Jump to content

Joe Tea

Member
  • Content Count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Joe Tea

  1. I hope so, I realize you play on the test servers too. I'm not trying to be super negative, but I just miss the old Halo trilogy and I haven't seen anything that has trended in that direction since maybe NBNS Reach.
  2. I've got nothing against Neighbor and I don't think it's necessarily his fault or anything but come on, it will almost be a full 1.5 years since this game launched and aside from switching up the weapons on maps and removing double storms I think, they have virtually done nothing to address the autos problem. We still spawn with ARs (which are overpowered and have too much range/finishing ability), there are smgs and/or storms on every map, and there is still radar to enhance crouching / radar watching with these autos. Yes I think it is easy to no scope in this game, but I don't think it was an issue that needed to be addressed. I'm not trying to be overly pessimistic or talk shit to/on Neighbor here either, but does he even play Halo 5 anymore? I remember matching him first season of ranked, but how often does Neighbor or Ghost really play? I'm sure Neighbor has good intentions, and I'm sure other "factors" may be holding his decision making back, regarding autos and such, but it was a genuine question...does Neighbor really even play Halo 5, does he actually enjoy this game or think it is good, and how much is he playing it. Edit: Neighbor is a champ 96 in Arena this season so I can say I am partially wrong here. He has 2400 ish games played on his account....in comparison to myself, someone who literally quit from last Feb. to this Feb., a year essentially, I have 3035 Arena games...he only has 56 warzone games though compared to ~1100. I'm sure he has alts too or whatever.
  3. LOL Out of all the things they could fix with this game they choose to nerf no-scoping with the sniper rifle? So this benefits someone with an AR or another auto trying to kill a sniper at mid-close range more than anything else basically. Am I taking crazy pills?
  4. It was, Epilogue at least...in Doubles and I believe regular Slayer (plus socials)
  5. Just to make counterpoints: - Gamebattles/MLG doubles in Halo 3 was up to 50 kills and it didn't feel like it took forever. I've played Halo 1 on MCC, which might be the problem, against varying levels of competition...even former pro/semi pro level players (NKM Nakamura, Utah Noobs I believe...) and it often feels like it takes forever for the game to end. Maybe more so on maps like Hang em High and Damnation than Prisoner/Derelict. - I'm well aware of crouching under melees, I usually run with a guy who is very good at Halo 2, his name is Andyyx, he was in the 40s highly ranked in that champion ffa thing H2 had going on, up there with pros and he actually made it to the main stage during Halo 3 for the bic flex FFA in Anaheim I believe...Str8 Sick was up there of course. Also I'd point out that I'm better than him at Halo 3 and he is better than me at Halo 2 but on MCC the gap is not that wide really, but he's definitely better at H2 even without it's "true form". - I don't think the Reach DMR is better than the H3 BR at all, I still won't alter my stance here. I think most people would disagree with your statement that Reach's maps were only marginally worse than H3's maps. Reach's maps were terrible, and the maps you listed were almost all forged and mostly remakes as well...I don't know how that can be rewarded. - I mean the game is literally shallow, yes, if we focus on the competitive mode only. Even Halo 1 is, despite it's intricacies of random spawns, nadeing weapons, etc. Each game only had a 4-5 map rotation for competitive play on average, maybe 5-6 at most, and it's literally repetitions of the same modes on the same maps, so in that sense it is shallow. But then CSGO is shallow as well. But they are not actually shallow from my viewpoint because they offer unrivaled replayability, enjoyment, and fulfill the desire for competition. We are also selectively omitting the rest of the games substance...Invasion in Reach was fun, BtB was good in Reach, Halo 3 introduced a lot of new game modes and social and casual ranked was fun, campaigns in each game, custom games... Forge! which Halo 3 introduced, you're welcome Halo Reach for saving your entire game because the dev maps were awful.
  6. That's blatantly not true, most pros played on 3-4 sens, I'd say most on 4 sens...but the vast majority played 3 or 4. I think Roy played 3 but he may have played 2? Naded moved from 5 sens to 2 sens to who knows because he is a psychopath. Very few pros played on 2 sens.
  7. Because game knowledge is so integral to Halo 1 and let's be honest here not many people played Halo 1 competitively, there was no xbox live, time lapse etc. Who were the top CE players who remained on top for years? Tsquared, Walshy, Ogre 2...? Other than those players who from CE was on top? Even with those players, at the end of the game were any of them considered top 10 at Halo 3 individually? Maybe Ogre 2 was, but the name value probably put him top 10 honestly, maybe Tsquared was early on when Str8 Rippin was the hot team. I'm not trying to shit on any players, or Halo 1, but I just don't see any facts here. Name the best players from CE who transitioned to Halo 3 and were among the best players (top 10 overall, top 10 sniper, something). I can spot you Ogre 2 as arguably or probably top 10, but aside from him? And I know that this argument can be used for Halo 5 as well, someone can say oh Ogre 2 isn't a top 10 player individually in Halo 5, Halo X, but I think that A. much more time as passed (he is 30) and he clearly has much less interest in H2A/none for H4/ H5, B. Halo 3's core mechanics are not so drastically different like Halo 4-5 where there is a clear massive drop in skill or difference in gameplay. Sure H1 and H2 had a higher skill gap and you can kill others much faster, but it isn't like Halo 3 has a super AR/ autos, with radar, huge hitboxes etc. Halo 3 had the highest skill sniper and BRing was skillful as well....Walshy's BR wasn't on the level of Pistola/Snipedown/Roy/many others, it's mechanical skill.
  8. I don't take any offense man, it's cool. I know I am being passionate in debating/arguing this as well so I don't mean to offend you or anyone else either. To the shallow point, I was not sure whether you were referring to the entire game of Reach v. Halo 3 or solely the MLG variants of each, but I was focusing on the competitive modes of each I think. When focusing only on the "MLG" variants of each I don't see why Halo 3 is significantly more shallow than H1, H2 or possibly Reach to be quite honest. Sure it didn't expand on much after Halo 2, and it did remove button glitches, but other than that I don't know why it would be considerably more shallow. Compared to Reach I do not see how Halo 3 could be more shallow in any regard unless you consider using sprint/bloom/evade-other abilities in the earlier iterations of the game. Halo 2: Midship, Lockout, Sanctuary, Beaver Creek, Warlock. 5 maps Halo 3: Narrows, Guardian, Pit, Construct, Heretic, Amplified, Onslaught. 7 maps, but two were forged and one is a remake...but good. Reach: Countdown, Zealot, Sanctuary, Pit, Nexus, Oasis?. 6 maps...I think, I don't quite remember if the last two forge maps were in rotation, Admittedly played Reach far less than H2/H3 and stop playing intermittently. I was around for NBNS but I don't remember v7 rotation. Either way, Reach has 4 maps that are forged, two being remakes...one being an H3 map. Most matches were played on Sanctuary and Pit from what I remember. Just from a map rotation stand point I don't see how Halo 3 is shallow, and how Halo Reach is not very shallow. Halo 3's maps played very well generally, The Pit is one of the best maps in Halo easily, Guardian is iconic, Narrows/Construct/Guardian are all original quality maps. Heretic was a remake done right, much better than Truth in H5 or the loose remake Zealot. Amp and Onslaught have flaws, registration-wise, aesthetically, but they played relatively well...better than Nexus and Oasis I am pretty sure. Reach relied on remaking two maps with forge as their best maps. Reach is battling Halo 4 for the worst launch/dev maps out of every Halo title, what is better Haven or Countdown/Zealot? Just from a map rotation standpoint Reach has to be considered extremely shallow, and the game play of v7 isn't more innovative than what Halo 3 did in anyway. I just have a problem with the word shallow here. You can really call anything shallow. CSGO is shallow then, but it's highly re-playable just like Halo 3 was/is.
  9. Okay, let me first address that I am not trying to argue the skill gap of Halo 1 and I have already conceded multiple times that Halo 1 has the highest skill gap, though I do think it is overstated in comparison to H2/H3 but that is not the point here. I was simply responding to a statement in Teapot's post where he said every H1 player was not worse at H3, who played competitively. That is simply not true imo and I think it is objectively not true. Sure, you can say Halo 1 puts more emphasis on individual skill, and of course that would be the case in 2v2 formats....obviously, but according to that statement Ogre 1 and 2, Walshy, Legend etc. should all be considered top 10 players individually in Halo 3. That is not the case...clearly Ogre 1 and 2, and especially Walshy were worse compared to their peers individually on Halo 3 skill wise (not to say they were bad). Would anyone consider Walshy a top 5 or top 10 individually skilled player in Halo 3? No, unless they are being irrational or fanboys. Meanwhile he was a top tier player easily considered top 5-10 in Halo 1 and 2 correct? So therefore he is worse at Halo 3. And he had success at Halo 3, he had great strategy, leadership, and played objective roles well, but he did not have a top 10 sniper or a top 10 BR, he was worse in terms of mechanical skill and there were many others who were pro at h1 and h2 who competed in Halo 3 that were worse comparatively to their past skill levels, that is just a fact. You say Halo 3 limits what an individual can do...well obviously when you can 3 shot someone with a magnum across the map and control power-ups and weapons in a cascading fashion, or insta-kill someone with a button glitch, have a host or non-host sword with a huge lunge, etc. How does it limit the individual in terms of mechanical skill with the sniper? I believe sniping in Halo 3 takes the most skill out of any title, why weren't Walshy/Ogres/Carbon members/Ant/Legend even close to being considered the best at sniping? I don't think any of their BRs were considered top class either, sure they were obviously good but not among the best. Also Halo 2 emphasized team shooting as well, long range with hitscan...I'm aware Halo 3 furthered it but it's not like it wasn't present. It's only focused on because the ttk with a magnum in H1 is so small. I don't want to write blocks of text every post, but to briefly address your other points...1v1 and 2v2 are just completely different than 4v4. It doesn't necessarily equate to more individual skill, especially in recent Halo titles, and the pace of play and entertainment value would suffer. I don't think Halo 5 2v2 would be more skillful or entertaining at all to apply it to our current shitty game.
  10. Sorry I was just about to edit my post again and say that I enjoyed the rest of your post and agreed with a lot more points or...disagreed less passionately with other points. Let me read your new post before I respond, but I saw H3A and I will say that I strongly do no think that will be released.
  11. What? How have time and perspective not been kind to Halo 3? It still feels pretty good even on broken-ass MCC. It plays so much better than Halo 1 and Halo 2 do on MCC (which is not the fault of those games) so I don't see how time has not been kind? The exact same thing could be said of H1 or H2 or any older title, I really don't understand that statement. "Shallow game" Dude come on, you are saying Halo Reach is better and it disempowered the individual more than Halo 3 did and the vast majority of matches were played on two robo-cock silver forge remakes on Sanctuary and Pit, or you could play mediocre Zealot/Countdown which were scaled for sprint as someone already stated. Reach was literally the most shallow Halo title ever. As I have already said in response to something Teapot said, which is completely false, tons of Pros and top tier pros from Halo 1 and Halo 2 were worse at Halo 3 (Walshy, Strongside, Ogre 1/2, Tsquared, Shockwave, Bestman, Defy, Gandhi, Legend, Ant, etc.). Now don't get me wrong this doesn't necessarily mean anything, as players who were great at prior, more skillful titles (h1-h3-Reach even) have dropped off on the individual rankings in Halo 5. But, Halo 5 is clearly a completely different game, similar to Halo 4 and even more amplified, where as Halo 3 did not incorporate sprint/thrust/abilities/etc.etc.etc. and clearly had the most skillful sniping in the entire series, can we at least agree to that point? So it had straight up BRing, where players like Walshy for example had weak individual skill at BRing and Sniping in comparison to the prior titles. It's not like everyone is spawning with an AR, sprint, radar, thrust, slide, embarrassing ass game mechanics, in Halo 3. Clearly the skill gap was there and respectable.
  12. This has to be the most incorrect statement I have ever seen. How about almost every single one of them that I can think of? Ogre 1 and 2 were worse at Halo 3 comparatively to their individual rankings in Halo 1, Walshy, Legend wasn't even good at Halo 3 really, or at least he was not successful on a team other than the one event you mention. I don't think there is any Halo 1 pro that is better at Halo 3 other than Tsquared arguably, and he was never a top tier player in Halo 3...I'm not sure how he was regarded in Halo 1 among pros but I am pretty sure he was up there right? I mean that statement is so wrong it's crazy. Edit: Also sorry if I am coming off like I am talking shit, but I just have to vehemently disagree with you on that point. Also on the Tsquared point, he I want to amend that to...he was not someone who was a top 10 individual player in Halo 3 when all was said and done, I don't think at least.
  13. It's clear that you have a preferential bias for Reach and I have a bias towards Halo 3. I don't consider being able to scope in and cross map enemies essential to the skill gap. Also the Halo 5 pistol, despite being hitscan and the game having huge hitboxes, is not necessarily effective from the distances we are holding the H3 BR to. We definitely agree on other ideas, and I agree with a lot of things here, but I cannot see how Reach NBNS is in the same league as Halo 3 MLG settings, so that is why I say we can agree to disagree. Also you cite the rockets in Reach as a positive? They were the most overpowered rockets in the entire series, I thought they were a negative personally.
  14. No that is not the case at all, we already laid out our arguments. If someone was arguing that Halo 4 had a higher skill gap than Halo 1 what is there to argue about? Yes it was originally about starting weapons or the BR in Halo 6 hypothetically but it evolved into talking about individual games and their skill gaps. I've already conceded that Halo 1 and 2 have higher skill gaps than Halo 3, but my argument is that Halo 3's skill gap is much closer to those two than people here seem to judge or project. It's very clear to me that H1>H2>H3>Reach NBNS> ---here is where it gets murky but H5 or H2A > H4. The only argument I see is the randomness of the spread and the fact that registration is poor at long ranges (it's not hitscan). A BR fight in Halo 3 is more skilled than Reach, and it's clearly more skilled than Halo 2 when you cannot double/quad shot. Yes....that is unique to the H2 BR, but it's also a glitch that is unintentional and isn't really intrinsic to the gun itself, on top of this I am conceding H2's skill gap regardless. This happened before and I am not going to change anyone's mind and the arguments I see are not going to change my mind either. Which Halo game requires the most skill for sniping? Halo 3. Other than Halo 1, which game requires the most skill to win BR fights without button glitches? I would argue Halo 3. I'm not sure in what universe Halo Reach has a higher skill gap than Halo 3, it's baffling to me.
  15. No, obviously I was considering it to be NBNS settings Reach. Nothing wrong with the DMR in those settings but if you think Halo Reach had a higher skill gap than Halo 3 MLG there is just a clear bias and I can't argue around that.
  16. I wasn't really comparing H1/H2 to snipers, just stating the fact that spawning with a Sniper increases your 'high kill potential', not the mechanics or skill gap's involved in the games. You still do have to punish someone by hitting your shot with a sniper rifle if they are in a bad position or out in the open, and let's exclude Halo 5 where any drool cup can use the sniper with it's massive hit box to no scope or hit headshots while aiming at someone's thoracic spine. I' don't take any offense but I didn't start playing in Halo 3, I already said that I played Halo 1 (split screen/campaign...local) and I guess I started at Halo 2 for online play, probably more hours than any other halo title or comparable to my time in Halo 3. You cannot use default Halo 3 as your argument. I thought it would be a given that we were talking about MLG settings Halo 3. If you want to handicap my position like that then we have to assume Halo 2 is SMG popcorn starts, Reach has bloom and Armorlock/abilities, sprint, etc. The only way to play Halo 3 is on MLG settings, which aren't even a dramatic change. The thing is, Onslaught is a forge map and suffers from the Foundry registration issues/lag, but what you are totally omitting is the core mechanics of Halo 3, the fluid movement in strafing and gandhi hopping/jumping etc, that was much more fluid and less stiff than it's predecessors Halo1/2, so when you are strafing at an effective level/speed combined with leading your shots, combined with, yes, the ineffective registration/range of the gun itself to an extent, it is going to be near impossible to impossible to cleanly 4 shot someone across the map. That is how the game is. That is the range of the weapon, and I do not find a problem with that. "And people bitch about Halo 5's escapability" - Come on, Halo 5 has sprint, thrust, slide, clamber, spartan charge, ground pound and radar. To escape in Halo 3 took SKILL, you had to be sneaky like Pistola, it was a skill to move across the map and outsmart other players which was effectively stripped away in Halo 5 with all of the aforementioned features. Strafing actually mattered in Halo 3 where as you have to crouch-strafe like an absolute dickhead in Halo 5 and thrust/counter-thrust etc. and it's only effective because the aiming mechanics are so bad that it's harder to hit pistol shots than hitting any other utility shots in other Halo titles, oh and you can just AR people while crouch strafing. We can just agree to disagree about this because citing the Reach DMR as a better weapon than the H3 BR is laughable to me. I also don't consider double-shotting to be an inherent part of the H2 BR but that is less egregious imo. It's not worth arguing because I know what the case is here. There are a lot of people who are much worse at Halo 3 or downright terrible and think they are much better at H1/H2 (not saying you, but in general this is true). I'm not even trying to claim that Halo 3 has a higher skill gap than H1/H2, but I am trying to say that it's skill gap is EASILY third best in the series (MLG settings obviously) and it's a lot closer than what some people here think. I really don't think nading down weapons or executing random spawns should factor into a skill gap either. That is game knowledge. That is the reason Halo 1 has such a "legendary" skill gap IMO, because barely anyone fucking played it, so you have these super important features that barely anyone knows, and then kids with less ACTUAL SKILL in shooting the weapons will just have a massive advantage. It's like not knowing any of the spawns in Halo 3, not knowing any of the strat, but worse. Also Halo 1 was mostly played on PC and that was with a mouse no? I know that last paragraph is heresy here, but that's what I believe is the truth. Halo 1's skill gap is overrated because so few people played it and actually know the game/strategy of said game, and PC's were used by the highest populations that played the game. Don't get me wrong, I still think it's a high skill gap, but Teapot's signature is so hyperbolic when it comes to skill gap. *Sorry, got a little LIT during this rant lmao. I'm sure most will disagree with the H1 sacrilege
  17. I still don't think the spread was a huge problem despite goofy clips like someone posted. Obviously having a 3 shot kill magnum with a scope and massive range, or being able to insta-skill someone by closing the distance and BXR or BXBing them are going to lead to "higher kill potential" as an individual. I'm not debating the skill gap of H1 or H2 at all, but having a game set on team snipers causes a higher kill potential without necessarily changing the skill gap for example. I have to completely disagree that the H3 BR is one of the worst utilities in the series based off that either. It has to be considered top 2 IMO, or at least top 3 if we are going to consider double/quad shot and button glitching into the inherent weapon itself. I just cannot see how it is one of the worst, the Reach DMR with or without bloom, a Halo 4 br/dmr or the Halo 5 pistol/ar is better? I'm not having a problem with map flow...per say, I'm not sure what you mean by that. In halo 2 there can be a ton of stand-off ish periods of time due to the hitscan/range of the br. In Halo 5 I just think the map flow/gameplay is abysmal with the lines of sight and constant rotation and soaring everywhere and I think we can both agree there I think. I just don't think the inability to long-range...consistently at least, with the H3 BR causes problems necessarily. It's not necessarily a bad position if the optimal range of the weapon does not reach there or what not...for example you could land shots on a sniper standing S2 from your S2 on the Pit, but it's not something you necessarily want to challenge at all because of the BRs range/consistency. I don't see this as a huge problem. Another example...someone going up a street on Onslaught (compounded by Foundry/Forge problems), you can land shots on them across the map, but it's hard to kill them solo or cleanly from that distance. I don't think this is a negative...I think this allows movement across the map without fear of being hitscan-cross-mapped to death instantly. Imagine if Guardian was played with hitscan h2 BRs or H5 Brs, it would play terribly most likely just like most remakes of it on H5 did/do. Lockout map flow/gameplay can just grind to a halt and this is partially due to how effective the hitscan scoping in is I think. But ultimately I agree with you, if a hitscan BR or DMR or Pistol can be made properly so that it has a certain skill gap akin to Halo 1 or Halo 3 imo, that would be ideal. Just anything better than what we have had to deal with in Halo 4 and Halo 5. All of this is irrelevant anyway, we know the starting weapon is going to be shit and/or going to be an AR in Halo 6.
  18. I just wrote something in response to this but my page went elsewhere and it got deleted so I am tilted. Essentially I was going to say I completely agree that arbitrarily saying "BR" doesn't mean anything and is not the solution necessarily, as seen in H4 and H5. The BR is too easy to use in H5, however I think the DMR and Carbine (I guess LR too) are too easy to use and have far too much range on hitscan. The Pistol on the other hand is too weak/inconsistent with the aiming mechanics of this game, the aim assist/magnetism seems to drop off when fighting a one shot/no shields player. The pistol also has to go up against a starting AR and other autos so it's clearly unbalanced as a starting utility weapon I think. I was basically saying that I think the H3 BR is the best starting weapon in the series. I know this is controversial probably, but let me say that this is not factoring in the h1 pistol because I cannot speak on it as I was 11-12 years old when I played Halo 1 and never played it competitively, on XBC, or on PC, so all I can judge it on was MCC where it was clearly broken as fuck. I truly believe that the Halo 3 BR, despite it's inconsistencies and registration issues at times, created the best skilled gun fights and had a very respectable skill gap when we control for button glitching in Halo 2 and when we omit the h1 magnum or assume that it's up there...equal or better, whatever. The H3 BR didn't allow for cross mapping like every other weapon in the series essentially did, which created a better flow to the game I think. I believe BR fights in H3 had more skill gap than straight up in H2, Reach, H4, H5, H2A, clearly. Sniping in Halo 3 was also one of, if not the most skillful in the Halo series. I do believe that the aiming system of leading the shots that existed in Halo 3, tweaked and tuned a bit and on dedicated servers would be the answer for Halo 6, among many other fixes. I know some will disagree but I do think the H3 BR was great. I'm not sure if you meant the Halo 5 DMR, but that still has too much range and ease of use for a starting weapon I think, though I'm not sure. It would help against the AR but it wouldn't solve that problem with autos.
  19. I hope he responds, I don't understand how someone could say 343 is taking the Halo franchise in the right direction unless they have only experienced this direction (Halo 4-MCC-Halo 5). Even then all the numbers and rankings show the state of this game, and the only figure that is actually good, ~5 million copies sold, is actually a massive negative because it gives 343 free reign to continue this path and justify it. I don't really want to shit on the guy either, forget his name...jeebles? But I'm just passionate about Halo and I am genuinely baffled as to how he can believe that.
  20. I really can't tell if you are trolling or not. I hope you are, or I am going to assume you are <16 years old and started playing Halo during Reach or Halo 4 (and this is not an ad hominem attack, I am being logical). 1. All the evidence and trends point to the fact that Halo 6 will most likely be "bad". They certainly aren't going to give up micro-transactions, they probably are going to focus even more on Warzone, and every 343 title has had sprint, some form of abilities, lack luster maps, frame-rate issues, so on. I couldn't possibly understand how one would think Halo 6 predictably will be a success. 2. You're right to say that Bungie/Reach did start to "kill" halo by adding spartan abilities, bloom, sprint, and 343 did actually step in and remove Bloom/Sprint for competitive. But you also fail to realize that it was a more complicated issue where MLG was essentially scumbagging the Halo franchise that built them after being pressured by Activision and CoD. Either way, there was hype for Halo 4....how did that perform? Oh it put this series on life support because it was a disgrace for a halo title. Halo 5 only had hype because it's a fucking halo title, it killed all hype shortly after as seen by the population quickly and continuously dying, casuals shitting on the campaign, the vast majority shitting on the game mechanics and saying this game is simply not fun. 3. I mean...please tell me you are trolling. People like where Halo 5 took the series? Where did it take the series? Oh 129th place on the Twitch list, 19th place on Xbox most played games where there aren't even many good titles for the XBONE at all, a population of 10-30k and that is being generous, micro-transactions and focus on a casual playlist over anything else, lack of direction and without a fucking clue how to balance/tune the competitive side of the game, oh and everyone thinks the campaign was the worst in the entire series. If MCC wasn't so broken, and IMO purposefully not fixed / broken again after the initial fix, it would have a similar population if not higher than Halo 5. 4. Lastly, I don't know what the fuck you are talking about with diverting resources. You think that 343 has been working on Halo 6 PRIOR to the release of Halo 5??? Where BTB, Assault, KotH, Infection, Grifball, Doubles, FORGE, etc etc etc. were all not included and graciously given to us peasants as "DLC" from the kind overlords at 343? Please tell me how they are diverting resources to Halo 6 when they have to put minimal effort in to fix things in this game and they DON'T, such as Icarus Armor, the Warzone 12 man glitch where they are banning people 1 week instead of, you know fixing it, the matchmaking system, frame-rate issues, Map-rotation for playlists, Breakout settings, Competitive settings. Idk man, I hope you just caught me with your bait and are reeling me in as a troll because I cannot see how you believe this game is a success or Halo 6 will be one, you might as well just play the real thing, Infinite Warfare, if you think this series is moving in the right direction. We will have fucking grapple hooks in Halo 6, mark my words. Either Roadhog or Widowmaker or both style grapple hooks that you can use in Warzone at the very least. Or 343 will rip something else from OW or CoD, Payload Warzone, running on walls, none of this shit will surprise me whatsoever.
  21. Dude just wait for Halo 6! :uncledrew: And the sad thing is everyone here will buy and play Halo 6 too... Another thing I'd like to say, just adding it on to this post, is that the ranking system in this game is just so fucking terrible. I've posted about this multiple times over a year ago, but it's still just as bad if not worse possibly? I'm a pretty good player, much better at H2 and H3 than this game, but I'm actually half-decent...not amazing, and I've been playing mostly BTB after a year hiatus so I'm obviously going to be worse/unaware of new maps and placements at first, etc. It's irrelevant. Point is...I run team Arena today (and multiple times in the past few weeks, same shit happens) with a to4. We have someone who is on an alt for some reason, low diamond, I'm like a ~1630, we got a high 1800 and a high 1700. Now apparently CSR is way higher than it was during the first few ranked seasons when I played and champ in Arena is ~mid 3000s I believe? Anyway, with that team of relatively low onyx and a diamond we match champ 120 something in arena and high onyxs today, not a huge problem...lost but had a close game. Prior we have matched 3 champs on the same team, beat a high ranked ~20s champ and a team with two champs. It's just the principle here. There is no equality. Why should my team with an average CSR of ~1700 ish and a diamond ranked player be matching a team with an average rating of ~3000 plus or high 2000s AND not be able to match the equivalent discrepancy downwards in the spectrum....like 2 plats and 2 diamonds? 3 diamonds and a plat? Idk whatever it equals out to be. Probably the 100th time I've said this but nothing has changed: The game's ranking system is designed to protect the lesser skilled players who comprise a large precentage, if not the majority of playlists. It's analogous to if Halo 3's ranking system said....you hit level X (45 let's say) in MLG or any playlist, and now you can only match players 45-above, and it's even worse because this system exceeds level 50 basically right? It's like protecting all the lower skilled players or less knowledgeable players from 35-44 (boosting aside). This and the hidden MMR which certainly still exists in social/everywhere, is another major reason why this game is just not fun. It's frustrating, grinding, constantly rotating against sweaty - relatively skilled level competition in conjunction with a game where anyone can kill you because the skill gap is not very high.
  22. This is a company in 343, where the best thing they ever did was take over during Reach and actually fix/mitigate the problems of the game turning it to NBNS or whatever, and were lauded for it. They then turn around and release Halo 4 with sprint, more spartan abilities including thrust/promethean vision, perma-scoping without getting knocked out of scope, and bloom is still present for some weapons. There is no hope. Literally no hope, I mean what can we do? get a few hundred, maybe a thousand or a couple thousand people max to sign off on some petition? or signatures on some essay on why halo is failing and what needs to be amdended? 343 won't listen, they sold ~5 million copies of this game allegedly, despite the fact that the population now is probably ~15-20k on average I'd say, I bet it dips to as low as 10-12k and peaks at 25-30k max (free play weekends don't count). The majority playing Warzone too. How many people tune in for HCS tourneys now? I've seen like 3-5k viewers on average for the past few events, maybe the finals max out to 15-20k+ but you also have to factor in that a lot of viewership now is from twink optic fans who are literally fans of the brand and more so CoD team, and that out of the hardcore viewership there is a percentage that actually likes Halo 5 and prefers it over H1-3. Basically I say there is no hope because future success is usually based of past history. 343 has only really accomplished one objectively good move (Reach) and has consistently made decisions to drive this franchise into the dirt aside from it. Unless you are delusional and one of the "Adapt kid! Support this halo community!" guys who rationalized Halo 4 and now Halo 5, it's so painfully clear that 343's directive is to cater to the casual demographic and try to steal numbers from the CoD demo. They have failed at this imo, but they still sold a shit ton of copies, a shit ton of micro-req packs from what I understand, and guess what? We will have paid DLC in Halo 6 I bet. I keep writing long posts but it's hard to be concise when talking about this overarching subject. When you have a company that is trying to "break into esports" and is dumping some money, although fractions of profit from micro-transactions probably, into their tournaments and most likely making a loss I'd assume...that doesn't have a fucking clue on how to make a halo title, and still has AR starts, radar, smgs/storms as a massive turd cherry on top of their trash-ass core mechanics and dog shit to average at best maps, then I really don't know what to say.
  23. Well the problem with your last statement is that weapons that don't take a certain amount of skill should not be in competitive settings playlists or tournaments, or they have to be limited and designated as power weapons. Also you can't have weapons that take very little skill be that viable, or every weapon have viability or you will end up with the trash weapon sandbox of halo 5. Shotguns in H2 were wayyyyy worse than the god tier H5 shotgun, or the h2a shotgun. The sword in this game inadvertently is used as a speed boost power up to run flags much faster. The lunge is terrible without zoom, but with zoom it's rather large...I don't really have a problem with the sword in H5 other than the flag running boost. The problem with this game is more so the starting AR which has far too much range and melts shields, is better than the starting utility weapon and takes far less skill to use than the pistol itself. I'm not sure why the AR and other automatics still exist in competitive, it's basically akin to Bungie never taking out regens/bubbles/equipment, shotguns etc out of MLG H3 almost. Regarding the sword, obviously sprint factors in too. But why is there this sick fetish to ADS with everything in this game? Why are we aiming down the sights of a sword, a hammer, or even every automatic...they honestly don't deserve to get any increased range damage or accuracy.
  24. I haven't posted in awhile but completely agree with this here, and I came here to basically say the same thing. Who gives a fuck (swearing allowed? I forget) about black undersuits when the entire game is shit and the leadership/vision of the game and series is clearly terrible. I took a year break from H5 after the first HWC 2 million tourney and I come back a few weeks ago and I see that competitive settings still has an AR start, radar, smgs/storms on map although less etc. I come back and see that breakout has full shields, radar and shotgun starts. I look at the twitch numbers and there are ~570 views right now, almost 20x less than Runescape, literally 20x less than what Ninja is pulling on h1z1 right now as well. The problem isn't minor or nearly irrelevant smokescreens like cosmetics and antiquated split-screen (where the frame rate is already terrible on many maps) etc. The problem with this game is the core gameplay mechanics. We don't need sprint, thrust, clambering on everything to make jumps, radar in competitive, AR starts, a sandbox where every weapon is viable in a negative sense, a starting weapon that is worse than BR/Carb/DMR pickups and isn't good enough to combat the low skill gap weapons (AR,Smg,Storm) that melt and have far more range than they should. I'm probably beating a dead horse but what the fuck? Does 343 simply not listen to input from Ghost, Neighbor, Strongside, Dersky etc? Are they scared to criticize this shit game and want to preserve their paychecks? I mean it's so obvious that success can be obtained through the arena shooter style of the older halos, as seen by CSGO's popularity. Is 343 going to continue to chase and cater to the CoD/casual demographic where they will obviously just play the original, CoD, and other casual games (Destiny, OW, etc) instead of this hybrid abortion of a halo/CoD title that we have had since 343 started making their own titles? They have half a foot in the eSports door while continuing to keep Halo on life support by catering to the warzone and casual community. I'm not trying to be super negative, though I am, but how can anyone expect halo 5 to become a big eSports game or even grow when the twitch numbers are so pathetic?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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