Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/04/2020 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    I personally think that if you tea bag a dead corpse enough, it should start to flatten and get squished like a pancake. I suppose that would modify the player model.
  2. 2 points
    Did you just compare the demand for porn with the demand for Halo MCC Multiplayer? Realistic expectation.
  3. 2 points
    It is but I don't want people to abuse the fuck out of it to "thrust" out of shots Think you're playing Pit, and you start BRing some guy who's in Long Hall, only for him to completely fuck your aim by jumping off the wall. In a game that has a significant playerbase on console, players should never be able to break the opposing player's aim assist simply with the push of a button. It's completely undeserved.
  4. 2 points
    With a fast BMS, you get: • A much better strafe and actual difficulty in tracking opponents (provided equally high strafe accel) • Omnidirectional movement • The ability to perform trickjumps without needing to make yourself vulnerable Though it's important to state that there can't be too high of a BMS buff, nothing more than 130% that of the old games. There's an element of strategic predictability with regards to movement in the older games that gets put into a shredder when you raise the BMS without also lowering the TTK. Turns out my PC can just barely run Diabotical's Open Beta. Looks like I'm not leaving MCC anytime soon. Just .....can't wait.
  5. 2 points
    I wish shooters would go back to the mission structure that placed all the objectives (Yes, objectives) on the level from the beginning and let you do them in any order you wanted (Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Time Splitters, Syphon Filter Omega Strain), and make you beat the level in one life. It was so much more satisfying to beat a level on Perfect Agent than it was to beat a level on Legendary. Make objectives pass/fail, and have each objective’s result affect the rest of the mission (more/less guards, lights/alarms turn off, armory unlocked, etc), and have only the final objective be mandatory. This creates massive replayability, as players find the most efficient strategies and struggle to improve their mission rating. Maybe the one-life thing is a turn-off. Okay. Allow respawning at the closest completed objective (or insertion point), but if you choose to continue, you do so knowing you’ll get an F rating at the end because you were KIA. This let’s tourists play the whole game, without denying the diehards the thrill of the challenge. This goes even deeper once you factor in co-op. Have a different rating for each number of players in the game, so players are encouraged to play every mission with 2, 3 and 4 players separately, with entirely different strategies for each. If the level isn’t linear, let each player choose from a few different insertion points at the beginning of the mission. The mission could play totally differently if players breach opposite doors, or if one player is on a skylight instead. Maybe certain timed objectives give you less time as the player count increases. Maybe they kill the hostage scientist (that will unlock the shortcut if you save him) 4min in if you’re solo, but they kill him 1:30 in if you have 4 players. If you die, you need to be revived. No respawning. Each successive revive takes longer. You’re rating takes a massive hit if you finish the mission without all 4 players. Ratings are determined by speed, objective completion, enemies killed, enemies undisturbed (snuck past), and so on. Make the best rating HARD to get, and then tie unlocks to each rating for every mission. You could even have different awards/medal chest for each mission and difficulty that encourages different play styles. 100% accuracy. No shots fired. Undetected. Every enemy killed. No enemies killed. No vehicles. Etc. Then do mission-specific ones like “Beat this mission without using the sniper rifle” or something. Show which skulls you’ve beaten the mission with. Each mission should have its own medal chest that takes some serious time and effort to fill. You can make a mission-select style game and still give it an assload of replayability if the missions are done well, it’s challenging, and you give the player a lot of different goals to attain (and a reason to attain them). I’d take that game over a Far Cry style game ANY day.
  6. 2 points
    How many times can they put fiesta and shotty snipers in the rotational playlist before it gets stale I get that there's a skeleton crew working on MCC, but could we at least get some community made/chosen modes? H3/H2 Mayhem, Big Team Fiesta, Vehicle Fiesta, Low grav snipers, stuff like that. Nobody wants to play fucking team duals, that's insulting.
  7. 2 points
    Dallas Empire manager is Elumnite, Clayster competed in Halo 4, and Crimsix broke into the top 4 in Reach. It's a story as old as time itself - Halo players rule.
  8. 1 point
    I don't understand this idiotic "Esports have ruined games" notion that casual players vomit out into every possible crevice of the internet. "Esports culture is making everybody too sweaty and ruining the casual experience!" Esports culture has always existed in games, just in far less accessible forms. Even in the days of Street Fighter, competitive play existed. It was merely restricted, because internet access was poor. Likewise, toxicity and rage was also always a thing in video games. It just didn't manifest as visibly. If it's become disproportionately popular (which it hasn't, btw), then that's not something you can fault eSports or competitive players for. It's what they find fun, just like how you find holding down W and the left mouse button for 12 minutes to be fun. "You can't have fun anymore in games because all your teammates are toxic tryhards who sweat the entire game!" No, you can't have fun because developers are clueless idiots who can't make a decent social mode alongside a decent competitive mode, so they try to mix the two together. In the end, neither crowd is satisfied. Competitive players are tearing their hair out because they get shit-for-brains teammates who can't aim and shoot at the same time, and casual players get curbstomped by people far better than them. The solution is to let Casual players do whatever the fuck they please in lobbies where they exclusively match each other, and give Competitive players the same privileges in lobbies of their own. "The developer ruins the game to cater to competitive players!" They don't. You have some stupid, pre-conceived, vindictive attitude that's completely misplaced towards high-level players. Most of the time, the developers don't fucking listen to them, and take it upon themselves to decide what the ideal balance is (while doing an awful job at it). In the rare instances that companies do actually listen to competitive players, most changes that they make are merely to buff the useless elements and nerf the overcentralizing elements. If you complain about something as fucking mundane as nerfing an overpowered ability, it's because you love abusing it to ruin other people's fun. You aren't interested in maintaining any "casual fun", you're just a shameless apologist for whatever zero-effort method you use to completely destroy other people's enjoyment. You're like the kind of person who'd complain if Bungie nerfed the plasma pistol's overcharge in Halo 2, because it was way too easy for you to destroy people with it. "I just want to have fun!" First of all, I really doubt that you do. What you want to do, is be able to destroy people really easily, because you're too lazy to put in any effort to actually play the game. Whatever misplaced grief these idiots have for "esports/sweaty players/competitiveness", is either just a temper tantrum thrown at competitive players for trying to balance a game to be less bullshit, or an incompetence from a developer. I don't know why they mention Esports at all, because 1) They don't actually know shit about Esports and lobbying 2) Esports has much lower influence on design than they assume it does It's just a profoundly stupid idea that permeates because the number of people who suck at the game dwarf the number of people who don't, and they either have petty agendas held against the latter for nerfing their favorite ways to ruin the fun for other lower-skilled players, or they match people who don't want to just fucking teabag all game and get mad at the guy who's playing to win, instead of the developer for matching him with said player. rant over
  9. 1 point
    Do you think it’s acceptable to briefly disable the player’s ability to attack, should he choose to activate the significant advantage that is Evade (in no sprint settings)? Do you think it’s fair that an Evading player receives both a means of transportation as well as an effective damage resistance buff due to the reduced size/shape of his player model?
  10. 1 point
    Yup it's just not necessary. The issue with sprint arguments is that a fast base speed is better in every way. I have to constantly explain to H5 kids that adding penalties to basic movement works against the very "freedom" they preach about.
  11. 1 point
    If you find anything interesting, post it here so I can read it too. For my movement abilities, I took inspiration from Chess. Spartans thrust sideways like a Rook. Elites evade diagonally like a Bishop. Brutes high-jump, lunge, then ground-stomp, like a Knight, jumping over spaces before turning and landing on another. Prometheans transform into a sphere that allows them to access shortcuts, much like a Castling King. With regard to puzzle solving, Elites can also Wall Kick, allowing them to climb up a mine shaft by repeatedly wall kicking back and forth, up the narrow shaft. Brutes can high jump then lunge then clamber up a ledge, allowing them to reach elevated platforms that other species cannot. Prometheans can turn into a ball and roll through a hole in the wall, the Sphere ability acting as the key that unlocks access to the areas beyond. Aside from abilities that allow the player to move around his predefined environment, certain weapons can modify the environment itself. The Energy Sword can slice through certain objects. A boosting SAW can ram through others. The most prominent example of a weapon manipulating the environment is the Power Glove that can pick up, move, rotate, drop, and launch objects. The Conduit grenade type fires a short range beam that can disable Shield Barriers, allowing the player to pass through a previously barricaded path. The Token equipment allows the player to teleport back to the map’s designated teleporter exit node. This allows the level designer to create a hub, where the exit node is located, that the player fights outward from. After completing one spoke of the wheel-shaped level, he teleports back to the central hub and begins the next spoke. The single-rider Unicycle vehicle allows the player to Wall Ride, granting access to previously inaccessible areas. Alternatively, the player could ride down a half pipe hill, jumping and firing the whole time, allowing him to survive an area that would have led to certain death if he decided to just run straight down it. These sandbox items give the player the tools he needs to access new areas and survive new encounters. Completing one puzzle could give him a new tool that he uses to complete the next puzzle, gradually building up the campaign player’s base abilities, making him feel more powerful as the game progresses.
  12. 1 point
    I agree about objectives. Providing multiple objectives on a level where a few are mandatory and most aren't, creates a lot of variation within each playthrough, especially when non-mandatory objectives being completed or not affects how future missions will play. Though, I wouldn't entirely throw away the linear progression of a regular Halo mission. The thing that linearity allows developers to do, is exercise greater control over player-sandbox interaction (What possible weapons could you bring to an encounter), enemy interaction (How you come upon the enemy AI in any given encounter), and scripted sequences. These are important to the difficulty tuning. Absolutely. Why this isn't a feature in most FPS, I don't understand. Also, SPV3 already tried this in one specific mission. On Halo (Legendary and Noble difficulty only), after you save the marines near the first forerunner structure, you're given a warthog to rescue the other marine survivors. Right before the "This cave isn't a natural formation" section's entrance, there are two Covenant relays placed. If you kill the enemies by these relays and activate both of them, then you can see all incoming Phantoms for all the rest of the missions, highlighted with an icon on your HUD as they approach. Imagine if on Sierra 117 in Halo 3, you sniped the Chieftain off the phantom before you even got to the final area of the mission where you'd normally kill him. As a result, the brutes from that encounter are now all jackals, and you instead get ambushed by stealth brutes when you advance into said section. This is an awesome idea. Enemy composition, enemy ranks, enemy relax/patrol/alert states, weapon availability, ammo availability, vehicles, map sections being open or closed to the player, powerups being made accessible for certain sections, etc. It would reduce consistency in playthroughs, but that's not a bad thing. To want the player to think on their feet. Closest completed objective seems way too far back, man. If you want to make a Halo game where people die at least 2-4 times per encounter unless they have perfect aim, perfect judgement, and perfect AI manipulation, then it'd be too unforgiving. It'd be like Contra, where the game itself is pretty fucking hard, but the progress loss per game over is the real kick in the balls. People like their progress reset to the beginning of a section where they died, so they can immediately try again instead of having to crawl through a previous encounter that they already beat. I think "last objective checkpoint" is just way too harsh. Agree on the grading system, though. Players shouldn't go through the mission for the first time and be able to achieve everything, perfectly. Oh shit, I didn't even think about timed objectives lol. That's actually an incredible idea. Honestly, all types of objectives should come back from prior Halos and even new ones from other games. Traditional Halo "Kill everybody in this big room" objectives, entrance location objectives, some puzzle solving, "stalk the enemy leaders undetected" objectives, escort objectives, destruction objectives, rescue objectives, etc. It's nice to mix up gameplay and not have it be the same "shoot the aliens" routine every time. Reviving instead of respawning is a cool mechanic for co-op, but I don't agree with the increasing revive times. The key in designing would be to make perfection incredibly difficult, without making the experience around getting that perfection equally miserable, regardless of the other advantages that a revive system gives the player in a co-op setting. It'd start to make players play in the most self-preserving way possible at the expense of aggressive play, and I don't want that. Absolutely, there should definitely be awards for completing missions with a certain level of proficiency. XP awards, armor sets, skins, nameplates, emblems, etc. Again, disagree on the "mission select" style game approach. It's theoretically possible, but it'd take exponentially more time to design a game and a plot to work coherently around each other in this form.
  13. 1 point
    It’s pretty obvious Shyway has an agenda he already made another “sPrInT iS gOoD” video 2 weeks ago and reddit being reddit will try and pass these videos off as fact hopefully Favyn or someone else will make some videos debunking them sooner rather then later having misinformation videos being left unaddressed isn’t a good thing.
  14. 1 point
    The main reason you don't see a lot of innovation in the FPS genre's campaign is because almost all of the development these days is centered around creating a multiplayer game that people continue to spend money on via microtransactions. Most of the time its just a token campaign. The good single player shooter is almost extinct in general. In a lot of ways Halo hasn't often really been a leader via good single player elements such as story or mission structure. It was a game that made shooting feel good on console and then blew up into a multiplayer giant for awhile and then began to fade. While maybe not really what people are looking for Cyberpunk 2077 is the game we should be looking at this year for an enjoyable single player experience
  15. 1 point
    So then why include it?
  16. 0 points
    Don't think I've posted this gem yet However much people complain about H2 and H3 being utterly fucked on MCC, HCE is 3x worse
  17. 0 points
    The skins don't look bad but they're the second-to-last thing anyone's interested in seeing about Infinite Also what does mean
  • 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.