Halo Infinite Discussion

[Aphex Twin]

In the age of fast killtimes (CoD, Valorant, CS, etc...), Halo cant get away with 1.5 sec TTKs anymore, otherwise Reach - H5 would have been able to retain an appropriate playerbase for a AAA title. 

It's not fun to feel weak in a shooter. People dont like putting 3-4 shots into an opponent only for them to sprint away to safety. 

Modern Halo copied all the industry trends with the exception of fast killtimes, and it has never had a playerbase that could compete against the very games it copied as a result. 

[Reamis25]

35 minutes ago, Aphex Twin said:

Why did H1 - H3 have much better player retention than any modern halo? 

Why couldnt H5 retain players as well as H1 - H3? 

H1 had no competition there was nothing else same for h2&3 all it had was cod and gears(when I say no competition I mean multiplayer centric games) 

[Hully]

1 minute ago, Reamis25 said:

H1 had no competition there was nothing else same for h2&3 all it had was cod and gears(when I say no competition I mean multiplayer centric games) 

I hate this argument so much. Google FPS games from 2004 - 2007 to see how much competition there was with Halo. It's not that there was no competition, it's that Halo dominated the competition. Halo was an innovator and it set the trends that other games wanted a piece of. Insert Reach, where Halo started copying other games and the decline started. Then Halo gets handed to a company whos entire business model seems to be copying better games, and here we are. Bitter old men talking about a dead franchise that we used to love, a full decade post mortem. 

[Aphex Twin]

6 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

H1 had no competition there was nothing else same for h2&3 all it had was cod and gears(when I say no competition I mean multiplayer centric games) 

Wrong as always.

[Obnokshus]

I would truly appreciate if you all just stopped replying to that guy, it's frustrating to see new posts and expect it to be drivel half the time. 

[Reamis25]

4 minutes ago, Hully said:

I hate this argument so much. Google FPS games from 2004 - 2007 to see how much competition there was with Halo. It's not that there was no competition, it's that Halo dominated the competition. Halo was an innovator and it set the trends that other games wanted a piece of. Insert Reach, where Halo started copying other games and the decline started. Then Halo gets handed to a company whos entire business model seems to be copying better games, and here we are. Bitter old men talking about a dead franchise that we used to love, a full decade post mortem. 

Bruh I just did and a lot of those were single player games. Some of the games were pc games like TF2&CS which were both more popular than halo. Let’s just point out halo didn’t have the competition it does today, especially regarding the games it must compete against today. 

[Reamis25]

@Aphex Twin I will agree with you the TTK is a bit too high. It’s not fun having someone your shooting at run away. However this is easily solved with balances to sprint. The problem in halo 5 is they balanced sprint but added thruster which made get out of jail free even worse than h4. It was as if 343 forgot why we hated sprint in the first place and that was because sprint introduced all these get out of jail free cards.  

[Aphex Twin]

1 minute ago, Reamis25 said:

@Aphex Twin I will agree with you the TTK is a bit too high. It’s not fun having someone your shooting at run away. However this is easily solved with balances to sprint. The problem in halo 5 is they balanced sprint but added thruster which made get out of jail free even worse than h4. 

And attempt #4 at making sprint work in Halo will be different because ...? 

[Aphex Twin]

6 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

Bruh I just did and a lot of those were single player games. Some of the games were pc games like TF2&CS which were both more popular than halo. Let’s just point out halo didn’t have the competition it does today, especially regarding the games it must compete against today. 

You were probably too young to remember games like Medal of Honor, CoD pre-MW, Gears (not sure why you discount this one), SOCOM, Battlefront 2, Rainbow Six, etc... 

Halo 1 - 3 had as many competitors as H4/H5 has today. 

The big difference, as was mentioned before, is that Halo was a trend-setter, whereas now it's a trend-chaser. 

[Reamis25]

9 minutes ago, Aphex Twin said:

And attempt #4 at making sprint work in Halo will be different because ...? 

I mean sprint technically didn’t not work in h5 the problem was sprint+ thrust. These two things don’t belong. 

[Reamis25]

9 minutes ago, Aphex Twin said:

You were probably too young to remember games like Medal of Honor, CoD pre-MW, Gears (not sure why you discount this one), SOCOM, Battlefront 2, Rainbow Six, etc... 

Halo 1 - 3 had as many competitors as H4/H5 has today. 

The big difference, as was mentioned before, is that Halo was a trend-setter, whereas now it's a trend-chaser. 

I played all those at a young age except socom. However the battlefront games weren’t that popular in the online multiplayer capacity.  A lot of games during that age had terrible online play and halo, cod, and gears had the best at the time. Hells cod multiplayer didn’t pop off until cod 4 the OG MW

[Aphex Twin]

Just now, Reamis25 said:

However the battlefront games weren’t that popular in the online multiplayer capacity.  

That's my point- hardly any games were as popular as Halo pre-Reach despite plenty of competition in the market. 

Now that halo's gameplay isnt fun anymore, it cant dominate the competition like it used to. 

[Craneteam]

8 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

H1 had no competition there was nothing else same for h2&3 all it had was cod and gears(when I say no competition I mean multiplayer centric games) 

 

2 minutes ago, Aphex Twin said:

You were probably too young to remember games like Medal of Honor, CoD pre-MW, Gears (not sure why you discount this one), SOCOM, Battlefront 2, Rainbow Six, etc... 

Halo 1 - 3 had as many competitors as H4/H5 has today. 

The big difference, as was mentioned before, is that Halo was a trend-setter, whereas now it's a trend-chaser. 

also WOW was hitting its stride during this time as well and the xbox ecosystem as a whole was smaller than it is now. halo having the population it had for as long as it had it is still impressive. just because we are flooded with BRs and live service games doesnt discount what halo did

[Reamis25]

8 minutes ago, Aphex Twin said:

That's my point- hardly any games were as popular as Halo pre-Reach despite plenty of competition in the market. 

Now that halo's gameplay isnt fun anymore, it cant dominate the competition like it used to. 

Dude halos gameplay isn’t what set it apart . I already explained why halo popped off but you don’t want to believe it. When you have all these fun game types, progrresssion system, amazing custom games, and map editor then of course you’ll have a kick ass multiplayer. 

[Reamis25]

7 minutes ago, Craneteam said:

 

also WOW was hitting its stride during this time as well and the xbox ecosystem as a whole was smaller than it is now. halo having the population it had for as long as it had it is still impressive. just because we are flooded with BRs and live service games doesnt discount what halo did

You’re right it doesn’t but don’t try acting like it’s gameplay is what made it take off or arena games like quake and unreal would be really popular forever. If your game feels friendly to come too, people will play the fuck out of it. All in all halo infinite will pop off. It’ll have a solid population bigger than what we’ve had in the past. Will it be h3 levels high, probably for a week but it’ll no doubt keep a 100k or more I guarantee it. 
 

also h5 population was high until it lost dev support. Games that lose suppprt usually don’t hold high populations. People didn’t struggle to find games. 

[BigShow36]

1 hour ago, Aphex Twin said:

In the age of fast killtimes (CoD, Valorant, CS, etc...), Halo cant get away with 1.5 sec TTKs anymore, otherwise Reach - H5 would have been able to retain an appropriate playerbase for a AAA title. 

It's not fun to feel weak in a shooter. People dont like putting 3-4 shots into an opponent only for them to sprint away to safety. 

Modern Halo copied all the industry trends with the exception of fast killtimes, and it has never had a playerbase that could compete against the very games it copied as a result. 

Classic Halo developer logic; increase aim assists and slow down strafe, which mean more people are landing shots more frequently, so to "balance" that out, Bungie decided to increase kill times rather than address the core issue of shooting skill. 

[AlphaBenson]

4 hours ago, Sitri said:

It makes one wonder how many decisions regarding Halo were meant to improve the core gameplay, or a pitch prefixed with "Wouldn't it be cool if...".

I assume the reason is is that 343 thinks that the quickest way to win over fans is to add back in ALL weapon types eventually. A Smash Ultimate of Halo, I guess. Problem is, Halo's always been at its best when its sandbox has been focused and allowed for every weapon to have their own purpose. Like when I play ODST, I do not miss the Battle Rifle for a second, nor do I miss the assault rifle in Firefight.

[Reamis25]

Every little kid with an Xbox to the series x is going to play halo infinite and with it being free to play they’ll no doubt try it. I’m expecting a lot of launch content compared to h5, but only time will tell clearly. 

[AlphaBenson]

53 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

H1 had no competition there was nothing else same for h2&3 all it had was cod and gears(when I say no competition I mean multiplayer centric games) 

Didnt Melee come out the same year?

[Aphex Twin]

19 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

Dude halos gameplay isn’t what set it apart . I already explained why halo popped off but you don’t want to believe it. 

Wrong again - I explained to you why Halo isnt fun anymore, and you agreed (kill times are too long). Halo's trend-setting gameplay is what caused it to pop off. 

Halo's trend-chasing gameplay is what is causing it to die. 

If this is wrong, I'll ask again, why cant H4/H5 retain a population like H1-H3 despite a similar amount of competition in both eras? 

The main difference between these periods of Halo's lifespan are the gameplay changes. 

You can lead a horse to water... 

[Aphex Twin]

Hecks, you even admitted that modern Halo's gameplay isnt fun enough to sustain a population without it being free to play. 

Why was H1-H3s population healthy despite it not being free to play (again, with similar levels of competition in the 2000's vs 2010's)

[Reamis25]

6 minutes ago, AlphaBenson said:

Didnt Melee come out the same year?

A game that’s on Nintendo only hmm isn’t I want to compare really. I would prefer comparisons of games that were popular for their multiplayer or known and their numbers on their Xbox versions compared to halo. 

[Aphex Twin]

1 minute ago, Reamis25 said:

A game that’s on Nintendo only hmm isn’t I want to compare really.

Yeah it's pretty inconvenient to your argument, I would want to ignore it if I were you. 

[Reamis25]

10 minutes ago, Aphex Twin said:

Hecks, you even admitted that modern Halo's gameplay isnt fun enough to sustain a population without it being free to play. 

Why was H1-H3s population healthy despite it not being free to play (again, with similar levels of competition in the 2000's vs 2010's)

I mean h5 I enjoy that but like I said before it’s aiming kills the game for me. vand think infinite looks very fun gameplay wise. The competition of today isn’t comparable to the lack of back then. H2 started xbl and other games played awful. These games weren’t popular because of their gameplay. Why is it h3 on pc wasn’t able to come close to competing with games of this modern era? 

[Reamis25]

1 minute ago, Aphex Twin said:

Yeah it's pretty inconvenient to your argument, I would want to ignore it if I were you. 

They’re two different genres why would I want to compare them?