Jump to content

SaltyKoalaBear

Member
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Interesting take. Have you ever had the opportunity to play Halo 3 on LAN? I began my competitive infatuation with Halo during Halo 2. When I first started playing Halo 3, I absolutely loathed the game. That is until I played it more and more and began to realize it wasn't the game I used to love, but something new entirely. It had to be played differently on a fundamental level, and I grew to appreciate that. I won't apologize for the poor hit detection and other technical shortcomings, but I won't entirely condemn it for those things either. I admired how it stripped self centered play, and made players lean into there teammates more then any other Halo. The slow TTK really emphasized team shooting, player positioning and weapon/powerup control to a level that wasn't seen yet in previous Halo entries and I loved the team strats that evolved out of the ineffectiveness of players individual damage output. Snipers became your main slayers, and I loved how team roles and dynamics developed. Halo 3 was peek teamwork/team play Halo and nothing will take that away from it. It's definitely not for everyone, and I understand the psychological aspect of individuals that don't enjoy the feeling of being "powerless". But there is a high demand and player base for such games. The popularity of overwatch and league of legends speaks to this enough. Im glad Halo 3 existed, and that we can still play it on MCC but I don't think we need another repeat of the entry come Infinite.
  2. Which iteration of camo are you referring to? The main issue with H5's camo is the fact that it acts as more then just a " visual camoflauge" this is an issue with how the aim assist/sticky reticule of an opposing player interact with someone who has camo. Instead of Camo serving its primary function of granting a player visual camouflage, it also grants is user a secondary (even more powerful ability in my eyes)that effectively shuts off an enemy's ability to target you fairly by decreasing the aim assist/sticky to extremely low levels. This means the person using camo not only has the visual advantage in the fight, but also a mechanical aim assit/sticky reticule advantage... which acts as a pseudo-over shield. That's the problem in my eyes, not the actual visual camouflage. Im from the forge community, and I also design maps. MultiLockOn and Xandrith are very intelligent and creative designers but they are human and have there own issues understanding that there subjective preferences are not ALWAYS objective gold standards... as well as issues with self evaluation of there own designs and others. Interestingly enough, many of there maps (not all) completely hinge on power-ups in order to prevent stagnation and camping.. I'm in the camp that believes maps can be unique and follow there own set of rules and standards depending on the design goal for the map and the identity you want the gameplay to hold. That means if you wish to design a map that doesn't hinge on power weapons/pickups being needed to promote movement, all the power to you and be aware of that goal the entire design process so that your final design reflects this intent. I also believe it to be viable to design with the idea and intent that powerweapons/pickups will be the primary resource that drives player movement. Neither of these ideas/stances are flawed in and of themselves... its all about the application and intent of the designer and the audience they are trying to target. Raw map geometry itself is a "resource" as its territory essentially, just as a power weapon/pickup is a resource. Slayer is primarily resource/territory control. When gunskill is equal, those that most effectively use and control the territory and resources will win. I personally prefer maps in which the geometry is the primary resource that promotes player movement, but this doesn't by any stretch of the imagination mean this style of design is "objectively better". Its a subjective preference, and its important to understand that.
  3. The problem with the pieces is the high polygon count that makes up there geometry. Simpler objects, with more complex textures would improve frame-rate issues. So unfortunately a simple patch cannot do that, they would need to actually create all new geometry for the objects which they wont do
  4. I just fcking hate these maps and the human worms that feed off there s h i t t y carcasses. My whole forge career has culminated into this cold bitter hatred and you purely fat deserve to die. Now is the time for vengeance and not one of these maps is worth saving.
  5. Fixed. Honestly, and with all due respect, does anyone "forge" with the hopes there map will have any shelf life, much less be put on the shelf at all? Its a sad truth of the current state of halo, but there just inst a demand for forged maps amongst the almost non existent h2a custom community If anything, a 2v2 may be your best bet as it requires considerably less people to play. I would hate to see a map design/build compromised into something lesser as to hit a target audience that just isnt there. DO what feels right for the map, if 2v2 fits the bill, than go for it. I do like your forerunner architecture and with 2v2 size maps, you could explore it more without the fear of running into framerate/perfomance and budget issues. Just my 2 cents
  6. For every action there is an equal an opposite reaction. With FF turned on or off the Meta and Strategy's of the game are deepened but in differing respects. I for one prefer my Ranked/ Non Social Halo with FF turned on and my Non Ranked/ Social Halo with FF turned off. Likewise, there is a reason why no radar TS is good for ranked team playlists and not so good for Social team playlists.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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