Jump to content
CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

I tune in to a lot of Overwatch league and play at a somewhat high level. And I agree with @MultiLockOn about it being very difficult to follow. I've had to watch a ton of footage to try and understand what's happening. Even then the cameraman has to have the camera in the right spot so you can see what happened.

Having said all of that its still very entertaining to watch. What makes Overwatch special is the heroes. The team compositions and strategies that get used are what makes every game and every OWL team unique. There simply isn't that much variance in Halo. It's much more subtle. Halo is of course a much easier game to watch for a spectator though. I'm not sure that spectators care that much about truly understanding pro gameplay though. Overwatch is flashy and colorful and that seems to attract audiences. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Destroyaaa said:

I tune in to a lot of Overwatch league and play at a somewhat high level. And I agree with @MultiLockOn about it being very difficult to follow. I've had to watch a ton of footage to try and understand what's happening. Even then the cameraman has to have the camera in the right spot so you can see what happened.

 Having said all of that its still very entertaining to watch. What makes Overwatch special is the heroes. The team compositions and strategies that get used are what makes every game and every OWL team unique. There simply isn't that much variance in Halo. It's much more subtle. Halo is of course a much easier game to watch for a spectator though. I'm not sure that spectators care that much about truly understanding pro gameplay though. Overwatch is flashy and colorful and that seems to attract audiences. 

I mean there is character differentiation and different counters to them, but the overall meta remains the same. 

OW has a good enough spectator mode that you can understand whats going on without seeing it first hand. I've been watching some streamers and the OW league for the past couple days and I don't ever feel like I'm lost in whats happening even if I'm not seeing it through whatever player I'm watching. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Nokt said:

I mean there is character differentiation and different counters to them, but the overall meta remains the same. 

OW has a good enough spectator mode that you can understand whats going on without seeing it first hand. I've been watching some streamers and the OW league for the past couple days and I don't ever feel like I'm lost in whats happening even if I'm not seeing it through whatever player I'm watching. 

The meta has changed tremendously since the game came out. New heroes, new maps, hero balancing, and just more coordinated teamwork has contributed to that. Right now GOAT's is the still the dominant pro meta which is pretty terrible for the viewers but outside of pro play there isn't really a dominant meta.

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Silos said:

I was thinking a bit about something the other day, and would love to hear your perspective. This triggered the thought again.

For individual skill, I feel it's pretty easy to determine an individual aspect. Like if you miss more shots in one game compared to another assuming the same input method, it's probably harder to aim. If you mess up your movement more, it's probably harder to move.

But how would you "measure" teamwork skill? My current understanding would suggest that it's too abstract to judge or purposefully design for. But if I purposefully wanted to make a game have a higher focus on teamwork, would you have certain things you would measure or plan for to do this?

If I had to guess, I would suggest that you would measure the amount of opportunities you had to assist a teammate. Be a distraction, give information, offer firepower. But in my suggestion, teamwork skill immediately goes up by adding more people, but I don't think MAG's 128v128 necessarily has a high teamwork skill gap just because it has significantly more people than Halo 2v2.

I think it has more to do with possible opportunities to work as a team rather than how often it actually happens.  I don't believe Halo 2 requires more teamwork than CE just because you quite literally have to sit there with a team of 4 to pelt someone out of S3 on Lockout, just like I believe CE has a higher cooperative skill than other Halo's by looking at the buddy spawning on its own. Halo 2 forcing teamshot isn't "more teamwork" just because it happens more frequently because teamshot will always be an effective strategy in any shooter no matter what, it's not as though because CE is so individualized that shooting someone with your teammate is no longer a viable strategy.  It's still just as (if not more) effective, it's just not a requirement.  Unless you design a weapon that literally doesn't do additive damage to someone if they're already being shot with it, not possible.

Like you said about Mag's 128 vs 128, it just exaggerates the high end of these high player count modes but makes the same point.  It's just beyond human comprehension, you can't possible understand what's happening with your 127 other teammates let alone the entire enemy.  No amount, or little, communication will ever change that so encounters begin to delve into unpredictability and randomness.  It's probably just important to decide where exactly that threshold is for the best output of teamwork and individualism.  I'd argue 2v2 is the actual, mathematical perfect number. In a 1v1 everything is completely under your control. If you see a weapon missing and you didn't pick it up, you know the enemy did.  A missing health orb? The enemy just ran through here.  There's no reason with a well designed map and game in that sense to ever have a lack of predictability. 2v2 you can essentially occupy 99.9999999999% of that predictability and situational awareness because it's very easy to be actively communicating with 1 other person. I speak, they speak.  We're all clear.  If I don't see someone on my screen, and he doesn't on his, it's usually pretty  easy to do a 1 second analysis and make a pretty educated guess (in a well designed map) to know exactly where the enemy team is. If I see the arrow over his head turning red because he's shooting you can find out within an instant where he's shooting at or being attacked from.  And it's through that in a 2v2 if I stared at one person's screen, you can basically instantly understand what all 4 people are doing. I'd argue that once you step above that player count all of that begins to fly out the window.  I think 3v3 teeters the edge and 4v4 jumps off it. But in a 2v2, there should never be an encounter that you're not involved in some fashion - even as a distraction or just being a nearby threat of presence so that they just choose to not walk a certain direction.  There's basically no single encounter in a 2v2 match that's doesn't involve both teammates, even if one is literally dead on the respawn screen it's influencing a lot of decisions as to how much time they have to push the other teammate or allow the other to respawn.  So much of that goes out the window the more players you introduce. That's at least why I like 2's - easy to communicate.  Easy to watch.  Highly highly interactive.  And a great mix of individualism and team focus. It also means you can afford to have more power weapons on the map, at least in Halo where you can only carry two at a time it's not intelligent to ever be without your utility weapon (unless you're t2 rocket snipe).  So the chances that one team in a 2v2 would carry 4 power weapons are pretty low, meaning that they'll likely be distributed throughout both teams.  In a 4v4 they can all be carried without a second thought and then snowballed.

 

As for your question, I think there are many ways to purposefully design for teamwork without shoving it in their face and forcing it to happen.  The buddy spawning is the most current obvious example we have but a lot can be done regarding weapon design. Level design can reward teams for splitting up and covering otherwise unwatchable angles (<--- big one), grenades are usually a good tool to prevent hand holding if they're tuned properly.  But it's hard to comment on specifics without knowing the game in question.  Just realize that mechanical skill and inputs are half the battle in any shooter, the other half being mental skill and decision making. the more you can expand both of which the better of you'll be.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Destroyaaa said:

The meta has changed tremendously since the game came out. New heroes, new maps, hero balancing, and just more coordinated teamwork has contributed to that. Right now GOAT's is the still the dominant pro meta which is pretty terrible for the viewers but outside of pro play there isn't really a dominant meta.

Miscommunication on my part. I didn't mean that it hasn't changed over time, just that as people pick different characters/counters the overall meta remains the same currently.

There is also that most of the action plays out within a much smaller area, its rare that you'll have multiple small battle around the map. Its all pretty much centered in a single area which helps to keep track of whats going on without having to switch between a bunch of players. 

Share this post


Link to post

I’ve always wondered why 3v3 isn’t more of a thing in halo. I clearly remember some of my more interesting matches during H3 where the match was locked 3v3. Just seemed strange that we jump from 2v2’s to 4’s. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Stoppabl3 said:

I’ve always wondered why 3v3 isn’t more of a thing in halo. I clearly remember some of my more interesting matches during H3 where the match was locked 3v3. Just seemed strange that we jump from 2v2’s to 4’s. 

It had to do with the number of controllers xbox could handle at the time.  That was essentially the determining factor. Now that splitscreen isn't relevant it's become somewhat of a relic player count outside of Halo. Playing 3v3 Trials in Destiny was a lot of fun though, my first encounter with that player count.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Stoppabl3 said:

I’ve always wondered why 3v3 isn’t more of a thing in halo. I clearly remember some of my more interesting matches during H3 where the match was locked 3v3. Just seemed strange that we jump from 2v2’s to 4’s. 

I always hated if the MM settled for a 3v3 because H3's maps were mostly too big and shit got stupid boring on stuff like Pit TS. But if the game was designed around the player count I could totes see this become a thing. I remember CE 3v3s in MCC (which IIRC was an accident on 343s part lol) being quite fun.

Having an uneven player count forces teams to make decisions and is why CSGO being 5v5 is so crucial. The CTs can't just stack both bomb sites with 2 players, they have to make a decision and prioritise. I could see something similar in Halo in objective gametypes.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, OG Nick said:

In response to the SAW being fine by saying it is a power weapon, power weapons should not be easy to use. They should be the hardest weapons to use OR come with a lot of risks

Why? 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Arlong said:

Why? 

Because easy to use is not fun to play against. 

Share this post


Link to post
59 minutes ago, MultiLockOn said:

The buddy spawning i

Didn’t halo reach have a game mode with this spawning? I deeply remember it having a gametype. Another part of this was you could spawn in 3 different spots or next to a teammate but only if they weren’t already in a fight. Would you say this is an improved version of that? 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, OG Nick said:

Because easy to use is not fun to play against. 

Why not? That doesn’t tell me anything. It’s not fun being killed by a power weapon anyway, but it’s definitely fun for the weilder. Hehe.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Arlong said:

Why not? That doesn’t tell me anything. It’s not fun being killed by a power weapon anyway, but it’s definitely fun for the weilder. Hehe.

Hold on let me post your argument in one single gif

giphy.gif

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Arlong said:

Didn’t halo reach have a game mode with this spawning? I deeply remember it having a gametype. Another part of this was you could spawn in 3 different spots or next to a teammate but only if they weren’t already in a fight. Would you say this is an improved version of that? 

Yeah that was a very different buddy system and done in a very different context. 

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, Stoppabl3 said:

I’ve always wondered why 3v3 isn’t more of a thing in halo. I clearly remember some of my more interesting matches during H3 where the match was locked 3v3. Just seemed strange that we jump from 2v2’s to 4’s. 

Honestly, probably has a lot to do with the simple fact that odd numbers didn't work well on split-screen. 2 players got a quarter screen and one had half. It was an awkward setup, and so 2s and 4s became the norm. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, OG Nick said:

Hold on let me post your argument in one single gif

giphy.gif

I love you man haha. That’s honestly perfect. 

In all seriousness I do agree with you. But competitive already does this. They only allow tge power weapons that take skill to use. Rockets are a somewhat exception but in most of the halos besides halo 1 & reach they’re easily dodgeable.

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, MultiLockOn said:

Yeah that was a very different buddy system and done in a very different context. 

Yes it was different but would say it was bad or better? In my opinion it’s better because it gives the player full control where they spawn. With another ability to not get spawn killed because my teammate made a crucial mistake. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Arlong said:

Yes it was different but would say it was bad or better? In my opinion it’s better because it gives the player full control where they spawn.

Well letting the player do what they want isn't necessarily a good thing, the buddy spawning in CE is good because it eliminates (most) randomness.  Reach's system only eliminated randomness from your own end, but from the perspective of an enemy shooting your teammate - how are they supposed to know if they have someone spawning on them? Invasion was a larger player count, are they supposed to memorize which player is tagged to another? It was more akin to squad spawning in Battlefield than it was to buddy spawning in CE.  I could give or take it tbh, the balancing of larger game modes don't bother me one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, MultiLockOn said:

Well letting the player do what they want isn't necessarily a good thing, the buddy spawning in CE is good because it eliminates (most) randomness.  Reach's system only eliminated randomness from your own end, but from the perspective of an enemy shooting your teammate - how are they supposed to know if they have someone spawning on them? Invasion was a larger player count, are they supposed to memorize which player is tagged to another? It was more akin to squad spawning in Battlefield than it was to buddy spawning in CE.  I could give or take it tbh, the balancing of larger game modes don't bother me one way or another.

Hmm ok understandable. I’ve always liked squad spawning, it’s such a unique feature. I’d like to see this for halo infinite’s BTB/warzone. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, MultiLockOn said:

 

If anything 4's showed how shallow the player count is compared to 2's.  If it were truly more skillful to track 4 players on (and 3 of your own) then we might as well jump all the way up to Big Team as the pinnacle of competition.  It's not a ratio where individual skill drops therefore team skill rises.  You can absolutely lose of either and gain nothing in return.  CE has both more individualism and teamwork oriented gameplay than anything that followed, and ironically, the best way to compensate for shit kill times and weapons that we saw in later installments of Halo is to drop the player count and not reduce the potential for massive team shot.  Any setup becomes more difficult to execute when you've only got half the players to man the positions. The only reason you think 4's ended up working out is because it's what we've followed for the past decade, in an alternate reality if Halo was a 5v5 game most people would likely be singing the praise of 5's.  Look beyond the precedent - 4v4 isn't even a conducive player count for any multi sided objective.  You could make an argument for KoTH or Oddball but neither of those are played in rotation competitively anymore (unless they are, in which case don't crucify me. Haven't followed pro H5 in a while).

Thing is, 2v2 and 4v4 are played on the same general maps, whereas BTB has their own big maps and that slows the gameplay down to not take as much skill. 4s takes an extra layer of awareness verse 2v2 in all halo games outside of halo 1. More players to track on smaller maps means you have to know how far you can go without getting melted, how to communicate more effectively and concisely (small talk) and you have to master rotating within all of this with 4 players on the same page.

Another reason why 2s is easier in all the other halo games outside of halo 1 is because the spawn system is very predictable and easy to follow. All 2s is, is slayer meaning that all you have to do is slay the opponent, block a couple spawns and you have a general idea where the opponent is, and that's it... you really don't have to have too much awareness to do this. Whereas in halo 1 the spawn system in 2v2 is a big part of the skill gap since you have the ability to force random spawns or specific spawns, this is a major reason why 2v2 in h1 is more skillful than 4s, since you can't realistically force randoms in h1 4s. Basically, 2v2 H1 is probably the most skillful halo ever due to the spawn system manipulation available, whereas in other halos, the spawn system becomes more simplified and the 2v2 skill gap lowers compared to that of 4s since you don't have to manage as many skills effectively. 

Share this post


Link to post

Seems like Ruffian/Splash Damage are playtesting a Title Update Reach gametype on Beaver Creek on PC. I can kind of make out the words "TU BTB Slayer"
mccpcplaytest1-d08f4e6c22494ce683c5d8299

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Darkomantis said:

Seems like Ruffian/Splash Damage are playtesting a Title Update Reach gametype on Beaver Creek on PC. I can kind of make out the words "TU BTB Slayer"
mccpcplaytest1-d08f4e6c22494ce683c5d8299

YES YOU’RE RIGHT. zoom in with your phone or mouse and it says TU! 343 isn’t being stupid it appears. Where’s that hallelujah music when you need it. 

Share this post


Link to post

Must be nice to be excited/optimistic from that picture

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Arlong said:

YES YOU’RE RIGHT. zoom in with your phone or mouse and it says TU! 343 isn’t being stupid it appears. Where’s that hallelujah music when you need it. 

tu btb was on og reach lol. if it was ZB btb, then u could have called forth the angels

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.