Jump to content
CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

There's literally no advantage to opaque over transparent other than performance (which, considering how much 343 have been touting "xbox one so great much power wow," shouldn't be a problem). And while the water in H2A forge being fully walkable means we no longer have to worry about suicides due to depth, it makes figuring out kill barriers at the edges of a map problematic and obviously stops any deep-water shenanigans or underwater maps (which were pretty cool - they made for some scary infection games).

I think that the decision was probably along the lines of allow you to build more with Forge/have the generating lighting issue become less common, or have transparent water. I would personally choose the first option any day.

Share this post


Link to post

The Ark used the water correctly. The water looked deep in the context of the theme. You should expect to fall in to your death.

 

Water that is obviously shallow (by looking at the map's theme) should not.

 

@@Goat I think you either over value water as a functional game play element or you under value water as an artistic element. Water has by far more to contribute to the beauty of a map than impact game play. I cannot imagine why being able to see weapons in the water is so valuable to you. Do you think they should spawn there? Being able to see dropped weapons would be nice. But shaping the water's edge to make your theme come alive is critical to immersion.

 

In other words if I had to choose between shaping water edges and transparency, there is no question which is more useful. The water is very useful in awash because you can shape it fully.

 

if you value water primarily for "beauty" or aesthetics, then it doesn't matter whether it's transparent or opaque (although it'd make sense to prefer water that is more interactive and realistic behaving like Reach and Halo 3's water was). however, if it's playable space or interacted with in a prolonged and meaningful way, opaque water has the potential to negatively impact gameplay while offering no positives.

 

if water is a playable space on your map and somebody drops a power weapon in it, you can't see it with opaque water. this is simply bad for gameplay because it creates dead zones on the map. if the water isn't playable space and is just "contributing to the artistic value of the map", again, it doesn't matter whether it's opaque or transparent. but transparent is always favorable, whereas opaque is a workaround a limitation. 

 

it's understandable why the water is opaque if the engine can't handle rendering transparent water; however, it seems ignorant to prefer it that way when all it does is limit map potential. a map will only look better with transparent water with more lifelike physics, and it comes with a depth of possibilities (no pun intended) you simply lose with opaque water, like natural barriers. using a theme to simulate that is also working around a limitation. 

Share this post


Link to post

I think that the decision was probably along the lines of allow you to build more with Forge/have the generating lighting issue become less common, or have transparent water. I would personally choose the first option any day.

I'm not quite understanding the connection between having translucent water and lighting issues.. could you please explain?

Share this post


Link to post

if you value water primarily for "beauty" or aesthetics, then it'd make sense to prefer water that is more interactive and realistic behaving like Reach and Halo 3's water was. opaque water has the potential to negatively impact gameplay (regardless of how minor it may be) while offering no positives - being easier on the frameate is a limitation, not a stylistic choice - therefore it should be obvious which system is superior.

 

as it's already been mentioned, it's understandable why the water is opaque; however, it seems ignorant to prefer it that way when all it does is limit map potential. a map will only look better with transparent water with more lifelike physics, and it comes with a depth of possibilities (no pun intended) you simply lose with opaque water.

I didn't say I prefer opque water. I said I prefer having flexibility without rendering degradation over transparency due to how much more shaping the waters' edge improves immersion than transparency improves game play. Would I like both?of course. But this conversation came from your comment that the water was basically [completely] useless which is far from the truth.

 

And immersion is a huge positive. The greatest single failure of Forge 4 and Forge Reach were a complete lack of immersion due to the blocks looking like blocks. That is why I am thrilled that awash has potential for an all natural theme.

Share this post


Link to post

I didn't say I prefer opque water. I said I prefer having flexibility without rendering degradation over transparency due to how much more shaping the waters' edge improves immersion than transparency improves game play. Would I like both?of course. But this conversation came from your comment that the water was completely useless which is far from the truth.

 

And immersion is a huge positive. The greatest single failure of Forge 4 and Forge Reach were a complete lack of immersion due to the blocks looking like blocks. That is why I am thrilled that awash has potential for an all natural theme.

 

i said it's useless because they made a point about it being a foot deep. but since you can't see beneath it, i think it'd be a poor design decision to include it on a map as playable space. by that i mean allowing players to fight in the water, whereby a dropped weapon of importance would essentially vanish from sight while remaining in playable space. 

 

i'm all for immersion and artistically compelling maps, but if any of that negatively impacts gameplay, it's never worth it. that's supposed to be one of the golden rules of forging. 

 

edit: i suppose it's worth noting that weapons in halo 2 anniversary have waypoints on them. perhaps this is their workaround for opaque water. i still stand by what i said, but remembering this, i'm less bothered by it. 

Share this post


Link to post

i said it's useless because they made a point about it being a foot deep. but since you can't see beneath it, i think it'd be a poor design decision to include it on a map as playable space. by that i mean allowing players to fight in the water, whereby a dropped weapon of importance would essentially vanish from sight while remaining in playable space.

 

i'm all for immersion and artistically compelling maps, but if any of that negatively impacts gameplay, it's never worth it. that's supposed to be one of the golden rules of forging.

 

edit: i suppose it's worth noting that weapons in halo 2 anniversary have waypoints on them. perhaps this is their workaround for their workaround. i still stand by what i said but remembering this, i'm less bothered by it.

I see what you mean then. If you intend to create a map that intentionally forces players to play in water then you would have an argument that water contributes more to game play experience. But even then I wouldn't say it was useless. Perhaps heavily challenged...

 

But personally I have no desire to make a map play in water. I have never found the appeal from those maps.

 

I would change my mind if they included a boat or jet ski and made the water deep. Then it would play in a way that would maintain immersion. The water isn't useful for maps that want to form and maintain immersion in a large body of water. But for narrow creaks and shore lines (where the play area does not extend off shore) it will be powerful.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I see what you mean then. If you intend to create a map that intentionally forces players to play in water then you would have an argument that water contributes more to game play experience. But even then I wouldn't say it was useless. Perhaps heavily challenged...

 

But personally I have no desire to make a map play in water. I have never found the appeal from those maps.

 

I would change my mind if they included a boat or jet ski and made the water deep. Then it would play in a way that would maintain immersion. The water isn't useful for maps that want to form and maintain immersion in a large body of water. But for narrow creaks and shore lines (where the play area does not extend off shore) it will be powerful.

 

i understand your point better now as well. those kinds of subtle things would be okay. i just looked at the beaver creek remake and thought "so...what if somebody dies in the creek with rockets?" 

 

waypoints help, but i'd sooner avoid that. using it for aesthetics is always nice though. if we have access to off-white pieces without many textures like the forge island stunt ramps, i think it'd be more interesting to mix that with terrain and foliage to create a dry riverbed aesthetic instead of an actual creek. it'd also let you keep the basements.

 

among the many things i'd like to see in halo 5, transparent, craftable/placeable water is high on the list. i was very fond of the puddles on forge world. 

Share this post


Link to post

You clearly did not read any of the points I or anyone else made regarding playing halo 1 on splitscreen. Congratulations on getting everyone to agree with you though. :/

 

You're a Halo CE guy, huh? shame

 

You're right.  I totally didn't.  And yeah, I started with CE in 2003 and I still try to LAN it as much as I can.  My splitscreen FOV in 2014 just really isn't that big of a deal to me.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

You're right.  I totally didn't.  And yeah, I started with CE in 2003 and I still try to LAN it as much as I can.  My splitscreen FOV in 2014 just really isn't that big of a deal to me.

It should be a big deal if you plan to LAN MCC.

  • Upvote (+1) 4
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

5 overshields in one game on Warlord in H2A.

Classic Warlord in H2A. Every remastered map has their classic setting (Like no dynamic element, no new jumps or holes, old weapon settings, etc)

Share this post


Link to post

It should be a big deal if you plan to LAN MCC.

 

Sorry dude I negged your post on purpose :/  Please don't hate me

Share this post


Link to post

It should be a big deal if you plan to LAN MCC.

People will say it doesn't matter because everyone just plays on their own screen nowadays. If you take this viewpoint then you should still be on board with fixing the FoV. Just because it doesn't affect you doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed and there's not even an argument you can make as to why it shouldn't be changed.

 

If it somehow resulted in a negative effect on the rest of the game then sure we can debate about it, but as it stands everyone should agree it should be changed.

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

It should be a big deal if you plan to LAN MCC.

 

Why?  We're all going to have our own Xboxes and monitors, as we have since like 2007.  We don't need to splitscreen anymore, unless someone doesn't have their own gear to play on, which isn't the case in my LAN group anymore.

 

And even if we did have to split screen, so freaking what?  The game is still fun with a smaller FOV than the ENORMOUS FOV they give you for 2-split H1.  Yeah, that FOV was nice, but it isn't necessary to have fun, and it isn't worth complaining about in 2014.

  • Upvote (+1) 5
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Why?  We're all going to have our own Xboxes and monitors, as we have since like 2007.  We don't need to splitscreen anymore, unless someone doesn't have their own gear to play on, which isn't the case in my LAN group anymore.

 

And even if we did have to split screen, so freaking what?  The game is still fun with a smaller FOV than the ENORMOUS FOV they give you for 2-split H1.  Yeah, that FOV was nice, but it isn't necessary to have fun, and it isn't worth complaining about in 2014.

 

I'm going to try to make an argument that accepts the change in FoV for H1. Please don't take this as the "H4 or H3 OMG TIZ KID HAZ NO CLUZ WHAT HES TALKING ABOUT" post. I started playing at Halo 2. Just try to listen to me for a minute.

 

So as I've read over the past couple pages is that split screen has been a very huge factor in competitive H1 gameplay due to the ability to see your teammates screen which includes their respawn, weapon pickups, etc. Others have commented on how callouts could suffice but H1 players have retorted that seeing your teammates screen is much faster. I absolutely agree that seeing your 1 teammates screen is definitely faster, but isn't there some skill in being able to relay your location and status to your teammate? Don't you think that same logic could be used for H2 and on? Why isn't that such a demand in H1? I get that because of the limitations split screen was the obvious choice at the current time period I really do. But seriously, of all people, I would of thought that H1 players were open to options pertaining to the advancement of competitive Halo. Personally, I see callouts and more teamwork (even though its only 2v2) as a better thing for competitive Halo. 

 

I am more than welcome to a reply about this and guarantee I will not neg you (If you care about that sort of thing)  

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Why?  We're all going to have our own Xboxes and monitors, as we have since like 2007.  We don't need to splitscreen anymore, unless someone doesn't have their own gear to play on, which isn't the case in my LAN group anymore.

 

And even if we did have to split screen, so freaking what?  The game is still fun with a smaller FOV than the ENORMOUS FOV they give you for 2-split H1.  Yeah, that FOV was nice, but it isn't necessary to have fun, and it isn't worth complaining about in 2014.

I agree that if you all have your own screens then obv its a non issue. I assumed that since xbone is so new and somewhat expensive not everyone that LANs with be able to bring their own xbox also this is a remake that 343 has said will be true to the original. Many of us would like to play this remake just like we have been playing the original, using split screen on LAN. 

 

Also if you have been lanning halo1 since 2007 with everyone on their own screen you are a noob. If you have been lanning halo1 since 2007 using split screen then you should know why this massive FOV difference is a big deal. If you have been lanning halo 1 split and you don't understand why this is a big deal, then you are either ignorant or an idiot or both. Based on your previous posts on this forum, and your own admission you are not an expert on halo 1, ie a noob. So its not surprising that you don't understand this issue which all veteran players are concerned about. 

  • Upvote (+1) 2

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.