus exclusively on them, because if they had their way, they'd still be playing what made them fall in love in the first place. (Face it - what the hardcore would love more than anything is if someone put in the time and effort to remove the cheating from Halo 2, right? Because that was the best multiplayer ever, right? But the rest of us - and no, I don't count myself among the 'hardcore' in this context, even though I've been in this community longer than almost ALL of you - we'd be bored shitless if that's all Bungie/343 did. And we'd find some other game company to buy stuff from.)

Game companies walk a really fine line when they have a successful title. They have to find a way to make a replacement that's BETTER than what they just did (to convince people to buy more from them) but they have to also make sure they keep the stuff that was great in the first place (because that's what people are now EXPECTING from the franchise). And sometimes, those aren't compatible goals. For a lot of GAFers, Reach went too far with the changes - the 'better' became worse.

But for other people (me, for example), Reach's gameplay is MORE fun than what came before it - at least if you judge by how much time I'm putting into it. And no, it's not because of Armor Lock, or Evade, or ARs, or any of that - I use Sprint 95% of the time, and my tool of destruction is the DMR. But I can LIVE with all that stuff that makes you guys crazy - and that's the difference, I think.

I'm getting away from the original point - the original point is that the hardcore are NOT responsible for the success of the game - by the simple fact that they're a minority. Most copies are bought by people who don't care about most of what you care about. Also, the idea of allowing your 'hardcore' fans decide the direction of your game development is a bad one, from a business standpoint. You can certainly let them INFLUENCE you - but letting them run the ship would lead to ending up on the shoals.
You're right when it comes to the initial sales. Casual gamers make up most of that.

But then the Hardcore community is the loudest.... And you are right that if you tick off this group of people it will be VERY bad.

This should be approached in only two successful ways.

The better, but harder way: As easy as it is to say... Make the game competitive but still accessible. Easier said than done for sure. I think as long as you balance the game well and include a good learning curve with a wide enough skill gap... Competitive will be happy and casual won't care. Focus on nailing down the golden tripod and if any AAs are added make sure they enhance those values. Nothing that's super annoying to fight against. Nothing that slows the game to a crawl. Nothing that breaks maps.

The easier way: Segregate the community. Unfortunate, but if you could build experiences around the competitive scene and keep the casuals content this might need to happen. Include a better Psyche Profile that actually works and let people decide what kind of game they want to play before even searching. Both sides win, but the community is a bit separated.
 

kylej

Banned
Louis Wu said:
The VAST majority of Halo players has ALWAYS been more casual than that.

Yeah, and those casual people don't give a fuck what the weapons are, or what the playlists are, or what maps are in the game...

Louis Wu said:
They're also the ones who LEAVE once a community settles down to 'hardcore mode'. (Look at Halo PC.

Black Ops seems to be having a hard time now that things have 'settled down' after launch. What Black Ops does, that Bungie incomprehensibly doesn't realize, is it allows for choice no matter your skill or type of gameplay you like. One thing objectively welcomed by all gamers is choice. Halo does not offer choice. It forces you to choose playlists and hope you get a gametype you like. It forces you to veto and hope you get a good map to pop up. You should never have to do this.

DMRs and Sprint are never going to turn the casuals away - it's the complete lack of reward in any part of Reach. The credit system sucks, the armor customization sucks, the armor abilities suck, the maps suck, the veto system sucks, and the playlists suck. Stop pointing your ire at communities like HaloGAF, who play the game religiously and provide insight that I honestly believe nobody at Bungie is spending half as much time thinking about, and instead point it at a company that released a game 3 years behind its competition. When a playlist has 88 people in it last night like Classic, or averages 600 people since New Years like Objective, what is the harm in changing things up? Is HaloGAF responsible for those populations? Bungie.net? They're ARs, Needle Rifles, AAs, all this shit that caters to the casuals and it's still bombing.

If game companies catered specifically to their hardcore fans to the exclusion of everyone else, they'd be out of business. It's really that simple.

And Reach is what happens when you cater to nobody. It's a half-assed swing at Call of Duty with its other arm scared to let go of the past. Not surprisingly, it falls flat for just about everyone. It's really that simple.
 

Louis Wu

Member
kylej said:
Stop pointing your ire at communities like HaloGAF

My ire? lol - I spend more time here than anywhere but my own site. It's full of insightful discussion. (It's also full of bullshit - but I don't think there's anywhere on the internet that doesn't have that problem.)

I don't think Reach is bombing - I think three quarters of a million people every day put their disc into their 360 and play a game or two (or 20). Could it be MORE successful? Sure. Would removing bloom and armor lock magically bring another million people a day to the game? No way in hell.
 
Kind of want to see Kyle & Wu open a business together.

It's obvious to me that ye're both mostly right. I do certainly agree with Wu that the ship has somewhat sailed. Even this TU & H:CEA won't really change the population in the long term.

I do wonder if H4 has always been intended to come out in 2012. 4 years of continued yearly releases...
 
Top Bottom