Jump to content

Mr Doogles

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mr Doogles

  1. In theory I would say the trade-off works, but we've seen it in action for the past few titles and it's always been a problem. You could argue that a smaller delta between Sprint and Not would be better or something along those lines, but that would get to a point where in the end, it's just better not to have Sprint. 343 really doesn't have that much of an understanding imo. They want fast-paced gameplay, but they think moving faster creates this. Everything they understand is superficial and lacks further meaning than what is in your face. There is no depth and anything that created depth is a complete accident. Sure, in H2, button combos were an accident, but in CE, nading weapons wasn't an accident. The outcome of people nading them to themselves was, but plasma stun, quick camo, almost all that other cool stuff was intentional. There is nothing intentional besides finally having Plasma's Nade weapons that has been intentional or deep in any 343 game. You could argue that even Bungie lost that creativity after CE. Sprint really adds nothing to gameplay. Ground Pound really doesn't add anything either. Almost none of the SAs that have been added to the game add anything. The thrusters have a chance to add something, but 343 won't let it because they feel that it isn't balanced. The people who thought that a 5 shot BR was perfectly fine for H4 are talking about knowing that it isn't balanced if you can shoot while thrusting. I'm ranting a bit, but their lack of understanding isn't something that I'm really surprised with. H4 was their attempt at making a CoD and it was bad. Many weapons that all did the same thing as 2+ other weapons. Instant respawn. Loadouts. POD. It's obvious that they don't know what made Halo the game it was and the only way they will get it is if people who actually make Arena Shooter games tell them what is wrong with their games.
  2. If they increased the base movement speed to match Sprint, we would still be in a better boat than having Sprint. One problem with sprint is that you can't shoot while sprinting. If they just remove sprint and make the base speed match that of Sprint, then at least we could shoot while moving at max speed. I do agree that increasing the base speed to that of sprint would be bad, but since they said they are just lowering the delta between sprint and base speed, then I would say that the base speed increase would still be significantly lower than the original sprint speed. This change would be great as it would make it so Sprint has less of an effect on the gun battles. It still hurt the other aspects like Map Design and everything just the same as always, but at least the pursuer will be able to put more shots in someone who just runs away than previously.
  3. You know what they could have done... Since they have two different "main characters" (this is assuming you are playing as both Locke and MC), they could have easily made two different play styles. Locke could have strapped up with the new Armor with all the immersing SAs and sprint and everything, while MC has his classic Mark VI armor where he doesn't sprint, doesn't skydive into a ground pound, or anything like that. Have two completely separate characters with separate armor that can do separate things. This would leave the door open for both styles of Multiplayer, it wouldn't alienate new or old Halo fans, would allow for more tournament games or two different Halo tournaments run side by side with more teams and create more viewership/revenue/etc... With all the toggles they have in place, how hard would it have been? Make a new zoom for the scope so MC doesn't pull the gun up to his face, disable all the SAs, and bam... You have your more classic Halo. Plus, there would be maps tailored specifically to each style of play so no one plays on stretched out maps with the wrong settings.
  4. Do I need to put the /s or a list of faces next time? I thought that was a running joke around here and no one took it seriously anymore.
  5. Fire them all, hire a new team, give them the original trilogy and say, "Make that, with better graphics." All joking aside.... Build the MP experience. Have a beta, get feedback from the important groups who actually know what makes Halo good and not the general public. Tweak the game. Have a beta, get feedback... With what should be the final tweaks as to how the game will play during MP, in order to keep the game consistent across all gametypes, build the campaign levels. Go to E3 Have a tourney with the important people who helped build the game (i.e. pros, competitive community, big names...) Release the game. I know I didn't put a real timeline, but this is all hypothetical anyways and I don't know how long it would take to build the campaign, but obviously if you build the campaign then the MP and then set out to tweak the game to what people like, you're going to have to tweak the campaign also instead of just the MP, or just leave it how it is, which is what 343 has to do because they didn't make sure people would actually like the game first. So the campaign should come last when it comes to actually building the levels and whatnot. The campaign is a story, and you can build the story around your mechanics without having to change the story. The story and everything will be also hashed out long before the MP is finished in any sort of way, so it would just be development intensive at that point. That is the flow I would follow for the first iteration of the game. After that, you know that people like the game, so I wouldn't change it too much. Maybe new, unique weapons, remove some old weapons also. Things of that nature. Still have a beta or two, but I would be able to build the campaign faster because I wouldn't change the way the game is played. Maybe if I was feeling adventurous, I would go the route of the MCC and I would just have the solid MP experience, constantly update it with a new map or two every 8-12 months, and just push a campaign to the system so it's one complete experience that never ends. Something similar to what Spartan Ops was supposed to be, but actually use the main campaign instead of some knock off story that no one cares about. When a new console/system launches is when I would start the next user experience, that way people only have to buy one disk if they want, and they can just enjoy the whole thing. If you buy the disk for each campaign that is released, I would make it so the UI is loaded onto the system so you could launch the UI, remove one disk, put in a new disk, and the game would automatically launch the campaign from there so not to interrupt the experience while changing disks. That's how you create immersion.
  6. Yeah, they got the money they want, but know that when it works, more people will buy it so they will make more. It's sad money is all they are looking at. On some level I hope to hell that H5 fails and maybe even H6 and people quit buying Halo stuff so that MS and 343 realize there is more to a product that making money and you have to actually treat your customers with respect. A campaign that no one really wants to play in HD... no one cares... That's not a fan service, thats a cop out.
  7. Honestly, the only things that are going to bring the population numbers up are completely fixing the game, implementing ranks, then basically forcing the game down people's throats with massive advertising towards it being a Games for Gold title for a month. Put it right on the front page when people start up their XBones. G4G, Halo MCC is free, completely fixed, and ready for the world. Literally advertise that the game works 100% and give it away. Also include ODST when it's finally available. Don't charge extra for it. Just give it to people as a token of good faith.
  8. At this point, I hope the collection gets fixed eventually, but MS then seriously considers doing an H3 Anniversary. I know that H3 looks great and everything, but I would hope that whomever is at 343 at that point would be competent at that point to actually do the game right. Remake a classic Halo game, but just fix the things that are wrong with it. Improve the BR, remake all the maps, let the other Halos be what they are, and make sure the game actually works. I'm sure people would love to have a proper game that actually works that actually resembles a game from the original trilogy. Two years time isn't that far away, so they should start working on it now, but I hope to God that H6 doesn't cause them to outsource the entire thing again. If they do, it'll be another shit show like we have now.
  9. I enjoy h3 because it was the first Halo game I owned. I never had an XBox and first graced the series on the 360, so I was an H3 kid. I played H2 on friends consoles back in the day and I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I can't actually kill as well as I can in H3. So I'm better at H3 than H2, so I enjoy it more. However, I will always pick CE when given the opportunity. I feel there is less bullshit to deal with. If I die, I know it's probably because I was out-played. Not because someone had a power drain or regen in their back pocket. Also knowing that the better person will win makes me always push the envelope in CE whereas I'm hesitant in H3. That makes CE more fun for me and why I think I hated H5 so much during the beta.
  10. I really don't feel the need to buy H5. I might pick it up used, but my #Don'tBuyH5 is basically a "Don't buy it new" kind of thing. I don't support the new direction of Halo, thus I won't put money into the game. I'll give the money to the store selling it, because they profit from the resale of the games, but that's the only option I'll go with. If someone wants to buy it used and return it, then I'll pick it up to get the story, but I had about 0 fun with the Beta. I quit playing and didn't really miss it about halfway through the BR starts week. I was really hoping the BR Starts would make the game better, but I didn't have a team to go in with and playing solo was just a crap shoot. The only things that kept me playing until I quit was the hopes for BR Starts and the ranking system, but getting shit teammates because the system didn't match people that well made it impossible for me to enjoy the game. So with BR Starts not helping and a terrible skill matching system, I just gave up. I'll campaign the hell out of it so I can see what happens, but for once I'm actually not excited for Halo. The things Josh has said (dedicated servers for customs, weapon tunings, etc) make me a little excited for the series moving forward, but I'm just not excited about the game. If they launch another beta (which they said they probably won't) then I would probably play it to see if the changes made a difference, but with the complete focus on needing two players to take down one is just not what I want in any game. I get the teamwork focus, but I don't want a teamshot focus.
  11. So funny story, I was playing some GTA last night, looking to do some heists, and since my buddy and I needed two more, but couldn't find anyone, we decided to play some #IDARB (made by 343, or so I've heard). I go to join my friend, and as soon as I connect to his session, the game freezes and restarts. So I try again. Same thing. So we decided to try some Halo. We hop on MCC, go into Team Slayer, people pick H3 TS on some dumb map. The game refuses to load and it kicks us back to the lobby. So all in all, we tried to play two different games that 343 made, and both of them crashed/failed to load back to back to back, which wasted a total of ~10 minutes of my life. Thanks 343. I'm glad I ever gave you money for anything.
  12. I don't disagree, but the DMR and all weapons in H5 are easy as hell to use. The pistol is probably the hardest to use, but has less range, which means it would take the most skill to use. If you were to add the 3x zoom to CE, then there is no doubt that it would still make shots easier though. People who don't understand how to play the game will be stomped more so than they already are. As Logfish said, people don't move on HeH, but I really only run into that in 4v4 with really bad players. I'm not great, but I can move around. Adding incentives to move will get people to attempt to move. I won't argue that. I always try to make a push when weapons/powerups are spawning, but making the player able to shoot farther easier will make the game more standoffish. If there were no BRs in H2 and everyone had SMGs, then Lockout Slayer wouldn't have such standoffish battles between the two towers. It's the same principal. People would have to push strategically in order to get to their opponents. You being able to cross map people on HeH isn't as easy for the less skilled players as it is for many people on here. But I would prefer it stay that way because that means they would have to work at being able to aim consistently at that distance rather than being able to just zoom in closer. That's my gripe with Long Ranged weapons that aren't power weapons. That's the way I see it anyways. If you see it differently, I'm not understanding your stance.
  13. Considering we can't even get APIs to make a stat tracking app anymore, I doubt any 3rd party will be able to do anything of this magnitude for a long time. Maybe when H5 comes out, there will be something for that game, but I wouldn't count on it.
  14. I don't disagree that teamshooting isn't the way to go, but I feel that the tighter maps have always been preferred by most players when it comes to 2v2, 4v4, and having long ranged weapons on those maps aren't really great. I think the BR (with minimal spread) would be enough to accomplish this. I'm not saying that a single shot weapon wouldn't be better, but if the BR is a staple, then so be it, but I don't feel you need to be able to kill perfectly at all ranges. Part of what makes the sniper so deadly is the ability to brain people from without getting up close & personal. Making the DMR useful at long ranges means that it would have to suck at close range in order to balance it out, thus making it a mini sniper, which isn't really what Halo needs. The maps are already big enough as it is and having weapons that can reach longer distances isn't going to help make them any smaller. Also, if a Sniper is posted up with a sniper and not moving, that should be part of your communication with your team. You shouldn't be killing someone who has a power weapon every time. Yeah, if they suck with it, but with two equally competent players, the power weapon should win the majority of the time. So if I sniper can pick a few shots and keep moving around, then they should be rewarded. Calling out isn't necessarily useful for just teamshooting, but that is mostly what happens because of how the sandbox is. In CE, calling out where enemies are isn't always for teamshooting, it's for awareness more than not and it only has a pistol to ping snipers. The pistol doesn't have a ridiculous zoom on it either. It's a medium ranged weapon that can reach across the map. If you have the skill, you can kill someone at distance, which is what I was going for, but having multiple weapons that can basically give you the skill to reach across the map is one direction that I don't think the series needs. Imagine having a DMR on Hang Em High. Having a 3x zoom instead of a 2x. That would make the shots a lot easier, thus making people move around even less. That is my whole point. Sure map design must compliment the sandbox, but how much faith do you put in 343s Map design team to make good maps? They can't even make a decent Midship remake.
  15. This is a little off topic, but I feel 343 don't know what they are doing with the entire game. They know what they are going for, but they don't know how to do it. They are blindly grabbing at so many different things trying to piece together a game that is Halo, but new, and they can't figure it out, but they are close. It's really sad. The maps (some of them) are close to being decent, but they are ruined by being huge. The weapons play well, but they've put in to many redundant weapons and ruined them with SmartScope. Thrusters aren't bad, but they aren't the best because you can't shoot and it's only a defensive option. In the end, I'm not surprised that the maps are all pretty bad because 343 is trying to force in any mechanic they can, and no map I know can really support all the things they are searching for adding to the game.
  16. How did I misunderstand when you said that melees (fists) shouldn't deal friendly damage? I know a lot of your post was about just tweaking the threshold of certain betrayals and other things such as that, but I was specifically talking about removing any type of friendly fire. I agree that accidents happen, some betrayals shouldn't count like blowing up a Banshee and having it land on someone's face, but I disagree with removing any type of Friendly Fire. Ever since H4 came out, I have always hated the DMR/LR. I think the LR is a great concept and it was created/designed well, but I don't feel they don't fit into the Halo style of play and just create a more stagnant game. Most people, when they pick up a long ranged weapon (Sniper, DMR, LR), will sit back and just try to pick people off. They won't push forward, they won't engage and it every slayer game turns into some sort of standoffish match and as boring as watching Lockout Slayer if both teams are wielding Long Ranged weapons. The only reason I would have the BR vs another weapon like the DMR, is to prevent the Sniper from getting free kills. That's it. I feel the sniper should be the only Long Ranged weapon in the game. The pistol should resemble the CE pistol. Able to operate up close, but knock out the sniper zoom and the BR should operate in the grey areas. The close/mid range to the mid/long range. This would let the pistol, being the spawn weapon, be more effective at the more frequent ranges, but also be able to combat the BR effectively, even though it is tougher to use. On top of that, I would force everyone to spawn with the pistol and that's it. It seems really bare-boned, but it would allow the casuals to pick up an AR that actually is powerful like they have always wanted. Let the AR be a shredding machine. Not SAW shredding, but an up close weapon that can eat faces.
  17. Meh, I've seen some accidental back smacks happen that net me a kill and save my life. Granted, it's hilarious when it happens and it's not that often, but I don't feel like all weaponless melees need to be rid of FF. If you look at most things in relation to trolling/greifing... it's all situational. Normally there aren't any enemies within close proximity, multiple shots are aimed at a player, multiple melees have to connect, etc... Normally a friendly has to be hit more than once to kill, unless it's with a power weapon, so just put in an algorithm that takes those first things that are obvious into account and weigh them heavier towards the booting threshold. The difficulty comes with Rockets, Sniper, and other one hit kill weapons. If you betray someone with 1 sniper headshot across the map, it might have been on purpose, but then again, you can't apply the same parameters to the situation. It was only one hit, the friendly might have been engaged with an enemy, or a crazy ricochet bullet may have brained your teammate. Bad luck happens sometimes, with power weapons, so just don't weigh the act as heavily. Then you also have the people who keep their team mates weak if they are holding a power weapon and waiting for an enemy to finish them off. I'd rather see someone get some sort of penalty for constantly keeping their teammate one shot and not killing them than remove the thing that allows them to do so. Friendly fire can be a good/fun thing if it's not abused. So instead of removing the fun aspects of the game, just put things in place to prevent the abuse of them. Figure out ways that people abuse the mechanic and then implement a way to detect and enforce a penalty. It's sort of like a speeding ticket... Don't take away the fast cars from the people who enjoy them responsibly, just punish those who don't do it responsibly... Obviously you can't responsibly hit your own team mate, but you get the general idea.
  18. I was going to vote for Regret, but all the maps were terrible imo. Truth was too stretched out... Regret had way too much overlap (I like the vertical gameplay, but I felt like there was too much emphasis and they tried to just force everything together. Or maybe it was just the large focus on top mid and towers and lack of power weapons to push people out of those positions.), Weapon placements and the ability to camp outside and hold it down effectively as a team on Empire ruined the map for me since I had no more than one other person to coordinate with. And Eden is just bad. It has cool aspects, like dynamically moving parts, but I wish they were automatic rather than needing to shoot a trigger. I lumped the Breakout Maps into the same kind of category as the other forge maps, because I'm pretty sure I read/saw somewhere that they were made in a forge type thing or something like that. And since I don't feel they are legit "Maps" because they can be edited in an editor unlike Eden, Truth, etc... I wasn't going to cast a vote, but I ended up picking Trench because it was actually fun for me. It emphasized CQC but had long sight lines up top if you could shoot properly. It reminded me (sort of) like a smaller version of Hang Em High. It was my favorite of the two Breakout maps and I quit playing the beta before the other two forge maps were released. I just lost interest, so I can't comment on those two.
  19. Lol What would be cool is if they did have small "tutorials" about certain things that would add depth to the game. Like crouching when you fall in CE, idk if that was meant to be, but something like that would be nice to have and make it "deeper" than when in H2 you just jump from a high building and land with no consequence. I actually wouldn't have a problem with the Stabilizers they put in H5 is they were only used to save your ass from falling from high points. Maybe you couldn't shoot because you would be essentially saving your life with falling, but it would have the same effect as the crouch and no more of this stupid Hover Shoot crap. I hate that aspect of H5.
  20. I have a CE issue that I don't know if it really exists or not.... I play on Bumper Jumper, and when I get into 1v1 battles against people, sometimes we inevitably walk closer and closer and when they get close enough, I try to melee them with RB. If I'm shooting with a scoped weapon, most of the time it's the pistol, when I press RB, my weapon zooms in and I can't melee. I can't melee in scope and I have to try to get out of scope before I can melee. I didn't know if anyone else ever experienced this or not, but I'm starting to doubt my hands. I just need a little reassurance that I'm not losing my mind.
  21. Or CE 2v2 loading up and it still becoming a 3v1 or 3v2. I can see both sides of the argument though. Having something to strive for other than winning would be great, but when what you strive for gets screwed up so much, it won't discourage people from quitting anyways. I don't think adding ranks with the current state the game is in would deter quitting as much as people are saying. It would only discourage quitters from games that are actually good (good connection, equal team size, etc). That would be a relief, but at the same time, it wouldn't stop most of the quitting because games randomly end early and ranks reset randomly anyways. In the end, I don't think it would hurt to add them, but it doesn't make sense to add them at the same time because the game still has a lot of different problems for a lot of different people
  22. The fact that everything has to revolve around multiple people shooting the same person just baffles me. I know teamwork is important, but no one uses mics anymore. Unless you have a team of player to play with consistently, you aren't going to have fun. Casual players don't have full teams. They have 1-2 people max they play with whenever. So making the game so the casual players have fun, but then making them do things that aren't fun for them, like social interaction and coordination... I just don't get it. The more I hear and try to piece together, the less and less I really understand behind the mindset for the creation of this game. I get that the whole sprint is a mobility option and they wanted to expand on mobility.... fine, whatever. I feel that's a bad decision, but I understand it. I get that putting little holographic things on the sights of the gun are supposed to be on the Spartan Hud and it's "Lore".... again, I disagree with it, but I understand... Adding sprint and ADS, also for the sake of making it easier for the casual player to transition from other games, but then make the game highly competitive and require that to do your best, you have to play with and communicate with other players? I don't understand that. The majority of the XBL population doesn't even use the mic that comes with their system from what I've experienced. Most players play alone and are out for themselves, so now they are being taken out of their comfort zone, even though you've added things to put them in their comfort zone, which in the end won't work out that well..... And all this at the expense of pissing off the hardcore population that has been around since day 1.... That I don't understand. Maybe I'm reaching/misunderstanding something, but it's just... confusing.

Important Information

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