Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

[Cooper]

Numbers? Because few games have absolutely no skilled players. And all it takes is one guy who understates radar to abuse it.

What do you consider a "skilled player"?

[My Namez BEAST]

That's an assumption.

 

One that based on factual evidence and my own personal experiences that I would have to disagree with.

Factual evidence? Really? Show me these "facts" please.

[Cooper]

How about you guys go on the waypoint forums and make a thread about radar saying the things you are saying here.

 

I will sit back and watch the hilarity.

[EagleBurn]

WTF just happened in my game? It went to blackscreen 5-7 times and then it brought me to the loading screen where I only saw the opposing team in the post-game stats. 10 months in and I'm still finding new problems with MCC. It's like an Easter egg hunt, but instead of eggs, it's just with tears and salt.

[My Namez BEAST]

How about you guys go on the waypoint forums and make a thread about radar saying the things you are saying here.

 

I will sit back and watch the hilarity.

Because I always go to Waypoint for my Halo needs!

[Nj Pro]

New players THINK that the radar helps them find people. All it actually does is show skilled players where they are. If there are any maps with verticality radar is the worst possible thing for a team trying to get top control. Just look at Construct with radars. One of the worst experiences of all time once a team gets top control.

 

I have a bunch of casual friends who hate playing without radar. He actually enjoys camping in a corner with a sword on swordbase.. says it takes "skill"  

 

He also says Cheif should have radar because he is Masterchief and this is the major factor i notice with the casuals- they want everything to be realistic.... "But chief is a super spartan, he should be able to sprint"... or "chief is super spartan he should have all these spartan abilities"... etc

 

I agree radar stinks and actually hurts the lesser skilled, but they dont give hoot lol

[Cooper]

Factual evidence? Really? Show me these "facts" please.

How about the fact that 343 introduced thier playlists jackpots in reach. The MLG playlist received this jackpot treatment multiple times. The MLG population boomed. All kinds of casual players tried out the settings.

 

By your logic all these players would have kept playing after the jackpot time was over because the playlist had "superior" settings.

 

They didn't. They returned to the default lists.

[Droid]

How about the fact that 343 introduced thier playlists jackpots in reach. The MLG playlist received this jackpot treatment multiple times. The MLG population boomed. All kinds of casual players tried out the settings.

 

By your logic all these players would have kept playing after the jackpot time was over because the playlist had "superior" settings.

 

They didn't. They returned to the default lists.

 

 

I know it was years ago but you honestly cannot expect us to believe that unless you have some sort of actual stats to back that up. This is also a case (if it's true) of correlation =/= causation. You could easily argue that since there was a lack of a decent/actual ranking system in Reach all of these new players likely jumped into the playlist, got stomped, and proceeded to leave.

[My Namez BEAST]

How about the fact that 343 introduced thier playlists jackpots in reach. The MLG playlist received this jackpot treatment multiple times. The MLG population boomed. All kinds of casual players tried out the settings.

 

By your logic all these players would have kept playing after the jackpot time was over because the playlist had "superior" settings.

 

They didn't. They returned to the default lists.

That's because of the stigma that "default" has. There are no playlists with better populations than "default settings" because people assume that's how the game was meant to be played. They didn't stay in the MLG playlist because to them that's just another playlist that they can play when they are bored of the "real default" way to play.

[jeromesix]

They didn't. They returned to the default lists.

And what a lot of people are arguing is that they returned to the default playlists because they were named "team slayer" and no other reason.

 

Dude I avoided the hardcore playlist in H2 just because it was called that. It was intimidating. If only I knew then what I know now...

 

My wife is another example' and never wanted to play Arena or MLG in Reach because she thought they would be to competitive. But when CEA came out we switched to playing Anniversary Classic almost exclusively - which had far more competitive settings then vanilla Reach. And it was far more fun because of it.

 

The name of a playlist is very important. That's why Super Slayer and Legendary Slayer never took off - cuz what the hell does those names even mean?

 

It's the same reason zero bloom didn't do well in Reach (even though it's undeniably objectively better) because the name was confusing to casual players without the deep game knowledge.

[Cooper]

I know it was years ago but you honestly cannot expect us to believe that unless you have some sort of actual stats to back that up. This is also a case (if it's true) of correlation =/= causation. You could easily argue that since there was a lack of a decent/actual ranking system in Reach all of these new players likely jumped into the playlist, got stomped, and proceeded to leave.

You could make that arguement. Are you going to make that arguement for everything though?

 

Everyone here prefers BR starts to AR starts in h3 and yet...

 

Bungie was not shy about disclosing that based on veto stats, AR starts were vastly more popular than BR starts.

 

What you like, is just YOUR OPINION.

[My Namez BEAST]

I have a bunch of casual friends who hate playing without radar. He actually enjoys camping in a corner with a sword on swordbase.. says it takes "skill"

 

He also says Cheif should have radar because he is Masterchief and this is the major factor i notice with the casuals- they want everything to be realistic.... "But chief is a super spartan, he should be able to sprint"... or "chief is super spartan he should have all these spartan abilities"... etc

 

I agree radar stinks and actually hurts the lesser skilled, but they dont give hoot lol

Thy love it until it happens to them lol. I think a big problem is that they try no radar, get assassinated, then quit thinking "no radar is stupid". They have played thousands of games with a radar and only like 10 without one, yet they can make all these crazy claims.

 

The main thing is that some kids can abuse radar while others have no idea how it works. When I play social I abuse the shit out of it and can do well pretty easily. As far as your friend who enjoys that, I'm sure he does. But reverse the scenario. Give the other team top with swords crouching and see if he still likes it.

[jeromesix]

Everyone here prefers BR starts to AR starts in h3 and yet...

 

Bungie was not shy about disclosing that based on veto stats, AR starts were vastly more popular than BR starts.

 

 

Ummm, people vote against their best interests ask the time in real life. Don't you think it might be happening in a video game as well?

 

(Besides the H3 BR can't really be used as an example of a competitive weapon.)

[Droid]

You could make that arguement. Are you going to make that arguement for everything though?

 

Everyone here prefers BR starts to AR starts in h3 and yet...

 

Bungie was not shy about disclosing that based on veto stats, AR starts were vastly more popular than BR starts.

 

What you like, is just YOUR OPINION.

 

 

Oh you mean the same Bungie that gave Halo 2 SMG starts and later stated it was a bad idea? Give me a fucking break. Bungie can poop out all of the stats they want but the end of the day AR starts, radar, and all of that does impact the game play in negative ways whether or not the masses of noobs care or even know about. Shouldn't game play be tailored or favored to those who play the game most, I mean is that not fair?

 

I don't know how much Halo you have or have not played but I've clocked in a fair amount of time over the years playing Halo. (I have 773 MM games in MCC, 1124 in Halo 4, 6195 in Reach, and over 4000 in Halo 3) Here's what I've learned from playing, this isn't opinion, this isn't hyperbole, this is legitimate gameplay and therefore FACT:

 

Radar: frequent crouching and slowing down of gameplay in close quarters combat, leads to less sneaky game play and forces backing off in situations that one shouldn't have to. My problem with radar is that gives away a person's position without their consent, and considering how most of the games I play with radar noobs don't understand how to utilize it anyways its removal would do nothing but benefit everyone. What would happen is noobs would learn after playing games over and over that they actually need to use their thumbs and look for the enemy, not have their location presented on a silver platter. I also feel this may contribute to the 'thumbless-ness' of new players because they look more at their radar than their actual screen which creates a bad habit of over-relying on it.

 

AR starts: This has been debated to death and your advocacy for it because it's 'what the noobs play' only further undermines your point. If you want to come in here and start swinging you better read up on our side of the argument, and given the amount of dodging in your posts you are clearly not educated enough in the matter to even be discussing it. I've definitely have played more AR start game types than most players who vote for the game type because I've clocked in more time in Halo than a vast majority of Halo players so my 'opinion' on it is definitely more credible than 99% of the people who choose to play that game type.

 

Here's another fact for you: when you start with a gun that can only shoot close to mid-range the game has a much higher chance of snowballing and resulting in a match being a blowout. You know which group of players really don't like being stomped into the ground? Noobs. So why would it be in their best interest to spawn them with a weapon in which they are completely useless with because the weapon itself is awful? Do you think noobs like losing 50-16 because they can't shoot back at the player with rockets, sniper, BR, overshield, etc?

 

No, they don't. Precision weapons are harder to aim, but I guarantee you that if you put a BR in a player's hands in place of an AR for all of the games they have ever played that they will be able to shoot somewhat competently. Noobs would have more fun because they have better means of actually killing their opponent as opposed to tickling them. 

 

The major problem with your argument is that all of these crutches noobs love in the long term keep them at being worse and keep them from never getting better, and therefore having less fun. I'm sure some people love dual-wielding SMGs to their heart's desire, but I'm willing to wager they love getting more kills or winning even more.

 

The radar and AR starts are weak tools that give them the concept of how to play a game but ultimately they will never get better because these tools don't teach or influence better decision making. Why would a player ever need to think about map positioning when the radar just tells him where everything is at? Why would a player ever need or want to learn how to shoot precision weapons when he can just spray his AR and trade melee kills? Why bother?

 

Now ultimately you'll state something obviously stupid like, "well noobs don't care about getting better, they just want to have fun!" and for the most part you would be right. However, I dare you to find me a person who enjoys losing on a regular basis or enjoys going 2 and 15 every match. Do it. What you'll ultimately find is that every human being loves to win, and if we can incorporate tools into the game to naturally and progressively make them better over time so they can win more why is it at all logical to keep in ones that hinder them instead?

[Cooper]

Ummm, people vote against their best interests ask the time in real life. Don't you think it might be happening in a video game as well?

 

 

What?

[xboxdigger 94]

 

I love going negative everygame <3 

 

Sometimes going negative gets boring so I  push for a 0, or sometimes even +1. 

[jeromesix]

What?

How do you not understand that? I really can't believe that.

 

Edit: oh I had a typo. "ask" should be "all"

 

Even still though.

[Cooper]

Oh you mean the same Bungie that gave Halo 2 SMG starts and later stated it was a bad idea? Give me a fucking break. Bungie can poop out all of the stats they want but the end of the day AR starts, radar, and all of that does impact the game play in negative ways whether or not the masses of noobs care or even know about. Shouldn't game play be tailored or favored to those who play the game most, I mean is that not fair?

 

I don't know how much Halo you have or have not played but I've clocked in a fair amount of time over the years playing Halo. (I have 773 MM games in MCC, 1124 in Halo 4, 6195 in Reach, and over 4000 in Halo 3) Here's what I've learned from playing, this isn't opinion, this isn't hyperbole, this is legitimate gameplay and therefore FACT:

 

Radar: frequent crouching and slowing down of gameplay in close quarters combat, leads to less sneaky game play and forces backing off in situations that one shouldn't have to. My problem with radar is that gives away a person's position without their consent, and considering how most of the games I play with radar noobs don't understand how to utilize it anyways its removal would do nothing but benefit everyone. What would happen is noobs would learn after playing games over and over that they actually need to use their thumbs and look for the enemy, not have their location presented on a silver platter. I also feel this may contribute to the 'thumbless-ness' of new players because they look more at their radar than their actual screen which creates a bad habit of over-relying on it.

 

AR starts: This has been debated to death and your advocacy for it because it's 'what the noobs play' only further undermines your point. If you want to come in here and start swinging you better read up on our side of the argument, and given the amount of dodging in your posts you are clearly not educated enough in the matter to even be discussing it. I've definitely have played more AR start game types than most players who vote for the game type because I've clocked in more time in Halo than a vast majority of Halo players so my 'opinion' on it is definitely more credible than 99% of the people who choose to play that game type.

 

Here's another fact for you: when you start with a gun that can only shoot close to mid-range the game has a much higher chance of snowballing and resulting in a match being a blowout. You know which group of players really don't like being stomped into the ground? Noobs. So why would it be in their best interest to spawn them with a weapon in which they are completely useless with because the weapon itself is awful? Do you think noobs like losing 50-16 because they can't shoot back at the player with rockets, sniper, BR, overshield, etc?

 

No, they don't. Precision weapons are harder to aim, but I guarantee you that if you put a BR in a player's hands in place of an AR for all of the games they have ever played that they will be able to shoot somewhat competently. Noobs would have more fun because they have better means of actually killing their opponent as opposed to tickling them. 

 

The major problem with your argument is that all of these crutches noobs love in the long term keep them at being worse and keep them from never getting better, and therefore having less fun. I'm sure some people love dual-wielding SMGs to their heart's desire, but I'm willing to wager they love getting more kills or winning even more.

 

The radar and AR starts are weak tools that give them the concept of how to play a game but ultimately they will never get better because these tools don't teach or influence better decision making. Why would a player ever need to think about map positioning when the radar just tells him where everything is at? Why would a player ever need or want to learn how to shoot precision weapons when he can just spray his AR and trade melee kills? Why bother?

 

Now ultimately you'll state something obviously stupid like, "well noobs don't care about getting better, they just want to have fun!" and for the most part you would be right. However, I dare you to find me a person who enjoys losing on a regular basis or enjoys going 2 and 15 every match. Do it. What you'll ultimately find is that every human being loves to win, and if we can incorporate tools into the game to naturally and progressively make them better over time so they can win more why is it at all logical to keep in ones that hinder them instead?

I'm not sure how many games of Halo I have played.

 

H3 Main-https://halo.bungie.net/stats/halo3/careerstats.aspx?player=thats%20Cheese

Alt-https://halo.bungie.net/stats/halo3/careerstats.aspx?player=CooperIVIW

Alt-https://halo.bungie.net/stats/halo3/careerstats.aspx?player=Coopers%201%20month

I had other alts as well so I was probably close to 5000

 

Reach- https://halo.bungie.net/Stats/Reach/CareerStats/default.aspx?player=CoooooooooooP

 

Played maybe 50 games of H4.

 

All these gameplay facts you are giving are only facts in games YOU play.  Radar did not make level 20 TS in H3 slow and crouchy. It only served to give the hordes of headless chickens a target to run after. There is a reason every game you play these days has waypoints all over the screen telling you exactly where to go and what to do when you get there. Do you like that? No. Do I like that? No. Does either of our opinions really matter in the grand scheme of things? No.

 

Hardcore settings should totally be catered to Hardcore players. Casual players are never going to enjoy hardcore settings as much as they are going to enjoy settings that are full of crutches(that allow them to enjoy the game).

 

I understand all the pitfalls of AR starts. They were terrible. I literally quit H3 for months when it launched to go play COD4 because the game was all AR starts. I'm not saying I like AR starts. But again, what I as an individual like or dislike is largely irrelevant. If the data the dev has says that the majority of the millions of players out there prefers AR starts they're not going to make every gametype BR spawns. You can kick, scream and write novels about game balancing all you want. It's not going to change little tommy Halo player's opinion.

 

The major flaw in your logic is your train of thought that says take away the crutches and bad players will get better and have more fun. On paper that sounds great. But most won't do that. They'l just stop playing and go play COD or destiny or some other crap game that isn't taking away the crutches.

 

The MUCH more effective way to encourage a player to stick with a game and learn is to ease a player into the game with entry level settings and then also offer hardcore settings that they can move on to once they are comfortable and willing.

[Larry Sizemore]

It's the same reason zero bloom didn't do well in Reach (even though it's undeniably objectively better) because the name was confusing to casual players without the deep game knowledge.

 

"ZB TU Slayer DMRs"

 

I mean, what the actual fuck? In retrospect that was a giant clue about the kind of shit we were in for with 343.

 

Lots of ordinary people don't even know that reticle bloom is called bloom. To them it's just some weird thing the reticle does after you fire. I remember playing that playlist when it launched and I can't tell you how many times I heard something like this from people in game: "Oh, the DMR doesn't go crazy after you fire it now! I was wondering what ZB TU meant! I actually like this better, the game seems to move faster now."

 

Unbelievably bad marketing. Just flat-out bush league actually.

[Cooper]

Look, I understand where you guys are coming from. I think sprint is something the majority thinks they like. But that that is only due to the fact that they don't understand the effects it has on the rest of the game. I think the majority would have way more fun with a sprintless Halo.

 

I just don't think radar falls into this category. 

 

Agree to disagree

[jeromesix]

He's right about casual players wanting a crutch though. This is why when I play a casual game of basketball with friends we use a girls ball, have no dribbling rule and set the net height at 6 feet.

 

It's much more fun, but that's subjective I guess.

[Larry Sizemore]

You know what might work as a substitute for radar in future Halo games? The map feature from ODST (with limited range of course). Everybody loves ODST in spite of the lack of motion tracker (imperfect comparison because it's a campaign game, but still). You can still have the eyes in back of your head, but now you have to stand still and actually open up the map, taking away your first-person visibility, in order to benefit from it.

 

And honestly, there are so many people out there riding 343's nuts raw no matter what they do that the studio could sell them on pretty much anything with some slick PR talk.

[Cursed Lemon]

Hardcore settings should totally be catered to Hardcore players. Casual players are never going to enjoy hardcore settings as much as they are going to enjoy settings that are full of crutches(that allow them to enjoy the game).

It's called a ranking system, or a social playlist. 

 

The settings have nothing to do with it. 

[My Namez BEAST]

He's right about casual players wanting a crutch though. This is why when I play a casual game of basketball with friends we use a girls ball, have no dribbling rule and set the net height at 6 feet.

 

It's much more fun, but that's subjective I guess.

...

[Cooper]

He's right about casual players wanting a crutch though. This is why when I play a casual game of basketball with friends we use a girls ball, have no dribbling rule and set the net height at 6 feet.

 

It's much more fun, but that's subjective I guess.

You do realise the NBA has a further 3 point line than amateur basketball right?