Jump to content
CyReN

Halo Infinite Discussion

Recommended Posts

My thoughts on Bungie, and the notion of them making Halo again.

 

 

 

 

This shit is great.  How many more do you have?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The final result is still varied speeds that would have to be accounted for in sandbox balancing and map design.

 

No Sprint, 1, Universal constant speed is literally all we need. We don't need to reinvent the wheel. 

 

Would it though? If it activates on a 3 second tick which resets when you get shot and is always affected by stopping power, escapability isn't an issue.  You can't "turn it on" like you can with sprint whenever you want. You wouldn't tune weapons around it since after first shot they would get dropped to base movement speed. You only use this for maps that are already big.  Hell, even if this were in arena, a 3 second lead-time would basically mean it would never activate.  You wouldn't make arena maps bigger to accommodate for something that takes so long to start and people get knocked out of.

 

To be clear, i am not saying i want this.  I think a single base movement speed is all you need BUT I still want to throw ideas out there for the sake of argument.  Would this be preferable to Sprint?  I think that obviously it would.

 

Why do people keep trying to make sprint okay?

lol im not. It's merely a thought experiment and quite frankly, damage control.  What are the odds that Sprint will be removed entirely?  Basically 0, lets be real.  While total removal would certainly be preferable, it never hurts to think of alternatives.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

This shit is great. How many more do you have?

I recorded 7 total but I might not put up a couple of them. There will be at least 2 more,

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Why do people keep trying to make sprint okay?

 

I've grown to really not like this question. The reality is that Halo Infinite is still being made by 343, and not us. 

 

Like, it's been 8 years. 343 likes Sprint. We haven't removed Sprint from Halo. They've done everything except make Sprinting drain health just to 'balance' the mechanic. As much as I hate putting a band-aid on things, the community usually end up coming up with better ones than 343, which I feel indicates just how much we haven't explored the options presented.

 

Compromise doesn't usually make good games, but when it's done well good things have come from it in the past. I just don't get why it's seen as admitting defeat to have some self-awareness to weigh your options and develop a fail-safe, and at least push to make Sprint less awful, rather than continue ramming your head against a brick wall.

 

I would still be playing Halo 5 if Sprint somehow didn't slow every aspect of the game down and make maps so much larger. That's being honest. If Sprint received serious changes, and everyone pushed for it, like letting you shoot and not being unlimited, and desprint would functionally have use for a change instead of combining it with shield delay for no reason, I would mind the mechanic (and the game itself) significantly less.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, thrust bothers me so much more than sprint. H4 Legendary settings were still pretty fun, even if they are inferior to previous Halos. Thrust is jarring and annoying to play against, it can erase bad plays better than sprint can (especially with stopping power on sprint), and it fucks up the weapon sandbox. And when thrust is included in the movement salad that is Halo 5, it affects map design almost as much as sprint.

 

Don't get it twisted, sprint still sucks. Thrust just sucks more.

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

I've grown to really not like this question. The reality is that Halo Infinite is still being made by 343, and not us. 

 

Like, it's been 8 years. 343 likes Sprint. We haven't removed Sprint from Halo. They've done everything except make Sprinting drain health just to 'balance' the mechanic. As much as I hate putting a band-aid on things, the community usually end up coming up with better ones than 343, which I feel indicates just how much we haven't explored the options presented.

 

Compromise doesn't usually make good games, but when it's done well good things have come from it in the past. I just don't get why it's seen as admitting defeat to have some self-awareness to weigh your options and develop a fail-safe, and at least push to make Sprint less awful, rather than continue ramming your head against a brick wall.

 

I would still be playing Halo 5 if Sprint somehow didn't slow every aspect of the game down and make maps so much larger. That's being honest. If Sprint received serious changes, and everyone pushed for it, like letting you shoot and not being unlimited, and desprint would functionally have use for a change instead of combining it with shield delay for no reason, I would mind the mechanic (and the game itself) significantly less.

 

Compromise is lose-lose. Nobody gets what they want. 343 "compromised" with classic Halo fans who despised the armor abilities system (choose which one of these six game-breaking upgrades you want to spawn with) by implementing equal starts... and giving everyone a set of six game-breaking upgrades. That turned out great, huh? Hell, they already compromised with sprint after people "pushed for changes" by disabling shield recharge, which accomplished nothing.

 

Shit, the entirety of Halo 5 is compromise.

 

WE CAN DROP THE FLAG GUYS!! ... oh but flagnum still exists

THEY'RE MAKING WAY MORE MAPS THIS TIME GUYS!! ... oh but half of them are "remixes" of each other

CHECK OUT OUR UBER-COMPETITIVE NEW GAME MODES STRONGHOLDS AND BREAKOUT ... hi land grab, hi elimination, wait no koth, oddball, or assault?

WAIT TILL YOU SEE OUR MUCH-IMPROVED FORGE!! ... two months after launch, and you can't use it offline

YOU CAN PLAY WITH BLUE TEAM IN CAMPAIGN GUYS!! ... oh but you can't trade weapons with them and their AI is horrific

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

I've grown to really not like this question. The reality is that Halo Infinite is still being made by 343, and not us. 

 

Like, it's been 8 years. 343 likes Sprint. We haven't removed Sprint from Halo. They've done everything except make Sprinting drain health just to 'balance' the mechanic. As much as I hate putting a band-aid on things, the community usually end up coming up with better ones than 343, which I feel indicates just how much we haven't explored the options presented.

 

Compromise doesn't usually make good games, but when it's done well good things have come from it in the past. I just don't get why it's seen as admitting defeat to have some self-awareness to weigh your options and develop a fail-safe, and at least push to make Sprint less awful, rather than continue ramming your head against a brick wall.

 

I would still be playing Halo 5 if Sprint somehow didn't slow every aspect of the game down and make maps so much larger. That's being honest. If Sprint received serious changes, and everyone pushed for it, like letting you shoot and not being unlimited, and desprint would functionally have use for a change instead of combining it with shield delay for no reason, I would mind the mechanic (and the game itself) significantly less.

Whether it's due to ego or ignorance or executive oversight, 343 doesn't display any signs of appreciation for the original halo formula that made it stand out and made it a classic. Being okay with some form of sprint in the game is being okay with erasing good halo gameplay. I don't see any way around that. Hitting a button to run full speed instead of strictly moving the left joystick all the way forwards is not halo and never will be. Reach/4/5 never have and never will do 1/2/3 numbers and what is one distinct feature not present in 1/2/3 that is a staple of reach/4/5?

Share this post


Link to post

I don’t know if I would prefer infinite sprint, but I hate having to spam a button just to move faster. It makes the experience a chore. It’s also a big reason why I prefer Quake to Unreal Tournament, because strafejumping/bunnyhopping feels way less ADHD than constantly dodging. Same reason I hate sprint/thrust/slide in Halo 5.

 

Honestly, once you learn how to strafejump, every other movement system feels braindead and repetitive. Might as well just have basic movement. I know this post isn’t remotely constructive but I’m not at that point yet, still in vent mode.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don’t know if I would prefer infinite sprint, but I hate having to spam a button just to move faster. It makes the experience a chore. It’s also a big reason why I prefer Quake to Unreal Tournament, because strafejumping/bunnyhopping feels way less ADHD than constantly dodging. Same reason I hate sprint/thrust/slide in Halo 5.

 

Honestly, once you learn how to strafejump, every other movement system feels braindead and repetitive. Might as well just have basic movement. I know this post isn’t remotely constructive but I’m not at that point yet, still in vent mode.

 

Moving around quickly in Titanfall might be the most rewarding feeling in FPS games. Quake is a better game all around, but the movement skillgap in Titanfall is unreal.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Moving around quickly in Titanfall might be the most rewarding feeling in FPS games. Quake is a better game all around, but the movement skillgap in Titanfall is unreal.

Pinball sucks breh.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, thrust bothers me so much more than sprint. H4 Legendary settings were still pretty fun, even if they are inferior to previous Halos. Thrust is jarring and annoying to play against, it can erase bad plays better than sprint can (especially with stopping power on sprint), and it fucks up the weapon sandbox. And when thrust is included in the movement salad that is Halo 5, it affects map design almost as much as sprint.

 

Don't get it twisted, sprint still sucks. Thrust just sucks more.

 

I agree with alot of your points about Halo, but disagree here. Many high-level competitive games such as Fighting games, UT series, "there is more but my brain is blanking". feature an "evade" mechanic or dash mechanic along with much more complex movement chains just as wall-jumping and terrain sliding. It is essentially a counter-move for projectile fire, grenades, and a juke at the top of the strafe. Now in UT it doubles as a main staple of the movement system to gain momentum and dodge the many projectile fire weapons(ie Shock combo) that is featured in the game. However in UT, you are not forced to sheathe your weapon and thus lose your ability to make an offensive attack, in a way its more like jousting than evading in that sense. This allows it to be an offensive move, as well as a defensive one giving it the essential two-way balance that is integral to any type of Arena-shooter style encounter.

 

In Halo, as is the MAIN issue with sprint, it is almost purely a defensive move which in turn has the effect of slowing gameplay down, allowing mistakes to go unpunished which ends up feeling "cheap" to the player who worked so hard to get in the perfect killing window in order to kill his enemy before he can escape. This leads to unsatisfying games of cat-and-mouse where the mouse too often wins the encounter based on the poor implementation of these movement mechanics as one-sided, game slowing, defensive mechanics. However, if thrust was made to be more like a "joust-evade" like it is in UT and other titles, along with sprint being either eliminated or fixed in the same way to allow shooting while sprinting, the majority of the balance issues would be eliminated I believe and the essential balance of the "offensive-defensive" dynamic in an Arena shooter would be mostly restored or at least greatly improved.

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with alot of your points about Halo, but disagree here. Many high-level competitive games such as Fighting games, UT series, "there is more but my brain is blanking". feature an "evade" mechanic or dash mechanic along with much more complex movement chains just as wall-jumping and terrain sliding. It is essentially a counter-move for projectile fire, grenades, and a juke at the top of the strafe. Now in UT it doubles as a main staple of the movement system to gain momentum and dodge the many projectile fire weapons(ie Shock combo) that is featured in the game. However in UT, you are not forced to sheathe your weapon and thus lose your ability to make an offensive attack, in a way its more like jousting than evading in that sense. This allows it to be an offensive move, as well as a defensive one giving it the essential two-way balance that is integral to any type of Arena-shooter style encounter.

 

In Halo, as is the MAIN issue with sprint, it is almost purely a defensive move which in turn has the effect of slowing gameplay down, allowing mistakes to go unpunished which ends up feeling "cheap" to the player who worked so hard to get in the perfect killing window in order to kill his enemy before he can escape. This leads to unsatisfying games of cat-and-mouse where the mouse too often wins the encounter based on the poor implementation of these movement mechanics as one-sided, game slowing, defensive mechanics. However, if thrust was made to be more like a "joust-evade" like it is in UT and other titles, along with sprint being either eliminated or fixed in the same way to allow shooting while sprinting, the majority of the balance issues would be eliminated I believe and the essential balance of the "offensive-defensive" dynamic in an Arena shooter would be mostly restored or at least greatly improved.

Improved? Certainly, but it’s a low bar. I don’t think a thrust mechanic will ever work well with Halo. A huge reason is the aim assist balance, as Hard Way mentioned. Let’s say you have the auto aim balanced perfectly for the strafe. Now you add thrust and have two choices: 1) change nothing; 2) increase auto aim to accommodate the effectiveness of thrust.

 

If you don’t increase auto aim, thrust is now practically guaranteed to let you dodge a shot for free. At best, the firefight is now just prolonged artificially as both sides dodge a shot for free. At worst, this compounds the problem of thrust used as an escape option because it makes you far too hard to hit. If you increase auto aim (as they did in H5), you mitigate the escaping issue but now have invalidated the basic strafe. Unless thrust recharges insanely fast, you put players at a massive disadvantage in 2v1s, not to mention completely changing the rhythm of Halo’s “joust” (a term used by a 343 designer in one of the vidocs) to revolve around one singular mechanic rather than a variety of strafing techniques and mixups. Strafing in Halo 5 is literally defined by how and when you use thrust, it’s ridiculous. And thrust’s massive importance for both strafing and general map movement really highlights how modern Halo is all about tradeoffs between movement and action, whereas the defining aspect of classic Halo was the unity of the two.

 

I could go on and on. I really don’t like the mechanic and I don’t see how similar mechanics in other games justifies its inclusion in Halo.

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

If thrust had half the range, lower speed and maybe a faster cooldown to compensate I could live with it. Similar to how the delta between sprint speed and base speed was nerfed, we need to lower the delta between thrust and strafe speed and range. Oh and allow shooting while thrusting already. This would allow us to return to CE/H3 levels of aim assist and magnetism (lol like 343 is ever going to do this).

 

 

As for sprint, I think adding Apollos suggestion but only visually could work. Increased weapon sway and adding the wooosh lines on the HUD after a few seconds of moving forward would do the trick. Couple that with an increased FOV across the board and a BMS increase and we're set.

Share this post


Link to post

Compromise is lose-lose. Nobody gets what they want. 343 "compromised" with classic Halo fans who despised the armor abilities system (choose which one of these six game-breaking upgrades you want to spawn with) by implementing equal starts... and giving everyone a set of six game-breaking upgrades. That turned out great, huh? Hell, they already compromised with sprint after people "pushed for changes" by disabling shield recharge, which accomplished nothing.

 

Shit, the entirety of Halo 5 is compromise.

 

WE CAN DROP THE FLAG GUYS!! ... oh but flagnum still exists

THEY'RE MAKING WAY MORE MAPS THIS TIME GUYS!! ... oh but half of them are "remixes" of each other

CHECK OUT OUR UBER-COMPETITIVE NEW GAME MODES STRONGHOLDS AND BREAKOUT ... hi land grab, hi elimination, wait no koth, oddball, or assault?

WAIT TILL YOU SEE OUR MUCH-IMPROVED FORGE!! ... two months after launch, and you can't use it offline

YOU CAN PLAY WITH BLUE TEAM IN CAMPAIGN GUYS!! ... oh but you can't trade weapons with them and their AI is horrific

 

Halo 5 was not a compromise. It was a convenient strawman of what fans of original Halo like, going off of a small group of pro players with vastly different individual opinions, which 343 used to justify whatever nonsense they wanted to be in the game. It was a middle finger to people that prefer how Halo used to play in basically every way and all they attempted to do was mask that with the entire pro scene.

 

That must be where we differ. I just did not view Halo 5 as a 'compromise'. There's almost nothing there that caters to me. Actually it's probably the worst value out of any game in the series in terms of what I enjoy in a Halo game.

 

As far as I'm concerned they haven't even TRIED to compromise yet.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Would it though? If it activates on a 3 second tick which resets when you get shot and is always affected by stopping power, escapability isn't an issue. You can't "turn it on" like you can with sprint whenever you want. You wouldn't tune weapons around it since after first shot they would get dropped to base movement speed. You only use this for maps that are already big. Hell, even if this were in arena, a 3 second lead-time would basically mean it would never activate. You wouldn't make arena maps bigger to accommodate for something that takes so long to start and people get knocked out of.

 

To be clear, i am not saying i want this. I think a single base movement speed is all you need BUT I still want to throw ideas out there for the sake of argument. Would this be preferable to Sprint? I think that obviously it would.

 

lol im not. It's merely a thought experiment and quite frankly, damage control. What are the odds that Sprint will be removed entirely? Basically 0, lets be real. While total removal would certainly be preferable, it never hurts to think of alternatives.

This sounds like the approach Epic was taking with UT before ultimately mixing the idea.

 

The question I ask is Cui Bono? Would the pro-sprint crowd enjoy the mechanic if it takes so long to trigger and can so easily be negated? If not, why include it? It certainly won’t do anything for the anti-sprint crowd. And will still serve to add a layer of complexity for players and designers alike w/o a corresponding layer of actual depth.

 

I think that the best solution for this “problem” is do accept that having two Base movement speeds is a fundamentally flawed. Then instead of pushing “no-sprint” we should push for “always-sprint, with no combat penalties” - Do all the work to create a great sense of, but never remove a player’s ability to deal damage.

Share this post


Link to post

As for sprint, I think adding Apollos suggestion but only visually could work. Increased weapon sway and adding the wooosh lines on the HUD after a few seconds of moving forward would do the trick. Couple that with an increased FOV across the board and a BMS increase and we're set.

 

Ideally this is exactly what i would do.  Make the FoV a respectable 90 all the time, increase BMS a bit, add some animation and particle effect stuff that ramps up for a few seconds the longer you hold forward but doesn't actually change your top speed.

 

My whole point even positing an idea for a "second" base movement speed is because pragmatically, if we want our voices to be heard we need to offer ideas that are more nuanced than "Remove it entirely or your wrong".  Everybody and their mothers know why sprint is bad and im sure people at 343 have read a thousand sound arguments why thats the case.  Hopefully they take it to heart and just axe the shit but if they are dead-set on having some sort of zoomy zoomy mechanic it doesn't matter how sound the no sprint arguments are, you're basically arguing with a wall at that point.  Having an arsenal of shit thats "not nearly as bad" is still a good exercise to go through.

 

Hell, it very well could just add more evidence to the "sprint is bad" argument.  If all the alternatives sound just as bad or clunky.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Improved? Certainly, but it’s a low bar. I don’t think a thrust mechanic will ever work well with Halo. A huge reason is the aim assist balance, as Hard Way mentioned. Let’s say you have the auto aim balanced perfectly for the strafe. Now you add thrust and have two choices: 1) change nothing; 2) increase auto aim to accommodate the effectiveness of thrust.

 

If you don’t increase auto aim, thrust is now practically guaranteed to let you dodge a shot for free. At best, the firefight is now just prolonged artificially as both sides dodge a shot for free. At worst, this compounds the problem of thrust used as an escape option because it makes you far too hard to hit. If you increase auto aim (as they did in H5), you mitigate the escaping issue but now have invalidated the basic strafe. Unless thrust recharges insanely fast, you put players at a massive disadvantage in 2v1s, not to mention completely changing the rhythm of Halo’s “joust” (a term used by a 343 designer in one of the vidocs) to revolve around one singular mechanic rather than a variety of strafing techniques and mixups. Strafing in Halo 5 is literally defined by how and when you use thrust, it’s ridiculous. And thrust’s massive importance for both strafing and general map movement really highlights how modern Halo is all about tradeoffs between movement and action, whereas the defining aspect of classic Halo was the unity of the two.

 

I could go on and on. I really don’t like the mechanic and I don’t see how similar mechanics in other games justifies its inclusion in Halo.

What I like about thrust is that it adds more verticality to gunfights. In past Halos, jumping while in the middle of a gunfight often ends up being a bad idea because it puts you on a predictable trajectory you can't deviate from. It makes you an easier target. Because of that, jumping in the middle of a gunfight is much less common in those games than it is in H5, where you have a way of altering your trajectory in mid-air. 
 
In Halo 5, I often see people jumping when they've already used their thrust and don't have it available--which is a mistake because it puts them on a predictable trajectory just like in past Halos, but I understand why they do it. Jumping during a gunfight is more common in Halo 5--so common that it becomes habit. That makes me think the addition of thrust also adds a bit to the knowledge gap and a little more need for self-awareness/self-control. The whole "Don't jump while in a gunfight" rule no longer applies in Halo 5, it's now: "Don't jump in a gunfight WHEN you don't have thrust" instead, and that seems to be harder for people to remember and creates a habit that's hard to break.
 
I think a lot of the problems people have with thrust right now isn't with the mechanic itself but how it's implemented. Couldn't the increase of auto-aim necessary to kill a thrusting opponent be negated by a decrease in thrust's speed? I don't see why not.
 
So, if thrust is implemented in such a way that it doesn't force the devs to increase auto aim, that means the typical strafe would still have the same effectiveness as it always has. Right?

Share this post


Link to post

What I like about thrust is that it adds more verticality to gunfights. In past Halos, jumping while in the middle of a gunfight often ends up being a bad idea because it puts you on a predictable trajectory you can't deviate from. It makes you an easier target. Because of that, jumping in the middle of a gunfight is much less common in those games than it is in H5, where you have a way of altering your trajectory in mid-air.

 

There’s a simple solution to this: just increase the air control. Here are some reasons this is better than thrust.

• Can’t be abused to escape battles

• Can’t be abused to break map pathing, except if you incorporated some subtle trick jumps intentionally designed for it

• Doesn’t rely on a cooldown ability, so it feels like a natural enhancement and doesn’t put you at a huge disadvantage getting into back-to-back fights

• More subtle direction change makes aim adjustments less jarring and doesn’t overshadow strafing

• Much simpler input so you don’t feel compelled to claw or buy a modded controller

• I could go on.

 

In Halo 5, I often see people jumping when they've already used their thrust and don't have it available--which is a mistake because it puts them on a predictable trajectory just like in past Halos, but I understand why they do it. Jumping during a gunfight is more common in Halo 5--so common that it becomes habit. That makes me think the addition of thrust also adds a bit to the knowledge gap and a little more need for self-awareness/self-control. The whole "Don't jump while in a gunfight" rule no longer applies in Halo 5, it's now: "Don't jump in a gunfight WHEN you don't have thrust" instead, and that seems to be harder for people to remember and creates a habit that's hard to break.

 

I don’t see how this adds any depth to the game other than the helpless feeling of “my ability is on cooldown now I have to play the game completely differently and hope I don’t get wrecked by someone who just came off respawn.” People jump so much even without thrust because they’re hoping the momentary lapse in target acquisition causes their opponent to windmill because of the aiming system.

 

I think a lot of the problems people have with thrust right now isn't with the mechanic itself but how it's implemented. Couldn't the increase of auto-aim necessary to kill a thrusting opponent be negated by a decrease in thrust's speed? I don't see why not.

 

The problem is that thrust is fundamentally a different beast. It’s the only movement ability that can be used in every situation with absolutely no tradeoff. There’s never a time when using thrust puts you at a disadvantage—it’s straight-up better than any other strafing tactic. Jumping throws off your opponent’s aim at the cost of a predictable trajectory, and it’s best used in close range as a mixup. Crouching moves your head hurtbox really quickly at the cost of slowing movement, and it’s best used in close range. Thrust is good at every range and has no tradeoff other than the opportunity cost of using it a few seconds later. It’s a prime example of an overbearing mechanic.

 

So, if thrust is implemented in such a way that it doesn't force the devs to increase auto aim, that means the typical strafe would still have the same effectiveness as it always has. Right?

 

Not exactly. Looking outside the vacuum of your proposition, thrust still increases escapability and makes players move around the map faster, so map designers increase sightlines and open up areas to counteract thrust. The average engagement range increases, meaning opponents have to adjust their aim less to account for strafing. And a lower percentage of close-quarters engagements results in fewer viable strafing tactics. The expansion of maps just increases the reliance on thrust. This all boils down to the main idea in my post, which is that having two distinct speeds/accelerations will always result in something feeling off. You could decrease the delta between the two, much like with sprint, but it’s just a fact you can’t get rid of.

 

You might be thinking, “wow, this guy won’t come to a compromise on anything.” But that’s not true. Besides increasing air control, which would be sick, I’m a fan of the wall kick idea that I’ve been bringing up for the last couple years. Here it is.

 

Function

• Press jump while airborne in contact with a wall

• A wall kick instantly redirects your movement perpendicular to that wall to be equal to base movement speed

 

Benefits

• Doesn’t introduce a separate speed

• Can’t be used for escape or to break map pathing

• Situational rather than omnipresent/overbearing

• Doesn’t require an extra button that clutters the control scheme

• Improves the utility of jumping in fights

• Doesn’t require a cooldown timer

 

Hm, same benefits as increasing air control. I wonder if combining the two would make for a genuine improvement to Halo that doesn’t divide the community yet again....

  • Upvote (+1) 7

Share this post


Link to post

I had this dream where there was a modern shooter where when you aimed, you didn't slow down or have to stop, you still ran at the same speed. Additionally, my sights didn't take up 30% of screen space.

 

Then I realized I wasn't dreaming and I was playing Halo 3.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I had this dream where there was a modern shooter where when you aimed, you didn't slow down or have to stop, you still ran at the same speed. Additionally, my sights didn't take up 30% of screen space.

 

Then I realized I wasn't dreaming and I was playing Halo 3.

Oh, I thought that you were talking about Doom 2016.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, I thought that you were talking about Doom 2016.

 

Mmmmmmm. Doom 2016. Good game.

Share this post


Link to post

That must be where we differ. I just did not view Halo 5 as a 'compromise'. There's almost nothing there that caters to me. Actually it's probably the worst value out of any game in the series in terms of what I enjoy in a Halo game.

 

That's the magic of a compromise. You get dick, and fans of the experience being compromised (Reach/H4) also get dick.

Share this post


Link to post

There’s a simple solution to this: just increase the air control. Here are some reasons this is better than thrust.

• Can’t be abused to escape battles

• Can’t be abused to break map pathing, except if you incorporated some subtle trick jumps intentionally designed for it

• Doesn’t rely on a cooldown ability, so it feels like a natural enhancement and doesn’t put you at a huge disadvantage getting into back-to-back fights

• More subtle direction change makes aim adjustments less jarring and doesn’t overshadow strafing

• Much simpler input so you don’t feel compelled to claw or buy a modded controller

• I could go on.

TryHardFan said the same thing a little over a year ago in a similar discussion on Waypoint. My only real concern is I could see it getting annoying if spammed. Imagine Spartan's making squiggly paths through the air over and over again like pieces in a game of tetris. Yuck. Maybe if thrust was shortened and slowed to the point that getting around maps with it wouldn't be any quicker than BMS and it could be fired off multiple times in mid-air but still require a cool down after it's used?

 

People jump so much even without thrust because they’re hoping the momentary lapse in target acquisition causes their opponent to windmill because of the aiming system.

That's a good point, that's probably true. If Halo 5 didn't have such screwy aiming, wouldn't this be a nonissue, though?

 

The problem is that thrust is fundamentally a different beast. It’s the only movement ability that can be used in every situation with absolutely no tradeoff.

You can be shot while thrusting but you can't shoot back. That's a tradeoff, but I'll admit it isn't a very significant one in Halo 5. The slower thrust is, however, the more significant that tradeoff becomes.

 

There’s never a time when using thrust puts you at a disadvantage—it’s straight-up better than any other strafing tactic.

That's not true. The best time to use thrust is when you're one-shot, to make that final headshot even more difficult to acquire. If you use it before you're one-shot, it's easier for your opponent to continue damaging you at the most efficient rate because he's still whittling away at your shields so he only needs to keep hitting you in the body. And like I said, you can keep shooting your opponent while doing any other strafing tactic, but you can't shoot back while you're thrusting. The slower the act of thrusting is, the more likely you are to be punished for it.

 

Jumping throws off your opponent’s aim at the cost of a predictable trajectory, and it’s best used in close range as a mixup. Crouching moves your head hurtbox really quickly at the cost of slowing movement, and it’s best used in close range. Thrust is good at every range and has no tradeoff other than the opportunity cost of using it a few seconds later. It’s a prime example of an overbearing mechanic.

Another drawback to thrusting is it's often more predictable than the initial moves of any given typical strafe pattern. Looking at a player, there's no prior sign that he's about to crouch. There's no prior sign that he's about to strafe one way or another. But in a Halo with thrust, if his feet leave the ground and you haven't seen him already use it, it's generally safe to assume he's going to thrust. You get an instant's warning upon seeing the player jump that he's about to thrust.

 

It's also often easier to guess what direction the player is going to thrust in since by thrusting into a wall he'd be shortening the amount of distance he puts between himself and the enemy's reticle (which is inefficient), so if there's a wall anywhere nearby on either side of him, you can guess he'll be thrusting away from it. Those two combined seem like another rather large tradeoff to me.

 

Not exactly. Looking outside the vacuum of your proposition, thrust still increases escapability and makes players move around the map faster, so map designers increase sightlines and open up areas to counteract thrust. The average engagement range increases, meaning opponents have to adjust their aim less to account for strafing. And a lower percentage of close-quarters engagements results in fewer viable strafing tactics. The expansion of maps just increases the reliance on thrust. This all boils down to the main idea in my post, which is that having two distinct speeds/accelerations will always result in something feeling off. You could decrease the delta between the two, much like with sprint, but it’s just a fact you can’t get rid of.

In comparison to sprint, I feel the difference between a map designed with thrust in mind to one without it would be negligible. Sprint is something you have constantly, thrust is something you can only use once every so often and there's no rule written that states it has to carry you as far as H5's does. Using only thrust wouldn't be as favorable for getting around a map without thrust-slide, so I imagine players would be even more inclined to save it for gunfights. If sprint is taken out of the equation, the average engagement range decreases by quite a long ways. By comparison, do you honestly think pushing it a little farther back out for thrust would be so significant? Do you honestly think it would push close-quarter engagements far enough away that those strafe tactics would be deemed ineffective? I don't. Not even close--not with how effective I've seen those same tactics be in Halo 5, which already has ridiculously bloated maps thanks to sprint.

 

In the end, it has to do with whether or not the mechanic's upside is worth the downside. Sprint obviously isn't worth it because everything beneficial it brings to the game (or at least to 4v4) is an illusion. Thrust seems a bit more complicated.

 

You might be thinking, “wow, this guy won’t come to a compromise on anything.” But that’s not true.

No no, you're clearly trying to find a compromise and I can appreciate that. Not being sarcastic.

 

Besides increasing air control, which would be sick, I’m a fan of the wall kick idea that I’ve been bringing up for the last couple years. Here it is.

 

Function

• Press jump while airborne in contact with a wall

• A wall kick instantly redirects your movement perpendicular to that wall to be equal to base movement speed

 

 

Benefits

• Doesn’t introduce a separate speed

That's actually part of the problem with it. Because it doesn't change speed from BMS, there's little incentive to actually use it. You'd be thrown into a predictable pattern just like normal jump. Combined with increased air control, maybe it would work. Oh--or maybe if it increased your speed vertically but not horizontally, so it launched you up in the air at a speed faster than BMS but couldn't be used to traverse maps any more quickly. Or maybe kicking yourself off a wall lets your Spartan ricochet off the ceiling in certain places like they already do on certain maps, so you pick up a faster-than-BMS-speed going down. It would be even more predictable than thrust currently is but would also serve the same purpose; the tradeoff would just be harsher for the thrust user.

 

Alone, though, I think it's usefulness would be extremely limited--to the point that it wouldn't be worth implementing. By kicking yourself off of a wall, you'd be launching yourself out into space just like you'd be doing with your typical jump. Because of that, the only players I could see using it are those who are already up a significant amount of shots on their opponent, and even then, only for the lulz. If you're weaker than your opponent, there's no reason to launch yourself out into the open, you'd be better off attempting to strafe your way out of the situation.

 

• Can’t be used for escape or to break map pathing

• Situational rather than omnipresent/overbearing

• Doesn’t require an extra button that clutters the control scheme

• Improves the utility of jumping in fights

• Doesn’t require a cooldown timer

 

Hm, same benefits as increasing air control. I wonder if combining the two would make for a genuine improvement to Halo that doesn’t divide the community yet again....

Potentially. Who knows.

Share this post


Link to post

@@Cavik

 

You seem to be missing the point of my suggested compromises. They’re meant to complement the basic movement, not overtake it. The wall kick would offer you more combat strafing options while having zero negative impact on the game. When you jump near a wall, you can kick off of it at any point, or choose not to. It’s situational enough so that it doesn’t happen all the time—just like crouching or jumping in a gunfight in the original Halo games. Is it “too situational”? That’s impossible to quantify, really. I personally think it would be a useful mechanic as is, but making the speed increase be twice that of base movement would probably still not break map pathing nearly as much as thrust, and using it for escape or faster traversal would still not be viable since the fastest routes run parallel to walls, not perpendicular.

 

Better air control would mean increasing it to something still less than grounded acceleration. It’s enough acceleration to alter your trajectory significantly without being ridiculous like the scenario you imagined. You might be able to accelerate to full base movement speed from a standing jump. I think the upper bound would be the ability to accelerate to full base movement speed by the time you reach the ground after running and jumping in the opposite direction. Obviously you playtest this so it feels good. For good measure, I’ll clarify that the air control would not make you go faster if you’re already at full base speed.

 

Thrust will always be inherently out of place in Halo. Anything that has a cooldown timer will feel that way. Anything that removes your ability to deal damage will feel that way. Halo is based on balancing factors that feel organic and situational. It’s like if 343 realized no-scopes with the Halo 4 beam rifle were too easy and, instead of removing the bullet magnetism, decided to “balance” it by adding a charge meter that only fills up when you scope in. Not only would this not solve the problem (the feeling of noscope hits being undeserved), it would restrict players and make the game clunkier, less fluid. What possible balance could there be to thrust that doesn’t feel as unnatural as the mechanic itself? Each band-aid solution has its own negative. Halo is about seamless combination of movement and combat. Thrust is about increasing the separation between movement and combat.

  • Upvote (+1) 7

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.