Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

 

Prediction Time

 

So we know that Halo 5 will receive roughly 18 (listed as 18+) DLC maps between now and June 2016. Here's my guess for what they will be:

  • 6 Warzone maps: split into 3 maps for Warzone and their 3 Warzone Assault counterparts. I'm basing this on the fact that Warzone's maps made up a similar portion of the game's launch maps, and the Warzone Assault variants of each map were counted as separate maps. This will include the city-esque Warzone map spotted in the multiplayer trailer shown at Gamescom.
  • 6 Forged Big Team Battle maps: including the remake of Blood Gulch that 343i made, and the five other remakes made by the Community Cartographers.
  • 4 Remixes of the Arena maps which currently lack remixes: Coliseum, The Rig, Fathom, and Plaza. The recent Sprint episodes revealed that 343i's concept artists were working on the Fathom remix; and in this interview Josh states that 'We have remixes planned for most if not all our Arena maps,' so it stands to reason that we can expect these remixes post-launch.
  • 2 new Breakout maps.

 

 

I'm sorry, but if that's our promised DLC, I'm gonna be a bit piffed. It's bad enough they're glossing up some forge maps made by a couple of wannabe level designers and calling it DLC, but to also go and give us maps made up predominantly of reused assets (ie; remix maps), that's  just wrong.

 

DLC maps should be  fresh from the ground up, not recycled materials.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hey guys!

 

Here's the thing. Why do you think LoL is changing it? I don't know for sure myself, but if you read the rest of their changes, it suggests it's a matchmaking time waiting issue.

 

So if LoL, with their massive player base, doesn't have enough players to maintain a team vs. team only queue, I don't know what game DOES.

 

Which means compromise. 

 

I personally like what StarCraft 2 did for 4v4, etc. If you queued up as a team of 4, you got a separate skill on that team. Then, when you matched against non-parties, it auto-statistically knew just how much synergy (or lack of it) your team had. 

 

If you were a full party of, e.g., Gold skilled players, you'd end up matched against 4 random Platinum players, and they would consistently go 50/50. The synergy of the party would make up for the higher skill of the randos.

 

It results in even and fair matchmaking mathematically, but I'll admit that psychologically it still feels bad. But I think it's a decent compromise because you can have faster matchmaking, but still fair matches when you do have to do parties vs. non-parties.

 

I agree, and it's why I don't think Halo could support separating the two. But it is by far the most ideal way of doing things. 

 

But on the other hand, halo has a much more team-oriented population of gamers who LIKE to play as a full team, whereas LoL is a very individualistic style of game where you match with other players, flame them or get flamed, then never see them again. I think there's a CHANCE it could work, but I wouldn't put money on it.

 

Edit: I still think they should at least give "Company Arena" a shot in the rotation. Or do something in game with companies. There are SO MANY missed opportunities.

Share this post


Link to post

 People still want to win the match, communicate and buddy-up in a K/D ranking system because when your team has better control of the map and weapons, you're less likely to be killed by enemies and can more easily secure a positive K/D. That's common sense

Guessing you never played reach arena then?? Also when you say it's "common sense," you realize that that's what everyone says about their own opinions?

Share this post


Link to post

Hey guys!

 

Here's the thing. Why do you think LoL is changing it? I don't know for sure myself, but if you read the rest of their changes, it suggests it's a matchmaking time waiting issue.

 

So if LoL, with their massive player base, doesn't have enough players to maintain a team vs. team only queue, I don't know what game DOES.

 

Which means compromise. 

 

I personally like what StarCraft 2 did for 4v4, etc. If you queued up as a team of 4, you got a separate skill on that team. Then, when you matched against non-parties, it auto-statistically knew just how much synergy (or lack of it) your team had. 

 

If you were a full party of, e.g., Gold skilled players, you'd end up matched against 4 random Platinum players, and they would consistently go 50/50. The synergy of the party would make up for the higher skill of the randos.

 

It results in even and fair matchmaking mathematically, but I'll admit that psychologically it still feels bad. But I think it's a decent compromise because you can have faster matchmaking, but still fair matches when you do have to do parties vs. non-parties.

...

 

Who is this guy and when did TB get an Activision employee?

Share this post


Link to post

I do, and this guy from /r/leagueoflegends does too, and league is more team oriented than Halo. http://puu.sh/lc6Ji/51adb4b167.png He makes very good arguments as to why allowing full teams to compete for THE EXACT SAME TITLE that a solo player is competing for. It makes the person playing alone not care anymore, and it makes the achievement not as meaningful. There needs to be separate hoppers for full premade teams vs. people playing solo or duo.

 

Again, this is the perfect chance to include spartan companies IN GAME instead of just online.

Im not against that idea.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm going to say this right now. This game has been out for a week and a half and I'm already bored with it. All I want to do now is get my review done, and never come back to this game.

  • Upvote (+1) 2
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Im not against that idea.

 

I can see why there isn't, because population numbers wouldn't support it. But there has to be some sort of way to distinguish a "legit" solo-Diamond or solo X-ranked player from someone who is playing with a full party to obtain their rank, because it's fairly obvious people in a party have a much better chance of winning games than 4 randoms. 

 

I for one prefer individual rank and team rank to just mishmashing everyone together.

Share this post


Link to post

...

 

Who is this guy and when did TB get an Activision employee?

That's Josh Menke, the guy who designed Halo 5's ranking system.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'm going to say this right now. This game has been out for a week and a half and I'm already bored with it. All I want to do now is get my review done, and never come back to this game.

I honestly thought I was the only one. I really can't wait for forge to come. I can't wait for a fresh breath of air and beautiful gametypes like Sumo, Dodgeball, and Ghostbusters to hit the Action Sack playlist (implying we actually get an action sack playlist).

Share this post


Link to post

That's Josh Menke, the guy who designed Halo 5's ranking system.

Everything made sense all of a sudden

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Everything made sense all of a sudden

:) Even I didn't know. But his Twitter link is a dead giveaway.

Share this post


Link to post
So if LoL, with their massive player base, doesn't have enough players to maintain a team vs. team only queue, I don't know what game DOES.

Halo 3 did this fine, even years after Reach came out.

 

What do you have to say to that?

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Hey guys!

 

Here's the thing. Why do you think LoL is changing it? I don't know for sure myself, but if you read the rest of their changes, it suggests it's a matchmaking time waiting issue.

 

So if LoL, with their massive player base, doesn't have enough players to maintain a team vs. team only queue, I don't know what game DOES.

 

Which means compromise. 

 

I personally like what StarCraft 2 did for 4v4, etc. If you queued up as a team of 4, you got a separate skill on that team. Then, when you matched against non-parties, it auto-statistically knew just how much synergy (or lack of it) your team had. 

 

If you were a full party of, e.g., Gold skilled players, you'd end up matched against 4 random Platinum players, and they would consistently go 50/50. The synergy of the party would make up for the higher skill of the randos.

 

It results in even and fair matchmaking mathematically, but I'll admit that psychologically it still feels bad. But I think it's a decent compromise because you can have faster matchmaking, but still fair matches when you do have to do parties vs. non-parties.

It makes sense but I think the part that nobody is understanding with Halo particularly is that not playing is more fun than playing lopsided games. Search times don't matter if the game isn't fun because of the skill difference.

Share this post


Link to post

Halo 3 did this fine, even years after Reach came out.

 

What do you have to say to that?

 

Holy shit really? I was unaware Halo 3 had a premade-only playlist. When did they implement that?

Share this post


Link to post

That's Josh Menke, the guy who designed Halo 5's ranking system.

*Scrolls past long post by DoctorJ*

 

*Sees Moas post about who it is*

 

*Scrolls back up to long post by DoctorJ*

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Halo 3 did this fine, even years after Reach came out.

 

What do you have to say to that?

 

Not much really. I mean, the FPS and online gaming landscape has changed drastically since then.

 

Also, my memory of queuing for that is extremely long wait times, and then getting owned by people who always queue as parties.

 

As a noob myself (Gold 1!) my ideal (which no FPS I know of offers right now) would be to be able to party with friends, and match within a reasonable time against either a similar party, or 4 Platinum randos.

 

There's no perfect solution I know of given the constraints. Just a handful of compromises and you gotta choose.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Holy shit really? I was unaware Halo 3 had a premade-only playlist. When did they implement that?

You mean the ability to search a playlist and only find other parties of four?

 

:holmes:

Share this post


Link to post

That's Josh Menke, the guy who designed Halo 5's ranking system.

 

Oh my god, someone who won't post a stream of memes. 

 

A "streme" if you will. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Holy shit really? I was unaware Halo 3 had a premade-only playlist. When did they implement that?

 

I think he's referring to the fact that some playlists would not allow a party of N or more players to match against a full team of randos.

 

It's a commonly used compromise in a lot of games.

 

It works so-so. It does fracture the matchmaking, and does result in people who don't usual party up getting an uneven experience when they do.

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.