Jump to content
CyReN

Halo Infinite Discussion

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Larry Sizemore said:

None. No more remakes.

But remakes happen and most likely will. Not a single cod as I’m sure some haven’t halo(idk about gears or battlefield not much experience there) hasn’t had a remake. It’s hard to make original maps people will like. Sometimes it’s good to bring maps people enjoyed from the previous game into the next. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Larry Sizemore said:

None. No more remakes.

Theres nothing wrong with remakes, the problem lies in what we had in the early days of Reach and 4, where the only viable maps were the remakes because every other map was just awful. In Reach, The Pit and Sanctuary were carrying a lot of the weight because we couldn't survive with just Zealot and Countdown.

  • Fire (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Reamis25 said:

But remakes happen and most likely will. Not a single cod as I’m sure some haven’t halo(idk about gears or battlefield not much experience there) hasn’t had a remake. It’s hard to make original maps people will like. Sometimes it’s good to bring maps people enjoyed from the previous game into the next. 

> B-b-but its really hard to make original maps!!!

Holy shit. Youtube-tier response.

4 hours ago, Knighty Knight said:

Some maps need to stay in Halo. 

That's why forge exists.

19 minutes ago, -DeucEy- said:

Theres nothing wrong with remakes, the problem lies in what we had in the early days of Reach and 4, where the only viable maps were the remakes because every other map was just awful. In Reach, The Pit and Sanctuary were carrying a lot of the weight because we couldn't survive with just Zealot and Countdown.

Remakes are boring and they stopped being a cute tradition after Halo 3. If content creation is up to par, then there is absolutely no reason for the studio to waste resources on remade maps that 99% of the population already knows.

Also Pit and Sanc played like garbage in Reach. Neither map did that game any favors at all. Countdown and Zealot were more bearable.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Larry Sizemore said:

Remakes are boring and they stopped being a cute tradition after Halo 3. If content creation is up to par, then there is absolutely no reason for the studio to waste resources on remade maps that 99% of the population already knows.

Also Pit and Sanc played like garbage in Reach. Neither map did that game any favors at all. Countdown and Zealot were more bearable.

Remakes are boring to you. Pit and Sanc played like garbage to you. You're over-exaggerating the use of resources that a studio will allocate to remaking a map because it infers that the studios are not making original maps -- which every single Halo game as had, they just played very poorly which is why the competitive community hasn't used them. Pit and Sanc did not play like "garbage", they actually played significantly better than the alternatives that apparently you seem to prefer based on your argument, such as:

  • Powerhouse
  • Reflection
  • Sword Base (which many would argue is probably the worst Halo map of all time)
  • Condemned
  • Anchor 9
  • The Cage (a forge map, but an original release in the game)

Need I go on? I would love to see a tournament ran in Halo Reach with zero forge maps and see how much fun people have outside of Zealot and Countdown.

Obviously we want good quality, original maps. But having quality original maps does not mean that remakes are "boring" because we already know them nor does it mean we should absolutely never have them; it actually accomplishes the opposite. It makes players want to play them based on the fact that they already know them, it's fun assuming the map plays well. Chill Out was obviously an amazing map in Halo CE, but Cold Storage was awful in Halo 3. It just means that we need maps that fit the style of gameplay. However, I personally think 343's choice in remakes could be a little better (ala Relic > Remnant - which is probably the dumbest remake decision they could have ever made).

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, -DeucEy- said:

Remakes are boring to you. Pit and Sanc played like garbage to you. You're over-exaggerating the use of resources that a studio will allocate to remaking a map because it infers that the studios are not making original maps -- which every single Halo game as had, they just played very poorly which is why the competitive community hasn't used them. Pit and Sanc did not play like "garbage", they actually played significantly better than the alternatives that apparently you seem to prefer based on your argument, such as:

  • Powerhouse
  • Reflection
  • Sword Base (which many would argue is probably the worst Halo map of all time)
  • Condemned
  • Anchor 9
  • The Cage (a forge map, but an original release in the game)

Need I go on? I would love to see a tournament ran in Halo Reach with zero forge maps and see how much fun people have outside of Zealot and Countdown.

Pit and Sanc played like garbage. So did every other map in that list sans Powerhouse. So what's your point again? (Sanc in particular is the herpes of Halo, just an absolute piece of shit map that keeps on resurfacing just when you hope it's finally gone.)

Nobody had fun in Reach period. Nobody liked forge roulette and the avalanche of forged H2/H3 remakes either. The fact that absolutely fuckall has happened with competitive Reach since it was added to MCC is proof. The only reason it was ever tolerated is because MLG stopped supporting Halo 3 and there were no other options for online Halo at the time, and people evidently were too weak to just say the hell with it and go back to Halo 3 on their own.

Quote

Obviously we want good quality, original maps. But having quality original maps does not mean that remakes are "boring" because we already know them nor does it mean we should absolutely never have them; it actually accomplishes the opposite. It makes players want to play them based on the fact that they already know them, it's fun assuming the map plays well. Chill Out was obviously an amazing map in Halo CE, but Cold Storage was awful in Halo 3. It just means that we need maps that fit the style of gameplay. However, I personally think 343's choice in remakes could be a little better (ala Relic > Remnant - which is probably the dumbest remake decision they could have ever made).

There isn't a single remake that has played better than its original map. Not one. (No, Beaver Creek is not better than Battle Creek, because I know that shit is coming from somewhere.) Most of them flop. The absolute best you can hope for is a 1:1 remake in a similar game that simply holds up (Midship-Heretic). But then again, people are highly likely to just cling to those maps and refuse to give any original map its fair shake. As shown in Reach and H4 big team battle which, thanks to map voting, were nothing but Hemorrhage and Valhalla over and over and over again.

I repeat, if content creation tools are up to far (they were in Halo 5 and seeing as Tom French is still around last I heard, they should be in Infinite), there is zero reason for devs to piss away valuable time and resources on maps that everyone has already seen and have already run their course. It's not 2012 anymore, forgers don't have to rely on gray and blue forerunner blocks and some lighting tricks to try and make a convincing Midship or Turf.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Larry Sizemore said:

> B-b-but its really hard to make original maps!!!

 

Way to quote me wrong. I said original maps people will “like” I never said making original was difficult. 
you’re missing the point. Why did people choose hemorage or ragnarok in h4? Because the other maps didn’t play as well. I’d debate that pit and sanctuary played quite well in reach. The reach spawn system definitely was better for it. In h3 cold storage situation it was possibly the obvious superior movement and lack of 60 second power up spawns and weapons that did the trick.

  • WutFace (+0) 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's just Larry having opinions again. Ignore him, and he'll go away.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I sure hope that forge can give us a dev map feel. I’ll never understand people’s hatred for playing on them when some play amazing 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Larry Sizemore said:

No, Beaver Creek is not better than Battle Creek

What the fuck? People actually say that Beaver Creek > Battle Creek? Holy shit

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, _Synapse said:

What the fuck? People actually say that Beaver Creek > Battle Creek? Holy shit

Wasn’t Battle Creek the remake in reach? I personally think battle is better because of the caves but I don’t like the map because of reach dmr. Something about the dmr doesn’t feel right. 

Share this post


Link to post

How is Battle Creek superior to Beaver Creek?  

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Boyo said:

How is Battle Creek superior to Beaver Creek?  

I think the caves are a neat feature for flanking possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

I think the caves are a neat feature for flanking possibilities.

What caves? Or are you thinking of Battle Canyon from Reach?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Battle Creek does NOT have caves, and in fact does not have the ramps up the sides either (uses ladders instead).

From a design perspective, Battle Creek is better suited for 2v2 matches and Beaver Creek is better suited for 4v4 matches. I really prefer no ramps when playing 2v2 because it encourages movement toward the center of the map, while also making it more dangerous. Battle Creek also works very well in Halo 1 because of the weapons and mechanics. Camo is MUCH more valuable in Halo 1 than Overshield is in Halo 2, and Rockets are more valuable as well (though I know many disagree with this).

The Battle Creek design would not work nearly as well in Halo 2 because it would be too easy to maintain map control once you have it (again, this is assuming 4v4 play which is Halo 2's forte).  Beaver Creek would also not work as well in Halo 1. I think this is one case where both designs are actually quite good for their respective games.

Regarding remakes, I don't really have a strong stance one way or the other.  The one map that I think I'd be okay with in every Halo game would be Midship (though I would keep it basically identical to the original design rather than making variants like those we saw in Halo 5).  Maps like Sanctuary and The Pit should not be remade, imo, simply because their formula is so simple that it can easily be recreated in a fresh way that maintains the spirit of the original. There are SO many ways to make a mostly flat inverse symmetrical level akin to Sanctuary, or a symmetrical 3 lane map like The Pit.  The designs themselves are generic enough that if they were to be implemented repeatedly they should be done in a fresh way.

In general, whether or not a remake will work in a game depends entirely upon whether or not the mechanics and the design of a given level are compatible. You can't take a Counter Strike Map, insert it into a Halo game, and expect it to play well 'because it's a good design'.  'Good design' is always relative to both the play space and the mechanics used within that space.  For that reason, sometimes remakes work well, and other times they can be a disaster.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Fire (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, darkstar said:

What caves? Or are you thinking of Battle Canyon from Reach?

Lol I’m dumb that’s what I was thinking of. I swear that maps name gets changed every remake I don’t realize which one I’m talking about.

@a Chunk ironically sanctuary has worked in literally every halo. You say other maps like it can be made to give the same feeling but that’s not the case usually.

Share this post


Link to post

I almost didn't even want to reply because of how ridiculous and immature this response is. You didn't even make a single valid point, all you did was just give your subjective opinion on every single aspect of the game. I respect everyone's opinion on here, but you're seriously reaching beyond normal levels.

9 hours ago, Larry Sizemore said:

Pit and Sanc played like garbage. So did every other map in that list sans Powerhouse. So what's your point again? (Sanc in particular is the herpes of Halo, just an absolute piece of shit map that keeps on resurfacing just when you hope it's finally gone.)

I'm not sure how you didn't get my point when I literally stated the point, immediately after that list: "Need I go on? I would love to see a tournament ran in Halo Reach with zero forge maps and see how much fun people have outside of Zealot and Countdown" You literally responded to my point. "[...] played like garbage. So did every other map in that list", which is my point exactly. The original maps in this game have not been good, therefore, of course people are going to try some remakes to see if they work. Turns out, surprise! There are a few remakes that happen to play a lot better than Powerhouse, Sword Base, Anchor 9, etc. I'm not sure how you missed the point when the immediately following sentence summarized it.

Quote

Nobody had fun in Reach period.

I lol'd... Just for the record, personally, I hated every game after Halo 3. For me to sit here and say "Nobody had fun in Reach period" would be the most ridiculous thing anyone has ever heard. I don't even know why you wrote this as if you could have even been remotely correct in this statement.

Quote

The fact that absolutely fuckall has happened with competitive Reach since it was added to MCC is proof. The only reason it was ever tolerated is because MLG stopped supporting Halo 3 and there were no other options for online Halo at the time, and people evidently were too weak to just say the hell with it and go back to Halo 3 on their own.

You were seriously expecting a resurgence of competitive Halo with the release of Halo Reach? If Halo 3 couldn't do it, what even sparked the idea in your mind that Halo Reach could do it? I'm not even sure what this section is even replying to in my post, because Halo Reach started the downward trend of competitive Halo and every Halo game thereafter. Not sure what in my post, even sparked you to even say any of this when Halo Reach started the downfall of competitive Halo.

Quote

There isn't a single remake that has played better than its original map. Not one. (No, Beaver Creek is not better than Battle Creek, because I know that shit is coming from somewhere.) Most of them flop. The absolute best you can hope for is a 1:1 remake in a similar game that simply holds up (Midship-Heretic). But then again, people are highly likely to just cling to those maps and refuse to give any original map its fair shake. As shown in Reach and H4 big team battle which, thanks to map voting, were nothing but Hemorrhage and Valhalla over and over and over again.

I repeat, if content creation tools are up to far (they were in Halo 5 and seeing as Tom French is still around last I heard, they should be in Infinite), there is zero reason for devs to piss away valuable time and resources on maps that everyone has already seen and have already run their course. It's not 2012 anymore, forgers don't have to rely on gray and blue forerunner blocks and some lighting tricks to try and make a convincing Midship or Turf.

I feel like you just make up arguments that nobody has even said, to vent out your frustrations about the game. While valid criticism, I'm not even remotely sure what in the world you're replying to here. You were replying to a paragraph that said IN the paragraph: "[...] assuming the map plays well. Chill Out was obviously an amazing map in Halo CE, but Cold Storage was awful in Halo 3. It just means that we need maps that fit the style of gameplay." 

I have no idea what any of your response is actually arguing against, because if anything I literally agreed with you. No one said anything about a remake playing better than any of its counterparts. But there isn't a single person on this forum that will argue that Sword Base and Powerhouse played better than The Pit and Sanctuary in Halo: Reach. That would be absurd. Powerhouse wasn't even a horrible map like that, but didn't make a good competitive map, and that was the problem.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Ladders have largely been replaced with ramps and gravity lifts in Halo.  The ladder mechanic doesn’t have to be linked with a physical object on the map though.  A weapon with a “Wall Climber” alt fire mode could carry the user up any wall.  

Share this post


Link to post

As a separate point. No one on this forum is under the impression that Halo needs remakes in order for it to survive. Obviously, we all want good original maps. I feel like this discussion has evolved into a random assumption that if you want remakes here and there, then you want no original maps whatsoever. That's absolutely absurd. There's always room for a remake or two, they're fun. No one, to this day, has recommend that every map from Halo CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3, comprise of the entire map pool in Halo Infinite when it releases.

But let's just say for example, Halo Infinite plays exactly like Halo 5 (and god, I sincerely hope it doesn't), we all are going to want original maps. Clearly. But I don't think anyone would mind a Coliseum remake, because it may end up being a map that plays really well due to the playstyle. If Halo Infinite played like Halo 5, I highly doubt anyone would want to see a Derelict remake in the game - It has to make sense. Again, this is just an example. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with Larry in the sense that, with Forge being as good as it is, I'd rather the dev leave the remakes to the community, and just take as many shots as they can at making some decent original maps.

I feel like the odds of an excellent forged remake surfacing and becoming known/implemented into MM is a lot greater than the chance of an excellent original forge map getting discovered.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Reamis25 said:

Wasn’t Battle Creek the remake in reach? I personally think battle is better because of the caves but I don’t like the map because of reach dmr. Something about the dmr doesn’t feel right. 

CE: Battle Creek

H2: Beaver Creek

Reach: Battle Canyon

Share this post


Link to post

If we have the option for new good maps ofc we are going to pick that, but if the option is between a remake that has been proven to work and an original map that plays like shit (Overgrowth, Riptide, etc.) then I'm going to pick the remake every time. Ideally we would have all new original maps and leave the remakes to forge but do we really trust 343's map making abilities that much?

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I think we just need to go ahead and admit that most new Halo maps have been garbage for a long time. I think we should have a package of competitively viable maps that we can carry over between games or the tools to accurately remake them in a pleasing way. I'm not saying 343 shouldn't make new maps. They should. I'm just saying we shouldn't have to rely on those maps because historically we can predict with confidence it will not go well.

We need to step back away from expecting to play nearly all new maps. We have a catalog of designs that spans decades. They will not do better in a few years every cycle for the new game. We should just have staple maps that we know work well and move towards minor improvements over time and the inclusion of a new map every few years if it turns out to actually be good. We currently have no quality control and just end up playing on some bullshit every few years before remaking something that does work with boxes

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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