Jump to content

TI Inspire

Member
  • Content Count

    717
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

About TI Inspire

  • Birthday 11/17/1997
  1. Making Infinite free-to-play is a great way to encourage millions of players to try it out. Halo is gonna have the most players it's had in years, maybe ever frankly. Lets hope it can sustain its popularity.
  2. What's the point of a 1-50 system if it were to operate the same way as a modern tier ranking system? The grind to 50 is pretty much its defining feature, taking that away gets rid of any distinction between the systems. The second point was primarily made in reference to the first. The traditional 1-50 system lends itself to grinding. Which of course is exacerbated by the reality of playing a team game such as Halo, wherein the already long grind of a 1-50 system is made even longer by having lower skilled players placed on your team, who wouldn't be in the same game as you if a placement matching system existed. Another point is that most people, even a sizable amount of talented players, are not going to be motivated enough to begin the process of grinding to a 50. Meaning that at the higher levels of a particular playlist, you'll have an inherently limited pool of players to match against if the playlist has meaningfully restrictive search parameters, as opposed to the hypothetical alternative of having a modern tier ranking system that quickly places talented players against one another.
  3. A 1-50 system necessitates grinding to get to a ranking that is representative of a player's skill. With a tiered system, you can much more quickly place the player into a group of players with similar skill. 1-50 also has disadvantages in a team game like Halo. Frequently you will get paired with players who for one reason or another execute poorly, the ensuing loss delays your rise in the rankings and necessitates further grinding.
  4. I wonder what motivated them to design a new engine for Infinite. 343 would of course be privy to any hardware roadmaps that Microsoft and AMD would have, so I wonder if there was some explicit technical reason that motivated them to go for a new engine over modifying the engine they already had further, even though they knew it'd delay the new game for an extended period of time. My guess is that it'll probably have pretty much all of what we expect at launch.
  5. I just ranted at someone on r/halo who claimed that the Halo's popularity decline didn't begin with the addition of sprint.
  6. One of the things that differentiates Halo from other shooters are the generally longer kill times. I think COD kill times would be received pretty negatively. We'll see what happens, but I feel pretty sure that after 5 years, 343 came up with a number of ideas we probably don't expect.
  7. Halo: Infinite is probably going to have gameplay that has little resemblance to any prior Halo game. After all, Microsoft's penultimate goal with the game is to create a large multi-platform hit that is as popular as other mainstream FPS games like CS:GO, Valorant, COD, etc. To do that, 343 has probably taken the game in an entirely new direction in an attempt to make the game appealing not only to the franchise's existing console fanbase, but also to the much larger potential audience of FPS players on PC. How exactly they're going to do that is very difficult to say, as their prior attempts to revamp the franchise's core gameplay haven't been all that inspiring, to say the least.
  8. Even when you pace your shots the Reach DMR has a tiny amount of spread. Not much though, probably comparable to the spread on the H2 snipe.
  9. Well I was playing with a team of 8, so I didn't see the selected game modes. But there's only one mode marked as having AR starts, and that's auto slayer. I don't know, all I know is that in Reach BTB, AR starts is absolutely horrible.
  10. That only applies to slayer. If you search with objective gametypes selected, those objective games are probably going to be AR starts. It's absolutely ridiculous, and makes those gametypes pretty much unplayable.
  11. I play on Xbox, I couldn't give a shit about what happens on PC. AR starts in Reach BTB is fucking absolutely horrible to play, I want my DMR back.
  12. Getting genuinely upset that because some people on reddit who barely know how the game works complained, objective Reach BTB games seem to be primarily AR starts. I've played Reach BTB regularly since 2010 and the state that it's in on MCC right now is horrific. The map weighting is absolutely awful (an example being that horrid maps like Superstition for whatever reason are very weighted in heavies). Some good maps like Trident and Mt Lam Lam don't appear at all. And I just can't believe that AR starts is included in Reach BTB in any meaningful capacity. It feels awful seeing Reach BTB be in the state it's in on MCC. It's an utter disgrace.
  13. One of the main issues is that the ranked Reach playlists are generally inactive. If I want to play Reach 4s, it has to be social. Halo is not an easy game that someone can just pick up and play. Just read reddit comments where someone notes that they're okay at any shooter with the exception of Halo, where they get stomped. With it being difficult to learn, social matchmaking ends up being filled with players who just don't get how the game works. The crude team balancing MCC employs trys to make up for this, with the understanding that players who get stomped are probably less likely to come back. But of course, for varying reasons, a lot of them have already left, meaning that it becomes more difficult for the matchmaking system to do a decent job, hence the games where I face a team of randoms who all have positive K/Ds, while I get three players with 0.5 K/Ds. An invisible MMR would result in matchmaking times that are too long, but having seemingly none (even if does skill balance), results in terrible games. What I'm suggesting is a soft MMR of sorts, where, in acknowledgment of MCC's low population counts, we don't implement a full blown MMR system. But, to reduce the amount of terrible games, we provide the matchmaking system with a set of guidelines that attempts to segment the player base into two distinct halves without significantly extending search times. If there aren't enough players available, then resort to normal matchmaking parameters. However, if given a sizable enough player base, the matchmaking system should attempt to match players in the top 50% with other players in the top 50%, and vice versa for the bottom 50%. As to where a player might be in the top or bottom 50%, I don't think it matters all that much, I just don't think it makes sense to match players who time rockets with players who have never played before.
  14. DMR is 1.6 secs at max ROF IIRC. AR is 19sk (if every bullet hits of course, don't remember the kill time).
  15. I don't really mind losing if my teammates were average or slightly below average, it's just that I get stomped in a significant proportion of the games I play in because I get absolutely zero support from my teammates. To put it one way, there was a game where I was initially dominating on Boardwalk with 15 kills early on but my team was pretty much tied at 18 because the other 3 players couldn't do anything... It's so unbelievably frustrating that I constantly get teammates with 0.5 K/Ds, like please at least be average since my opponents are almost always competent. I had an 11 game stretch yesterday where I went positive 10 times, but also lost 10 times. It's not fun.
×

Important Information

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