Jump to content
CyReN

Halo World Championship 2017 Teams, Seeds, and Discussion‏

Recommended Posts

Watching the contra stream while waiting for Snakebite to get on and it's night and day. Contra talks shit against randoms while playing with his friends. That's why I support pros like Snakebite - mature and talented. 

 

I don't care if he's good or not, but he's certainly not likable. 

 

I agree.  This is my first time watching a substantial amount of a Contra stream, and while his shot is straight :fire: , the immaturity and people in chat talking at length about prescription drugs is really painful.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Change is not needed. I don't get why people keep thinking this. CS:GO is the perfect example, hell you could even use Starcraft.

How is cs:go a good example? That game was essentially a flop until a 1.5 years after it launched when they dropped the arms race update.

 

The idea that that games success is owed purely to NOT making changes is false. Otherwise,why would they have even bothered to make a new game?

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

What are y'all's thoughts on the thrust mechanism? Do you think it's a copout for strafing, or is it a legit mechanism but just imperfectly implemented in H5, or is it fine the way it is?

 

imo it could have a lot more depth. but I'm not 100% sure how. and it definitely does step on the toes of a good strafe, esp. in H5 when strafe accel is so low

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I have a hard time believing that Contra or Devon will ever be on a top 4 team again, they have bad attitudes and that is why most pros won't team with them. For all of H5 they've been teaming with either up and comers or semi pros who can't get top teams (like sr8 sick). 

  • Upvote (+1) 2
  • Downvote (-1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

How is cs:go a good example? That game was essentially a flop until a year after it launched when they dropped the arms race update.

 

The idea that that games success is owed purely to NOT making changes is false. Otherwise,why would they have even bothered to make a new game?

The gameplay itself was awful on launch.

 

Most CS players at that point and for a year onward stuck with CS 1.6.

Share this post


Link to post

/OPINION ALERT

 

 

People stopped playing this game when the gameplay changed.

That's not an opinion.

 

That is a fact.

 

The only opinion at play there has to do with correlation or causation.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

What are y'all's thoughts on the thrust mechanism? Do you think it's a copout for strafing, or is it a legit mechanism but just imperfectly implemented in H5, or is it fine the way it is?

 

imo it could have a lot more depth. but I'm not 100% sure how. and it definitely does step on the toes of a good strafe, esp. in H5 when strafe accel is so low

 

I think it's a poor, overpowered replacement for decent strafing (funny, because they seem to have cranked up bullet mag a ton to compensate anyway). It's an extremely easy defensive tool (thrust away when you fuck up and/or are down shots). It's a poor excuse to clutter up the control scheme even more. It compounds the problem with forward aggression and close range weapon balance (no need to use your brain when you can just sprint then thrust/thrust-slide into people with the shotgun/scatter/sword/storm). It contributes to the ability of players to fly all the way across maps in 2 seconds off spawn.

 

​I'm sure some people love it because of shit like "thrust canceling" and the handful of fucky, awkward movement "tech" you can do with it, but I would rather see things like a snappier strafe, some actual aerial control, and possibilities like wall kick or double jump than a free, instantaneous jolt in any direction. All of those mechanics could even use 343's surely beloved thruster aesthetic.

  • Upvote (+1) 8
  • Downvote (-1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

How is cs:go a good example? That game was essentially a flop until a year after it launched when they dropped the arms race update.

 

The idea that that games success is owed purely to NOT making changes is false. Otherwise,why would they have even bothered to make a new game?

Are you kidding me? Why has competitive counter-strike remained nearly the same for getting close to 2 decades? Source failed because hitboxes were a joke. CS:GO took a bit to take off again because people were either sour about playing Source or still playing 1.6. And they bothered to make a game to pretty much refresh the graphics and make more money.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Our very own Mikeface Killah is facing Contra now lol. 

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

The sales, population, and general sentiment towards Halo outside of its increasingly small communities speak for themselves. Former casual players of Halo respect it about as much as CoD and the number of longtime, hardcore fans they have alienated is significant. You know what you get from people who haven't been keeping up on Halo and aren't desperate for the series to be relevant again?

 

​"Oh, they're still making those games?"

 

"The last good Halo was Halo 3." (sometimes Reach)

 

​"Wow, Halo 5 fucking looks like CoD."

 

​They are not saying "omg thrust slides look soooo coooool!!!!1"

 

But yeah. That's, like, his opinion, man.

f7FdEdG.jpg

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

What are y'all's thoughts on the thrust mechanism? Do you think it's a copout for strafing, or is it a legit mechanism but just imperfectly implemented in H5, or is it fine the way it is?

 

imo it could have a lot more depth. but I'm not 100% sure how. and it definitely does step on the toes of a good strafe, esp. in H5 when strafe accel is so low

 

I personally don't hate thrust because it does allow players to poke a bit more and chase down players a bit more, I just wish it could be a more offensive tool rather than defensive. Maybe make it reset your CD on your shields like sprint does.

 

I think 343 did a good job balancing it in terms of the cool down and how powerful quickly and far it moves you. It is a million times better than the H4 version.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Are you kidding me? Why has competitive counter-strike remained nearly the same for getting close to 2 decades? Source failed because hitboxes were a joke. CS:GO took a bit to take off again because people were either sour about playing Source or still playing 1.6. And they bothered to make a game to pretty much refresh the graphics and make more money.

Had they not released the arms race update, no one ever would have moved to CS:GO. They were hovering around 25k concurrent players for a year (halo5ish numbers, mind you) Then it shot up to 300k over the following year once the community was able to profit from the in game economy. Are we just going to ignore the circumstance surrounding CS:Go's shift from an utter failure to a massive success.

 

Why did people eventually stop playing 1.6? Why by this new game if it was exactly the same?

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Had they not released the arms race update, no one ever would have moved to CS:GO. They were hovering around 25k concurrent players for a year (halo5ish numbers, mind you) Then it shot up to 300k over the following year once the community was able to profit from the in game economy. Are we just going to ignore the circumstance surrounding CS:Go's shift from an utter failure to a massive success.

 

Why did people eventually stop playing 1.6? Why by this new game if it was exactly the same?

Not true. Population, viewership and tournament scene was growing prior to the arms race update. I think SLTV got over 60k concurrent and people were buzzed as fuck. The arms race was a massive catalyst for people who had already bought the game to have a second look but the year or so of developer updates (Valve taking over the project) making the game not a sack of shit was a reason people stuck around.

 

People stopped playing 1.6 because it was yonks old. I was still getting games in 2012 but there comes a point where you're ready to board the next ship and with 1.6 having an active tournament life up until 2012 I think it was fair to say it 'had a good run'. Also I think what people are trying to get at here is the game being true to the core of the experience not necessarily a remake with updated graphics - weapon balance, economy, spray patterns, movement are all present but tweaked to meet a more modern vision.

 

OT- Fuck Source. 

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Had they not released the arms race update, no one ever would have moved to CS:GO. They were hovering around 25k concurrent players for a year (halo5ish numbers, mind you) Then it shot up to 300k over the following year once the community was able to profit from the in game economy. Are we just going to ignore the circumstance surrounding CS:Go's shift from an utter failure to a massive success.

 

Why did people eventually stop playing 1.6? Why by this new game if it was exactly the same?

A game can be very different, fresh and interesting without changing the gameplay.

 

CS GO is the perfect example. They found a way to make the new CS game something that offered a new experience for it's players without fundamentally altering the core gameplay.

 

Fundamentally altering core gameplay is the change that is most likely to yield negative results and yet it is the route most developers take.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Not true. Population, viewership and tournament scene was growing prior to the arms race update. I think SLTV got over 60k concurrent and people were buzzed as fuck. The arms race was a massive catalyst for people who had already bought the game to have a second look but the year or so of developer updates (Valve taking over the project) making the game not a sack of shit was a reason people stuck around.

 

People stopped playing 1.6 because it was yonks old. I was still getting games in 2012 but there comes a point where you're ready to board the next ship and with 1.6 having an active tournament life up until 2012 I think it was fair to say it 'had a good run'. Also I think what people are trying to get at here is the game being true to the core of the experience not necessarily a remake with updated graphics - weapon balance, economy, spray patterns, movement are all present but tweaked to meet a more modern vision.

 

OT- Fuck Source. 

So much this, especially the bolded.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Not true. Population, viewership and tournament scene was growing prior to the arms race update. I think SLTV got over 60k concurrent and people were buzzed as fuck. The arms race was a massive catalyst for people who had already bought the game to have a second look but the year or so of developer updates (Valve taking over the project) making the game not a sack of shit was a reason people stuck around.

 

People stopped playing 1.6 because it was yonks old. I was still getting games in 2012 but there comes a point where you're ready to board the next ship and with 1.6 having an active tournament life up until 2012 I think it was fair to say it 'had a good run'. Also I think what people are trying to get at here is the game being true to the core of the experience not necessarily a remake with updated graphics - weapon balance, economy, spray patterns, movement are all present but tweaked to meet a more modern vision.

 

OT- Fuck Source.

If that's what people were getting at i don't disagree. Any changes need to be respectful of the core experience, which is not how I'd describe any of the changes since CE honestly (though 2 and 3 were less egregious).

 

But that wasn't the argument. His argument was that change is unnecessary and that cs:go is proof.

 

the idea that change itself is an inherently bad or totally unnessisary thing is false. You'll be hard-pressed to find a single long running franchise that hasn't tweaked it's gameplay for modern sensibilities, especially on console, where players have much shorter attention spans.

 

Regarding cs:go's playerbase, no one was playing the game before arms race

 

Source: valve's own graph

http://m.imgur.com/gallery/VoOWnVv

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Watching the contra stream while waiting for Snakebite to get on and it's night and day. Contra talks shit against randoms while playing with his friends. That's why I support pros like Snakebite - mature and talented.

 

I don't care if he's good or not, but he's certainly not likable.

Dude he's joking lmao
  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Question where do you place H5 on the list of esports games? In terms of exposure, org interest, and money.

Main ones: 

LoL/Dota/Starcraft

CSGO

CoD

Halo

Gears

 

I'm sure I'm missing a big game but I just threw this together but I think Halo really is at the very bottom. Probably above gears but that's a toss up.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×

Important Information

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