Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

[Hard Way]

Single obj gamtypes in h5 devolve into clusterfucks because the players near the objective are moving and engaging each other at a much slower speed than the players who are away from the obj, converging towards them.

 

This is why CTF(two objectives) plays much better than assault. In assault people can spawn and converge on the bomb too quickly because it's the single objective.

 

King would play terribly in h5 because the players who are away from the objective can converge on it too quickly. The player spacing would be way off.

 

The 3 objectives in Strongholds creates a much needed modicum of player spacing.

I feel like traditional 10 second respawns would help so much with that. I hate 8 second universal respawns so damn much. I'd love to hear the reason for it too, because it just seems like pointless change that only made the game worse.

[Mhunterjr]

You said my argument was that if we made it more like Slayer, it would be Slayer, that isn't my argument.

 

My argument is that they all play like Slayer in the first place.

 

The former is making misrepresenting my argument so its sounds stupid, ie, strawmanning.

 

Strongholds takes the basic strategy of holding map positions to manipulate where your foe spawns from Slayer and simplifies it to a capture and forget objective based mode. How you win the match, is to force your opponent into a spawn trap, like Slayer.

 

So, in that vein, at a high level, the modes do not play very differently at all, what that causes them to play differently is the positions of the Strongholds themselves

Every single halo gametype has the element of slaying and manipulating spawns. But if you are playing capture and forget, you arent playing it right.

[Oriiii]

Because the nature of H5 spawns and maps is that the strongholds will naturally be "Spawn A, Spawn B, and Spawn/Center C." My first sentence is intentionally simplistic (obviously spawn manipulation is always a factor), but the point is that the positioning of 3 objectives in Strongholds results in almost identical spawn manipulation to Slayer. In CTF, you have static spawns and an objective on each side. In one bomb, you have static spawns and the neutral objective and 2 goals. In Oddball, you have the ball spawn point and a moving objective. In Slayer/SH, you have the majority of the map that is being controlled, and the minority of the map where the team without map control is spawning.

This isn't necessarily true though. It's only true of the maps that are currently used for strongholds and slayer in H5. h5 just happens to only use asym maps and symmetrical maps with dynamics spawns(yuck) for slayer.

 

On two sided, base oriented slayer maps with static spawns the spawn manipulation in slayer and CTF are identical.

 

It has less to do with the gametype and more to do with the maps that it is being played on.

[Oriiii]

I feel like traditional 10 second respawns would help so much with that. I hate 8 second universal respawns so damn much. I'd love to hear the reason for it too, because it just seems like pointless change that only made the game worse.

I mean, obviously it would help but I just can't see king playing well in H5 at all. It's just too easy to bum rush and bum rushing was already an issue in halo games with uniform(good) movement mechanics.

 

But ya, universal 8 second respawns are horrid. Slayer is god awful in this game. So many steaks.

[MATCLAN]

Empire KotH would probably be better than Empire SH.

It'd still be a bit of a clusterfuck, but I think it would feel more predictable and less chaotic. A bit like a bastardized Nexus KotH.

[Mhunterjr]

You control the map to get slays to get points. But controlling the map to get points is COMPLETELY different, right? lmfao. And being forced to spawn in one area because every H5 map has like 5 major spawns isn't a spawn trap. OK.

 

The ideal triple cap is literally IDENTICAL to the ideal set-up in slayer. Collapse on their spawn (take the stronghold). Enemy spawns on the opposite side of the map, collapse and kill the spawners (reset the stronghold). Turn around and collapse again. Rinse, repeat. Double caps play pretty much exactly like a stand-off in Slayer. The only difference is that players are getting points for controlling the map instead of having to control the map and THEN get points. Are all of your arguments a matter of pedantic fixation on extremely minor details presented as major issues?

This is such a wierd argument because every gametype, even ctf is about controlling the map, and manipulating spawns to create scoring opportunities.

 

 

Its funny because it's actually YOU who are fixated on minor details presented as major issues. Sure, the spawn locations may be similar (in these particular maps) to a game of slayer, but in practice it plays differently.

 

In slayer, it's your spartans physical position that dictates where opponents spawn. Is SH, it's your objective status.

 

So, In SH you can have 2 or 3 zones capped, and be scoring without actually having positional map control.

 

You can have positional map control, but not have teammates in the right place at the right time to capture and secure strongholds. This is why teams can get heavily outslayed and still win.

[TheIcePrincess]

Haha, didn't realise someone had linked my post in here. I'll try to explain myself a bit better.

 

First off though I'm gunna qualify that I'm talking about largely on-foot encounters. I completely agree that previous Halo's had far better integration of vehicles into the levels. If the main thing you're looking for in a Halo campaign is sandboxy vehicle encounters then I completely understand the disappointment with 5's campaign. Personally I always preferred on-foot combat, hence my focus on it. Anyway...

 

The reason I prefer H5's on-foot combat is spartan abilities. Sprint, thrust and clamber allow for a hit and run style of gameplay which I really enjoy, in my experience the pace and level of action was much higher in 5 than previous titles. Sprint allows for quickly getting into and out of combat, thrust gives you a completely new dynamic in close quarters or an option to quickly escape into cover, and clamber allows for rapid and smooth ascension of terrain. I very rarely found myself sitting in cover waiting for my shields to recharge, instead I was constantly on the move. The way I play 5 is a dance of engage in combat, move into cover, flank and reengage, a high pace game of hit, run and hit again. The abilities also allow for more interesting movement across terrain, I feel much more grounded in previous Halo's than I do in 5.

 

The increased level density plays heavily into this. With increased object density you're always closer to cover which makes it easier to break the line of site with an enemy and flank. I'd also argue that more open and less dense levels don't actually give you more options for engagement. Speaking generally, consider an open field with a few pieces of cover to move between compared one with lots of cover. Yes, overall there will be more possible paths to take in the field with less cover, however, there are less viable routes and a large amount of redundancy. In a more dense play space the total number of options is reduced but the number of viable routes is greater and there is less redundancy. Halo 5 does appear to have more "defined" paths in its arenas, however, for the most part I found it easy to ignore them. Using thrust, clamber etc. you can easily move between these paths and create your own. I considered those paths less as control over your movement and more as suggestions. 

 

Because of the movement and the level design I felt like I could be more creative in how I approach and handle encounters in 5 than previous titles. Any route I chose across an arena would offer a different experience and would be equally viable. Don't get me wrong I loved the previous titles' on foot combat as well, however, in my experience 5 offered a faster and more dynamic style of gameplay.

 

 

Edit: Drive by downvotes and literally no counterarguments. Not sure why I expected anything else from this thread really.

I won't downvote you, honestly, because I find it to be pretty dumb to do so solely because I disagree with what you say.

 

Anyhow, my issue with all these movement abilities is how the creativity you'd speak of is hilariously limited by how arbitrarily impeded you are when you do these. If you want to clamber, you need to face the wall, jump, and jump again, effectively turning your back to the combat/scenario you're in. Honestly, that isn't smooth. That's a terribly clunky and forced mechanic that took AWAY the viability of a smooth mechanic: crouch jumping. People would argue this is risk vs. reward, but honestly, you shouldn't be forced into that for basic map navigation and older Halos didn't do that. Same for sprint and putting your weapon down, solely to get a proper movement speed going. This may come down to opinion, but honestly, being grounded is one of the better feelings in Halo, especially with how the opposite's been achieved, and how it yanks combat effectiveness and control from you. I'd rather feel grounded and in control, than fly around lacking control, which just stresses me out and makes me uneasy because my basic movement turns into my biggest enemy, because using almost any of it stops me from being able to fight at all, and I need to use it to navigate the maps, due to how they're designed. It feels counter intuitive and counterproductive to what the game's trying to push: movement. And to me, that just screams "this doesn't work".

 

My other issue comes from how hypothetical creativity comes at the cost of a consistent pace and nullifies a bit of the skillgap in combat since escape is so easy. And to be fair, older Halos also had creativity in movement. Finding trickjumps to out-navigate (lol) your opponents or gain an advantage by faster map navigation in a way outside of movement speed itself. Creativity was present and certainly favored those who learned the maps and didn't require what we have now (abilities) to be there. And in the same breath, maps in past titles also offered the luxurious experience of being dynamic experiences every time. They were dynamic without being pace-breaking and arguably negative to the game's overall flow. They also weren't cluttered, didn't have deadspaces, many line of sight blockers, relatively simple layouts that allowed for proper prediction and map knowledge to occur... The last two are key to this, too. All these other corridors and map choices/suggestions really only lead to a lack of prediction and the like because of the number of pathways, which just adds to the uncertainty and unpredictability portion that I hate which (personally) just adds stress to the game, over fun.

 

[Il Meanbean lI]

I won't downvote you, honestly, because I find it to be pretty dumb to do so solely because I disagree with what you say.

 

Anyhow, my issue with all these movement abilities is how the creativity you'd speak of is hilariously limited by how arbitrarily impeded you are when you do these. If you want to clamber, you need to face the wall, jump, and jump again, effectively turning your back to the combat/scenario you're in. Honestly, that isn't smooth. That's a terribly clunky and forced mechanic that took AWAY the viability of a smooth mechanic: crouch jumping. People would argue this is risk vs. reward, but honestly, you shouldn't be forced into that for basic map navigation and older Halos didn't do that. Same for sprint and putting your weapon down, solely to get a proper movement speed going. This may come down to opinion, but honestly, being grounded is one of the better feelings in Halo, especially with how the opposite's been achieved, and how it yanks combat effectiveness and control from you. I'd rather feel grounded and in control, than fly around lacking control, which just stresses me out and makes me uneasy because my basic movement turns into my biggest enemy, because using almost any of it stops me from being able to fight at all, and I need to use it to navigate the maps, due to how they're designed. It feels counter intuitive and counterproductive to what the game's trying to push: movement. And to me, that just screams "this doesn't work".

 

My other issue comes from how hypothetical creativity comes at the cost of a consistent pace and nullifies a bit of the skillgap in combat since escape is so easy. And to be fair, older Halos also had creativity in movement. Finding trickjumps to out-navigate (lol) your opponents or gain an advantage by faster map navigation in a way outside of movement speed itself. Creativity was present and certainly favored those who learned the maps and didn't require what we have now (abilities) to be there. And in the same breath, maps in past titles also offered the luxurious experience of being dynamic experiences every time. They were dynamic without being pace-breaking and arguably negative to the game's overall flow. They also weren't cluttered, didn't have deadspaces, many line of sight blockers, relatively simple layouts that allowed for proper prediction and map knowledge to occur... The last two are key to this, too. All these other corridors and map choices/suggestions really only lead to a lack of prediction and the like because of the number of pathways, which just adds to the uncertainty and unpredictability portion that I hate which (personally) just adds stress to the game, over fun.

 

Thanks for actually responding, quite refreshing actually.

 

I do have to note though, my post was purely about the campaign...

 

 

...which now that I go back and read my post wasn't actually very clear.

 

 

 

In multiplayer I'm more mixed. I love H5's multiplayer and I think the spartan abilities encourage a quite aggressive and chaotic style of play which I really enjoy. That said I also really enjoy the more methodical gameplay in previous titles.

[TryHardFan]

Thanks for actually responding, quite refreshing actually.

 

I do have to note though, my post was purely about the campaign...

 

 

...which now that I go back and read my post wasn't actually very clear.

I don't know how anything she could've said of multiplayer doesn't apply to campaign in a similar manner.

[TheIcePrincess]

Thanks for actually responding, quite refreshing actually.

 

I do have to note though, my post was purely about the campaign...

 

 

...which now that I go back and read my post wasn't actually very clear.

 

 

 

In multiplayer I'm more mixed. I love H5's multiplayer and I think the spartan abilities encourage a quite aggressive and chaotic style of play which I really enjoy. That said I also really enjoy the more methodical gameplay in previous titles.

Fucking RIP. Totes thought ya meant MM. I honestly love Halo 5's campaign gameplay over most others. Gives me a pretty Reach-like vibe in some cases, gameplay wise and it's where I think SAs and movement work very well. Blue Team was surprisingly fun to play through with how the map's designed, alongside others like Genesis, Battle of Sunaion, etc.

[Il Meanbean lI]

I don't know how anything she could've said of multiplayer doesn't apply to campaign in a similar manner.

Well it's a completely different frame for the argument. Different design intentions etc. For one thing a "skill gap" doesn't really exist in the campaign because it's a solo experience.

 

Fucking RIP. Totes thought ya meant MM. I honestly love Halo 5's campaign gameplay over most others. Gives me a pretty Reach-like vibe in some cases, gameplay wise and it's where I think SAs and movement work very well. Blue Team was surprisingly fun to play through with how the map's designed, alongside others like Genesis, Battle of Sunaion, etc.

Haha, to be fair it's completely my fault. It definitely reads like I'm talking about multiplayer.

 

I'm glad someone else thinks similarly to me though. 5's campaign certainly isn't perfect, if anything it's the most flawed campaign in the series. I still thought it was a tonne of fun to play though. The Sanghelios through to Sunion string of levels is probably my favourite in the series. 

[TheIcePrincess]

Haha, to be fair it's completely my fault. It definitely reads like I'm talking about multiplayer.

 

I'm glad someone else thinks similarly to me though. 5's campaign certainly isn't perfect, if anything it's the most flawed campaign in the series. I still thought it was a tonne of fun to play though. The Sanghelios through to Sunion string of levels is probably my favourite in the series. 

Honestly, where my faults are with the story entirely go out the window with gameplay. My complaints mainly lay in AI and how difficult they are. Doesn't stop environments from being fun to transverse and immerse yourself in. And they took it up a notch by introducing moments like the Guardian run on top of the SAs, which quickly rose to my favorite gameplay moment from any campaign, bar Lone Wolf's objective flare of "survive" and "there'll be another time".

[Devaneaux]

And now, ladies and gentlemen, from the great minds of "Adapt" settings comes this soon-to-be-classic:

 

 

Don't forget to smack that LIKE button.

[CorporalWings0]

And now, ladies and gentlemen, from the great minds of "Adapt" settings comes this soon-to-be-classic:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-te8nKmqBCQ&feature=youtu.be

 

Don't forget to smack that LIKE button.

I found this funny, but what are your thoughts on autos? Also, not sure if the SH thing was intentional but if so, nice touch lol.

[Il Meanbean lI]

Honestly, where my faults are with the story entirely go out the window with gameplay. My complaints mainly lay in AI and how difficult they are. Doesn't stop environments from being fun to transverse and immerse yourself in. And they took it up a notch by introducing moments like the Guardian run on top of the SAs, which quickly rose to my favorite gameplay moment from any campaign, bar Lone Wolf's objective flare of "survive" and "there'll be another time".

I agree completely, even as far as running down the Guardian and "Survive" being two of my favourite moments in the series.

 

I wish the section where you run down the Guardian was longer though. I feel like they could have made an excellent level purely from that if they fleshed it out a bit. How cool would it be if the entire level shifted and moved around as you fought through it. New routes and cover appearing and disappearing as you go.

[Cursed Lemon]

And now, ladies and gentlemen, from the great minds of "Adapt" settings comes this soon-to-be-classic:

 

 

Don't forget to smack that LIKE button.

 

Alright the melees made me lol 

[Infinity]

I agree completely, even as far as running down the Guardian and "Survive" being two of my favourite moments in the series.

 

I wish the section where you run down the Guardian was longer though. I feel like they could have made an excellent level purely from that if they fleshed it out a bit. How cool would it be if the entire level shifted and moved around as you fought through it. New routes and cover appearing and disappearing as you go.

 

 

The Guardian running sequence was one of the coolest things 343 has done with single player Halo and it lasted like 30 seconds.

 

When they do the "running UP the Guardian" sequence in Halo 6 it better be longer.

[MultiLockOn]

And now, ladies and gentlemen, from the great minds of "Adapt" settings comes this soon-to-be-classic:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-te8nKmqBCQ&feature=youtu.be

 

Don't forget to smack that LIKE button.

This merited a micro chuckle

[TheIcePrincess]

I wish the section where you run down the Guardian was longer though. I feel like they could have made an excellent level purely from that if they fleshed it out a bit. How cool would it be if the entire level shifted and moved around as you fought through it. New routes and cover appearing and disappearing as you go.

Eh, see, I think the novelty would've worn off or it'd just become tedious. Halo 4's Shutdown did something similar, where level shifting was a thing as time went on and the Didact assumed either more or less control of the towers you went in. I was indifferent to it. If anything, it made basic navigation a bit of a bitch when stuff started shifting your pathways. A Guardian itself, though? Running down the entire thing and doing an airdrop like Section 8's spawn system (Basically like an ODST but you ARE the drop pod) would be the only way I'd improve it. 

[CyReN]

 

Have to give them props, they always seem to find a way.

[Il Meanbean lI]

Eh, see, I think the novelty would've worn off or it'd just become tedious. Halo 4's Shutdown did something similar, where level shifting was a thing as time went on and the Didact assumed either more or less control of the towers you went in. I was indifferent to it. If anything, it made basic navigation a bit of a bitch when stuff started shifting your pathways. A Guardian itself, though? Running down the entire thing and doing an airdrop like Section 8's spawn system (Basically like an ODST but you ARE the drop pod) would be the only way I'd improve it. 

It would depend on how it was done. IIRC Shutdown was just platforms and cover disappearing in front of you wasn't it? That's not particularly engaging, it doesn't really add anything to the combat. I'm thinking more along the lines of an arena where different sections of the terrain move about. If done well I don't think it would just be a novelty, it could genuinely add a completely fresh dynamic to the combat. First of all I'd make the movements fairly predictable, no randomly disappearing or appearing sections. I'd also design it so there were little to no ways to fall to your death, they're no fun at all. That way you'd remove frustration associated with it and allow for a degree of planning and strategy it how to use the shifting levels.

 

Although, I imagine the reason they didn't do anything like that would be that the AI wouldn't be able to handle it.

[Moa]

 

Have to give them props, they always seem to find a way.

Not only should this playlist not exist anymore, but they also manage to add one game mode that I guess was meant to be Christmas themed... after Christmas is over.

[Il Meanbean lI]

Not only should this playlist not exist anymore, but they also manage to add one game mode that I guess was meant to be Christmas themed... after Christmas is over.

Action sack shouldn't exist anymore? Say what? You'd piss the entire casual fan base off removing it.

 

Also it's winter themed, winter doesn't end after Christmas.

[Moa]

Action sack shouldn't exist anymore? Say what? You'd piss the entire casual fan base off removing it.

 

Also it's winter themed, winter doesn't end after Christmas.

The custom game browser made Action Sack obsolete.

 

You can argue it's winter-themed I guess but it would have made more sense to actually put it in the playlist before Christmas, not after. 

[Mhunterjr]

The custom game browser made Action Sack obsolete.

 

You can argue it's winter-themed I guess but it would have made more sense to actually put it in the playlist before Christmas, not after.

Custom browser is cool, but there are still benefits to having MM bringing people in and out of matches quickly. Anytime i hit the custom browser, I'm too slow getting matches that aren't full, then the ones with space i don't want to play.