Jump to content
CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

Honestly, I feel it could be solved with having playlists/queue options with something similar to how league of legends has Blind, Draft, and Ranked (along with appropriate incentives). The former two being something along the lines of social playlists with no sbmm and Arena unranked or whatever you want to call it with loose sbmm.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Mr Grim said:

Alright so I got around to playing ce multiplayer.

The fucking pistol is aids. Shot a dude 8 times in the fucking head and didn't get the kill. This was fucking 5 away btw.

It can be frustrating at times, but even with the inconsistency I enjoy it much more than anything else. 

We should keep in mind that console online gaming networks didn't exist when it was made, and it wasn't designed to be played online at all.  Considering that, and the fact that it's a port of a port of a 20 year old game, I think it actually does reasonably well.

But then again, I've been gaming since far before online gaming existed, and was around to experience some really bad connectivity issues along the way, so to me this is pretty minor in comparison. I realize not everyone has this same context.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Mr Grim said:

Alright so I got around to playing ce multiplayer.

The fucking pistol is aids. Shot a dude 8 times in the fucking head and didn't get the kill. This was fucking 5 away btw.

Yeah man every game and every opponent will be a little different. There are some things that you can do to help yourself be more consistent though.

-Don't shoot with the center of your reticle. Shoot with the edges of the circle. Yes, even if they're standing still. Just use the bottom.
-Don't shoot as fast as you can. Take your finger off the trigger between shots if you notice your bullets landing in weird spots. This is the spread bug, where the game thinks your holding in the trigger bc you're shooting too fast. This will be fixed in the next update.

Hopefully this makes the game more enjoyable for you. It'll still be inconsistent, but much less so. You can get a feel for it, and increase your odds.

  • Like (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Hard Way said:

Yeah man every game and every opponent will be a little different. There are some things that you can do to help yourself be more consistent though.

-Don't shoot with the center of your reticle. Shoot with the edges of the circle. Yes, even if they're standing still. Just use the bottom.
-Don't shoot as fast as you can. Take your finger off the trigger between shots if you notice your bullets landing in weird spots. This is the spread bug, where the game thinks your holding in the trigger bc you're shooting too fast. This will be fixed in the next update.

Hopefully this makes the game more enjoyable for you. It'll still be inconsistent, but much less so. You can get a feel for it, and increase your odds.

Thanks for the tips. I played some more last night and sort of got a handle on the thing. Some games it's good and others it's pretty wacky. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I hate how in ce I can lay my whole clip and get no kill. Even h3 MCC ain’t ever done that to me, and I’m talking when I have red reticule.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Reamis25 said:

I hate how in ce I can lay my whole clip and get no kill. Even h3 MCC ain’t ever done that to me, and I’m talking when I have red reticule.

Part of my problem was also not accounting for bullet sway at times. As far as reticle placement, I swear it changes from match to match. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Reamis25 said:

I hate how in ce I can lay my whole clip and get no kill. Even h3 MCC ain’t ever done that to me, and I’m talking when I have red reticule.

Next time it happens, take a clip. Maybe we can help.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Hard Way said:

Next time it happens, take a clip. Maybe we can help.

How do I do this on pc? 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Reamis25 said:

How do I do this on pc? 

Windows 10 has a game record function.

Share this post


Link to post

I can't stand modern SBMM in any game that has it I currently play.

Destiny 2: strict SBMM to protect bad players and casuals from crying on reddit combined with team balancing that skews lobbies makes the game a chore to play.

MCC: I'm assuming there's some heavy lobby balancing going on

H5: Feels pretty strict with some lobby balancing shenanigans

Gears 5: Who the Hell knows how their matchmaking works.

There's a prevailing trend that devs want the low end of the skill curve to keep playing the game, so they try to make them feel good at the game. That's fine, but it seems silly to do that and harm the playerbase that will stick with the game through its lifespan.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, AArkham said:

it seems silly to do that and harm the playerbase that will stick with the game through its lifespan.

^^^^^^^^^^^

Share this post


Link to post

Strict in ranked. The entire point is to play against people your level or around your level until you're better and therefore progress up.

Lax in social, but not completely free so total newcomers don't oppose competent players until they can pick a weapon up without stopping and reading the text for 20 minutes.

Even more lax in BTB.

Parties team with parties unless the playlist is dead. In BTB parties match against parties of equal size (so if you're a party of three, there's a party of three on the other side).

Gee that was hard.

Edit: Also if the game has a big enough playerbase, match people with different styles more often. We know they have the data. Like if you play BTB and it's a CTF game, split the people that have tonnes of objective time (time with ball/flag/bomb in hill) with people that have lots of sniper kills. Match up the people who have thousands of wheelmen with people that have lots of Warthog kills. Split them evenly. I know they have the data for this, why not use it? Imagine ranked where four people on one team are all "equal skill" but one likes to rush flag, one likes to grab shotty and rockets, one just loves using utlity weapons and one loves sniping. They have the data to do this.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Shekkles said:

Strict in ranked. The entire point is to play against people your level or around your level until you're better and therefore progress up.

Lax in social, but not completely free so total newcomers don't oppose competent players until they can pick a weapon up without stopping and reading the text for 20 minutes.

Even more lax in BTB.

Parties team with parties unless the playlist is dead. In BTB parties match against parties of equal size (so if you're a party of three, there's a party of three on the other side).

Gee that was hard.

Edit: Also if the game has a big enough playerbase, match people with different styles more often. We know they have the data. Like if you play BTB and it's a CTF game, split the people that have tonnes of objective time (time with ball/flag/comb in hill) with people that have lots of sniper kills. Match up the people who have thousands of wheelmen with people that have lots of Warthog kills. Split them evenly. I know they have the data for this, why not use it? Imagine ranked where four people on one team are all "equal skill" but one likes to rush flag, one likes to grab shotty and rockets, one just loves using utlity weapons and one loves sniping. They have the data to do this.

We can't do almost any of this because they don't make games that are good enough to have a population to begin with. Obviously its ideal that we have good skill matching that makes sense (looking at you teams of four) but its irrelevant in the face of what they actually produce. It would help if it didn't take an act of congress to implement any improvement in any area of the game too. Poor decisions, slow to react to those decisions, population loss, further loss due to poor MM parameters because of previous loss etc. They destroy themselves by being unbelievably slow to understand and act on feedback. Their entire patch structure seems to be reliant on producing a super good game right out of the gate and then they simply don't. They need to iterate quickly to address inevitable issues. Every developer needs to do this but you have some leeway if you happen to accidentally drop a masterpiece first try unfortunately that almost never happens for anyone not just 343 so really I have no idea what their plan has been or how anyone thought it would be a good idea in relation to the health of the series

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'd be willing to bet the reason companies continue with SBMM is that they have hard data that it actually helps the player base despite the protests on places like Reddit.

I think it's interesting to see how companies take different approaches to game balance; I view Valve at one extreme for example. Their balance patches disregard complaining by the community and (I assume...) wait for data to roll in over a long period of time that informs their decision. I personally think it works really well and believe CS:GO is a good game in part because of it.

Jagex with OSRS is at another extreme with gameplay decisions decided by an in-game polling system. OSRS has gotten really popular in the last few years but I think there's no denying that game has experienced a tremendous amount of power-creep and so much of the game is completely dead-content not even worth exploring. OSRS's founding principle literally was the in-game community polling system created with the intention to let the community steer the game. The dead-content and power-creep is not surprising to me, I think it's a natural consequence of letting the community take control.

 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, NavG123 said:

I'd be willing to bet the reason companies continue with SBMM is that they have hard data that it actually helps the player base despite the protests on places like Reddit.

I think it's interesting to see how companies take different approaches to game balance; I view Valve at one extreme for example. Their balance patches disregard complaining by the community and (I assume...) wait for data to roll in over a long period of time that informs their decision. I personally think it works really well and believe CS:GO is a good game in part because of it.

Jagex with OSRS is at another extreme with gameplay decisions decided by an in-game polling system. OSRS has gotten really popular in the last few years but I think there's no denying that game has experienced a tremendous amount of power-creep and so much of the game is completely dead-content not even worth exploring.

 

That part at the end there is a player problem and not really an avoidable one long term for a game like OSRS. You cannot perfectly balance everything and if most players choose efficiency over fun some content will inevitably become irrelevant. Much like you cannot continue to produce exclusively new and niche rewards and content without eventually creating some item or content which is better/more efficient than an older piece of content. Another issue is player perception in that a number of pieces of content are only made irrelevant for players in the end game where a new player would still find it valuable for a period of time. So you might hear everyone complaining that a lot of content is dead when the real underlying complaint is that low level content is now irrelevant for medium to high level players because something was finally specifically produced for them.

Compared to the first go around they've actually done an amazingly good job at dodging power creep. I can't really think of another game that updates so often but goes places so slowly

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, NavG123 said:

Their balance patches disregard complaining by the community and (I assume...) wait for data to roll in over a long period of time that informs their decision.

I think I ranted about this last year. There is this intensely large silent majority that will never say a single word about a game but will just play it.

Hell, I used to know someone that would talk about a game (Skyrim) and how much he hated it. CONSTANTLY talk about how much he hated it. Like all the time. But he never ever has given feedback about the game. Not once. He had 1500 hours in it.

I know someone that has spent $2500 on League of Legends and has never even once given feedback about the game. 

I have spent exactly $0 on Halo 5 REQ packs and I have given a shit tonne of feedback about that game and entered many discussions about it.  But I know someone that has spent over $300 on REQ packs and has never even commented to me if they like the game or not. 

So who will an executive listen to/cater for do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Shekkles said:

So who will an executive listen to/cater for do you think?

$$ talks

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, NavG123 said:

I'd be willing to bet the reason companies continue with SBMM is that they have hard data that it actually helps the player base despite the protests on places like Reddit.

I think it's interesting to see how companies take different approaches to game balance; I view Valve at one extreme for example. Their balance patches disregard complaining by the community and (I assume...) wait for data to roll in over a long period of time that informs their decision. I personally think it works really well and believe CS:GO is a good game in part because of it.

Jagex with OSRS is at another extreme with gameplay decisions decided by an in-game polling system. OSRS has gotten really popular in the last few years but I think there's no denying that game has experienced a tremendous amount of power-creep and so much of the game is completely dead-content not even worth exploring. OSRS's founding principle literally was the in-game community polling system created with the intention to let the community steer the game. The dead-content and power-creep is not surprising to me, I think it's a natural consequence of letting the community take control.

 

Yea, I think that's pretty common knowledge at this point. The question becomes why are devs so focused on the low end of the spectrum? We know that population drops occur rapidly after a game releases in the first few months. Yet, they still try and make safe spaces for these people that won't continue supporting the game long term. 

I honestly think the rise of SBMM is correlated with the introduction of microtransactions in game. Casual and bad players would more than likely trend toward spending money in the store if they feel good at the game, so what would companies gain by letting them encounter good players to shatter that illusion? Put in SBMM, protect them so they'll be likely to spend money, and let the core players that will play the game long term anyway deal with frustrations because they know they have them.

Hell, look at us with this series. After all the crap we've disliked we're still here foaming at the mouth for Halo Infinite while I'm sure there are a lot of casuals and bad players who picked up H5, played a few games of warzone, bought packs, and haven't picked it up since 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, AArkham said:

Hell, look at us with this series. After all the crap we've disliked we're still here foaming at the mouth for Halo Infinite while I'm sure there are a lot of casuals and bad players who picked up H5, played a few games of warzone, bought packs, and haven't picked it up since 2016.

Remember when halo was great for casuals and good players 

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Reamis25 said:

Remember when halo was great for casuals and good players  

When there was a true ranked and social split in games? Yea, feels like about ten years ago. Oh, wait...

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Simms (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

My SBMM thoughts are basically don't match 50s with 1s. It should not be a sweat-fest by any means - but matching very experienced players with people who just started picking up the game isn't fun either. Just something that has a little restriction, maybe like a +- 25 skill rank. So a level 25 could actually play against anyone 1-50. A level 30 could match up against levels 5-50. Other than this restriction, the biggest priority is just getting into a game. It will not purposefully try to match a 50 vs a 50, even if one is available. If 343 keeps the Bronze/Silver etc. ranks then you can still do something similar but I figured using the numbers would give a better understanding.

I think this gives any player at any rank a big enough player pool to get into matches very quickly without making every game feel sweaty, while also keeping games becoming so unbalanced that it isn't any fun at all for either side. Maybe you go +- 30 ranks but I personally wouldn't go past that. At least not at launch. When the game becomes old and/or playerbase drastically falls you can adjust the range accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/28/2020 at 12:11 AM, NavG123 said:

I'd be willing to bet the reason companies continue with SBMM is that they have hard data that it actually helps the player base despite the protests on places like Reddit.

I think it's interesting to see how companies take different approaches to game balance; I view Valve at one extreme for example. Their balance patches disregard complaining by the community and (I assume...) wait for data to roll in over a long period of time that informs their decision. I personally think it works really well and believe CS:GO is a good game in part because of it.

Jagex with OSRS is at another extreme with gameplay decisions decided by an in-game polling system. OSRS has gotten really popular in the last few years but I think there's no denying that game has experienced a tremendous amount of power-creep and so much of the game is completely dead-content not even worth exploring. OSRS's founding principle literally was the in-game community polling system created with the intention to let the community steer the game. The dead-content and power-creep is not surprising to me, I think it's a natural consequence of letting the community take control.

 

The content isnt dead. Its just not end game so why bother. Plenty of new players do that “dead” content. Power creep Isnt a problem because they can balance new bosses around the best weps and make them worse on said boss. Similar to how the best 3 range weps lose to dhcb sometimes. also the game has pvp and pvm which are are opposite ends. Like you implied, power vs mobs is like slicing through butter but power vs players is like trying to cut a boulder with a butter knife and the playerbase doesnt want drastic change so osrs is fucked essentially. the poll system prevents way too many good updates. It should be adjusted to like 50% and only poll weird shit. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/27/2020 at 10:08 AM, Hard Way said:

Yeah man every game and every opponent will be a little different. There are some things that you can do to help yourself be more consistent though.

-Don't shoot with the center of your reticle. Shoot with the edges of the circle. Yes, even if they're standing still. Just use the bottom.
-Don't shoot as fast as you can. Take your finger off the trigger between shots if you notice your bullets landing in weird spots. This is the spread bug, where the game thinks your holding in the trigger bc you're shooting too fast. This will be fixed in the next update.

Hopefully this makes the game more enjoyable for you. It'll still be inconsistent, but much less so. You can get a feel for it, and increase your odds.

Is the 60hz bug still a thing? If they are playing on PC they might need to enable that as well.

Share this post


Link to post

I just don't understand how I can't find a game in ranked CE doubles with a To2 already. Me and my buddy find a team about once every 3 days. And we either win 50-8 or lose 50-28, and once the other team backs out we never find a game again and go back to 4s. We don't even find games in social dubs...

And then 4's is either just us stomping on people who have no clue what they're doing. Or is decided by who out of me and my buddy and the other to2 we got matched up against got the worst teammates. There seems to be 5 tiers of players

Pro's/Long Time players Who play a shit ton (usually streamers)
Long Time Players
People who don't really get Halo but are good at shooters
People who aren't good at Halo or shooters
People who can't move and aim at the same time.

I think if there was just a way to cut that in half somehow, even if the system just tried to first I think things would be way better. I feel like every other game there's 1-2 people in the game who go like 1-15.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Jmacz said:

I just don't understand how I can't find a game in ranked CE doubles with a To2 already. Me and my buddy find a team about once every 3 days. And we either win 50-8 or lose 50-28, and once the other team backs out we never find a game again and go back to 4s. We don't even find games in social dubs...

And then 4's is either just us stomping on people who have no clue what they're doing. Or is decided by who out of me and my buddy and the other to2 we got matched up against got the worst teammates. There seems to be 5 tiers of players

Pro's/Long Time players Who play a shit ton (usually streamers)
Long Time Players
People who don't really get Halo but are good at shooters
People who aren't good at Halo or shooters
People who can't move and aim at the same time.

I think if there was just a way to cut that in half somehow, even if the system just tried to first I think things would be way better. I feel like every other game there's 1-2 people in the game who go like 1-15.

Idk what it is but I seriously never find incompetent players In any game compared to halo. It’s stuff like that why 343 makes op autos because players are too stupid to use the utility which they think isn’t how halo is meant to be played! Like least in other games overwatch cod the players are able to do shit! But in halo it’s move in a straight line hold right trigger/left mouse click. Like does halo make people stupid or what? 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.