Jump to content

arglactable

Member
  • Content Count

    2,028
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by arglactable

  1. I wonder why you didn't bring up any of the much more mechanically demanding big boy tier one esports that no one in their right mind would play with a controller like CSGO, DotA 2, League of Legends, Rainbow Six, and even Overwatch. Instead you threw the tiny number of respectable "controller esports" (Rocket League and 2D Fighters) in with a bunch of joke casual games designed for 12-year-olds that only have "esports" scenes because boomer execs know it's a trendy growth industry and Hi-Rez Studios' watered down knock offs of better, more popular games. It's a real mystery to me why you would do that. It will never stop being pathetic that grown adults have egos about playing games with objectively inferior input devices. It's fine to prefer playing games casually from your couch, but stop deluding yourself. No one is competing with an Xbox controller in a 3D shooter or a complex RTS/MOBA game unless the mechanical skill ceiling has been knee-capped to accommodate couch gamers. That's a fact.
  2. Seems a bit weird to get out a console controller just to use voice chat. I assume you plan to use it with your third arm.
  3. It's a game type that literally marks idiots on your HUD through walls. What more could you ask for? I'm also a big fan of Territories, which basically herds all of the tards into a small number of brightly colored corrals for your convenience.
  4. I don't think anyone is really denying that there is a lot of experience and game/map-specific knowledge that give the long time players an huge advantage over new players (to Halo) on PC. But I have seen plenty of people dismiss the concerns about aim assist by deflecting to that, which is what I'm talking about here. Summit himself (continuing to refer to him because he's the most high profile PC FPS player who stuck with the game for a while) fully admitted that his positioning and decision-making was poor and his general lack of experience was the biggest reason he was bottom-fragging in lobbies with veterans. He plays CS:GO PUGs with tier one pros. He knows what it's like to put in hours in a hard game and play with people who are way better than he is. That said, I am glad to see that a lot of long time controller pros and semi-pros are acknowledging the issue. I'm just not sure that "balancing" the input will ever be an acceptable solution. There are tons of PC players who absolutely do not want anything to do with aim assist and, as I mentioned, there are a lot of controller players who wildly under-estimate how dependent their sense of aiming competency is on strong aim assists. I'm also not sure that dividing the population by input preference is a great long term solution and it won't scale down well for what is generally one of the smaller playlist populations in the game. If I had to choose a compromise at the moment, I would lean towards no aim assist in Ranked playlists and leaving social as is.
  5. I realize this is probably hard for long time console-only players to understand, and I'm trying to be a respectful as I can about this, but it will never actually be fair as long as one input requires automated assistance and the other doesn't. The only people who benefit from trying to make these two inputs "balanced" are the controller players. And that's before you address the fact that a nontrivial percentage of controller players not only expect aim assists to be this strong, but DON'T EVEN THINK THEY ARE A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR. GROSS. He'll fit right in with all of the god gamers who insist aim assist actually just gets in the way of their incredible, high level thumb stick deflection skills, so they just turn it off. Really? Do you want me to screen cap the hundreds of comments on Twitter, on Youtube, in Twitch chats, and even on this very forum that heavily imply and very often explicitly claim that PC players are just bad at the game and blaming aim assist instead of gitting gud? I am aware that exceptions exist, but that doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of fragile console gamer egos involved in this.
  6. This is basically a cliche at this point. I am aware that Summit lacks experience in the game and that is the main reason he is under-performing in lobbies with players who have thousands of hours. SUMMIT is aware he lacks experience in the game. He's not a moron. His entire point is that he doesn't feel motivated to keep at it when he knows he can never be as consistent in DMR gun fights as comparably experienced controller players. He is not wrong. I brought up "Reverse flinch" to illustrate the point that aiming/shooting in Reach, Hardcore or not, is a joke. And yet PC players with thousands of hours in other FPS games can't possibly have any clue what they're talking about when they point that out? It's all just console halo veteran big brains? Do PC players in general probably exaggerate the degree to which the aim assist advantage impacts their game? Yes. Are they wrong when they complain about the garbage shooting mechanics and controller dominance? No.
  7. It's both. The core gun-play of Reach is a joke even in comparison to other fairly easy games in the series. They just released a patch for PC that disabled the absurd Reach flinch mechanic that literally moves your reticle towards the enemy when you get shot, which probably led to a lot of MKB players over-correcting more. Still enabled for controller gods, though. Of course, as expected, it seems that most long time console veterans™ would prefer to pretend that PC players are just whining about losing instead of acknowledging that shooting in Halo (outside of the maybe the sniper) has never really been that hard and that low skill ceiling (and super long TTK) favors aim assist players. There's a reason Summit was basically the only person streaming the game after launch day who wasn't a long time member of the Halo Controller Community. He clearly wanted to learn the game, but it's just depressing knowing that you will never have a shot as consistent as the veteran players unless you switch to the heavily assisted input device they are all using. Can't wait for another year of Halo tournaments with all of the same players playing with controllers on PCs. The delicate egos of console esports community can remain intact while everyone else continues to not give a fuck about Halo tournaments.
  8. There's literally no reason controller aim assist needs to exist in a multiplayer FPS on PC. Hopefully 343 realizes this with Infinite or that game's "competitive" modes will be a waste of time too.
  9. You realize that Xbox consoles have always sold at a loss and Microsoft makes the vast majority of their money from software and subscription sales, right? Everything about their current strategy for Xbox is basically platform agnostic (Xbox Play Anywhere, XCloud, Xbox Game Pass PC) and moving away from the idiotic console model that ignored the fact that Windows is the most widely used PC operating system in the world. The new Xbox even looks like a PC, is confirmed to support up to 120fps, and they've added official mouse and keyboard support on console. Add to that their push for esports, which is a growing, trendy industry, OVERWHELMINGLY PC-focused and it makes literally no sense for them to waste the Halo IP to sell... controllers? Even if that was a huge revenue stream for them (doubtful), Xbox controllers are one of the most widely used input devices outside of Kb&M on PC already in large part because of DirectX and XInput. That said, I don't really expect them to make Reach a real PC game. I just think it's a wasted opportunity to finally support Halo on PC just to provide a marginally improved console experience on a platform that has the potential to do way more than that and it would be a HUGE mistake to handle Infinite this way. I'm not plugging in my controller to play an FPS game regardless.
  10. A significant percentage of PC players have no idea what the difference is because they haven't wasted time playing with a controller. Controller players tend to have the opposite problem and wildly over-estimate how much mechanical skill is required to aim in most console games. The mouse is an objectively superior input device in terms of precision. When you add aim assists to accommodate how terrible analog sticks are for aiming, the advantages become less clear. In this game, controller players have an advantage in mid range precision fights, because it is so fucking EASY. That is a fact. The controller does not have a meaningful handicap when the baseline aim tolerance is huge PLUS the game constantly corrects your reticle movement for you. That is the problem. In order for controller players to remain competitive, the game needs to aim for them and the aim precision requirements have to be a joke. Accommodating controllers in this way puts a hard cap on mouse aim skill WELL below what good PC players could handle. Otherwise, real PC players would wipe the floor with controller pros and their "years of experience" in gun fights. I have yet to hear a real argument for why this is a positive thing for the game. As it is, the mouse advantage in this game is only clear for the sniper and outside of red reticle range, because those are the scenarios in which the aim assist is not a major factor. I want bullet magnetism gone IN GENERAL, because it compresses any real skill gap inherently. This would mean that aiming with a mouse is much harder than it is now (which is piss easy). The input lag is basically irrelevant, because your shots connect in the massive radius indicated on screen by the reticle, unlike any other PC FPS. You don't have to be precise. The reason mouse aim is at a disadvantage is not because it's hard to aim in this game, it's because it's hard to MISS if you are even remotely competent with a controller. There is absolutely no room for skilled PC players to set themselves apart.
  11. This is a simple issue. It doesn't require faux nuance or fence-sitting. Optimizing the game for skill (or really just being roughly on par with other PC games) and accommodating controller players at high levels are mutually exclusive propositions. Console veterans' egos will take a hit, yes, once they realize that the game was doing most of the work and their aim mechanics peaked after a week at best of taking the game seriously. And a bunch of players who are propped up by how easy the game is—for example, certain players who did nothing at all in Halo 5, but suddenly competed in Halo Team Shot Edition grand finals—will no longer be taking up space in tournaments.
  12. Set all bullet magnetism values to zero on PC and then see how many controller veterans remain competitive with thumb aim.
  13. I'm sure no one here has ever thought of that. I'm sure that next time we'll be sure to avoid being big ol' meanies when addressing up 10+-year-old issues on an internet forum. Thanks for the tip, kid!
  14. I'm certainly not advocating for removing controller support entirely. I think CS:GO got that balance just about perfect.
  15. Imagine thinking you can talk shit when your gamerscore isn't even 6 figures. Yes. Balancing weapons around magnetism and aim assist ranges doesn't work when the game doesn't aim for you anymore. And it's also an idiotic way to balance an FPS.
  16. Let's be clear here: 1. The gun skill ceiling in Reach is a joke and that ABSOLUTELY favors controller players in fights. This objective fact has little to do with the second point 2. PC players are struggling with map/game knowledge and that's a big part of the reason they are doing poorly in ranked. This is especially shocking for many coming from just about ANY other vaguely popular PC shooter where mechanical skill can carry you farther, because those games have faster TTK and a much higher mechanical skill ceiling.
  17. Sure. I understand that. But my interest is primarily in the PC experience and I am not really convinced that balancing for mixed input is worth investigating. Yeah, that is no doubt the primary reason for it, but I think the benefit of drip-feeding the older games leading up to Infinite is pretty clear. They wanted to get a Halo game out for this holiday season, which is why they launched Reach before they finished overhauling Forge for PC (among other things) and having a continuous schedule of "new" content drops gives them a perfect platform for building hype on PC for the shiny new game at the end of 2020. It's basically an early access game + Halo Infinite promotional campaign.
  18. Oh, I am absolutely under no delusion that MCC will take over on PC. In fact, I'm sure that the predictable population drop-off for a port of an old game is a big part of the reason for the staggered release schedule leading into Infinite. People will play the campaigns of each new game when they come out, enjoy the nostalgic experience in multiplayer for a week or two, and then move on to whatever their preferred multiplayer game with regularly updated seasonal unlocks is. The population will plateau at something respectable but hardy chart-dominating between releases. To be clear, my primary concern is not Reach. Reach just happens to be the only real option for the moment on PC and the first example of the problems Halo will have on PC. My concern with with the series on the platform going forward and more specifically Halo Infinite. Halo has a chance to fill a hole in the market as a high skill respawn FPS (one more accessible than Quake). It will not do that if it launches as a console-first game with mouse controls tacked on. MCC is the best test bed for PC-friendly tuning they have now and scaring off the hardcore PC FPS audience this far out from the next new release doesn't seem like a good plan either. And, obviously, it would make the game much more enjoyable for me.
  19. The PC population, based on the Steam player counts alone, is in a fast and consistent decline already. I'm sure that there are a variety of reasons for this, but overpowering aim assists ARE a significant problem for PC FPS players and the complaints about it are widespread on plenty of platforms not specific to Halo. Plenty of bigger PC FPS streamers played the game day one, immediately noticed what a joke the gun-play is, and have barely touched it since. Aim assist complaints remain a staple in the remaining stream chats (which are all long time controller players). The "plug in my controller and bask in high school/college nostalgia" experience isn't going to sustain the game long term. Obsessive console Halo players were going to be grinding the game regardless... Or complaining about it on Halo forums while barely playing it at all. The idea that everyone waiting for Halo official supported on PC was just waiting to plug in their console controllers is a bit ridiculous to me. And none of this has any real relevance to the joke that is competitive play on PC dominated by controller players. At the very least, changes need to be made to hardcore.
  20. I honestly hope that the made for console double digit IQ weapon tuning doesn't kill this game on PC, because I've been saying for ages that Halo could be a truly great PC FPS. This current port is not a PC FPS. It's a console game with a few PC features. The fact that it's already as fun as it is simply with the addition of mouse aim speaks to the potential the series has, but 343 needs to stop catering to console expectations and let this game (and the rest of the MCC) have the aim skill ceiling it deserves. Fundamentally, the age old DMR starts and bloom arguments are a distraction from this larger issue. Step one before they even consider running tournaments is to massively reduce the ridiculous fat reticle bullet magnetism/autoaim that pulls your shots into enemy targets within a massive radius.
  21. I've long been of the opinion that no weapons in Halo that aren't snipers should have scopes on them anyway (mid range de-scope battles are stupid and awkward), and the sniper doesn't need a 10x zoom either, but I'm not really convinced that the DMR is a problem. Halo has a pretty long tradition of stupid map design for BTB in particular and it's pretty obvious that instead of rethinking the viability of "giant valley with no cover" maps, Bungo tried to enforce "intended ranges" with a variety of random factors. This is not the fault of the DMR. It's the fault of Bungie designing shitty maps with tons of extremely long, open sight-lines CONSISTENTLY in every single game. And the only way that can possibly work without the impacts that people whine about (i.e. lots of long range gun fights forcing you to stick to cover) is if the weapons are all basically useless outside of close-mid range. I don't want to single out Bungo on that issue either, because 343 used a similar rationale for adding random spread to the H5 BR when they finally decided to try some re-balancing. If you just make it harder, decent players will quickly hit the low console aim skill ceiling, but if you make it RANDOM, everyone is inconsistent at range. Balance! They eventually settled for obnoxious recoil instead. And now with Reach on PC, we have the "problem" that people aiming with a mouse (i.e. me) are still consistent outside of red reticle range. And why is that? Well, it might have something to do with the absurd bullet magnetism/autoaim values that were tuned for ease of use on console 10 years ago and capped the skill ceiling well below any reasonable maximum for mouse aim. Not that it's particularly hard most of the time to get back behind cover when someone is hitting you at that range, given the extremely long TTK and bloom. No big deal, tho. All of the "competitive" players are plugging in their controllers for that high level aim assist hardcore game-play!
  22. At least with 30 meaningless progression systems in play and random loot, I can see the psychological manipulation that keeps people engaged. But with AR/SMG starts Halo... I honestly don't get it. Even if the game actually played the way they imagine it would... Why is that even fun to them? I want to obliviously run around the map collecting mostly shitty weapons that are only remotely interesting because they fire brightly colored bullets before walking in a straight line directly towards the objective spraying my ar and then trading melees hehe halo is so fun. These are the same geniuses that will dutifully go 2-19 in KotH standing in the hill all game oblivious to the fact that I am murdering everyone around them and going +30 with 0 hill time. You might be able to convince me that the warthog deserves a buff, but I would be lying if I said I wouldn't miss being able to pretty consistently kill all three idiots in a warthog with only my spawn weapon. Maybe just make the driver and passenger harder to kill so I can still murder turret kids. Fuck Banshees.
  23. I'm not seeing why this is an issue. Is it more fun when literal morons can fly around the map in their unstoppable vehicle getting free kills until someone finally stops them with their designated Anti-Vehicle Power Weapon™? I can't remember the last time Halo vehicles were this tolerable.
  24. So, your argument for why PC and the huge list of objective advantages it has over consoles (and the vastly larger game library going back decades) is a "hassle" is that... some half-assed console-first ports exist? Stunning. And I'll bet, like on consoles, there was no way for the community to modify any of those games to improve the experience when the publisher wouldn't, right? Laughs in CSGO console port
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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