Jump to content
CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

Just now, TheIcePrincess said:

There aren't many I want, no. Because even at its most benign, you get shit like Halo 5, where you spawn with a capable AR/precision weapon and tons of map pickups are straight upgrades of them that you have to rely on to be successful. Was garbage and it wasn't even a set of power weapons. Map pickups in general are meh. I just want good, straight gunfights. Where the changes in gameplay come from how YOU handle the map and what you choose to do, which obj gametypes like CTF let you run with in spades. Not what map pickups dictate you do.

I’m aware of your philosophy.  If you HAD to pick three weapons to be on map pick ups, what would they be?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Boyo said:

I’m aware of your philosophy.  If you HAD to pick three weapons to be on map pick ups, what would they be?

Utility weapon ammo in 3 different spots 

  • Downvote (-1) 2
  • Simms (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Lack of power weapons makes more sense for OBJ. Last time we argued about this it was contained to obj and how the flag or bomb already provide incentive to move around the map.

Share this post


Link to post

If I am following correctly with this logic, Boom Boom Rocket is the worst game ever made?

Share this post


Link to post

Power weapons are necessary for directing map flow and providing the match with a focal point. Halo 5 has hardly any true power weapons in arena, and since most of the maps lack any useful power positions as well, the game plays like a directionless clusterfuck and devolves into a bunch of jerkoffs whizzing around the map with their AR, magnum, and thruster pack until somebody finally hits 50 kills, with minimal order, rhyme or reason to any of it. It's like a basketball game without hoops, where the players do nothing but run the floor, dribble, and pass it to each other the entire time.

As for rockets, they're (usually) the most powerful and contested item on the map. Therefore, they should offer the highest reward for whoever can come away with them. That's just common sense. I believe that the skill with rockets is maximizing your output with them. Any average player can fire off 4 crude rockets and come away with the requisite 4 kills (one per shot). Someone with a higher skill and/or experience level will have a better idea of where and when to place his rockets, capitalizing on spawners and players moving blindly during combat. He can turn single kills into two-for-ones, two-for-ones into triples. Even if he doesn't get the extra kill, every additional player he hurts with splash damage becomes an easy cleanup for his teammates, putting even more kills on the board or furthering the goal of clearing out the map and putting the other team on respawn for an objective run.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Fire (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, MultiLockOn said:

@Fixaimingsorry Why are you even trying to discuss this if you repeatedly devolve into "Well that's subjective, that's your opinion".  Why have any converse at all if you default to that every time you're backed into a corner? It's pretty telling someone doesn't have any more reasoning to stand on when they default to claiming subjectivity. Beyond choosing your favorite color there's objectivity and truth to everything.  You denying that doesn't make it any less true, it just makes you wrong.

Backed into a corner? Who the hell gave you the right to dictate what’s true and untrue. A fact is blue is blue, but an opinion is what’s competitive and what isn’t. Regardless of what majority may think about that subjective opinion, it remains an opinion you fool. A conversation is a conversation where one can agree or disagree. Now if we go into debates, you must convince me or others that you’re right, by providing facts! Not saying shit like “2v2” ce is the most competitive by only providing what goes on in that game and not using what goes on in the 4v4 games you’re debating are inferior.

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Larry Sizemore said:

It's like a basketball game without hoops, where the players do nothing but run the floor, dribble, and pass it to each other the entire time.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Larry Sizemore said:

Power weapons are necessary for directing map flow and providing the match with a focal point. Halo 5 has hardly any true power weapons in arena, and since most of the maps lack any useful power positions as well, the game plays like a directionless clusterfuck and devolves into a bunch of jerkoffs whizzing around the map with their AR, magnum, and thruster pack until somebody finally hits 50 kills, with minimal order, rhyme or reason to any of it. It's like a basketball game without hoops, where the players do nothing but run the floor, dribble, and pass it to each other the entire time.

As for rockets, they're (usually) the most powerful and contested item on the map. Therefore, they should yield the highest reward for whoever can come away with them. That's just common sense. I believe that the skill with rockets is maximizing your output with them. Any average player can fire off 4 crude rockets and come away with the requisite 4 kills (one per shot). Someone with a higher skill and/or experience level will have a better idea of where and when to place his rockets, capitalizing on spawners and players moving blindly during combat. He can turn single kills into two-for-ones, two-for-ones into triples. Even if he doesn't get the extra kill, every additional player he hurts with splash damage becomes an easy cleanup for his teammates, putting even more kills on the board or furthering the goal of clearing out the map and putting the other team on respawn for an objective run.

Your point makes sense for slayer, but what Kelly usually argues is that slayer sucks and objectives solve the problem. Which I think is a fair point. 

I agree that there's still skill to rockets and maximizing efficiency, but the ceiling is low compared to maximizing sniper shots. And later Halo games prove the sniper is still a highly contested and valuable weapon. 

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Larry Sizemore said:

Power weapons are necessary for directing map flow and providing the match with a focal point. Halo 5 has hardly any true power weapons in arena, and since most of the maps lack any useful power positions as well, the game plays like a directionless clusterfuck and devolves into a bunch of jerkoffs whizzing around the map with their AR, magnum, and thruster pack until somebody finally hits 50 kills, with minimal order, rhyme or reason to any of it. It's like a basketball game without hoops, where the players do nothing but run the floor, dribble, and pass it to each other the entire time.

As for rockets, they're (usually) the most powerful and contested item on the map. Therefore, they should offer the highest reward for whoever can come away with them. That's just common sense. I believe that the skill with rockets is maximizing your output with them. Any average player can fire off 4 crude rockets and come away with the requisite 4 kills (one per shot). Someone with a higher skill and/or experience level will have a better idea of where and when to place his rockets, capitalizing on spawners and players moving blindly during combat. He can turn single kills into two-for-ones, two-for-ones into triples. Even if he doesn't get the extra kill, every additional player he hurts with splash damage becomes an easy cleanup for his teammates, putting even more kills on the board or furthering the goal of clearing out the map and putting the other team on respawn for an objective run.

That entire first paragraph is hilariously false. I'm just gonna ask you how much halo 5 did you play?

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

OS and Camo aren't inherently offensive power ups. You can play passively with them, and often times should. The only thing that encourages playing aggressive is MAYBE damage boost. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, VinnyMendoza said:

Your point makes sense for slayer, but what Kelly usually argues is that slayer sucks and objectives solve the problem. Which I think is a fair point. 

Objective gametypes provide one point of contention on the map (hill, ball, other team's flag) instead of zero. That's a slight improvement, but still boring as shit. Particularly in H5's case.

13 minutes ago, VinnyMendoza said:

I agree that there's still skill to rockets and maximizing efficiency, but the ceiling is low compared to maximizing sniper shots. And later Halo games prove the sniper is still a highly contested and valuable weapon. 

So what? There's always going to be one act that takes more skill than another act. I've just demonstrated that there is skill involved with the other act. Sucking the life out of that weapon in some sorry attempt to make it take a teeny-tiny bit more skill to get it up to par with the other act (the one that supposedly takes more skill to begin with) won't accomplish anything.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, My Namez BEAST said:

That entire first paragraph is hilariously false. I'm just gonna ask you how much halo 5 did you play?

More than enough to know that it was pure shit water and a mistake of an endeavor.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Larry Sizemore said:

More than enough to know that it was pure shit water and a mistake of an endeavor.

So you didn't play much nor did you play high level. Gotcha makes sense now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, My Namez BEAST said:

So you didn't play much nor did you play high level. Gotcha makes sense now.  

No, I played plenty. You just hear what you want to hear because, as usual, you have absolutely no counter to a single goddamn thing anyone is saying.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Larry Sizemore said:

No, I played plenty. You just hear what you want to hear because, as usual, you have absolutely no counter to a single goddamn thing anyone is saying.

Ah my sweet summer child show some self awareness please. It's almost like we have had this exact same conversation and all it ends up at is you guys calling us ******* for not liking what you like. This isn't new. 

Also here you go young one. Halo 5 is NOTORIOUS for having stupidly powerful broken power weapons. It was pretty much unanimously believed by pros that the game was dominated too hard by power weapons. And literally every map change made to HCS, shockingly, limited power weapons either by ammo or numbers. So forgive me for assuming you don't play the game based on that flat out wrong statement. However, you could simply, I don't know, answer the question I asked about how much you played the game. You know, a tangible number of sorts? 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Boyo said:

I’m aware of your philosophy.  If you HAD to pick three weapons to be on map pick ups, what would they be?

Again, I wouldn't, lol. If we talk power items as they are right now, at least. If you're talking about tweaking shit? Eh, I'd have to get back to you about it.

1 hour ago, Larry Sizemore said:

Power weapons are necessary for directing map flow and providing the match with a focal point. Halo 5 has hardly any true power weapons in arena, and since most of the maps lack any useful power positions as well, the game plays like a directionless clusterfuck and devolves into a bunch of jerkoffs whizzing around the map with their AR, magnum, and thruster pack until somebody finally hits 50 kills, with minimal order, rhyme or reason to any of it. It's like a basketball game without hoops, where the players do nothing but run the floor, dribble, and pass it to each other the entire time.

It literally sounds like you've never played Halo 5 before, lol. 

Share this post


Link to post

I hate H5 as much as the next guy but the power weapons in that game are borderline broken. I mean Larry's right that it's mostly a clusterfuck of people running around on terrible oversized and cluttered maps. But let's face it that's mostly because of the bullshit abilities and the pistol being so useless at punishing people for running around like headless chicken and not because the power weapons are too weak. Literally the first time I'm reading that H5's power items aren't good enough.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Larry Sizemore said:

Objective gametypes provide one point of contention on the map (hill, ball, other team's flag) instead of zero. That's a slight improvement, but still boring as shit. Particularly in H5's case.

So what? There's always going to be one act that takes more skill than another act. I've just demonstrated that there is skill involved with the other act. Sucking the life out of that weapon in some sorry attempt to make it take a teeny-tiny bit more skill to get it up to par with the other act (the one that supposedly takes more skill to begin with) won't accomplish anything.

I agree that power items just add more flavour. I'm on your side with that one.

 

Your second paragraph didn't really convince me of anything. It was kinda like a "just because" argument. I still don't see how the weapon requiring more skill would be a bad thing. Perhaps it could still be really powerful if that's what people like about it, but require more skill in its usage. Imo it would just make it even more awesome when a pro is slaughtering people with it in a way I could never do. That's the appeal of the sniper for instance.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Fixaimingsorry said:

Backed into a corner? Who the hell gave you the right to dictate what’s true and untrue. A fact is blue is blue, but an opinion is what’s competitive and what isn’t. Regardless of what majority may think about that subjective opinion, it remains an opinion you fool. A conversation is a conversation where one can agree or disagree. Now if we go into debates, you must convince me or others that you’re right, by providing facts! Not saying shit like “2v2” ce is the most competitive by only providing what goes on in that game and not using what goes on in the 4v4 games you’re debating are inferior.

Actually, what is competitive vs. not competitive is not a matter of subjective opinion. "Fun" is subjective, but "competitive" merit can be fairly well defined objectively, with some room for subjectivity. For example, we can all agree that, objectively, basketball is more competitive than rock-paper-scissors. That's a fairly clear example of OBJECTIVE reality in determining what is or isn't competitive. However, we can't objectively say Soccer is more competitive than Basketball, but we can acknowledge that they are both competitive. 

Just because someone disagrees with something doesn't mean the discussion is subjective. Someone can claim the earth is flat, but that doesn't suddenly make the geometry of the earth subjective, it just makes them ignorant. 

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

You know, there’s a reason call of duty doesn’t have TDM in its competitive mode. Because TS always creates these situations of camping in the back of a certain area. I do agree with you Ice that obj is the way to incentivize map movement. But many here and I’d say most in the halo community like power weapons and ups, simply because they’re another layer in the game. I understand this hate of a position being taken over simply because this guy had rockets or snipe. Heck’s even the hr Grenade launcher was annoying AF. But this extra layer of gameplay outside of simple stuff such as positions, gun skill etc etc isn’t always bad. 

Share this post


Link to post

CE frags as a "power-weapon".

 

Vote Yes or Yes and explain why or why.

  • Simms (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Fixaimingsorry said:

Backed into a corner? Who the hell gave you the right to dictate what’s true and untrue. A fact is blue is blue, but an opinion is what’s competitive and what isn’t. Regardless of what majority may think about that subjective opinion, it remains an opinion you fool. A conversation is a conversation where one can agree or disagree. Now if we go into debates, you must convince me or others that you’re right, by providing facts! Not saying shit like “2v2” ce is the most competitive by only providing what goes on in that game and not using what goes on in the 4v4 games you’re debating are inferior.

No one gave me the right, that's what objectivity means.  I didn't determine it otherwise it would be subjective.  Ironically, the most condescending a egotistical thing I find is when someone is trying to discuss mechanics and then the other party devolves into "well, that's subjective".  The very idea of objectivity is the most humbling perspective any designer or artist can follow - it means you admit that you determine nothing and simply recognize a truth that exists within everyone.  That everybody is capable of inherently recognizing the human nature within us and that there is something we are inexplicably drawn to ("good" game design) and that we're just struggling to interpret that and reach it.

You looking at any discussion, any merit of competition, any game, any piece of art, and then instantly devaluing it into "well CE 2's are in my opinion bad" is what find to be condescending; an undeserved and unwarranted critique.  As if I was going to listen to the Moonlight Sonata and respond in kind with "Well don't like it, it's subjective." 

 

'Competitive' (or, skill ceiling to describe it more accurately) is probably the easiest thing to measure in a game.  Average kill times vs perfect kill times, strafe speed, AA levels, outside factors to track, outplay potential.. all numbers that can be easily looked at and digested.  Even outside of that, I think everyone whether or not they want to admit it is perfectly capable of inherently recognizing something and how it resonates with them without ever consciously realizing it or stating it.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, VinnyMendoza said:

You can't make a game completely predictable though. There's a fine line. A perfectly predictable game would be like octagon. No one is arguing that it's not really skillful, but it's also not as replayable or interesting. 

Like I said I see where you're coming from and I think it comes down to preference in how much unpredictability you desire. I think a little more unpredictability that is temporary and was earned and promotes more map movement is acceptable. 

I know you can't make a game 100% predictable. That doesn't mean you should add more unpredictability to it for the sake of "variety" in this way when you could get it through other ways.

 

Share this post


Link to post

There’s one of two ways to look at the power items in CE. They’re either cheese that allow lesser skilled players to get undeserved kills against better players and thus lower the skill gap, or they are items that allow an already good player to shine even more and allow them to have absolute control of a match over lesser skilled players thus making the skill gap wider. Now, one could easily see how in theory the OS, camo, and rocks would fall into the former category. In practice, however, they most definitely fall into the latter. Great CE players don’t just beat good and average players. They shit on them in a pretty dominating fashion. You can theory craft all you want but at the end of the day the gameplay has to speak for itself.

Share this post


Link to post

If you make a game that has to be played "at a high level" to be fun your game isn't good

  • Like (+1) 5
  • Upvote (+1) 4

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.