Jump to content
CyReN

Halo Infinite Discussion

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, ShmaltzyLatkes said:

I love that you quoted the full post instead of condensing it down. Let's see how tiny we can make the scroll bar for this page.

Sorry. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Unlimited Ammo Energy Sword 

 

Instead of draining the Sword’s battery, each lunge heats the weapon up.  3 consecutive sword lunges overheat the weapon.   

The cooldown rate is much slower than most battery-operated weapons, one sword lunge taking 7 seconds to cool down.  You could look at is as the weapon has 21 seconds worth of recharging ammo and each sword lunge costs 7 of those seconds.  

The weapon’s other abilities, thermal scan and speedboost, heat the weapon as well.  Thermal scan costs 5 seconds per use and Speedboost costs 1 second of recharge per 1 second of use, so a player with a cold sword could Speedboost for 21 seconds if that’s all they wanted to do with it for a while.  

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Is this an unpopular opinion or are people just so sick of tight SBMM in social that they rip all the nuance out of the argument?

SBMM should exist in social but only as so far to protect the bottom 20%ish of players from the top 20%ish of players. Otherwise it should be totally open. 0-80% of skill can match each other and the 20-100% can match each other. No other kind of prioritization or filtering beyond that.

Or an alternative where you are basically assigned a slider where you can match say +/- 30 or 40% of your skill level.  So if skill goes to 100 and you're a 20, you can match people up to 60.  Still a pretty wide gap that will give you a random assortment of game experiences, but shouldn't risk you going 3-65 in your first 3 games then saying "Fuck this" and never coming back.

You could also add a modifier to widen it further the more you play.  If you have played 1000 games of social the last 3 months, you're not going anywhere so open that shit up 100%.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Boyo said:

Unlimited Ammo Energy Sword 

 

Instead of draining the Sword’s battery, each lunge heats the weapon up.  3 consecutive sword lunges overheat the weapon.   

The cooldown rate is much slower than most battery-operated weapons, one sword lunge taking 7 seconds to cool down.  You could look at is as the weapon has 21 seconds worth of recharging ammo and each sword lunge costs 7 of those seconds.  

The weapon’s other abilities, thermal scan and speedboost, heat the weapon as well.  Thermal scan costs 5 seconds per use and Speedboost costs 1 second of recharge per 1 second of use, so a player with a cold sword could Speedboost for 21 seconds if that’s all they wanted to do with it for a while.  

You know, that actually sounds like a good idea and would make the sword a risk/reward weapon. 

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, Apoll0 said:

Is this an unpopular opinion or are people just so sick of tight SBMM in social that they rip all the nuance out of the argument?

SBMM should exist in social but only as so far to protect the bottom 20%ish of players from the top 20%ish of players. Otherwise it should be totally open. 0-80% of skill can match each other and the 20-100% can match each other. No other kind of prioritization or filtering beyond that.

Or an alternative where you are basically assigned a slider where you can match say +/- 30 or 40% of your skill level.  So if skill goes to 100 and you're a 20, you can match people up to 60.  Still a pretty wide gap that will give you a random assortment of game experiences, but shouldn't risk you going 3-65 in your first 3 games then saying "Fuck this" and never coming back.

You could also add a modifier to widen it further the more you play.  If you have played 1000 games of social the last 3 months, you're not going anywhere so open that shit up 100%.

SBMM is so hard to measure that I can’t figure out how it works. Like is it win/L base, k/D based what?  And if both how do you even calculate those to determine a balanced match 

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

SBMM is so hard to measure that I can’t figure out how it works. Like is it win/L base, k/D based what?  And if both how do you even calculate those to determine a balanced match 

I expect its based exactly on the way that it works for ranked which is:

10 placement matches against various opponents skill. During placement, skill calculations are accelerated and weighted primarily based on your K/D against said opponents. Initial starting opponents are selected to be slightly less skilled than where you finished the prior season. After placement matches, skill is determined primarily on W/L.

As far as we can tell, and from stuff Menke has said in the past,  social carries out the exact same calculations its just a little looser in who you are allowed to match up against after the fact.  At this point it might be pretty damn loose so people can actually find games, but for the first couple years at least it was almost as tight as ranked.  When casual players were complaining about it being a sweatfest and dropping like flies, this is what they were talking about.  They were blaming the "MLG Bros" for making the game this way, but really it was the matchmaking system giving them tight games every single time.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Apoll0 said:

I expect its based exactly on the way that it works for ranked which is:

10 placement matches against various opponents skill. During placement, skill calculations are accelerated and weighted primarily based on your K/D against said opponents. Initial starting opponents are selected to be slightly less skilled than where you finished the prior season. After placement matches, skill is determined primarily on W/L.

As far as we can tell, and from stuff Menke has said in the past,  social carries out the exact same calculations its just a little looser in who you are allowed to match up against after the fact.  At this point it might be pretty damn loose so people can actually find games, but for the first couple years at least it was almost as tight as ranked.  When casual players were complaining about it being a sweatfest and dropping like flies, this is what they were talking about.  They were blaming the "MLG Bros" for making the game this way, but really it was the matchmaking system giving them tight games every single time.

I see. SBMM is something that works but only if population is high. To me a high population would be 30k+in social alone and maybe 16k+ in ranked.

no doubt infinite will have SBMM. It’s surely a good thing infinite’s multiplayer is going to be free. We might get numbers like 100k+ and they won’t drop to 10k- in 1-3 months. Halo infinite’s gameplay and movement is enough for newer generations to enjoy. And if the game has tons of content at launch, alongside its cross play there shouldn’t be any problems in that regard. I know many here aren’t interested in infinite because it’s not a classic halo like we desired, but it’s the halo we’re getting so stay on Mcc until an h3a eventually is made. In h5 the SBMM is very tight. On average in quick play my team and opponents be sweating. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Apoll0 said:

Is this an unpopular opinion or are people just so sick of tight SBMM in social that they rip all the nuance out of the argument?

SBMM should exist in social but only as so far to protect the bottom 20%ish of players from the top 20%ish of players. Otherwise it should be totally open. 0-80% of skill can match each other and the 20-100% can match each other. No other kind of prioritization or filtering beyond that.

Or an alternative where you are basically assigned a slider where you can match say +/- 30 or 40% of your skill level.  So if skill goes to 100 and you're a 20, you can match people up to 60.  Still a pretty wide gap that will give you a random assortment of game experiences, but shouldn't risk you going 3-65 in your first 3 games then saying "Fuck this" and never coming back.

You could also add a modifier to widen it further the more you play.  If you have played 1000 games of social the last 3 months, you're not going anywhere so open that shit up 100%.

These percentages only make sense if you know the actual skill gap of the game. 

Sure if we get another "everyone is a winner" Halo then this works, but if the game is as punishing as CE then 0-20% will get obliterated by the 20-40% tier. 

Share this post


Link to post

SBMM in theory is something else entirely from what it is in practice

In theory, it's 8 evenly skilled players in a 4v4. 

In practice, if you're lucky it's 4 pairs of evenly skiled players (as in, each pair is equally skilled) playing on subpar connections and getting incredibly tilted by losing because the bots on each respective team can't aim and shoot simultaneously. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

87b1476f659fcb86c10980012d79ce34.png

HOly fuck I just found it super ironic that anytime someone brings up Bungie returning to take over halo (I'd rather a new studio entirely) people immidiately shoot it down saying. "blah blah blah, bungie's not the same bungie that made the old halo games, they're scummy now, they make shallow games with no story, MTX filled hollow games."

 

Meanwhile Infinite is going the EXACT SAME DAMN ROUTE. F2P, MTX up the wazoo and if H5 is anything to go off of for story and content. Infinte won't have content at lauch or a good story (well now it hopefully will with joe staten)

 

so there's literally no difference between the two. Bungie at least knows when to move on when they're creatively fatigued with an IP

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, _Synapse said:

SBMM in theory is something else entirely from what it is in practice

In theory, it's 8 evenly skilled players in a 4v4. 

In practice, if you're lucky it's 4 pairs of evenly skiled players (as in, each pair is equally skilled) playing on subpar connections and getting incredibly tilted by losing because the bots on each respective team can't aim and shoot simultaneously. 

Tbh when I play h5 for the most part this is the case a decent amount of the time 

Share this post


Link to post

Here’s a comment from ske7ch today 

Right now we're still going through the huge cascade of implications and ramifications to the release shift and the team is heads down working through nearly every facet of the game. Full disclosure we don't have anything planned for the VGAs, but are hoping to offer at least a high level update within the next few weeks so we can kind of restart this journey together after the holidays. Pulling together something like a demo or big beat for the VGAs is an enormous amount of work and would cause challenges with current milestones of the holidays. I know it's hard to wait, but the team is going to make the most of this extra time and we want to make sure we can put our best foot forward and commit to greater transparency and dialog on the road ahead. We'll get there and get the train going again.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, _Synapse said:

SBMM in theory is something else entirely from what it is in practice

In theory, it's 8 evenly skilled players in a 4v4. 

In practice, if you're lucky it's 4 pairs of evenly skiled players (as in, each pair is equally skilled) playing on subpar connections and getting incredibly tilted by losing because the bots on each respective team can't aim and shoot simultaneously. 

I dont really mind a larg skill gap within teams, as long as both teams are somewhat balanced. Most OG H3 socials games I remember had 2 sweats and 3-6 bots on each team depending on gamemode. Now it's usually 1-2 competent players and a bunch bots versus '08 Str8 rippin on the other team. IMO the problem with SBMM in recent games is that it flat out doesn't do a good job at balancing teams and doesn't even attempt to compensate the massive advantage of to4s.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Boyo said:

Unlimited Ammo Energy Sword 

...

I don't see why it should have unlimited ammo, but limited use over a shorter amount of time. That's just promoting a conservative playstyle and capping plays, which the sword definitely doesn't need. Adding more ways to use it are welcome though.

 

Changes I'd like to see to the sword are those that promote aggression. Inspired by the powerup that achieves that:

- Battery depletes slowly when in use. Turning it on drains a few percent so you have some incentive to keep it in hand.

- Pressing reload turns you invisible for three seconds, with a 12 second cooldown. Committing to this ability is risky, as being seen means you are caught with no ranged weapon in hand. However, it gives you much more freedom of movement.

- Pressing zoom slows you down, but footprints are highlighted after 0.5s. This lets you hunt players around the map, but the activiation pause lets juking counterplay live.

- Sword has a tiny passive speed boost, letting you close very small gaps at close range in a second or two (to avoid those frustrating chases of someone oblivious). I don't want a large speed boost as that replaces the careful maneuvering required to get close (like in Halo 3) with just running at targets (like in Reach).

  • Thonking (+0) 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, znot said:

87b1476f659fcb86c10980012d79ce34.png

HOly fuck I just found it super ironic that anytime someone brings up Bungie returning to take over halo (I'd rather a new studio entirely) people immidiately shoot it down saying. "blah blah blah, bungie's not the same bungie that made the old halo games, they're scummy now, they make shallow games with no story, MTX filled hollow games."

 

Meanwhile Infinite is going the EXACT SAME DAMN ROUTE. F2P, MTX up the wazoo and if H5 is anything to go off of for story and content. Infinte won't have content at lauch or a good story (well now it hopefully will with joe staten)

 

so there's literally no difference between the two. Bungie at least knows when to move on when they're creatively fatigued with an IP

Story wise, Destiny if fucking ridiculous.  Most of the story lines don't make any sense and the lore is wackadoo but... its always been that way.  Its always been wonky so they have the liberty of keeping it that way and making up whatever shit they want.

Halo has always been more grounded and straightforward even though its sci-fi, so 343 decided to take it and make it wonky and now the story sucks real bad. My argument against a Bungie return is they were already experimenting with gameplay that eventually lead to destiny when Reach came out. Its always been purely from a gameplay standpoint, and i like destiny. But clearly they were done with making real halo games given what they did with reach, so meh let them go and do their own thing.  But 343 was created solely to carry Halo forward, so as soon as people are getting tired of it internally and want to do their own thing, time to let them go.  The fact that there hasn't been a wholesale replacement of leadership at 343 is beyond me.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Apoll0 said:

Story wise, Destiny if fucking ridiculous.  Most of the story lines don't make any sense and the lore is wackadoo but... its always been that way.  Its always been wonky so they have the liberty of keeping it that way and making up whatever shit they want.

Halo has always been more grounded and straightforward even though its sci-fi, so 343 decided to take it and make it wonky and now the story sucks real bad. My argument against a Bungie return is they were already experimenting with gameplay that eventually lead to destiny when Reach came out. Its always been purely from a gameplay standpoint, and i like destiny. But clearly they were done with making real halo games given what they did with reach, so meh let them go and do their own thing.  But 343 was created solely to carry Halo forward, so as soon as people are getting tired of it internally and want to do their own thing, time to let them go.  The fact that there hasn't been a wholesale replacement of leadership at 343 is beyond me.

my counterpoint to that is, you're right but Bungie only did it because they already had their eyes set on Destiny and were using Halo Reach as a way to test the mechanics for Destiny.

IF MS just let them have their way Reach would never exist and it would have just been right to Destiny. Halo 3, H3: ODST, Destiny. But MS said they have to ship them one more game before their contract goes up.... hence reach

Hell they even said numerous times that it wasn't going to be called "Halo:reach" MS was on their backs about brand recognition and how it would never sell without Halo in the name. Hence why the main menu only says Reach. This was their way of getting back at MS by saying it's our game, our menu, "REACH"

 

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, znot said:

my counterpoint to that is, you're right but Bungie only did it because they already had their eyes set on Destiny and were using Halo Reach as a way to test the mechanics for Destiny.

I think it’s worse than that.  I think Bungie intentionally added a bunch of controversial mechanics with the intent of kneecapping Halo before they moved on, leaving their predecessor with no easy path to another great Halo game.  Does 343 launch their first Halo game with less “features” than Reach or do they double down on those features, moving further away from classic Halo?  Lose/lose.  

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, znot said:

87b1476f659fcb86c10980012d79ce34.png

HOly fuck I just found it super ironic that anytime someone brings up Bungie returning to take over halo (I'd rather a new studio entirely) people immidiately shoot it down saying. "blah blah blah, bungie's not the same bungie that made the old halo games, they're scummy now, they make shallow games with no story, MTX filled hollow games."

 

Meanwhile Infinite is going the EXACT SAME DAMN ROUTE. F2P, MTX up the wazoo and if H5 is anything to go off of for story and content. Infinte won't have content at lauch or a good story (well now it hopefully will with joe staten)

 

so there's literally no difference between the two. Bungie at least knows when to move on when they're creatively fatigued with an IP

There actually is a huge fucking difference between bungie and 343 though. They make functional games that people buy and play. Anyone that tries to put them on the same level or lower than 343 has absolutely no idea what they're talking about so its probably better to just ignore it. Its one of the worst hot takes ever to shit on bungie like they aren't more successful and talented than nearly every game studio in the world. There are very few that actually do a better job despite all of the crying and complaining that goes on via the internet

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I don't care whether it's Bungie or 342 developing Halo, I'd like for neither of them to ever have the IP again.

Why not the current dev is so blatantly obvious that I'm not even gonna state it. 

Even for Bungie, the level to which mechanics were absolutely ruined from CE - Reach is nothing short of staggering. It feels like intentional self-sabotage.

Bungie were nerds that were infinitely more interested in making a porn-tier plot about dual wielding SMGs and dunking on aliens, than they were in refining gameplay. 

As sorry of a state as Halo may be in now - I'd keep this than have Halo go the Destiny route. I don't care about the viewership, I can't endorse any Halo games that I find unplayably bad and even less so the dev that produces them. 

  • Fire (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, _Synapse said:

I don't care whether it's Bungie or 342 developing Halo, I'd like for neither of them to ever have the IP again.

Why not the current dev is so blatantly obvious that I'm not even gonna state it. 

Even for Bungie, the level to which mechanics were absolutely ruined from CE - Reach is nothing short of staggering. It feels like intentional self-sabotage.

Bungie were nerds that were infinitely more interested in making a porn-tier plot about dual wielding SMGs and dunking on aliens, than they were in refining gameplay. 

As sorry of a state as Halo may be in now - I'd keep this than have Halo go the Destiny route. I don't care about the viewership, I can't endorse any Halo games that I find unplayably bad and even less so the dev that produces them. 

Is CE the only good halo to you or what? 

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Apoll0 said:

Story wise, Destiny if fucking ridiculous.  Most of the story lines don't make any sense and the lore is wackadoo but... its always been that way.  Its always been wonky so they have the liberty of keeping it that way and making up whatever shit they want.

Halo has always been more grounded and straightforward even though its sci-fi, so 343 decided to take it and make it wonky and now the story sucks real bad. My argument against a Bungie return is they were already experimenting with gameplay that eventually lead to destiny when Reach came out. Its always been purely from a gameplay standpoint, and i like destiny. But clearly they were done with making real halo games given what they did with reach, so meh let them go and do their own thing.  But 343 was created solely to carry Halo forward, so as soon as people are getting tired of it internally and want to do their own thing, time to let them go.  The fact that there hasn't been a wholesale replacement of leadership at 343 is beyond me.

Here is the thing with 343 approach on the story. I really liked the way they went with Halo 4. I still do. All the forerunner history with precursors, ancient humans, I loved it. The problem was, they didn't serve the story throughout the game, instead the huge important chunk of it was hidden in terminals and books. Not many people go out of their way that much. But otherwise, as a science fiction fan, I really liked it (they even hired freaking Greg Bear, Hugo award winner, to write the forerunner trilogy, very good books, except the weaker middle part). Even the in-game cinematics, the cortana struggle, Chief breaking the rules and the more personal, intimate feel of some of the scenes...that was some top quality work.

But. Instead of changing their approach, they throw away what they have built in Halo 4 altogether (they finished the Halo 4 story in comic book...) and go totally different direction. Yes Halo 5 story, mostly, sucks. And it looks like they are doing the same thing with Halo 6, except now they are trying to follow Halo Wars storyline. What a mess.

This is my take on this.

  • Like (+1) 4

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.