Dissecting the best element's of each of the game's in a franchise using reach and 4 as example's of what not to do. Would likely be a much better game, than following industry trend's to draw audience for the game whilst losing the older fan's.
What style of game play would you have for a Halo multiplayer?
- Thread starter Mistel
- Start date
Twilight Gap
Member
In my rambling, I forgot to mention that the purpose of a ranking system is to match players against even competition. If players are constantly being beaten by players better than them, the matchmaking system isn't doing its job. A highly competitive game with a steep learning curve (not that Halo's was that steep) can be and still is appealing to all kinds of gamers when they are not playing beyond their means. Game breaking abilities don't need to be added to make the game "easier" to play.
Dumbing the game down instead of matching even-skilled players would be like lowering the basketball hoop because one team is shorter than the other. Of course it should come as no surprise that when these things are added, there are less people to find even matches with because nobody wants to play babby Halo.
Dumbing the game down instead of matching even-skilled players would be like lowering the basketball hoop because one team is shorter than the other. Of course it should come as no surprise that when these things are added, there are less people to find even matches with because nobody wants to play babby Halo.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
I would like basically two modes -
One for large scale maps that plays pretty much like Battlefield. 64 players with all the vehicles and such.
One for small/medium maps with 8 - 24 players that plays like Halo 2.
One for large scale maps that plays pretty much like Battlefield. 64 players with all the vehicles and such.
One for small/medium maps with 8 - 24 players that plays like Halo 2.
Jessie.Bristol
Member
I know, I loved Dual Wielding in Halo 2. Two SMG's were amazing!
Twilight Gap
Member
As abilities, some of them may have a place in AI modes or canon-centric multiplayer modes like Invasion. For the default playlists, I think some have potential as equipment or enhanced power ups (re. Jetpack example), but that's about it. If nothing is done to AAs, Camo at the very least should return to being a power up. If a guy picks up the sniper and runs to the camo power up, then he has earned it, as opposed to spawning with it and not leaving his base.
It can work, but only if those weapons are auto-dual wieldable. If you pick up the Plasma Rifle or SMG, you automatically get two of them, and you can only swap one gun with another dual wieldable weapon. It eliminates the redundancy that those weapons faced when single-wielded, and it also provides a good alternative to the overpowered SAW found in Halo 4 by trading grenade and melee usage for the increased damage output. This also eliminates the need for a damage boost powerup and expands the role of specific weapons to function both as AoD and CQB weapons.
Only 4 multiplayer is linked to canon, so there's that. I suppose it could work but it would end up with dramatic differences between the AA and non AA gameplay.
A simpler way than automatically giving a player dual wielding would be to increase the damage on the single weapons, so they are just as viable on their own as dual wielded.
Twilight Gap
Member
I agree. I was merely leaving the possibility open as far as hypotheticals go. As long as they are not major elements and are streamlined instances of gameplay, the disparity between it and default can be allowed (e.g. action sack vs default slayer). It's important to keep any differences between modes very minimal so there aren't 20 completely different Halo experiences in matchmaking.
It is indeed simpler, but how would a damage boost account for their single-wield relevancy versus redundancy against their single-wield counterparts? That is, what justifies carrying a single SMG or PR on their own compared to the AR or Storm Rifle? I feel that the extra step of equipping the second weapon could be eliminated and introduce something a bit different. It is nice to have the option to single wield, but it'd ultimately end up inferior to the other weapons on the map. Whoever picked up the Spiker on Avalanche always used both of them (and still would have even if the damage alone was increased) because the combined damage was greater. If he wants to use the Spiker and still have access to grenades and melees, he'd be better off using a weapon that is stronger.
I could see it going both ways so long as people don't mind the redundancy. We have 4 primary rifles now anyway, so redundancy might just be a dead argument.
Most of the new weapon's in four are redundant copies of human one's any way, so the issue redundancy is like beating a dead horse. As for the weapon themselves changes would have to occur for them to be worth picking up, (people use the storm rifle? Ugh...) such as making the SMG into the ODST one.
Twilight Gap
Member
Yes, redundancy has become an unfortunate side effect of the loadout system. I'm curious to see what changes they make to the Forerunner sandbox to make those weapons more unique instead of "alien copies of human weapons".
A scoped SMG could be an interesting direction to take the weapon, but i'm not sure how people will respond to an automatic with a scope. Perhaps it could replace the AR as the automatic of choice in default settings.
To build upon my previous posts, there's a wealth of existing mechanics that can be refined or re-purposed to make the game feel "new" without actually introducing things that reform it on a fundamental level. Fresh mechanics and new features are good if they can improve the game and stimulate player growth - two things Halo has not seen much of as of late. It may be too late to play it safe, but I think it's necessary to start from ground zero, polish those mechanics, and build from there. I'd rather see a modest Halo than a bold one that takes it in a direction its [remaining] fanbase doesn't fancy. To loosely quote the Didact, if they haven't mastered even these primitives, then they have not attained the mantle.
I've played Halo 1-3. The thing I missed from 2 and 3 the most was Warthog controls and physics. The damage was not as fun either. It was more rewarding to grenade/rocket to flip them over instead.
Dunno, I guess my opinion is irrelevant because I will not be a future player. I would be happy if MS does a Halo:CE Steam release.
Dunno, I guess my opinion is irrelevant because I will not be a future player. I would be happy if MS does a Halo:CE Steam release.
This thread by Funknown, summaries pretty much what I want for halo thread.
Mechanic's in my opinion seem to have followed a one step forward two backwards, the ideas are nice but the execution is always lacking or generally flawed. They add unneeded randomness to the game. As for forerunner weapons personally I don't really use them that much to have an opinion, other than they are not very interesting copies.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
No ADS
No Sprint
No loadout, back to weapons on map
Back to original player health
Customization of halo 3
I liked the perks in Halo 4 besides a few OP ones. Thrusters were amazing
No Sprint
No loadout, back to weapons on map
Back to original player health
Customization of halo 3
I liked the perks in Halo 4 besides a few OP ones. Thrusters were amazing
Ol No Bones
Banned
Halo 2 with dedicated servers and polish on the glitches would be very nice. New weapons and vehicles but just Halo 2 essentially.
WHAT?! Why?! what is wrong with you, boy?
Sangheili was the best part of Halo in the world.
Ok, but seriously, I liked having Sangheili in 3. I don't see why you'd remove them as an option.
The point behind dual weild is that you have more overall gun power in exchange for the ability to grenade. It's a tradeoff. One can be better than the other depending on the situation, the person you're up against, etc.
I don't see why you should pick up two automatically, since one of the great things about dual weilding is that you can mix and match. Say, a plasma pistol and a magnum can actually be pretty deadly if you know how to effectively charge the plastma pistol and then get a few headshots with the magnum. I also like to put a spiker and a plasma rifle together. It's actually one of the great things about Halo, even with non dual weild. Having a sniper rifle and a needler is going to make me play differently than an AR and a Feul Rod, and that's one of the beautiful things about Halo, I think. It makes it even more varied when you add things like dual weild. Halo is at its best when it allows players to take a base, simple sandbox, and carve their own creative play style out of it. I think dual weild fits perfectly into that.
Plus, it isn't an unbalanced mechanic. It's balanced by the fact that you can't throw grenades, as we discussed earlier.
Why not customization of Reach? Halo 3 was extremely limited.
As long as it's simply cosmetic, I don't see an issue there.
Halo 4's base gameplay was honestly my favourite of the series. The movement and aiming just felt really good and getting kills was very satisfying. However while I don't dislike them anywhere near as much as many people do, I think removing stuff like loadouts etc. is a good idea.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
Yeah, I looked at it, played it for years, had some fun, but ultimately that game unnecessarily changed so much of CE that started this downward trend of "casualizing" Halo when it was already accessible to begin with.
It's extremely disappointing how the large majority of Halo fans don't understand this simply because they started late in the game and/or don't have the experience with CE. I can't recall a single person complaining about CE saying how the game needed to appeal even more to casual players and needed heavy amounts of aim assist, on top of the other issues Halo 2 had.
Halo 4 had the best gunplay since CE IMO. Halo 2 had crazy amounts of aim assist, Halo 3 was an inconsistent mess, Reach had bloom and a lot of aim assist, but Halo 4 was decent comparatively.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
Halo 4 did have pretty satisfying gunplay but the decreased time to kill really hurt the whole overall experience
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
I'd really like to see the potential kill times lower to match the CE Pistol for some of these rifles, balanced by lowering the aim assist and increasing the movement speed/strafe.
As is, people are routinely 4-6 shotting people with the BR and the kill time is still too long. Easy to use (comparatively), easy to get minimum shots to kill, longer to actually kill people - why? 343's not helping any crowd except hurting the depth and skill of this game.
Once I started getting good in Halo 3, the kill times started getting into the .9 second range about. I like it that way, as I've probably told you before, since it allows the other the time to react and even win the engagement if he can properly outplay the player who initiated said engagement.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
Huh? The Halo 3 BR had the longest kill time of any other version. H2/H4 BR is at like 1.6 secs IIRC.
Also, the part about allowing you to win a battle if you were shot first, I've proven several times how that's not entirely true and doesn't directly play into shots-to-kill. A weapon that has a decent skill curve with a fast kill time lends itself more to players having a fighting chance if shot first over weapons with longer kill times.
EDIT: Yeah Chettlar, you have no idea what you're talking about. The H3 BR kill time was 2.3 secs - that's the fastest you could kill someone with that weapon. It's this type of ignorance that I talk about whenever Halo fans have described their ideal Halo over the years.
Not to single you out, but 0.9 sec kill time for the H3 BR?? Clearly you were just throwing that number out your ass lmfao
You're right, I'm probably misremembering, now that I think about it. I should have just said under a second since "0.9" sounds like something somebody did a study. I meant "just under a second." And even that's completely wrong, like you said.
Still, whatever the kill time with the BR is, I've grown to like it immensely. I mean, I'd be happy to be proven wrong (I actually usually am, because it usually means I get to find out something new I never knew before), but for right now, I'm really having a lot of fun with it.
Or I was. I don't have gold anymore. :'(
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
So why even comment or provide an estimate to something you have no clue about being fact?
Boggles my mind man.. It's the same shit as people spewing nonsense about the Pistol being OP and wanting longer kill times as if that increases their chance to fight back.
The weapon with the fastest kill time was the CE pistol (sure it was could be wrong) and that required skill to do, and was in no way OP. Longer kill time's stale the pace of gameplay, to give more people a chance decreasing the skill gap.
You're right. That was bad posting. My apologies.
The point of the comment, though, was that I found the BR satisfying, and have not seen why kill times should be quickened up for it significantly. I have played CE, and I like the pistol's role in multiplayer, but I don't see how it makes the BR bad. I enjoy both thoroughly. idk.
I don't think the Pistol is OP or in any other way undesirable.
Poimandres
Member
Halo 2 had the best maps no doubt, but spawning with that pissy SMG was a raw deal. Weapons would need to be re-evaluated.
Halo 3 probably had better weapon balance, but I wasn't so fond of the reduced movement speed and half the maps were average.
Halo 3 probably had better weapon balance, but I wasn't so fond of the reduced movement speed and half the maps were average.
A billion less playlists and fire anyone who dares repeat that.
Have servers with map rotations for BTB and make it huge like BF.
Actually come up with good maps and objective modes.
Vehicles need to work better in the sandbox. They are like a temporary broken side attraction.
ALL MAP DLC IS FREE. ALL MAP DLC IS FREE.
Stop splitting the community for a small profit that ultimately kills the community. Keep us all together. Sell cosmetic DLC, leave the rest alone.
Have servers with map rotations for BTB and make it huge like BF.
Actually come up with good maps and objective modes.
Vehicles need to work better in the sandbox. They are like a temporary broken side attraction.
ALL MAP DLC IS FREE. ALL MAP DLC IS FREE.
Stop splitting the community for a small profit that ultimately kills the community. Keep us all together. Sell cosmetic DLC, leave the rest alone.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
I know what your point was, and you simply "playing" CE clearly isn't enough if you don't see how it makes the H3 BR bad. I know you said you started late in the game, so you not having the years of experience with these games is understandable, but come on now lol. And you haven't seen why kill times should be increased after the many posts by myself and other HaloGAFfers or other breakdowns on the internet? Damn..
- No hitscan.
- Worse netcode.
- Sluggish movement/aiming/controls.
- Inconsistent weapons like the BR and Magnum.
- The list goes on.
I've seen....you post that. Can't think of anybody else.
And I'm not the only one who thinks the way I do. For one thing, what about all the people saying Halo 3's multiplayer should return? I'm not alone at all.
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
I thought you said you lurked HaloGAF for a long time?
Also, I never said you were alone in that. If anything, the people saying Halo 3 I'd question what multiplayer they started with, what year and how much experience do they have with it. Not trying to sound elitist, but Halo 3 was easily the worst between the first three games (from a multiplayer gameplay perspective). I'm fully aware that the majority of Halo's fanbase prefer Halo 2 or even Halo 3, but let's not forget how CE was never as mainstream as those two games because it didn't have XBL and it was the first in the series. It never experienced the drastic increase in numbers and exposure.
Poimandres
Member
Halo 2 multiplayer had some serious issues (online at least) that were improved with Halo 3 though. The major improvement in Halo 3 was spawning with a weapon that could actually kill people.
All of the criticisms you level at Halo 3 are fair it must be said.
I played stacks of Halo 1/2/3 from a few months after the Xbox launched. For me Halo 2 was at its best playing system link spawning with BRs and shotguns. I lived with a friend, so we had our systems linked all the time and played hundreds of hours this way. Online paled in comparison to that experience.
Twilight Gap
Member
The system I proposed doesn't prevent you from mixing and matching weapons. It just eliminates the weapon's single-wield so as to not create redundancy or give the user an inferior weapon when it is not dual-wielded. You could still walk up to a plasma rifle, magnum, PP, or what have you and swap one for one of the SMG's. I'm no game designer though and those things need to be tested beyond hypotheticals if they are to work.
It was merely an idea to make weapons more effective, though the scoped SMG could help to make that particular weapon different than its AR counterpart when single wielded. Anything to minimize the already cluttered sandbox is fair game in my opinion.
Tye The Czar
Member
I don't think I've ever seen such a fanbase as divisive as Halo's. It feels like folks lose their minds over the slightest tweaks or mechanics.
As a casual Halo fan *raises flame shield*, I liked the AA in Reach and the lack of dual-wielding. If 343 makes something like this completely optional and balances it out more(and completely loses the levelling system), I will be happy.
As a casual Halo fan *raises flame shield*, I liked the AA in Reach and the lack of dual-wielding. If 343 makes something like this completely optional and balances it out more(and completely loses the levelling system), I will be happy.
Twilight Gap
Member
That's the problem that Halo 4 drove to the ground. Reach was a prequel, so its additions could have been logically and canonically excused if Halo 4 went back to traditional gameplay like Halo 2 and 3. Instead, it drove the wedge that was "traditional" vs "class hybrid" into the ground by copying Reach, and now the community is tearing itself apart. Before all this, it was AR vs BR and that was about it.
Unfortunately, the solution to this is probably just going to be to provide "options" to players. They'll have 1% of the game play traditionally via community playlists and customs, while the rest is Infinity 2.0.
Quoting here for 50ppp folks
As for the bolded, that never made much sense to me either, so as long as the tradeoff for the increased firepower (no grenades, longer reload time, etc.) is balanced, I'd be for it.
Twin Tails
Member
Reach lobbies
Ok, that makes more sense. And I get where you get the sentiment, actually, just like you said, it sounds great hypothetically, but not sure how it would work out in real life.
I think a better solution would be to just have dual wields slightly more powerful. Apparantly, I think it was the plasma rifle was weakened significantly since "Well you can dual wield it!" which is dumb. On the other hand, having two full powered guns shooting at the same time is very over powered, so I think kind of a balance in between the two would be the best bet. I don't think we need to necessarily have a person pick up two at a time. Just make them somewhat stronger.
I VERY much dislike how I drop weapons in dual wield when I melee. Doesn't make sense logically (if I can hit a dude with a gun in one hand...why does having a gun in the other hand matter?), and is frustrating. That really needs to be fixed.
Every time I've responded to you this last time, my computer has crashed. *sigh*
I'm actually really curious to see what people would do/say/feel if given proper Halo CE online multiplayer. I honestly can't believe 343 completely screwed that chance they had with Anniversary. I mean...great, now that chance is blown. We'll likely never see Halo CE multiplayer exactly as it was every again. Thanks for nothing 343. For serious, I think the Halo community has lost something there.
I'm also curious, though of course it's impossible to find out, how people would feel about Halo 2 and 3 multiplayer if they had played CE online first. I still think a lot of people would probably prefer Halo 2 and 3 (though a lot is relative, since even the smallest percent of Halo players is a lot of people); I just wonder how much different.
We might have gotten a taste if Anniversary had had proper multiplayer, but noo..NOOO, 343 got cold feet.
EDIT: MY COMPUTER DIDN'T CRASH!
samurai1226
Member
Actually there are really a lot of players who played Halo CE online per tunnel software like XBConnect
