Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/26/2021 in all areas

  1. 16 points
    Integrity trumps all. People love to attribute random game design theories to what makes a successful game like "oh a good combat loop is the key to a good game!" Only thats complete nonsense. Bungie popularized that term with their "30 seconds of fun" quote except Bungie also had no idea what made halo good. There is no loop to halo and it's fun. There IS a combat loop in anthem where you sequence the same abilities over and over and over and it's not fun. Battle Royale are like the most formless loopless gameplay out there, every single game is completely different. But they're super successful. I also hear the "1 life" theory a lot like I mentioned last post only that doesn't explain everything either, as someone else here kindly demonstrated "oh wait, overwatch isn't 1 life and it has good retention". If you really want to find the absolute bedrock theory of what makes good game design with good retention you need an explanation that covers all bases and every example. If you want to know what I think, I'll say skill of any kind is really the magic bullet. Any franchise that has removed player skill has instantly suffered the consequences and the retention dropped like a rock (Reach, Halo 4, Smash Brawl, etc). The whole "casual vs competitive" shtick everyone talks about is bullshit and a lie. There's not a single human being out there that doesn't enjoy competing and growing and getting better against people their own skill level. I was in Nashville late last year on vacation with the gf, and her best friend and boyfriend. It was immediately after the Nashville bombing went off after Christmas and we ended up getting stuck in a hotel lobby for 5 hours with nothing to do except play chess because they had a board set up. Turns out, everyone had a blast and 5 hours flew by. If you had asked any of them prior if they enjoyed chess, or competing, they would've said no. But that's not true, they just didn't know yet that they did enjoy it. It's the same story as someone who's only ever played call of duty, they might not THINK they would enjoy a more skill game and competing, but they would if they tried it. No one who's ever played a more skillful, more righteous experience that is fulfilling and lasting ever is satisfied with anything else. It's why everyone on beyond is still here, we played the good halo games and now nothing else suffices. It's why Dark Souls kids play nothing but fromsoft games, because once youve experienced it you can't settle for anything else. A game that is difficult, and allows you to get better and succeed with skill, will be more successful than the same game without skill. It's also very possible to have a game that has skill, but also completely undermines it with stupid abilities and dumb shit. Halo 5, Quake champions, Destiny, are all games that have skill. You can grow and get better at significantly, they also have a mountain of stupid shit that can kill you with no effort which makes it very frustrating. This is where people who don't understand design as much will be like "Halo 5 doesn't take skill" but also "Halo 5 is super sweaty" (ie everyone on reddit) because technically, both are true. Halo 5 is both very competitive and casual, or more accurately its neither. You can't play it competitively because there's so much stupid shit in the game but the stupid shit doesn't make it fun for "casuals" if that's a real thing. Quake champions does this too with the new champion abilities. Destiny.... I'm not even going to talk about that game could be so good but it's so god damn stupid. And of course, none of this matters if your skill floor is too high for people to get interested in the game. Halo 5 is complex, but not deep. You want depth, not complexity. Complexity makes it hard to get into the game even if it's good. Starcraft obviously has a lot of depth but it's complexity is too high because it legit takes 2000 hours to learn the game. In summary - this is my formula Low skill floor, high skill ceiling. As simple as you can possibly get it while having as much depth as possible (complexity is bad, depth is good). Don't undermine whatever skill you have. The more skill the better, you can subdivide that into mental and mechanical skill, and it's not a ratio. You can have a lot of one and none of the other. Geara of war is straight mechanical skill and basically no mental. Mobas are basically all mental no mechanical. CS has a decent amount of both. The more of both the better. Run every successful game ever through those filters and compare the retention of them. It should hold up. Battle Royales are very difficult, and take a lot of skill and planning to win. They are popular. The ones with the best retention are the ones with the most skill, and undermine them in the least ways (warzone, Fortnite obviously has intense skill, Apex). Whenever a franchise lowers the skill ceiling ( Halo Reach , 4, Smash Brawl, Gears 5), undermines skill (Quake champions, Halo 5, Destiny) adds complexity and raises the skill floor (Halo 5, Doom Eternal, OW,) the player retention suffers. Sometimes it's more difficult to interpret because some things get better and some things get worse, like Doom Eternal was a much harder game than 2016 which I appreciated, it introduced new skill. But it did so by adding a LOT of complexity, so the player reception shifts. The people who are into Doom Eternal are super into it and would die for it. But on the whole it's reception was weaker than 2016, probably because the complexity was a turn off to more people than the prequel. But I promise if you look at every game through that filter it'll make sense.
  2. 13 points
    Yeah I never said that. I focused on fundamental things, not simple. In fact, design theory is the complicated part. The rest comes naturally once the foundation is laid and is simple in comparison. I also never said that my videos were meant to help Halo get back to where it was at. Of course, some of what Halo had we want back, but then far more. Halo has never been at the level it should be at. Even this game at its best is lacking, but it's on the right path! To take it all the way would take a principled look at the objective reasons why a game (a shooter) works at a fundamental level, and Halo is a great starting point because it got closer than most other games. And, to be honest, I don't see hardly anyone else here but Multi touch on the subject of theory, so I don't know what you mean by "familiar restatements" because that's not what I see from you or most anyone else. It's almost never an objective philosophy, but instead specifics (the covenant vortex is an anti-vehicle handheld weapon that...) or at the very best a mixture. And, even when it is philosophical, it's so often rooted in subjective reasoning, which gets us absolutely nowhere. My videos attempt to go in the opposite direction. So, designing a specific weapon means nothing in the context of my video and its goals. Once you know why design works, the rest is relatively easy and self-fulfilling. All you need at that point is creativity to implement good design in cool, diverse ways rooted in the tone and story of Halo. But, I don't work on Halo, and that doesn't help anyone understand objective principals, so it would just be a waste of time for me to do it. That's why I find it annoying in other videos (or posts) when super specific examples are brought up. Seriously, it doesn't work, and most likely, nobody is going to listen to you because it doesn't get to the heart of the problem. If someone with bad principles has a good idea explained to them, they'll probably hate it. cough waypoint cough The best illustration I could give would be something that I've actually experienced several times when helping people make maps. Someone shows me their level and asks for feedback, but then tell me that it's intentionally made to be a spawn trap (or something else along those lines). Maybe they don't even say it, but just design that way without knowing it and it's obvious in the map. Whatever. Okay... so I could give feedback all day long... really I could. Specific examples and geometry tweaks left and right, move this, change this, do this. Make this clipping smoother, make sure both teams get to this weapon at the same time... trivial things. But, there's a glaring issue with the design goal from the start. You know what would really help that person? Telling them that their entire approach is fundamentally flawed, and why. Once they understand that an intentional spawn trap is an objectively poor design, I don't need to talk about making a doorway slightly larger or something, that's up to them, they're the designer after all! And in Halo's case, that's up to the multiplayer team at 343. I have every confidence that if they just changed how they looked at design, they could start making Halo much better. Again, it's not about individual ideas, it's about your foundation, which is almost entirely ignored by the industry and game communities, mainly because we don't even think foundations exist in the first place, because we think the entire human experience is subjective. I know this first hand, because literally everywhere I've said this I get intense pushback, people who don't even consider what I have to say, but instead plug their ears and say "bUt I LiKE HaLo 5!!!" even though they don't play it, proving what I say to be right by their actions, even when their mouths profess something else. So there. That's why the video is the way it is. It's most certainly not the "easy stuff" as you put it, because almost everyone gets it wrong, and why the industry is the way it is. You know what, I bet even you thought twice when I said spawn traps are objectively bad design. You probably only partially agree at best, because It's in our nature to lean on subjectivity, and by far the most common sentiment. Why? It's nice and comfortable to think that design is subjective, because nothing is ever really wrong if that's true... but it's not, and that's not how we function. Tell me all day long about how you like Halo 5, and think Titanfall 2 is the best shooter of this generation. I don't care. The people who say that don't play those games. They're dead because they are poorly designed. So, don't be surprised that every game looks like every other game, and that a studio can go from making a fun game to a horrible game. Almost everything made is now built on shifting sand. None of these studios actually know what made their games successful, and that needs to be addressed before anyone could make the perfect Halo, or any decent game for that matter.
  3. 13 points
    I’m sure I’m not who this video was made for and I might be holding them to impossibly high standards but this video has rocked my previously unshakable faith in 343. Quinn talks about how CE is his favorite classic Halo then goes on to say “we want to keep pistols as pistols and rifles as rifles” as justification for replacing the iconic Magnum with their brain-shart Sidekick. Will you also be removing the Plasma Pistol, since pistols can’t be powerful, you uninspired hack? He goes on to talk about the long term plan and the perfect moment to drop a classic weapon update. Notice how he’s not talking about things like, oh I don’t know, the integrity of the current fucking sandbox, about how tight it is or the unique weapon interactions or basically anything interesting. Nope, it’s about how he can use weapon updates to turn Halo into Games as a Service. Fucking wack. He’s got this laissez faire attitude of “I’ll just keep pumping out new weapons” as if Halo was just like any other game and could support that kind of model. It’s stupid, it’s lazy, and it’s wrong. Solve the sandbox problems before the game ships so you don’t have to constantly patch your way out of your own stupidity, under the guise of “updating the meta”. Thanks for updating that 5 shot BR meta in Halo 4. Let’s be real though, it was painfully obvious that he has little experience with classic Halo as well as a general distaste for it. When he was asked those two questions about classic Halo, the disdain was palpable. From now on, I will be referring to Quinn is Pig Vomit.
  4. 13 points
    We’ve been making “compromises” for years. Sprint is bad for Halo. Full stop. How much time and resources have been wasted on trying to balance a bad mechanic that has been shown time and time again to negatively impact gameplay and map design? If you have to continually rework and rebalance and reinvent an ability, it’s to time to accept it sucks and do away with it entirely. The fact we now have climbing, slide, and ADS as mainstay mechanics goes to show how far this franchise has slipped into mediocrity, and how little identity it has left.
  5. 13 points
    They have their sights on the biggest game of 4 years ago.
  6. 11 points
    People love engaging problem solving. That’s the fundamental truth. Skill floors and ceilings are functions of the game mechanics, which means whatever the game is doing to achieve them is the real cause of its popularity. It’s not a given people love high skill ceilings either; most never reach it. It shouldn’t be very relevant. Skill is a good indicator though, as deep games typically have a large gap between beginners and pros. However, complex games also have a large gap, but they aren’t necessarily good, which again points to skill being a poor design guide. So what do popular games have in common? Lots of emergent, engaging problems. Games that present new problems forever, are fun forever. To explain how, first some more about depth (Multilockon is spot on about it). Depth is interaction between rules, viable options, etc. Complexity creates redundant, unviable options, rules that don’t interact. Peak complexity would be strict rules without interactions. Peak depth is when every rule interacts with every other rule. Now, depth is what creates engaging problems and solutions. Complexity without depth creates pre-solved problems. For example, if Overshield (OS) made you invulnerable to everything except the Plasma Rifle, you would always have to use the Plasma Rifle to counter it. That’s not an engaging problem as it only has one solution. From what I’ve read about Doom Eternal, they upped the focus on using specific tools for specific demons. That’s more pre-solved problems. On the other hand, lets look at how OS actually is. All weapons can damage it, but plasma is better, but also harder to land. You can backsmack for an insta kill, which makes not shooting preferable in the specific situation where you can sneak up. Grenades can be used without exposing yourself to a stronger foe. Etc. The "rules" are how OS, Plasma Rifle, melee, movement and other weapons work, that’s the complex part. Interactions between all of them creates depth which creates solutions with varying viability depending on the situation. It’s always fun to fight someone with OS, because even though all the rules are the same, the experience never is. Another example, the simple "rule" of plasma dealing more damage to shields has interactions with OS, melee, headshot weapons and more. Maximizing depth per complexity, or interactions between rules is elegant design. Halo CE is very elegant. Gameplay loop? Just a weird (often misunderstood and misused) term describing what problems the player solves over and over again (you need to have a motivation for driving the gameplay loop). In a good game, this is never the exact same problem, or the exact same solution applied again. Ideally many different problems and solutions emerge depending on the situation, like with the OS example. Testing that theory, Battle Royale has lots of emergent problems that are never the same. Every firefight is a problem. Fighting is the primary gameplay loop. Completing this loop over and over drives an outer gameplay loop that is the “winning the game”-problem. As Shekkels is saying, polishing what the player does the most is very impactful. As for why Halo isn’t popular anymore, I think the latest games simply haven’t been up to par for the population segment that matters. Some hold up at a high level, but at lower levels, there are too many things that ruin engaging problem solving with simple solutions. H2/3 Teamshot REACH: Jetpack - how to get an angle on your enemy? Just go up lol, don’t think. Weak ass DMR reduces agency Armor lock, hurt? Just wait Sprint, hurt? Run away Sprint+sword? No need to position carefully, just run straight at them. Grenades in reach are much easier to land damage with due to shorter fuse time. HALO 4 I barely played this when I was 14. HALO 5 “Advanced”, burst movement options removes a lot of the preemptive, strategic positioning caused by slower, consistent movememt. Map naviagtion no longer a puzzle. Just go where you want, whenever. Predictability suffers. Escape is easier than ever. This undermines or reduces skill as Mulitlockon put it, because good players can no longer choose better solutions. So the ultimate adage on what makes a game fun shouldn’t be phrased as “Low skill floor, high skill ceiling” because that is a consequence of the game being “Easy to learn, hard to master.” Which is pretty good, but a colloquialism for Easy to know the rules, hard to always know the solution. Which is caused by the game being deep and not complex. Which is what I’ve found to hold true for every popular game. And then comes the part on designing engaging problems and solutions, but I’ve written enough for now. ------ I did write some more though. Points that didn’t fit neatly into the above post, but someone might want to read anyways: ------ Complexity / depth example Complexity is MW gunsmith where there are literally millions of attachment combos, but only a handful at most of them are viable attachments and combos per gun. Depth would be having a few, viable attachments that all create viable loadouts. ------ Casual and competitve is a mindset. Good games are enjoyed equally by both groups. Shitty games are played competitively and deep games with lots of room to improve are played casually. ------ Battle royale have one more advantage. High-stakes games like Battle Royale demand your attention, because you are guaranteed to waste your time if you don't pay attention and die. And so people are engaged and have fun, even if the game might not be very good. Difficulty does the same thing I think. ------ Starcraft: Only the top players can actually make new strategies, but at any level lower than that, APM wins, i.e. executing predetermined solutions. ---- CS has some textbook complexity, rules that add nothing except "do this, always" (spread/recoil patterns) This is from very deep in my head, and I’m not a native English speaker, so please ask if something is unclear:)
  7. 11 points
    I've gotten an update on the information I've been sharing about Halo Infinite. I've been told that some of the leaks I've been sharing aren't true. I take full responsibility, and am sorry for spreading it. The following info will be declared false, and will be replaced with true info. Halo Infinite was developed on Unreal Engine 4 for two years - False. 343 never worked on Unreal at any point. Instead, they straight up copycatted Overwatch, then pulled back with CSGO, then Halo Reach, then where we are now. This actually makes 343 even more incompetent, as they had even less of a clue what they were doing. BTB 2.0 is a second attempt at Warzone - False. It's just a bigger Big Team Battle. Mythic unintentionally copying settings from a year ago - False. Mythic was its own thing. HCS Test Playlist in 2017 was a testing bed for Infinite - False. This was rather a test for their future Title Update. Everything else I have shared has been accurate. Again, I take responsibility for the inaccurate information. I will update my post above. Thank you for reading.
  8. 10 points
    I try not to shit on newer games specifically because I don't enjoy playing them. Fornite is a great example. I just don't have fun with the game personally but I can see why many people enjoy it and that's why I've never said a single bad thing about the game. But my MAIN issue with newer games these days, kind of goes with what Grim and Knight are talking about. I absolutely cannot stand the fact that I just cannot see anything clearly on games these days due to just overwhelming amounts of glare, lighting, effects, etc. One effect that I'm not sure has an actual name (if it does, I just don't know it is) is that effect you get when leaving and entering a building from inside to outside. Yes, I get it in real life your eyes adjust to the sun going in and out of a building but that effect is very annoying when you're trying to play a video game and you have to adjust to seeing an area that you're staring directly at, just because of the lighting. The last two Call of Duty games have been like this for me, specifically Modern Warfare. I can play just fine, because I'm good at the game, but it's a pain in the ass trying to see certain areas across maps in that game because there is just so much noise and, as Grim said, sensory overload going on that it just makes it more unnecessarily difficult to play. I feel like I'm transitioning to that Okay Boomer stage of my life (and I'm not even 30 yet ) but I miss the old days where I can simply just get on a game and.. see.
  9. 10 points
    First of all hi, love your post and mindset. You seem intelligent. To answer your question; 1: what would this actually solve 2: that's some weird rule bending and complexity to keep sprint in the game 3: it's also eating an entire button on the remote Compromise isn't necessarily a good thing. Bad mechanics are bad.
  10. 9 points
    I guess Brawl, Madden, Army of Two, Grand Theft Auto, Force Unleashed, Fable II, Rock Band, Mario Kart, Gears of War 2, God of War, Devil May Cry 4, Uncharted 2, SFIV, Forza 3, Arkham Asylum, Assassin's Creed II, Bayonetta, Left 4 Dead 2, Modern Warfare 2, Mario Bros. Wii, Resident Evil 5, Super Mario Galaxy 2, Red Dead Redemption, and oh I don't know fucking Minecraft were just too insignificant and unimportant to put a dent in Halo 3's numbers. Truly, there was no other game that mattered.
  11. 9 points
    You have to remember that 343 have been gutter-trash at communicating for their entire existence on top of hating Halo. Yes, 343 hate Halo. If they don't hate it then they at best don't understand it. - Halo 1 Anniversary doesn't look, sounds or feel like Halo 1 and it runs like shit. - MCC broken forever and Halo 1/2 never fixed - Disregarding deliberate decisions for Halo 2 (e.g. instead of in-game cutscenes using pre-rendered cinematics) - Removed every single iconic sound and visual element from the game (Halo 4). I cannot stress how much of a kick in the teeth this is. - Hired people who hate Halo - They literally created a "core Halo game" and then scrapped it becase "they now knew they could make it" - Infinite was being developed for so long that they lost track of which trend to follow and then relunctantly turned to Halo 1 for inspiration instead of leading with it. - Keep adding skins and their dogshit powerrangers armour into Halo 3 which was never designed to have it. - Removed the Flood and replaced them with one of the most anti-fun enemies ever (Prometheans) in a staggering display of poor game design (you don't even know when the Knight's shields go down in Halo 4... hell you don't even realise they have shields!) - Halo 5 champs were in a tent. - Pathetic communication and visibility at all times - Marty O'Donnell stated that he has contacted 343 on many occassions but 343 management told their staff not to contact him. Marty said he was even willing to hand over the sheet music for Halo 2 Anniversary but 343 management said no-one is to contact him. - All of Halo 5's marketing campaign - The binary rifle's entire existence is from someone that hates people playing games. - Halo 4 forge - Halo 5 didn't release with BTB or forge and then when it did release BTB it was forge-maps only. Bet the BTB fans felt really special from that. Now tell me it's the fans' fault that they're more fractured and toxic then ever.
  12. 9 points
  13. 9 points
    I think the biggest failing of Halo really came after Halo 3. Its not so much the mechanics that they tried and kind of failed to make as appealing as what they had before as much as how they stopped expanding what was possible. Instead of getting bigger/cooler modes they spent a decade creating new fuckery for simply moving my character when that wasn't a relevant or needed change at any point in the franchises history. They just stopped moving forward. They can say whatever they want but the bottom line is that Halo workmanship declined in quality as did the popularity. We just come back around to the same struggle and cycle with each game where they try to scrap together features to simply match what bungie released with Halo 3 never moving forward and usually declining in various locations as they try to patch up whatever they really failed at during the last cycle We went from a trend setting and industry leading studio and franchise to having input delay more than a decade later, incomplete releases and being unable to even remaster the original games without SERIOUS problems. Its pretty sad. Truthfully its so bad that it is painfully obvious that the people in upper management for Halo are absolutely not qualified for their jobs. They have proven that fact without a doubt. Their resume should be the fastest ticket out the door of the games industry imaginable. That probably sounds really toxic or harsh but you've gotta call it what it is somewhere and its been more than long enough. They're pretty good tank commanders if you want to bleed a product for money without worrying about the long term implications but that's about it.
  14. 9 points
    Sprint has been solved since Halo Reach. Just make it so you are sprinting at all times. Remove walking. Everyone is happy.
  15. 8 points
    Not every gun needs and alt fire imo. That seems like too arbitrary an idea, and is kind of similar to the whole "every gun gets a smart scope" thing from h5. Which I hated.
  16. 8 points
    Honestly, a lot of the negativity has to do with the obliviously ridiculous decisions that we tell them well in advance that will hurt the game/healthy population and then they just actively ignore it, put it into the game anyway, and then the game dies because of it. It's not like a lot of the negativity is just because it's a bunch of grumpy old men/women on here lol. We've had PLENTY of positive feedback on this forum, myself included. And even when I am giving feedback, I always give very detailed posts about why certain features are good and why they're bad -- Go back through my post history and find a single negative thing I've ever said about Halo 5's forge - And I hate Forge lol. I've had replies back and forth with Josh Holmes specifically on here. But not every piece of feedback needs to be positive. That's why it's called feedback. One example of an interaction I've had with Josh Holmes on here specifically was before Halo 5 came out and I wrote a post about the importance of party matchmaking at the very beginning of the game to sustain a healthy population at ALL skill levels because it makes the games more fair and balanced - Team matching + looser skill matching (meaning teams of 4 match teams of 4 but the range of skill can be slightly wider, similar to how 43s can match 49s in Halo 3 for example). He responded to me with something like (paraphrasing) "Hard and fast rules like that can be problematic so we can't do it" or something along those lines but... Halo 3's matchmaking did this for years with NO problems. Where's the problem? And you know what the issue was when Halo 5 released? People like myself got Champion on the first day playing the game and had to deal with NOTHING but teams of 4, even pro teams, against myself and a team of other randoms and lose game handily due to lack of team communication/synergy/etc. Especially during the age of Xbox where the game chat isn't a thing as it used to be; exasperating the issue. Could I win games? Of course, I'm not garbage at the game, but the games are entirely more unbalanced than they need to be. Especially during the beginning of the game's life span where the population is at its highest. So what happened? People stopped playing ranked, people couldn't get matches after a few months. Vetoed for example, is probably one of the best that just grinds matchmaking and he had to CONSTANTLY make new accounts because he just couldn't get a match after a while. Let's not also forget the big sprint poll fiasco where 343 basically had a poll on EVERY active Halo forum: TeamBeyond, Reddit, and HaloWaypoint. All three of which voted in favor of no sprint vs for sprint. Were you around when they decided "okay, no sprint was the majority opinion on every forum, BUT we're going to count people who don't care either way as for sprint therefore, for sprint wins." And then what happens? The people who don't care and the people who voted for sprint don't even play the game anyway past the first 6 days of the game coming out and we're stuck playing a worse version of a great game we could have possibly had. I just wanted to elaborate on this because you can't paint this picture like we're the bad guys when a LOT of us have tried our asses off for a decade to give feedback they need that we KNOW will help in the games life cycle and they just do the opposite and we have to watch our game die in the process.
  17. 8 points
    Remember when Frankie came here and had a civil discussion with 20+ people and then ONE guy made a semi-edgy comment and got downvoted to -20, but Frankie ignored all the good stuff, jumped on that comment and threw a hissy fit, rage quit and never came back? Remember when 343 employees sign up for this forum 3 months before launching their new game, drop some PR garbage and disappear as soon as the game launches? Remember lying about polling pros about Breakout? 343 and Beyond just don't get along, and no matter how nice or toxic you are this probably won't change. The name calling and directly attacking individual people is kinda lame and childish though, you can roast 343 in much better ways.
  18. 8 points
    For what it's worth. I'm done being critical of Infinite and the number company lol. It's exhausting and my complaining really doesn't matter in the context of changing the game's mechanics. For all of it's innumerable flaws and metric tons of wasted potential, I do genuinely like Halo and I don't want to feel bitter every time I think about it.
  19. 8 points
    Browsing social media is mad confusing. A disturbing amount of halo players on twitter/reddit talk about how much they love halo and constantly make jabs on players who prefer the classic games, while ignoring the fact that the Halo franchise is a laughing stock in the industry and the multiplayer is a complete ghost town. I hopped on H5 for the hell of it and the population is so low I couldn't find a game. Like what are we praising here? Gaming is bigger than ever and what's left of the halo community is still riding a game from the bush administration (Halo 3). I've got to give some sympathy to 343 here. If you would browse twitter one can be lead to believe that the community is content with the state of the franchise. Every criticism is shot down by sycophantic players who clearly aren't actively playing the game. I imagine that this is how they feel justified not releasing any updates of substance on the state of the franchise. I have no idea why people nowadays won't demand better from the products they consume. It's to the point where It feels kinda cult like to me. Don't get me wrong I'm a ride or die Halo fan but I'm able to call out BS when I see it. I just remember the days where fans and developers used to attempt a dialogue for good of the game. Now it's players actual job to go on social media and defend the franchise they based their careers on for clout. I thought the 2012-2014 era was bad but this is a new low. Fingers crossed that infinite is decent.
  20. 8 points
    I think this is all kind of irrelevant at the end of the day. The best players in the game generally have an idea of when weapon spawns will occur but 99.99% of the time if it really matters they have a 5th man talking to them about it rather than keeping time in their heads even better. The only people who actually tryhard weapon timings etc are casual competitive matchmaking players. The reality of Halo games kinda defeats the entire conversation but maybe for another game it would matter In 4v4 Halo at a higher level timing weapons is a lot deeper than keeping track of time. They're discussing and setting up for certain things or trying to not die too early (or too late) for some time before weapons spawn and all of that is the real game. The guy letting them know its about that time is pretty inconsequential in terms of player skill by comparison. So really if you put up some timers on people's screens maybe that's honestly more fair to the normal guy online since at a high level someone else is helping to direct that traffic anyways more so than the players actually playing
  21. 8 points
    In my experience testing modded settings in Halo 4, a weapon that kills in 4 shots in the 0.9-1.0 second range is ideal for 4v4 arena gameplay. Not quite CE but faster than modern Halo. This is assuming a relatively low aim assist though so players aren’t constantly hitting 4 shot kills.
  22. 8 points
    What I want to hear a sandbox designer say: "I've always preferred a leaner approach to building a sandbox so as to ensure every weapon and vehicle matter in a distinct way" What 343 will probably say: "We really thought it'd be cool to go crazy with the amount of guns /cut to some random artist/ the halo universe is just so deep and filled with so many influences that we really couldn't say no to anything"
  23. 8 points
    you guys know Quinn delhoyo is sandbox director right? NOTHING good can come of that. I'm sorry.
  24. 7 points
    Boyo you begged Westin for examples because you thought the stuff he said was 'the easy stuff' and then you continue to throw a mountain of terrible ideas. You throw out literally hundreds of random ideas and maybe 1% of them are good. If you actually understood a fraction of Westin said you'd realize it's not even important to hammer out the specifics when you actually understand this stuff because you can separate the good from the bad. I've known Westin for ~6 years and he's been on my project on my game with me for the last 3 years. The amount of times we came up with a general idea and went "Yeah we can go about this any number of ways, we don't have to hammer this out" because we both understand the same principles would be too many to count. Yes specifics are obviously important, but once you understand your core principles all that stuff is easy and just takes the smallest amount of creativity. I could probably sit here and list out 12 different ways to design the beam rifle in Halo that all would be improvements on what it currently does but none of that matters because you have no idea what makes something good or bad. Ideas are easy, they're free. Hell you throw out a thousand a day. And they mean literally nothing. And then someone actually makes a ~45 minute video trying to teach the foundations of design that you clearly have no idea about and you pester him for 2 pages asking him for specifics, saying that everything he stated was obvious and easy. Even if he did give you specifics of weapon redesigns or mechanical changes to movement, you would have no idea why it's good. If you did understand you wouldn't be unironically suggesting light blades that charge overshields, sandman vehicles that burrow underground, turning your spartan into monkey ball to roll through holes, or shoving your arm into the wall to charge an OS. For the record - if you worked for me as a designer and actually unironically suggested any of these ideas in a meeting I would probably fire you on the spot because it's just painfully obvious to me where your level of understanding is at. Which like fine, whatever. Not everyone is a game designer, not a big deal you don't have to be good at this stuff. But then to be ^ THAT ^ obnoxious when someone actually makes a video talking about the important stuff... this is why people don't talk about design here. Like why bother man.
  25. 7 points
    I mean, it just means you're not a good developer. You say all that and then wonder why like every single game in every genre looks like the next. We have a million Overwatch Clones, Call of Duty Clones, and League clones and basically nothing else. Even games in different genres are looking like one another. A good designer can understand why something works and not resort to copying. 343 didn't know why the CE magnum was so good, so they just 'copied it' to Halo 5 in how they thought it performed and it was a hitscan aim assist machine with huge bloom and spread. Stupid. If they actually understood why it worked the way it did, that wouldn't have happened. Genuine thinkers are hard to come by.
  26. 7 points
    I interviewed at Hi-Rez about a year ago for Rogue Company, and the lead designer on the project was actually Ghandi. I talked to him for about an hour and he had this same exact theory. He said gamers don't have the patience for multi-life games now which is why all the biggest games are 1-life modes or Battle Royales. I completely disagree with that reasoning and I think it misses the point, but just know that you're not alone in that process. It's definitely 1 theory out there.
  27. 7 points
    Wait...the Knights have shields?? This is something I can't "prove" but I know it's true...If Halo wasn't funded by Microsoft the franchise would've been cancelled years ago.
  28. 7 points
    I don't think we'll ever have a stats hub as complete as B.net ever again. In a technical sense, Halo and B.net were so ahead of their time.
  29. 7 points
    Funny how they try so hard to connect "lore" to all kind of multiplayer stuff, but when it comes to actual campaign, they have no problem to throw everything over the fence.
  30. 7 points
    You're calling people casuals yet you still hate on Combat evolved?
  31. 7 points
    Oh yeah I can get behind that. I moreso just appreciate how quick and easy it is to read. It's color-coded, and the dead player is always on the right, so it makes it easy to know how many are dead without having to hit the back button. My only improvement would be to leave it in the feed until the player respawns, so we never have to hit back to count kills. I always hated how older Halo's just used the same blue text, and even worse, would arbitrarily alternate between "X killed Y" and "Y was killed by X". It needlessly made it so much harder to process the information quickly.
  32. 7 points
    bro if we're talking free information i wish we had a fuckin pinging feature in game with like the dpad or some shit, r6 has one and it doesnt follow players but it will point them out in the spot they were standing when it did it would make solo q games more bearable or games without mics bc it gives at least some indication that something is important or to be careful somewhere else
  33. 7 points
    No existing Halo community on any social media accurately represents Halo's fanbase. Halo's fanbase dwindled to less than a tenth of it's original population between 2010-2015. All that you see now are the lowest common denominator of the fanbase - people whose favorite game was Reach, or people who think H2A is what classic Halo multiplayer is, or people who think that H5 campaign was the reason so many panned the game. In a nutshell - social slayer and/or campaign kids who care about the dumbest shit imaginable. The people who unironically play as dinos. You can test this theory out on Reddit. Every time a post from that hemorrhoid of a subreddit hits the front page, you see a shit-ton of comments from former Halo players with extreme resentment towards the number company. Comments that would have gotten black hole'd on any non-frontpage post. I can assure you, though. The number people who'd play a modernized version of a HCE Clone are still higher than the number of people who'll play Halo 5.
  34. 7 points
    I once thought sprint couldn't get any dumber, then MW2019 came out with "double-sprint". Like, you're sprinting but harder. I actually fucking face palmed.
  35. 7 points
    I'm down with sprint so long as it makes you run slower than the base speed.
  36. 7 points
    Hi, Tim Timmerman! I’m Boaty McBoatFace. What the fuck does this even mean? It seems that they do understand, at least on paper, what good Halo design is. I don’t know why you guys aren’t more excited about all these snippets: Except for this: That sounds like slow killing weapons. They continue to demonstrate an understanding of basic design concepts. This is good. Regarding the bulldog shotgun: So, a Mauler? If their main concern was truly sandbox balance and not selling action figures they wouldn’t have to make every new weapon belong to the human faction. A grappling hook as the Spartan advanced-movement ability doesn’t feel right to me. Seems mediocre, like the H3 BR of movement abilities. We shall see, I suppose.
  37. 7 points
    I'm pretty disappointed by this writeup. For all of their terminology usage of "combat triangle" and "cqc dance", we are given zero explanation of how they intend for their "sandbox" to work. It's a bunch of jargon with little substance. Then, to make matters worse, the only weapon they actually explain is the spam shotgun. To write off shotgun play in the series as "dull", and completely ignore CE's pump shotty is pretty annoying. I dont know how anyone over there expects a semi auto shotgun to work in an arena based format when it's use is pretty well documented in basically every twitch shooter ever; For all their claims to understand Halo fundamentals and then introduce a weapon that completely clashes with the format they've spent 2/3's of the document boasting about is embarrassing to read. Don't tell us you understand Halo. Show us that you do. With no in-depth explanation on how the sandbox plays and no showcase of the utility weapon said sandbox is supposed to play around this is a pretty big miss.
  38. 7 points
    https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/news/inside-infinite-january-2021 Not a bad write up and there seems to be an understanding this time around that Halo is a sandbox game and benefits much more from sandbox additions like weapons, vehicles and equipment than it does from inherent abilities. Sound's like a Repulsor bomb.
  39. 7 points
    Guys they added multi team to MCC! ... it's only rocket race.
  40. 7 points
    I think I'd cry if I knew how much 343 employees make.
  41. 6 points
    I think I would test every single weapon in Halo by playing games with only one weapon at a time, and if the match ended up being stupid, I'd start to redesign the gun. If a game of plasma pistol starts sucked, (which it absolutely would), that's an indicator that the weapon has absolutely no depth, and only exists to counter something else in the sandbox, or just as something you pair with a better weapon. It's not fun on its own because it doesn't require any prowess, no skil gap. Thing is - you can keep those counters and synergies between guns AND introduce depth to each individual weapon if you just designed it differently. Like, ideally every weapon could be thought of as a utility weapon, but still retain a unique strength/weakness while also still being beneficial to pair it with other weapons. You don't need to lose anything, and you'd gain a great deal. Think - If we played with some of the weapons of Halo that way right now, we would all realize how stupid they are and probably hate our experience. Sword starts, plasma pistol starts, plasma rifle starts, rocket starts, pistol starts (depending on the Halo) and several others... yeah they'd all be horrible to play with exclusively because they're brainless weapons. On that note, for the plasma pistol, I'd start by increasing its projectile speed and the removal of any tracking, then maybe have it leave a pool of plasma on the ground for area denial. Oh, and the charge should fire a shot proportionate to how long you hold the trigger, instead of the all or nothing design where if I let go 1 milisecond too early I don't get anything for it. Also quickly firing the small shots should be lethal, kinda like the plasma gun in quake, but probably not that powerful. You'd keep the shield popping via the charged skil shot, the addition of area denial, and the predictive prefire of the plasma gun. That would make plasma pistol starts fun, and it keeps all the roles the gun already had. A net gain.
  42. 6 points
    Should've posted this earlier, but Multi's posts reminded me about it because I used the same starcraft example.
  43. 6 points
    Reach BTB and invasion both fucking suck and it's a shame because anyone with a brain could turn it into something fantastic in 30 seconds. - No AAs - No bloom - 120% BMS - Make DMR and Sniper not hitscan. Too bad that 2010 Bungie was full of idiots that thought Armor Lock was quirky and had to ruin Halo MP for the next generation. People hate 343 and I get it, but late stage Bungie had this smug attitude coupled with atrocious design choices that will make anyone with at least a double digit IQ angry. Good riddance I'm glad they're no longer in charge of Halo, because any Bungie game after Reach would have been way worse than H4 and 5 gameplay wise.
  44. 6 points
    what? you guys dont like halo waypoint stats? I dont understand why? so much detail.... honestly this is a fucking joke... im like a 28 in hardcore and nothing is reflected in 343s shitty website.. god they are truly awful at EVERYTHING THIS HONESTLY LOOKS LIKE 2014 MCC when they left it for dead... but no. its 2021 and MCC is receving updates... how is this still a thing?
  45. 6 points
    100% accurate. Having the game show timers for you is actually beneficial to ranked sweaties like me because players with less game knowledge are given the information that I already know, allowing them to focus on other things and meaning you might get slightly better team mates in matchmaking.
  46. 6 points
    I liked the way power weapons were shown on the map in Halo 5. At a high level of play, that feature didn't detract from the game as timing power weapons/map knowledge is trivial shit, but at the lower levels it helped create a better game flow as the newer, less experienced/casual players had a big green icon showing them where to go and get a cool weapon. There were very few times playing Halo 5 where power weapon control went uncontested as a result of this feature. Playing MCC, its amazing how many times you can just, go and grab sniper/rockets on Ghost Town completely uncontested for example. I think they do need to probably replace the permanent green icon, with one that disappears 5-10 seconds AFTER someone picks up the weapon. That means the info/location is always there for accessibility, but someone who grabs it doesn't instantly give away their position as they have time to move before that icon disappears, revealing that the weapon has been grabbed. On a completely irrelevant topic, the Spartan Laser destroys vehicle play. It needs to be removed or reworked to be less anti-fun.
  47. 6 points
    I am actually very much on the opposite side of the aisle as most of you here I think. I can't stand the amount of free information given by most of these systems, the teammate outline through walls for example - if I see my teammate's outline shooting facing a certain direction, the game has just told me exactly where the enemy is because of where my teammate is looking. That was not communicated, and it probably would never have been communicated as clearly as literally seeing things happening through geometry. I actually don't even think you should be able to see your teammates position on the map through walls, I'm of the mindset that should be communicated as well. Not a fan of the killfeed showcasing who has what weapons, arrows over teammates heads, automated player chatter calling things out that the player themselves might not have even seen (MW anyone? Your character will shout MOVEMENT if someone's toe pops up on the other side of the map). GIve me none of that honestly. I'd get rid of the kill feed too if it wasn't completely necessary to know the score of the match.
  48. 6 points
    The thing that always gets me is that regardless of how well you balance sprint it immediately does not feel like I'm playing Halo when its included. You just instantly lose the fluid feeling of movement and the map feel that you would generally associate with the original Halo titles and instead start to toggle something on and off to move and navigate/fight in slightly wonky shaped rooms/maps. Its super detrimental imo from just a "feel" point of view for the game regardless of actual balancing Every time they talk about making something feel like "Halo" things like the inclusion of sprint get the biggest eyeroll ever from me at best because it proves simply by inclusion that they are absolutely not interested in producing a Halo title. Its hard to take seriously unless they start to differentiate between "Halo" and "I'm producing more games for Microsoft because it prints money while fucking around Halo lol." Obviously its just marketing and trying to pull on nostalgia but it really does feel dishonest how they keep trying to ship their new fps and sell units by applying a Halo skin to it. I'd really appreciate an actual effort towards releasing a true Halo game/experience even if it were just a side game with a smaller budget. Its a lot easier to appreciate the work of the MCC team because of things like what I just said above. Even if they fail or do something silly at least you can trust the intentions
  49. 6 points
    I think sprint fans would hate having a nerfed sprint, and I think anti-sprinters hate all forms of sprint regardless of how nerfed it is.
  50. 6 points
    Hey everyone, I don't usually post but do lurk this thread from time to time to keep up with Halo news and all of that. There's nowhere I'd rather get updates from. It's nice to know there are other folks to commiserate with about the state of this franchise. I confess: I haven't played Halo in a long time now. Some of my usual crew have MCC, but many of them have long since moved on from these games and I have more or less done so myself. It hasn't stopped me from reading news and seeing what you all have to say about things. I'm not an active user of this forum, but I believe there's a kinship among the broken and abandoned fans of the series. Anyway, I just wanted to say that it's commendable to see that you guys still care. I think it says a lot about how fun Halo used to be and the time that many of us put into the earlier games. I've cycled back and forth between apathy and disgust for years now. It would be nice to see a competitive Halo scene that was alive and thriving. You guys are (for the most part..) smarter than me about the game design and balance stuff, but I'll ask this: how would it work if sprint was available to players fresh off spawn until they were shot while using it? After that, it would be unusable again until the next respawn. It's just a thought I had but at face value it sounded like an improvement. But like I said, I'm not so knowledgeable with that type of thing. Back to lurking for me. Stay authentically you, Beyond.
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.