Jump to content
CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

Bro what? I was literally getting a sloppy beej that whole game lol. My hot gf was playing while I took was eating the 5 course meal she prepared for me. You are trash you couldn't even beat my gf. She doesn't even game!

 

Side note: you called the map "broken" because you were getting spawn killed lol. No that's called map control. And we are the ones that don't care about KD lol you're the one who quit after because you were getting the D. I've made countless posts about how KD isn't important lol but okay. My ego is fine. Were you not the one screaming "1v1 me on OG CE" after that game to everyone while composing about how "bad" sanc is? But yea my ego is the problem. Because I screenshotted a goose against friends. Lmao you're looking way too into this. BTW it's a pretty damn recent screenshot on my freed. Didn't take much digging.

 

Now any further responses should be in the H5 thread. I don't want the MCC people to keep suffering through this. Let's go back to the thread that we made a ghost town lol.

 

To be fair, Sanctuary is a terribly overrated map that only serves to highlight how overpowered team shot was in Halo 2 and any game past that. It's not a good map.

 

And are we really trying to argue with a straight face that Slayer should not be it's own playlist? Slayer works fine if the game itself isn't shit; fix the game and slayer works.

 

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

It’s not a hypothetical group. It’s the highest populated playlist in every game.

 

Don’t you think you are being selfish by wanting to deprive them of their preferred gametype, THE MOST POPULAR GAMETYPE, just so a less popular playlist can have people FORCED into it?

 

Make objective gametypes better, make more of them, give double XP, give rewards like weapon skins. Don’t remove the most popular playlist because you like something else better.

 

Will Infection, SWAT and Grillball be included in this social slayer/objective playlist, or only the gametypes you deem worthy?

It IS a hypothetical group, because the traits you’re applying to TS players aren’t accurate. You make them sound like they couldn’t possibly figure out “Stand Here”, or “Hold This”, or “Take This Here”. You’ve also ruled out the possibility that they might actually enjoy it or not hate it, if it were presented as the standard from now on. They’ve had to make a binary choice between Slayer and Not Slayer. Choosing one doesn’t mean they’d hate the other, or be hopelessly inept like you’re trying to claim.

 

Am I being selfish? Yeah, a little bit, I am. When the guy that has nothing asks the guy who has everything to share, I suppose it’s a bit selfish.

 

And no, Infection Swat and Grifball would not be in a standard 4v4 playlist. That’s a dumb question and you know that’s a dumb question. I want ranked Team Arena and Social Skirmish, and for Team Slayer to roll around 1 weekend a month.

 

This group of people that would flip out if they ever had to play obj is smaller than you think, and you’re exaggerating their would-be plight to a comical degree.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

One of the all time greats.

 

I know its good because i am average at best on that map and i still love to play it.  

Share this post


Link to post

To be fair, Sanctuary is a terribly overrated map that only serves to highlight how overpowered team shot was in Halo 2 and any game past that. It's not a good map.

 

And are we really trying to argue with a straight face that Slayer should not be it's own playlist? Slayer works fine if the game itself isn't shit; fix the game and slayer works.

 

Youve missed the point. It’s not that Slayer doesn’t work, it’s that when you make it a binary choice between Slayer and Obj, the Obj playlist has proven to be unable to support itself. In the case of MCC, the result is no social obj at all. Personally, I find that unacceptable. That’s what I’ve been arguing.

Share this post


Link to post

@@Hard Way

 

You want the most popular playlist in the game to be available one weekend a month? That is idiotic. That will only drive players away from the game, not toward your bastardized playlist.

Share this post


Link to post

H-hey can we talk about the state of MCC instead of sperging out like a bunch of virgins lol jesus

>on a forum dedicated to halo

>not a virgin

 

get the fuck out of here Chad you are not welcome any more

  • Upvote (+1) 7

Share this post


Link to post

Youve missed the point. It’s not that Slayer doesn’t work, it’s that when you make it a binary choice between Slayer and Obj, the Obj playlist has proven to be unable to support itself. In the case of MCC, the result is no social obj at all. Personally, I find that unacceptable. That’s what I’ve been arguing.

 

I just don't think you can force people to play what they don't want to play. People have proven over and over again that if you force them into a hybrid playlist, they will simply quit out of whatever they don't want to play. Just look at the cross game playlists; people don't get what they want and they quit. It's just the way it works. The MCC is a pretty poor reference to use for your argument, because it's population issues have very little, if anything, to do with the Slayer playlist vulturing all of the players and everything to do with the fact that the Objective Playlist is terribly designed. A Social Moshpit that includes Slayer and Objective is fine, but it shouldn't come at the expense of the most popular gametype in the game.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

@@Hard Way

 

You want the most popular playlist in the game to be available one weekend a month? That is idiotic. That will only drive players away from the game, not toward your bastardized playlist.

Yes. Because the way the playlists are currently constructed, it forces players to make an arbitrary choice, and it results in playlist cannibalization.

Share this post


Link to post

I just don't think you can force people to play what they don't want to play. People have proven over and over again that if you force them into a hybrid playlist, they will simply quit out of whatever they don't want to play. Just look at the cross game playlists; people don't get what they want and they quit. It's just the way it works. The MCC is a pretty poor reference to use for your argument, because it's population issues have very little, if anything, to do with the Slayer playlist vulturing all of the players and everything to do with the fact that the Objective Playlist is terribly designed. A Social Moshpit that includes Slayer and Objective is fine, but it shouldn't come at the expense of the most popular gametype in the game.

H5 shows that redundant playlists create population problems (Arena, HCS, Slayer, Skirmish). That’s not a viable option either.

 

I think it’s a fallacy to look at a scenario where players are forced to choose between ONLY A, or ONLY B, and conclude that everyone that chose A hates B.

 

Also, quitting out of H1 because it’s not H3 isn’t the same as quitting out of Flag because it’s not Slayer. If you booted up H6 for the first time and the options were Arena, Doubles, FFA, Snipers, BTB, etc, I don’t think people would lose their minds. I think they’d be fine.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes. Because the way the playlists are currently constructed, it forces players to make an arbitrary choice, and it results in playlist cannibalization.

I feel like you are using the same argument about piracy vs sales. You are assuming that every TS player is a possible OBJ player when this simply isn’t true. Just like every pirate isn’t a missed sale, every TS player isn’t a missed OBJ player.

 

And, once again, the MLG playlist is basically everything you are asking for. What is the sticking point about it being a SOCIAL playlist? To avoid the try hard stigma? It’s not like every map is suited for every objective anyway. The map/gametype combos should be curated.

Share this post


Link to post

I feel like you are using the same argument about piracy vs sales. You are assuming that every TS player is a possible OBJ player when this simply isn’t true. Just like every pirate isn’t a missed sale, every TS player isn’t a missed OBJ player.

 

And, once again, the MLG playlist is basically everything you are asking for. What is the sticking point about it being a SOCIAL playlist? To avoid the try hard stigmatism? It’s not like every map is suited for every objective anyway. The map/gametype combos should be curated.

I think the number of players that would be so upset over occasionally playing obj that they outright quit Halo is very small.

 

Why do I want a social playlist? Really Boyo?

 

And no shit the gametypes should be curated. I’m not asking for CTF Chiron here. But just because HCS doesn’t want to use CTF Tyrant doesn’t mean it shouldn’t exist in MM. If you’re trying to argue that a gametype not making the cut for HCS deems it unworthy to be in MM, explain that to Team Slayer on Guardian, one of the most popular gametypes ever.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

H5 shows that redundant playlists create population problems (Arena, HCS, Slayer, Skirmish). That’s not a viable option either.

 

I think it’s a fallacy to look at a scenario where players are forced to choose between ONLY A, or ONLY B, and conclude that everyone that chose A hates B.

 

I'm not concluding that, but I am concluding that when there is only a minor inconvenience for getting what you want, even if you just want it a little more than something else, people will do it. If someone wants to play Slayer, they're going to even if it means quitting out of a few objective games. Otherwise, what's the issue with just having one giant playlist with everything in it? You don't need redundant playlists, you just need a few well-designed playlist that cover what people want to play. The core issue lies with the gametypes not being properly managed and implemented.

 

You shouldn't have 3 different kinds of Slayer with different settings. You shouldn't have different playlists serving the same purpose. You shouldn't have multiple types of the same objective gametypes. You need a developer that's competent enough to say, "Here are the best settings for these gametypes and that's what our playlists are going to be."

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I think the number of players that would be so upset over occasionally playing obj that they outright quit Halo is very small.

I wish you were right but you aren’t. I wholeheartedly disagree.

 

Most players like killing and hate dying. Most don’t understand that 5 deaths for a flag capture is worth it. That’s not fun for them. Do people keep playing games they don’t have fun in?

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not concluding that, but I am concluding that when there is only a minor inconvenience for getting what you want, even if you just want it a little more than something else, people will do it. If someone wants to play Slayer, they're going to even if it means quitting out of a few objective games. Otherwise, what's the issue with just having one giant playlist with everything in it? You don't need redundant playlists, you just need a few well-designed playlist that cover what people want to play. The core issue lies with the gametypes not being properly managed and implemented.

 

You shouldn't have 3 different kinds of Slayer with different settings. You shouldn't have different playlists serving the same purpose. You shouldn't have multiple types of the same objective gametypes. You need a developer that's competent enough to say, "Here are the best settings for these gametypes and that's what our playlists are going to be."

In my ideal fantasy land, every standard gametype would be well crafted and under one roof, because I like to play everything. But if you were to segrate Slayer and obj, I would be a lot happier if the obj gametypes didn’t suck cock for once, ever. The obj playlists have always been bad. But my fear is that even if you did clean up the playlist, it would still have a weak population bc you’re forcing players to choose. I understand that most players prefer Slayer. What I don’t agree with is this notion that because they chose Slayer, that means they hate/can’t comprehend obj.
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I wish you were right but you aren’t. I wholeheartedly disagree.

 

Most players like killing and hate dying. Most don’t understand that 5 deaths for a flag capture is worth it. That’s not fun for them. Do people keep playing games they don’t have fun in?

We’ll have to agree to disagree then bud. I think it’s just reached a fundamental level here.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

We’ll have to agree to disagree then bud. I think it’s just reached a fundamental level here.

Agree to disagree on what?

 

Do you disagree that most players enjoy killing?

 

Do you disagree that most players don’t enjoy dieing?

 

Do you disagree that most players lack the foresight to see how dieing five times to secure an objective it is actually better than getting kills?

 

I can’t see you disagreeing with any of these points, if you are being honest.

Share this post


Link to post

Agree to disagree on what?

 

Do you disagree that most players enjoy killing?

 

Do you disagree that most players don’t enjoy dieing?

 

Do you disagree that most players lack the foresight to see how dieing five times to secure an objective it is actually better than getting kills?

 

I can’t see you disagreeing with any of these points, if you are being honest.

 

Its a saying to cordially end a debate that is clearly not going to go anywhere productive.  This is like social interaction 101.  let it go, let it goooooooooooo

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Its a saying to cordially end a debate that is clearly not going to go anywhere productive. This is like social interaction 101. let it go, let it goooooooooooo

Why don’t you go ahead and answer those three simple questions then bud.

 

Do you disagree that most players enjoy killing?

 

Do you disagree that most players don’t enjoy dieing?

 

Do you disagree that most players lack the foresight to see how dieing five times to secure an objective it is actually better than getting kills?

 

Because I suspect Hardway doesn’t disagree with any of them but answering them would be detrimental to his argument.

  • Downvote (-1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

To be fair, Sanctuary is a terribly overrated map that only serves to highlight how overpowered team shot was in Halo 2 and any game past that. It's not a good map.

 

And are we really trying to argue with a straight face that Slayer should not be it's own playlist? Slayer works fine if the game itself isn't shit; fix the game and slayer works.

 

Sanctuary is not an overrated map. I don't know what your logic is. Why do you think this?

 

That map features a super power position, ring 3, a position players must strive to get to if they want to control the map. It's one of the only maps that doesn't require power-ups or weapons to force map movement because of ring 3. Then you have two snipe towers for intense snipe battles. You also have good base design because you have good cover and angles to fight back from. And breaking out of spawn traps is actually pretty fair on that map. It's a great map, one of, if not the best map in Halo. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Why don’t you go ahead and answer those three simple questions then bud.

 

I'll answer the one that is up for debate.

 

 

Do you disagree that most players lack the foresight to see how dieing five times to secure an objective it is actually better than getting kills?

 

 

Dying five times to secure an objective is not universally better than getting kills in an objective game. This is a common fallacy that many casual players make, the same ones who say "dude it's an objective gametype, why are you slaying so much!?" That's like asking an offensive linemen why they don't run into the end-zone to catch passes in football? Sometimes, you need to do things that allow other people who are in a better position to secure the objective, even if what you're doing doesn't appear directly related to the objective. Dying 5 times to secure an objective might sound good in practice, but what if your deaths allow the other team to gain map and power weapon control, setting up 2 or 3 rapid counter-caps or ball time? What if you have Rockets and blindly rush to capture a flag, dying in the process and giving the other team rockets in your base? You can't just universally say "you should always secure the objective, even if it means dying 5 times in a row." That's just not true.

 

Pure slayers are essential in an objective game, even if they never physically touch the objective.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Why don’t you go ahead and answer those three simple questions then bud.

Because i don't want to.  This is another debate that is not going to go anywhere.  Slayer is going to always have a dedicated playlist, as much as i agree with hard way and dislike the binary aspect of it (or wish we had a multi-queue setup for matchmaking), its a truth that no amount of arguing here is going to have any effect on.

 

I'm learning to pick my battles around here haha

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Sanctuary is not an overrated map. I don't know what your logic is. Why do you think this?

 

That map features a super power position, ring 3, a position players must strive to get to if they want to control the map. It's one of the only maps that doesn't require power-ups or weapons to force map movement because of ring 3. Then you have two snipe towers for intense snipe battles. You also have good base design because you have good cover and angles to fight back from. And breaking out of spawn traps is actually pretty fair on that map. It's a great map, one of, if not the best map in Halo. 

 

It is the definition of everything wrong with Halo 2 (and later games); a blatantly obvious power position, very little hope for any individual to actually do anything against that power position, and no map movement other than "capture that power position." It "forces map movement" because there is literally nothing else to do but push against the middle and hope you get lucky. Everyone has the same basic strategy on that map because there is no other viable strategies. It's a static power setup with massive team-shot advantage. Sure, it's fun to gain control and wreck the other team, but so is gaining top control in 4v4 Derelict slayer. That doesn't mean it's a good thing.

 

It's a pretty map, but it simply exacerbates everything wrong with modern Halo.

  • Upvote (+1) 4
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

@@BigShow36

 

Even in slayer gametypes, many teams have a player that will lead a push, put two enemies weak, die, then have his teammates clean up those two enemies. That leading player looks bad on the scoreboard because his contribution can not be easily quantified.

 

The point I am trying to make is that most players lack the selflessness and team dedication to act in such a way. This phenomenon is only exacerbated in objective gameplay, like getting a touch on a close to home Flag about to return, is in many scenarios more important than slaying the two enemies returning it and allowing the flag to be returned too.

 

Their scoreboard would show one death and 0.1 seconds of carry time vs two kills. Most players would rather their scoreboard show the extra two kills vs the one death even though the one death may be key to winning the game.

Share this post


Link to post

Boyo, your argument works against you too. Yes, some people won’t like occasionally sacrificing their life for the obj. But others feel like they’re dying for a purpose, and feel way more valuable in obj than they do in Slayer.

 

I want to drop it because we’ve monopolized the thread for a while, and multiple people have expressed disinterest in the discussion, and I feel like we’ve talked in circles to arrive at a fundamental disagreement: Is the number of people that would be so upset over the occasional obj game that they would quit, greater than the number of people that would be happy to see social obj have a healthy home? You think it is, I think it isn’t, and I think we’ve reached a dead end. And that’s okay.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

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.