Jump to content
CyReN

Halo Infinite Discussion

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Arlong said:

So what exactly is wrong with h2a? I mean it’s basically the closest thing to classic halo we can get. Heck’s I wish the game would get the following tweaks 

1. Hit markers and indicators removed

2. Aim assist toned down and bullet mag

3. Buff all the weapons as the BR is just op as shit compared to everything else(gotta look out for the bad kids you know)

4. More maps would be nice

5. Optimization be nice as well, as FPS drops at times.

NO BUTTON COMBOS

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Was talking to one of my friends about other games and ended up pointing out that every time game reveals come out and the devs spend most/all of their time discussing the new technology/ai/whatever being implemented in games its basically a load of bullshit thrown in there because they have a lack of gameplay to speak on or its a result of devs being so disconnected from the player that they think it matters to them. I couldn't help but think of Infinite after I said it. Its a pro tip though when listening to any game reveal to just completely ignore or disregard anything mentioned in that vein because new tech means nothing for the end user and how its implemented is everything. So until they show you what they did with it you shouldn't be excited about or care about anything they say regarding possibilities or upgraded engines etc. People get hyped for nothing every time game reveals pull this shit and its never as cool as they make it sound.

  • Like (+1) 5
  • Fire (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Snipe Three said:

Was talking to one of my friends about other games and ended up pointing out that every time game reveals come out and the devs spend most/all of their time discussing the new technology/ai/whatever being implemented in games its basically a load of bullshit thrown in there because they have a lack of gameplay to speak on or its a result of devs being so disconnected from the player that they think it matters to them. I couldn't help but think of Infinite after I said it. Its a pro tip though when listening to any game reveal to just completely ignore or disregard anything mentioned in that vein because new tech means nothing for the end user and how its implemented is everything. So until they show you what they did with it you shouldn't be excited about or care about anything they say regarding possibilities or upgraded engines etc. People get hyped for nothing every time game reveals pull this shit and its never as cool as they make it sound.

Remember when bungie hyped up a super cool, super secret feature of halo 3 for weeks (months?) and it just turned out to be the water physics?. 

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, znot said:

I posted this vid back in oct and a lot of you didn't like the suggestions, but I wanna hear your thoughts about the portal 2 icon suggestion?

Icons on the map that point to where we should look for mic-less teammates

aad7a8fd0feea819f9133a10df84992f.png

 

b0c7dc2476706fc938482946aa3cef44.png

 

Only allow two icons at a time, and have a cooldown period so people aren't spamming it constantly, and only allowing two icons wont crowd up the screen. ( I guess it could be adjusted depending on the gametype size) BTB could have 3-4 icons that are smaller. The more icons used, the smaller they go so less screen real estate is taken up.

 

And Halo has had waypoints since CE so I don't see an issue adding them now.

Considering that in apex the average person doesn’t look towards where I mark, I think it’ll be useless in halo but not a bad addition since it doesn’t ruin anything.

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Squatting Bear said:

NO BUTTON COMBOS

To be fair those were unintended glitches that the community(competitive mostly) enjoyed. There’s a reason they weren’t added to the remastered edition. 

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Snipe Three said:

Was talking to one of my friends about other games and ended up pointing out that every time game reveals come out and the devs spend most/all of their time discussing the new technology/ai/whatever being implemented in games its basically a load of bullshit thrown in there because they have a lack of gameplay to speak on or its a result of devs being so disconnected from the player that they think it matters to them. I couldn't help but think of Infinite after I said it. Its a pro tip though when listening to any game reveal to just completely ignore or disregard anything mentioned in that vein because new tech means nothing for the end user and how its implemented is everything. So until they show you what they did with it you shouldn't be excited about or care about anything they say regarding possibilities or upgraded engines etc. People get hyped for nothing every time game reveals pull this shit and its never as cool as they make it sound.

This is true but not always. People do get excited when they hear a games being done on a new and more powerful engine since as a consumer that tells me 3 things

1. Better graphics, now sure graphics don’t make a game good but they help, it’s nice playing a game that’s beautiful to the eyes

2. Smoother gameplay, I expect a new engine would mean better optimization and overall performance.

3. More content, in infinite’s case they even said one of the reasons for slipspace engine was a content cap they hit on h5.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Arlong said:

To be fair those were unintended glitches that the community(competitive mostly) enjoyed. There’s a reason they weren’t added to the remastered edition. 

You sure about that?  If the discussion around the glitches was anything more than "What about the BXR?" "Copy a glitch? lol no" i would be shocked.

 

Its a good thing they didn't though because the BR is far too easy in the remaster.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Arlong said:

This is true but not always. People do get excited when they hear a games being done on a new and more powerful engine since as a consumer that tells me 3 things

1. Better graphics, now sure graphics don’t make a game good but they help, it’s nice playing a game that’s beautiful to the eyes

2. Smoother gameplay, I expect a new engine would mean better optimization and overall performance.

3. More content, in infinite’s case they even said one of the reasons for slipspace engine was a content cap they hit on h5.

That's the problem though. It doesn't actually guarantee the game looks better, plays more smoothly, or that they actually create more content. They're letting your imagination do their job for them. Its just possible that you could get those things assuming they do what they're supposed to do but you don't actually know they will (or how well they will) until it happens which in the case of 343 especially is pretty suspect. Its a good strategy and something bungie also did far more effectively because when you imagine something better you imagine what you want and what they actually produce will likely never measure up to whatever you dream up when they imply greatness. They essentially let you impress and hype yourself without actually giving you the details

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Letting the imagination of the user create hype by filling in gaps they have no info about is one of the older tricks in the book by now.
That's also why the "open world" trend works rather well, just let people dream up whatever they want when realistically you only release one game so it cannot match billions of hyped customers that hope there is a chance it's just like how they imagined it...

Most of the backend stuff doesn't directly effect what they do with the game, announcing they have 12v12 for example sounds nice on paper but if you play the BS that Warzone is you quickly see that it doesn't translate into an overall better game since it doesn't mean they are using stronger backend stuff for good design choices.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I always wanted warzone to be this chaotic battle. The AI would work a lot like the YELLOW faction from 2004s battlefront. They would only appear on certain maps like tatooine or kashyk.(Wookies and raiders) that would continually attack bases and even possibly capture them. Instead we got these set ai that more or less were easy point grabbers. 343 gave no real incentive to capture all 3 bases and destroy the core. Warzone also shouldn’t of allowed so many power items at once, there should of been a balance. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Arlong said:

I always wanted warzone to be this chaotic battle. 

I agree. I'd love to have seen it become this big half AI/half player focused battle. So you have Elites and Marines charging into combat with AI vehicles and aircraft all going nuts on each other around big objectives, pelicans and spirits dropping in reinforcements etc. All with real players mixed in to spice it up. I think of the opening to The Silent Cartographer but 40x the scale and constant.

But instead it's just discount BTB with broken powerups and a few AI that give you some points if you bullet sponge them long enough. 0/10.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Shekkles said:

I agree. I'd love to have seen it become this big half AI/half player focused battle. So you have Elites and Marines charging into combat with AI vehicles and aircraft all going nuts on each other around big objectives, pelicans and spirits dropping in reinforcements etc. All with real players mixed in to spice it up. I think of the opening to The Silent Cartographer but 40x the scale and constant.

But instead it's just discount BTB with broken powerups and a few AI that give you some points if you bullet sponge them long enough. 0/10.

Yeah this was the big problem for me. Boss ai could of been a thing but it just annoyed me how they were always in a set area. Regular AI should be “constantly” spawning whether elites or promethions, oh and to make it more fun, since in canon the elites and promethions hate each other, they’ll attack one another. 
Boss AI should show up every 5 minutes, and to make it interesting they attack ANY base and capture it. If your team doesn’t have a base the AI now attacks your core(enemy team still must hold all 3 bases for them to attack). 
this has several benefits.

1. Reduces farming, since the enemy team can’t just focus on you and vice versa

2. Creates less core destructions and goes back to the reduces farming since now the winning team can’t just hold you at your base with tanks and snipers.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just want a big, slightly lore-themed battle. BTB is where I'd go for PvP large scale but Warzone has so much potential to be a really cool "epic" experience rather than "lol get 50 points if you kill one of two elites that sit in a 10x10m square. Also people just spawn banshees at will."

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Shekkles said:

I just want a big, slightly lore-themed battle. BTB is where I'd go for PvP large scale but Warzone has so much potential to be a really cool "epic" experience rather than "lol get 50 points if you kill one of two elites that sit in a 10x10m square. Also people just spawn banshees at will."

Warzone is why we need 16v16 or 32v32 or he’ll even 50v50. 

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, Arlong said:

Warzone is why we need 16v16 or 32v32 or he’ll even 50v50. 

I mean we have no idea if that'd work at all. I'd need to see what they have in mind if we're gonna have player counts that high. Higher player count is usually not the answer. You can have "epic" without that many players.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Shekkles said:

I mean we have no idea if that'd work at all. I'd need to see what they have in mind if we're gonna have player counts that high. Higher player count is usually not the answer. You can have "epic" without that many players.

That’s true, but from experience in fortnite it’s pretty fun. 
I think 32 players could work mostly. 

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Shekkles said:

I mean we have no idea if that'd work at all. I'd need to see what they have in mind if we're gonna have player counts that high. Higher player count is usually not the answer. You can have "epic" without that many players.

I think Titanfall's Attrition mode has sort of the right idea in terms of making battles feel grand in scale, without overblown player counts.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, The Tyco said:

I think Titanfall's Attrition mode has sort of the right idea in terms of making battles feel grand in scale, without overblown player counts.

With the ambient battle in the background (there's a large space battle happening overhead) plus the large amounts of AI all fighting and interacting with the player (The Grunts always are impressed when you run past) plus the Reapers and such it certainly feels epic. I'd agree there 100%

My problem with Titanfall is that it is the messiah of "fun to use" but not "fun to have used against you". I have never been more frustrated at any game I actually like than Titanfall 2. Some sniper with camo kills you. Some really good player with the rocket takes you out and you can't hit them because they're pouncing around like a madlad. 

You're in a titan and you just get decked because they got their powerup first. I just... it is not fun to play against on any level. Fun to play as but not against.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Just thought of weapon balances in games and I believe every gun should be good, but some guns obviously better. Looking back at apex devs saying some guns should basically be trash, but I don’t agree. I sort of liked h5s original weapon balance, sure was a BR or dmr an upgrade? Yes but was this really that bad of a thing? It didn’t prevent the pistol from being effective, it didn’t prevent you from winning duals decently well when X player had a dmr or br, like in past games. I think we as halo players mostly hated these upgrades because the guns were just EASIER to use and were stronger which was the main problem. Simply some nerfs to AA wouldn’t be awful. People here talk about niche weapons, but isn’t the dmr having greater range means it’s a niche weapon? Heck’s that’s reason enough to pick it up. As for the BR? Ehhhhh that’s just nostalgia at this point. What I’m saying is, the h5 weapon balance was really good. I think what ruins it is the perspective of a halo competitive player.

1. Us mlg/hcs type of players enjoy halo for its precision weapon battles, mostly because we think/believe these take the most skill in halo compared to other weapons.

2. Seeing weapons that someone’s grandma could use being stronger or as strong as your spawning weapon is a bit of a tilt. 

now the Auto nerfs are acceptable, but all the precision weapon nerfs aren’t. The carbine, BR, dmr, come on these weapons suck. I think 343 should adopt a similar weapon balance into infinite, look we know they’re going to have all 4 precision weapons in the game because of nostalgia and probably give us the pistol again as the utility because it’s the weapon they can give the least range too. Heck’s one thing that I know would of satisfied people here was making the pistol 4sk. But then I ask would you have ever used the other weapons if this was the case? Idk about you but that’d of been a major upgrade making everything useless. Sometimes I think people exaggerated on the desired Nerfs because the pistol was weaker, comparing it to the past situations of enemy squad finding the brs and dominating, when that didn’t happen. Did it give people better chances at winning, sure, but in an arena game that’s not a bad thing. But we all know halo is about that utility weapon so people aren’t wrong for wanting a starting gun that’s stronger than guns on the map.

Share this post


Link to post

To me it's a rather simple case of having a utility weapon that shoots a single projectile in a straight line with TTK from 1 to 1.2 seconds.
The problem with the long TTK's 1.5+ seconds has always been that passive health regen makes it a teamshot fest and for example flanking 2 people they have enough time to turn around and shoot you before you can do much, it just nerfs the individual.
Now the faster TTK is what you build around, to prevent the game from being 99% kills with the utility weapon power ups/weapons should spawn more frequent and maps should be designed with enough items so it's hard for teams to control all of them at once, it also encourages more movement instead of sitting in a tower on Midship firing away at spawners. Currently we have maps with 2 weapons that both spawn rather slowly, they suck as a comeback mechanic, the team in control doesn't have to do much to get them if they are outslaying anyways. That's where the right maps could add a lot of depth imo.

And for other rifles and autos it's the same, you build around the main utility weapon but always ask yourself if the weapon in question is unique enough to shine in its own realm. That way you don't get shit like a sentinel beam that feels like an automatic weapon that shoots in a straight line because you would have noticed it needs another unique trait like increased knockback against players midair for example to make it a better defense weapon in objective gametypes.
Sadly this arena mindset of weapon roles doesn't seem to be what 343 applies to their games, instead they are going with the CoD-type shooter idea of having a ton of guns in the same class that differ very slightly so "people can use what fits them most" and you end up with 30 rifles with no memorable gameplay to them and 90% of them are trash to begin with. Don't get me wrong, for a game like CoD I can totally see this, esp if the weapon choices are based on existing weapons from the real world, but for Halo this is a shit concept if you ask me.

  • Like (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Warlord Wossman said:

That way you don't get shit like a sentinel beam that feels like an automatic weapon that shoots in a straight line because you would have noticed it needs another unique trait like increased knockback against players midair for example to make it a better defense weapon in objective gametypes.

KindlyPolishedBison-size_restricted.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I’d like to see playable Elites come back and have an Invasion-esque gametype with higher player counts and AI. Imagine. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The long ttk does make the games rather dull.  343 did good in h5 increasing the 1.5ttk of the past 11 years but they then added thrust and sprint to thwart it. I agree that a 1.0 kill time is a good compromise between ce and later. Its just a shame cause its so satisfying and fair that if rocket dude or sniper dude fucks up, that you can kill him. Even with a 1.0 thats enough time to dip. A 1.0 does allow more opportunities to kill people going from a to B tho. 
 

I also agree we dont need rehashed versions of guns that do essentially the same thing. If i was in charge i would make the h5 pistol with a clip of 12-16 the starting wep and a 4sk. .333 rof. The dmr, br, carbine, and light rifle would just be a skin of the pistol. All single fire, just a cosmetic skin. (I’d then sell skins other than that as mtx that are also unlockable through a grind). What sucked in h4 and even h5 to an extent is that u run out of ammo that u cant replenish. Id use the orange gun but then id have no weapon as my opponents all use br. 
 

 

The sentinel beam, concussion rifle, and grenade launcher are all fun weapons that should make a return with needed buffs. I do like the rail gun, its just needs to function like the spartan laser where u cant hold the charge. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Riddler said:

The long ttk does make the games rather dull.  343 did good in h5 increasing the 1.5ttk of the past 11 years but they then added thrust and sprint to thwart it. I agree that a 1.0 kill time is a good compromise between ce and later. Its just a shame cause its so satisfying and fair that if rocket dude or sniper dude fucks up, that you can kill him. Even with a 1.0 thats enough time to dip. A 1.0 does allow more opportunities to kill people going from a to B tho. 
 

I also agree we dont need rehashed versions of guns that do essentially the same thing. If i was in charge i would make the h5 pistol with a clip of 12-16 the starting wep and a 4sk. .333 rof. The dmr, br, carbine, and light rifle would just be a skin of the pistol. All single fire, just a cosmetic skin. (I’d then sell skins other than that as mtx that are also unlockable through a grind). What sucked in h4 and even h5 to an extent is that u run out of ammo that u cant replenish. Id use the orange gun but then id have no weapon as my opponents all use br. 
 

 

The sentinel beam, concussion rifle, and grenade launcher are all fun weapons that should make a return with needed buffs. I do like the rail gun, its just needs to function like the spartan laser where u cant hold the charge. 

Wait since when is 1.0 second kill time good? The freaking storm rifle on H5 has that and it's OP as hell.

 

Granted I looked up CE and that is about 1 second with a perfect 3 shot from a pistol. But how often do you land all perfect shots?

 

 

Are we saying all guns should have 1 second ttk or just precisions?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

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