Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

3. Aim assist and analogue stick aiming severely limit the feasible options for adding real difficulty to automatics. A Halo game on PC, balanced with PC in mind (i.e. zero aim assist) could experiment with things like spray patterns and the like, but I have serious doubts for the viability of that sort of thing on console.

 

And that's without addressing the simple question of "Why?" Why do automatics need to be skill-focused and why do they need to contend with precision weapons in the hands of competent players? It doesn't add anything meaningful to the game. It just adds shallow variety and guarantees more uneven gun fights. Both of those are what I consider casual appeal and should have no bearing on balance for high level play.

 

These 2 especially.  The real way to add skill to auto's is to add spray patters.  On PC with a mouse, learning to control that can be fun.  On console its just an exercise in frustration.  Considering that Halo 6 will certainly be a cross-play game, having differential balancing isn't going to happen so this really isn't an option.

 

Imo, Automatics in Halo (and console games in general) should be there to give new or only occasional players something that is easy to use.  Its something to help lower level plays feel competent so they can have fun too, but not something that needs to be used by actually competent players.

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The AR will always have a use. It will always have mechanics when paired with close quarters map geometry that will give it an edge over headshot weapons. What halo 5 did to exacerbate that advantage was to give people sprint and thruster to get in close, to make maps with tons of narrow areas, and to introduce radar to the main line game to encourage people to sit like trap door spiders with their automatics.

 

That's the big problem here in my view. Not the AR being able to compete in its niche, I didn't even have a problem with the headshot bonus really. I had a problem with the surrounding sandbox.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

While I advocate for the H4 AR or wouldn't mind the GoW Lancer in Halo, there is one thing that I want to point out.

 

The H5 launch AR killed in 15 shots to the body and 12 if the last three were on the head.

 

The H4 AR (post Turbo patch), killed in only 13 shots straight to the body, with no headshot multipliers. Although it doesn't have anywhere near the range of H5.

 

That H4 AR could flat out melt players at close range. Only kept in check by the BR's 2-burst melee. I personally enjoyed this, but do the other H4 AR proponents actually want that?

 

And as a point of reference, the H4 launch AR was pretty much the same as H3 before the Turbo patch buff.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I honestly don't understand why people think having a huge sandbox of "competitively viable" weapons is desirable at all. To me the biggest appeal of Halo, by far, is knowing that on spawn you are guaranteed one of the most versatile, effective, skill-oriented weapons in the game. Winning gun fights against other players ALSO using that weapon is the most satisfying thing in any Halo game by far. Picking up random shit on the ground and winning a fight where your weapon is just better? Pass. Getting a kill with an automatic at close range will never be cool.

 

 

That's the big problem here in my view. Not the AR being able to compete in its niche, I didn't even have a problem with the headshot bonus really. I had a problem with the surrounding sandbox.

 

The problem with the headshot bonus is that unshielded players are the only time when you REALLY have to hit a small target with precision weapons. The ability to spray in the general direction of their face with a bullet hose trivializes that. The precision buffed H5 AR is actually absurdly effective at cleaning up one shot players.

  • Upvote (+1) 5
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

What if headshots did extra damage even when shielded? I feel Halo would benefit from that immensely.

  • Upvote (+1) 2
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Its really bad that we're back around to this. We had a thread where we discussed everything from the pistol having recoil in the H5 beta, RRR, ease of use vs the skill of knowing when to swap weapons in their intended ranges etc. Its insane how we covered basically everything forever ago and it just keeps going in circles because nothing ever actually changes with Halo

Share this post


Link to post

Its really bad that we're back around to this. We had a thread where we discussed everything from the pistol having recoil in the H5 beta, RRR, ease of use vs the skill of knowing when to swap weapons in their intended ranges etc. Its insane how we covered basically everything forever ago and it just keeps going in circles because nothing ever actually changes with Halo

Well....

 

SegGG1b.gif

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

What if headshots did extra damage even when shielded? I feel Halo would benefit from that immensely.

No thanks. I like the dichomoty between how shield damage is dealt and health damage. There is also shot counting during gunfights and making decisions based on knowing exactly when a shield is going to pop. You will often not know if it was 2 headshots of extra damage or none or whatever. There is enough of that due to hit detection and the interwebs. I don't need more on purpose.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

No thanks. I like the dichomoty between how shield damage is dealt and health damage. There is also shot counting during gunfights and making decisions based on knowing exactly when a shield is going to pop. You will often not know if it was 2 headshots of extra damage or none or whatever. There is enough of that due to hit detection and the interwebs. I don't need more on purpose.

There'd have to be a visual feedback system put in place where players can distinctly differentiate their headshots from their body shots, which shouldn't be too difficult honestly.

 

Imagine the good this would do though. Off the top of my head:

 

- Raises the gap between perfect TTK and average TTK

- Puts more of an emphasis on precision throughout the entire engagement

- Increases individual prowess (given you can strafe effectively)

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

There'd have to be a visual feedback system put in place where players can distinctly differentiate their headshots from their body shots, which shouldn't be too difficult honestly.

 

Imagine the good this would do though. Off the top of my head:

 

- Raises the gap between perfect TTK and average TTK

- Puts more of an emphasis on precision throughout the entire engagement

- Increases individual prowess (given you can strafe effectively)

 

How are you supposed to keep track?  lets say 6 body shots take off shields or 3 headshots.  

Now if i hit Body, head, Body, head (or any combination) i have to keep track based on the hitmarker difference and basically do the math.  Do they have 1 body shot left or 2? etc etc.

 

The way halo is setup now is simple and i like it that way.  Damage is uniform against shields.  Once shields are gone, headshot is an instant kill. ez to understand.  Shield pop is really the only feedback you need.

THis is one of the reasons why i dont like headshot "multipliers" on auto's. Since they are inherently inaccurate, sometimes its all headshots, sometimes you get one peppered in the middle, who the fuck knows??  Headshots should be instant kill, only for precision weapons and only when shields are gone.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

The AR will always have a use. It will always have mechanics when paired with close quarters map geometry that will give it an edge over headshot weapons. What halo 5 did to exacerbate that advantage was to give people sprint and thruster to get in close, to make maps with tons of narrow areas, and to introduce radar to the main line game to encourage people to sit like trap door spiders with their automatics.

 

That's the big problem here in my view. Not the AR being able to compete in its niche, I didn't even have a problem with the headshot bonus really. I had a problem with the surrounding sandbox.

The precisions need to be able to compete with the autos. The autos dont need to be able to compete with the precisions.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Kind of weird that there is a strong correlation between the enjoyability of a Halo game and the position of the utility weapon relative to the sandbox.

 

We should probably nerf the Magnum to make sure the Storm Rifle is still useful in its intended

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Why though?  Why not let a weapon become obsolete at higher levels of play?  Introducing a niche use won't really change that i don't think (though niche things like that would still be welcome).  Like, it might encourage you to pick it up when you come across one, but it won't be enough to have you go out of your way for it.

 

I guess i just don't subscribe to the school of balance thought that all weapons need to be useful at all levels.

I works great in Halo 1. It gives players a meaningful choice to make when they grab camo, and it's a much deadlier melee weapon. People actually switch to it before double meleeing because of the range and the speed. I switch to it when I'm fighting OS and I know I can't get away.

 

We've seen it work well already. I'd like to see it again. I think it's silly to have a weapon become obsolete as skill improves. That just seems like a poorly designed weapon to me.

 

Edit: I am NOT advocating that the kill times or skill ceiling be able to compete with the utility weapon. The AR should be weaker, just like it was in H4 Legendary settings. It was a perfect backup weapon or alternative in close range fights. The problem was that it was the obvious option to trade out when you got another weapon, 100% of the time. What I like about Halo 1 and the quick camo mechanic was that it made this choice not as obvious. There was significant risk/reward from keeping your AR when you got camo/rockets, and it had nothing to do with the viability of the weapon itself. I think that's the way to go with automatics. Keep them weak because their very nature makes their ease of use a problem if you strengthen it, but give it other properties that make it worth keeping in some situations. I see no problem with this approach.

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

I think that's the way to go with automatics. Keep them weak because their very nature makes their ease of use a problem if you strengthen it, but give it other properties that make it worth keeping in some situations. I see no problem with this approach.

But if they spend all this time making a better sandbox, how are they going to find the time to make maps that play well?

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

I could probably balance the H5 sandbox on my lunch break one time and it would've been fine for the entire life span of the game. Weapon balance is literally so easy it blows my mind that they have a team of guys sitting there day in n out looking at a bunch of useless statistics and not doing anything with them. What a joke of a position.

But if everyone has different ideas about what Halo is, shouldn’t we try to split the power up so that there’s something for everyone? I mean, you could let individuals have a lot of control like in the development of Halo 1, but gamers in 2018 have so many expectations.

Share this post


Link to post

I could probably balance the H5 sandbox on my lunch break one time and it would've been fine for the entire life span of the game. Weapon balance is literally so easy it blows my mind that they have a team of guys sitting there day in n out looking at a bunch of useless statistics and not doing anything with them. What a joke of a position.

I hate that someone somewhere probably thinks we're just a bunch of armchair devs when it comes to this and we don't really know whats going on. Its not like we're breaking new ground here. We've seen 17 years of Halo. We've been playing the shooter genre as a whole for even longer. The problems they have with weapon and sandbox design are actually basic logic errors that anyone can and probably should be able to correct with little effort and live experience.

 

In fact I bet the real problem is company politics with too many hands in the pot. Nobody is this stupid. Something is holding up the process and adding useless/pointless additions rather than having everything moving forward

  • Upvote (+1) 9
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

There is no reason to have more than 14 weapons in a Halo game.

 

Change my mind.

There is no reason to have over 11 weapons in any FPS.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I hate that someone somewhere probably thinks we're just a bunch of armchair devs when it comes to this and we don't really know whats going on. Its not like we're breaking new ground here. We've seen 17 years of Halo. We've been playing the shooter genre as a whole for even longer. The problems they have with weapon and sandbox design are actually basic logic errors that anyone can and probably should be able to correct with little effort and live experience.

 

In fact I bet the real problem is company politics with too many hands in the pot. Nobody is this stupid. Something is holding up the process and adding useless/pointless additions rather than having everything moving forward

Nah they just actually think the balance is good

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

There is no reason to have over 11 weapons in any FPS.

I disagree. 

 

I enjoyed every minute getting over 500 kills with over 117 weapons in BF4, and yes, I could easily tell you the differences in all of them. 

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

I disagree. 

 

I enjoyed every minute getting over 500 kills with over 117 weapons in BF4, and yes, I could easily tell you the differences in all of them. 

How many of them were viable and would actually disturb the game if they were removed?

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

I could probably balance the H5 sandbox on my lunch break one time and it would've been fine for the entire life span of the game. Weapon balance is literally so easy it blows my mind that they have a team of guys sitting there day in n out looking at a bunch of useless statistics and not doing anything with them. What a joke of a position.

 

First, are you still working in the game industry or trying to?

 

Second, you think you would learn after the first couple of things that happened to you that you no longer are anonymous on the internet and no matter how much you act and smile during interviews in the gaming industry, you end up looking like a guy who thinks way too highly of himself through posts like this one. 

 

That's how you come off, not how you probably are. It's not hard to assign a face to an avatar these days, and a post like this doesn't come off like confidence, but sheer arrogance. Regardless of your point.

 

I hate that someone somewhere probably thinks we're just a bunch of armchair devs when it comes to this and we don't really know whats going on. Its not like we're breaking new ground here. We've seen 17 years of Halo. We've been playing the shooter genre as a whole for even longer. The problems they have with weapon and sandbox design are actually basic logic errors that anyone can and probably should be able to correct with little effort and live experience.

 

In fact I bet the real problem is company politics with too many hands in the pot. Nobody is this stupid. Something is holding up the process and adding useless/pointless additions rather than having everything moving forward

 

To be fair, that is exactly what everyone here is. A bunch of armchair devs with some having some game or engine experience and nothing more. I would hedge that most here lack virtually all qualifications or experience required to get into game design. 

 

And yes, we do not truly know what is going on at 343. Most guesses are at best, speculation and at worst, total nonsense. I personally would rather err on the side of caution when it comes to forming conclusions about what is going on over there.

  • Upvote (+1) 3
  • Downvote (-1) 7

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.