Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

Trolling?

 

If serious this is by far the most ignorant post I've ever seen on beyond.

 

But I'm going to assume a Waypoint kid just made a beyond account in order to troll.

 

I actually have been here for a couple years because its at least a lot more intelligent than Waypoint. Many of your own posts are examples of why I like reading Beyond forums. I mostly lurk and just read but occasionally post, seemingly scaring the shit out of people when I do.

 

And just because I didn't get to play online in the H2-H3 MLG days (didn't get LIVE until 2012, but started playing Halo in 2005), please explain how my post is ignorant?

 

The very bottom of my post explains my issues with the current skill required to using autos effectively and how I believe that it could be fixed, but currently never has yet.

 

And yes, HCE is my favorite Halo, if you were going to post anything regarding that.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Three things.

 

1. Are servers worse to anyone else in the evening? I can't seem to win a fight at night anymore, but during the day I'm fine.

 

2. Party restrictions are part of sustain right? They can't have purposely made the matchmaking worse without plans to fix it right?

 

3. Nerf autos plz

Share this post


Link to post

Three things.

 

1. Are servers worse to anyone else in the evening? I can't seem to win a fight at night anymore, but during the day I'm fine.

 

2. Party restrictions are part of sustain right? They can't have purposely made the matchmaking worse without plans to fix it right?

 

3. Nerf autos plz

 

1.) They are bad no matter what time

2.) No. They aren't planning to fix it. Adapt. Git Gud. Have fun.

3.) No. Autos are the future. If you don't like the auto's then Adapt, Git Gud, or Leave

 

/s Trying to be a future Waypointer. Rate me pls.

  • Upvote (+1) 3
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

1.) They are bad no matter what time

2.) No. They aren't planning to fix it. Adapt. Git Gud. Have fun.

3.) No. Autos are the future. If you don't like the auto's then Adapt, Git Gud, or Leave

 

/s Trying to be a future Waypointer. Rate me pls.

1.) 0/10 Waypoint never says bad things about Halo.

2.) Solid 8/10 forgot the "Get more friends to play with you"

3.) Definitely 10/10 Spot on

 

Overall: 7/10

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Im going from 50inch to a 24inch 4ms input lag. Lets see the difference

duuuuude you're gonna cum.

Share this post


Link to post

All this talk of Waypoint is triggering my PTSD.

 

I LOST TO MANY FRIENDS TO WAYPOINT, I AINT GOING BACK, NO WAY

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Like man, ever since CE, it has always been their intended purpose, 

 

CE has three automatic weapons. 

 

One is completely useless, another is meant to be a cleanup kill weapon for one-shot foes, and the last has a niche role and a special function that requires the user to both engage from the back/side and, ideally, move in for a melee kill - that is to say, NOT a full-frontal-assault weapon with zero nuance. 

Share this post


Link to post

I would say that this is a good post. I have read that awesome article before, courtesy of @@TiberiusAudley (thanks).

Although a game can still have some stupid mechanics. Accepting it doesn't necessarily mean that it's good, but defining that is very iffy.

The rest of my post is to try and contribute to the topic being discussed somewhat.

While I will agree that H5 has a lot of excess input required and too many dumb mechanics, I still don't understand how the automatic weapons get so much hate for actually wrecking in CQC.

Like man, ever since CE, it has always been their intended purpose, except now they are actually good and useful at it. Which I don't really have a problem with, in itself.

Precision weapons(including the Magnum) will all still be much easier to use at mid-long range than autos, and therefore will easily beat autos from any decent distance. They also have 1-shot headshot advantage, which is extremely powerful on shieldless enemies following a melee or grenade.

And the fact that the two types of weapons overlap at mid-range so often is good, IMO. To me, in Halo, the autos were always supposed to be short to mid range, and precision weapons were always supposed to be mid to long range. Now, that balance has been achieved with H5.

I understand that people probably don't like to actually have to 'press Y to win, but that is actually kind of my point.

I'm not saying this to be an asshole, but the argument you're making is kind of meaningless. You could just as easily say that you don't understand why people were upset with boltshot secondaries in Halo 4 because the "intended purpose" of the weapon is to wreck in CQC. For that matter, we could have shotgun secondaries and you could just say that it's not a problem because you "actually have to press Y to win" and that the gun is fulfilling its "intended purpose".

 

What we should be discussing, at least for competitive settings, is whether or not auto starts give a net gain or loss to the skill gap. You correctly pointed out that the skill of pressing Y is added in with autos. I would submit that to a player who has any decent understanding of Halo it is not that hard to know when to press Y and switch guns. You made this argument yourself when you pointed out that autos are good at close range.

 

So, we gain the extra skill gap between players who know to switch to autos in close range and those who don't. What we lose in skill gap is 99% of the technical skill in close range fights. I don't think it's a good tradeoff in a competitive sense or in a purely fun sense.

Share this post


Link to post

CE has three automatic weapons.

 

One is completely useless, another is meant to be a cleanup kill weapon for one-shot foes, and the last has a niche role and a special function that requires the user to both engage from the back/side and, ideally, move in for a melee kill - that is to say, NOT a full-frontal-assault weapon with zero nuance.

 

Look, I understand that. Have so for a while. I'm not arguing for autos with zero nuance.

 

What I'm arguing for, and have been for most of my time on Beyond, is to finally have an AR with a PROPER FUCKING BLOOM MECHANIC.

 

Everyone always ignores that one simple catch to my AR posts.

 

If you MUST burst-fire/Tap-fire to be perfectly accurate, and when you do the damn gun actually IS accurate that way, I don't think people would hate it nearly as much.

 

The gun would still be wildy inaccurate as all hell when holding down the trigger spraying full auto.

 

That is the ONLY change, and IMO, improvement, that I would make to the AR in CE specifically, for example. I don't see how that would be detrimental to the game at all.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not saying this to be an asshole, but the argument you're making is kind of meaningless. You could just as easily say that you don't understand why people were upset with boltshot secondaries in Halo 4 because the "intended purpose" of the weapon is to wreck in CQC. For that matter, we could have shotgun secondaries and you could just say that it's not a problem because you "actually have to press Y to win" and that the gun is fulfilling its "intended purpose".

 

What we should be discussing, at least for competitive settings, is whether or not auto starts give a net gain or loss to the skill gap. You correctly pointed out that the skill of pressing Y is added in with autos. I would submit that to a player who has any decent understanding of Halo it is not that hard to know when to press Y and switch guns. You made this argument yourself when you pointed out that autos are good at close range.

 

So, we gain the extra skill gap between players who know to switch to autos in close range and those who don't. What we lose in skill gap is 99% of the technical skill in close range fights. I don't think it's a good tradeoff in a competitive sense or in a purely fun sense.

 

No, don't worry, I understand what you are saying.

 

Press Y for the situational advantage, however, isn't the primary argument I am trying to make, as I agree that the AR should certainly have a much more skillful nuance to use it well, that I thought I explained in the last half of that post.

 

However, what you have completely ignored in the last half of that post, and I just explained to Lemon in the previous post, is that the AR specifically NEEDS to have a PROPERLY TUNED BLOOM MECHANIC.

 

Take the laughably inaccurate CE AR for example, and make it actually perfectly accurate ONLY and I mean ONLY when you tap the trigger, while continuing to leave it laughably inaccurate when held full auto, and there, it is done.

 

What is so hard to understand about that? I swear it seems so simple to implement correctly, that it drives me fucking insane that almost no one else is arguing for this same thing.

Share this post


Link to post

Look, I understand that. Have so for a while. I'm not arguing for autos with zero nuance.

 

What I'm arguing for, and have been for most of my time on Beyond, is to finally have an AR with a PROPER FUCKING BLOOM MECHANIC.

 

Everyone always ignores that one simple catch to my AR posts.

 

If you MUST burst-fire/Tap-fire to be perfectly accurate, and when you do the damn gun actually IS accurate that way, I don't think people would hate it nearly as much.

 

The gun would still be wildy inaccurate as all hell when holding down the trigger spraying full auto.

 

That is the ONLY change, and IMO, improvement, that I would make to the AR in CE specifically, for example. I don't see how that would be detrimental to the game at all.

 

The problem is that if you try to make a "utility" automatic weapon (termed loosely), it's either going to be overpowered or useless. There pretty much is no in-between. That's why the plasma rifle works like it does in CE, because it has a unique function. 

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

I would recommend that anyone with an interest in Halo's story and campaigns read Haruspis' level-by-level analysis of Halo 5, in particular that of the final level, a sample of which I've included below.

 

Halo 5 exists to be set-up for this new direction they’ve decided to go with the Created.

 

Halo 5 does not exist to be a sequel to Halo 4. 

 

If you will indulge me while I go on a slight tangent here, I can very much corroborate this with information gleaned from the recently released Escalation Library Edition – containing commentary from Brian Reed.

 

On the subject of the Ur-Didact in The Next 72 Hours, he says:

“When these issues were first conceived, we thought maybe the Didact was going to be in Halo 5. He was certainly present in the story early on, but as the plan for the next few years of the franchise (books, comics, other games, etc.) took shape, Didact became extraneous to the story we were telling.

We still wanted the Didact alive in our extended lore, because he’s a useful character and we have a dearth of viable named bad guys for our Halo rogues’ gallery. But how to dispose of him for the time being?” [Escalation Library Edition, pages 293-294]

 

The Didact was going to be in Halo 5…

 

Because of course he bloody was – he was conceived as the Reclaimer Saga’s primary antagonist, and Frank O’Connor said before Halo 4 even came out that the he would be instrumental in post-H4 fiction. He was conceived to be John’s “nemesis”, a first for the series, and we were going to see how that back-and-forth would play out as John very much became the new Forthencho figure for the Didact.

 

Oh, but then he became “extraneous” when they decided to throw in the Created out of nowhere, with absolutely no build-up.

 

Can somebody please explain to me how you can establish a character with the intention of making them the central antagonist by giving them an entire trilogy of books (written by Greg Bear, of all people) and a main game, only to then decide that they are “extraneous” and worthy only of being kept around in the extended lore? A real, living Forerunner in the modern setting, conceived to be the Master Chief’s personal antagonist, became “extraneous” after one game.

 

Reed quite openly admits that The Next 72 Hours was done to bump the Didact off to the side so they could do Halo 5 without him, but still bring him back when they feel like it (as in, when they run out of ideas with the Created). But the Didact couldn’t be outright killed off because of the “dearth of viable named bad guys for our Halo rogues’ gallery”, so he had to be temporarily tossed aside while we get the likes of Warden Eternal, Sali ‘Nyon, and a plethora of other nobodies pulled out of nowhere taking over from characters like the Didact and Jul who have actually had a wealth of fiction dedicated to building them up.

 

 

Now, in 343i's early days they stressed their efforts in uniting and stewarding the franchise's lore across various media; what happened with Halo 5 and some of the texts preceding it, namely Halo: Escalation, represents incredibly disappointing, poor management of the Halo story. The comments also fly in the face of the idea that the story of Halo 5 was planned well in advance. I have said this before, but I have no confidence that the current situation will improve and I have no interest in the direction 343i are taking the narrative.

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

The problem is that if you try to make a "utility" automatic weapon (termed loosely), it's either going to be overpowered or useless. There pretty much is no in-between. That's why the plasma rifle works like it does in CE, because it has a unique function.

 

There's no need to makes auto's skillful. They're accessible for a reason. When you make them have utility purposes the style of your game shifts to a game much less reliant on accuracy and precision. Yeah....no.

I would recommend that anyone with an interest in Halo's story and campaigns read Haruspis' level-by-level analysis of Halo 5, in particular that of the final level, a sample of which I've included below.

 

 

 

Now, in 343i's early days they stressed their efforts in uniting and stewarding the franchise's lore across various media; what happened with Halo 5 and some of the texts preceding it, namely Halo: Escalation, represents incredibly disappointing, poor management of the Halo story. The comments also fly in the face of the idea that the story of Halo 5 was planned well in advance. I have said this before, but I have no confidence that the current situation will improve and I have no interest in the direction 343i are taking the narrative.

Same. This story is basically unsalvagable at this point. There's no established build up to the end and the direction you're supposed to be led to at the end in Halo 4 is nullified along with Chief's development. I have zero interest in this story anymore; a shame because I was quite satisfied with the characterization in H4 and H5's plot promises.
  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

The problem is that if you try to make a "utility" automatic weapon (termed loosely), it's either going to be overpowered or useless. There pretty much is no in-between. That's why the plasma rifle works like it does in CE, because it has a unique function.

 

See, I believe that the loosely termed 'utility' auto could exist well in Halo, and in my eyes it has yet to be properly attempted to even proove either of us wrong.

 

And if any auto is supposed to be the 'utility auto', its the spawning AR.

 

In the context of CE's sandbox, the Magnum's 3sk would still be much faster than the AR's 15sk.

 

In fact, with what I am suggesting, the very act of burst-firing/Tap-firing the AR requires you to slow down its killtime even further, giving the Magnum more time to potentially land its own shots.

 

As long as the CE AR is the epitome of ridiculously high spread/bloom when fired full auto, all I am asking for is that the AR actually be reliably accurate when you pump the trigger.

 

As for the CE Plasma Rifle, I like where its at too. The only thing that I would change for that is to give it completely zero spread/bloom to begin with. It would still be niche, just removing the small amount of RNG it has.

 

What is wrong with these requests? Not changing damage values or anything of that nature, just making them more reliable for how they are best used.

Share this post


Link to post

There's no need to makes auto's skillful. They're accessible for a reason. When you make them have utility purposes the style of your game shifts to a game much less reliant on accuracy and precision. Yeah....no.

 

I understand, but disagree with this to a point. Just because they are commonly referred to as the Noob's weapon, doesn't mean that they can't serve a useful purpose in competitive, niche or utility. See HCE.

 

Halo gameplay revolves around precision weapons, there is no denying that.

 

Making autos, or more specifically, the AR(because all other H5 autos are mostly redundant), require patience and discipline to be shot accurately does not make the game require less precision.

 

In fact, don't the H5 AR and Magnum share mostly equal perfect killtimes? If the AR required you to SLOW DOWN your killtime by pumping the trigger, the Magnum would win by having a faster killtime much more often. Especially if the AR was made to be as wildy inaccurate as the HCE AR when sprayed full auto.

 

It would still be accessible, yet not completely overpower the Magnum, and still be useful for things such as clean-up kills and suppressive fire and even better at finding Camo because of a much wider radius for bloom spread.

 

It may still be easier in CQC, but the Magnum would be much more likely to win via perfect shots since the AR would have to either slow down its own killtime or miss shots via high spread bloom.

 

Why would that be a bad thing?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I understand, but disagree with this to a point. Just because they are commonly referred to as the Noob's weapon, doesn't mean that they can't serve a useful purpose in competitive, niche or utility. See HCE.

 

Halo gameplay revolves around precision weapons, there is no denying that.

 

Making autos, or more specifically, the AR(because all other H5 autos are mostly redundant), require patience and discipline to be shot accurately does not make the game require less precision.

 

In fact, don't the H5 AR and Magnum share mostly equal perfect killtimes? If the AR required you to SLOW DOWN your killtime by pumping the trigger, the Magnum would win by having a faster killtime much more often. Especially if the AR was made to be as wildy inaccurate as the HCE AR when sprayed full auto.

 

It would still be accessible, yet not completely overpower the Magnum, and still be useful for things such as clean-up kills and suppressive fire and even better at finding Camo because of a much wider radius for bloom spread.

 

It may still be easier in CQC, but the Magnum would be much more likely to win via perfect shots since the AR would have to either slow down its own killtime or miss shots via high spread bloom.

 

Why would that be a bad thing?

I think you missed what I meant.

 

I agree with you; I want autos to fucking wreck face up close. What I don't want is superfluous stuff like spread patterns and whatnot to make them more "skillful", because it begins to promote a style of game where your autos supercede your pistol and other consistent precision weapons.

Share this post


Link to post

duuuuude you're gonna cum.

Pretty big difference. I was hitting shots that I don't normally hit. My monitor looks better too. Good think I bout a 2tft hdmi cord

Share this post


Link to post

 

Boom. Toaster quality=confirm

Yeah, no reason for the UI to be done a year out of the ten year anniversary.

 

Halo 3 Anniversary isn't happening.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, no reason for the UI to be done a year out of the ten year anniversary.

 

Halo 3 Anniversary isn't happening.

Doesnt have to release on the anniversary. Gears ultimate edition came out a year earlier than the 10th anniversary.

 

 

Edit: confirmed fake rip the dream

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, no reason for the UI to be done a year out of the ten year anniversary.

 

Halo 3 Anniversary isn't happening.

Could just be a placeholder, and it's only the title screen. The same could be said of the Halo 5 beta.

 

I'm just hoping here, maybe we'll see something at e3

Share this post


Link to post

I think you missed what I meant.

 

I agree with you; I want autos to fucking wreck face up close. What I don't want is superfluous stuff like spread patterns and whatnot to make them more "skillful", because it begins to promote a style of game where your autos supercede your pistol and other consistent precision weapons.

 

I get what you meant. I don't want autos to replace the Pistol and other precision weapons either, as I said Halo gameplay revolves around precision weapons.

 

These 'spread patterns' as you call them would only reduce the Noob's ability to spam them with ease at mid-range, like they can in H5.

 

But a better player could reach out to mid-range, at the cost of a noticeably slower killtime than precision weapons, which would be easier and therefore encouraged at mid-range and beyond like they have always been.

 

'Pump the trigger for short-controlled-bursts to get the most out of your AR' actually has been a common AR tip since CE.

 

I only want that to actually mean something.

 

If you hold the trigger you are not getting anywhere outside of melee range, but burst-firing will allow you to reliably cause damage at mid-range.

 

Precision weapons would be far superior since you don't have to worry about any of that and kill faster.

 

What are you so worried for?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

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.