Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

But it is objectively counter-intuitive in every aspect of gameplay in a R+G Arena-style FPS with Regen shields. Any kind of Arena shooter, no matter the pace should never have sprint+ADS.  TF shouldn't, Halo shouldn't, Tribes shouldn't, and most certainly not Quake/UT or any old-school style Arena FPS. Halo wasn't build around sprint, every classic map is now obsolete because sprint exists in the game. Discouraging movement+shooting in tandem is discouraging the very nature of the game and has had a HUGE negative effect on combat balance/flow which is still an issue in Halo 5 where combat flow is dead in the water at high levels of play. Sprint+Smartscope(quasi-ADS) are straight pandering to the CoD audience no matter what Josh Holmes or Frankie tries to say. There is no good reason other than that for these mechanics to be forced into Halo after more than a decade of the game functioning perfect without them, nobody in the core community asked for these mechanics and still is not.

Again, while the effects you describe are true (though ADS should probably be separated out, as it has a different impact than sprint), the qualitative judgements are subjective.  Simply because it's not in other arena shooters does not objectively mean that it makes a shooter less competitive.  The only objective conclusion is that it is different.  Calling the disincentive to run and gun "negative" is another subjective judgement (one I happen to agree with, by the way).  We don't like how stop-and-go shooters play; we prefer run-and-gun.  Great!  I'm with you.  I feel the same way.  Still, that does not allow either of us to draw the conclusion that it is objectively reducing the skill gap.

 

Even if the mechanics were pulled indiscriminately from other shooters, that statement still does not change.  A borrowed mechanic does not objectively reduce the competitiveness of the game simply because it has no good reason for inclusion other than everyone else is doing it.

 

You might not like that mechanic - and I might agree - but I think the conversations with 343i might be more productive and less heated if we chose to acknowledge the subjectiveness of that judgement.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Viewing 24-30fps is fine, but you're not actively controlling TV.

Yes, I'm well aware of this. Did you not read my post? I'm not arguing that 30 is better, I'm just trying to explain why it looks more realistic.

Share this post


Link to post

There will be lots of new stuff, some H4 stuff and some classic stuff. Lots of options - many more than H4.

 

 

Ah yes, the objective truth of subjective opinion. :kappa:

 

 

See, that's what's great about "taste" and "opinions" - you can choose to hate things that other people love, and vice versa. The good news is that we'll have plenty of options for everyone so even if you hate a bunch of the designs because they seem overly complicated / detailed / lacking in functional design logic, you can go for the sets that you personally prefer. And you can shoot the people wearing the ones you hate. Win-win.

I enjoyed all the armor sets. People just salty. But will we be able to mix and match armor pieces in past games? Didn't you say over twitter that we will only be able to change our helmet, visor, and body?

Share this post


Link to post

@@Sal1ent, is the default visor color going to remain as blue?

 

On a similar note, I cannot stress enough how important it is that Athlon becomes the default armor. Definitely the best design in Halo 5.

If that becomes default. I won't change my armor lmao.

Share this post


Link to post

There are shields.

 

343 did something weird with the U.I. By making it appear as if there is only your health bar, but there are still shields present.

 

If there weren't shields, the BR would take 3 body shots to kill, which it doesn't.

 

Seems like the damage was increased on weapons and the U.I. Change is just contextual.

 

To be honest, I thought that the BR killed in 3 shots in breakout... but even if that wasn't the case, wouldn't it be more probable that there are some damage multipliers in place, no headshot allowed and no shields? Unlike "something wierd with the UI" you can set all that up in custom game options just fine.

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

If you're just being semantically picky with the use of the word "objective", then whatever, but Halo is not this giant mystery box of chaos theory. There are things that are very plainly bad for competitive play, such as bloom, and then there are things that can be determined to be bad for competitive play with minimal extrapolation, such as huge open maps in 4v4 play. Let me emphasize that nobody has ever offered an explanation as to why these things are good for competitive Halo, they've simply said that they "prefer it".

People use the word "objective" as a way of saying "this has been proven" - be it a discussion about sprint or evolution.  Pointing out that it has not actually been proven for sprint or thrusters is hardly just a semantic argument.

 

With bloom, you are correct.  Bloom automatically reduces the skill gap by introducing a random element that does not depend on player skill.  Because the element is random, player performances will be closer to the median than were it not included.  Bloom can be mathematically proven to reduce the skill gap (you don't even need empirical data for that one), so it does not help you make your point.

 

With sprint, your "prefer it" argument cuts both ways.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

See, this is why i love 4chan system, all these rep whores who get extremely mad when someone neg them.

 

 

 

these games have sprint tho, is just implemented in different ways, in UT4 for example, you have to hold forward for 3 seconds to start sprinting, but if you change directions you stop sprinting and go back to base movement, you don't notice this at first because base movement is already very fast.

 

That sprint mecanic has been suggested here and i think it would be cool to implement it in halo 5, but you know... why even waste your breath.

 

UT4 sprint is a gimmick for noobs who dont know how to dodge-jump, it does not effect the core gameplay or lessen the R+G core of the combat. Sprint in Halo as its implemented as a military shooter mechanic, completely changes the flow of combat, the overall feel of the game, and the map design. I would prefer it if they emulated the UT4 "sprint", it might actually increase the pace of the game then without disrupting the combat balance/flow.

Share this post


Link to post

People use the word "objective" as a way of saying "this has been proven" - be it a discussion about sprint or evolution.  Pointing out that it has not actually been proven for sprint or thrusters is hardly just a semantic argument.

 

With bloom, you are correct.  Bloom automatically reduces the skill gap by introducing a random element that does not depend on player skill.  Because the element is random, player performances will be closer to the median than were it not included.  Bloom can be mathematically proven to reduce the skill gap (you don't even need empirical data for that one), so it does not help you make your point.

 

With sprint, your "prefer it" argument cuts both ways.

Induction says nothing in the history of mankind has ever been proven, but I wouldn't use that fact while arguing about video games.

 

Preference there either counts for both or neither. You can easily make an argument that bloom creates a deeper teamwork and shooting meta by continuing where the Halo 2 BR left off in terms of robbing the player of power.

 

You would be completely wrong, but you could do it.

Share this post


Link to post

UT4 sprint is a gimmick for noobs who dont know how to dodge-jump, I would prefer it if they did it how UT4 does it, it might actually increase the pace of the game then without disrupting the combat balance/flow.

 

Men can dream, that'd make it perfect, on another note, it looks like even the project contingency thing is going to have sprint.

Share this post


Link to post

I am referring solely to the argument that sprint objectively reduces the competitiveness [i.e., skill gap] of the game.  I agree entirely that it slows pacing.  However, slow-paced games can be just as competitive as fast-paced ones.

 

On thruster, you compare apples and oranges.  In the first, yes, it gives lower skilled players more defensive capability.  In the second, though, you pit two high-skilled players against each other.  Different situation.  If the first comparison is high vs. low skill, so must the second comparison be.  In a battle of high vs. low skill, the low skill player is less likely to use the thruster at the opportune time than the high-skill player.  Halo 4 demonstrates this nicely.  Net advantage is still to the high skill player.  Moreover, in the battle for position, the high skill player is much more likely to use the thruster creatively to get to places faster or in a way that the low skill player does not anticipate.  Halo 4 proves this nicely as well.  So is the net effect of thruster to increase or decrease the skill gap?  I have one belief; you may have a different one.  What neither of us have is data, which means that neither of us can legitimately make a definitive statement.

 

The part that stood out was the statement about individual skill and team skill which I just felt was flat out wrong unless you were specifically linking it to the current Halo progression. I'm not quite sure how comparing one single mechanic in various players hands is comparing apples to oranges. What I'm trying to state is that the same thruster that gives a big advantage for less skilled players to escape doesn't nearly offer the same benefit in higher skilled games where it's shown to be less effective and in my opinion, not very skill induced for simply pressing a button. While you say that a battle of high vs low skill, the low skill player is less likely to use the thruster at the opportune time. Mind explaining the uses of the thruster that was showcased in Halo 4? Because as far as I could tell it was primarily used as a defensive tactic, and that's something less skilled players utilize often. Sure, maybe better players can utilize it better, but how? What depth does this add, and is there skill behind it? That's a bit subjective, but I think having various escaping options objectively hurts the engagement of gun battles, in turn creating a slower paced game with faster escape methods.

 

Slow paced games could definitely be just as good as fast ones, but that doesn't explain why we need a slower paced game. You may have missed it, but for about a decade we wanted faster weapon respawns and perfect times to kill. We've been asking for things that help indirectly speed up the pace of the game without having to add crazy abilities or sprint, so we can turn a blind eye to their intentions because we may not know them fully, but we can absolutely hold them accountable for creating the exact opposite environment we've been asking for. (again, subjective since you love objective/subjective)

 

 

Again, while the effects you describe are true (though ADS should probably be separated out, as it has a different impact than sprint), the qualitative judgements are subjective.  Simply because it's not in other arena shooters does not objectively mean that it makes a shooter less competitive.  The only objective conclusion is that it is different.  Calling the disincentive to run and gun "negative" is another subjective judgement (one I happen to agree with, by the way).  We don't like how stop-and-go shooters play; we prefer run-and-gun.  Great!  I'm with you.  I feel the same way.  Still, that does not allow either of us to draw the conclusion that it is objectively reducing the skill gap.

 

Even if the mechanics were pulled indiscriminately from other shooters, that statement still does not change.  A borrowed mechanic does not objectively reduce the competitiveness of the game simply because it has no good reason for inclusion other than everyone else is doing it.

 

You might not like that mechanic - and I might agree - but I think the conversations with 343i might be more productive and less heated if we chose to acknowledge the subjectiveness of that judgement.

 

So you're telling me that I can't objectively state how Prometheon Vision was bad for competitive, or casual play when it's completely ripped off from Shadowrun? In shadowrun, the ability took up a tech spot, had limitations, and had counter abilities that prevented from being seen. Completely thought out ability that had it's own counters and shifted being useful vs useless. Then we have halos, which didn't decide to balance it AT ALL. Whether objective or subjective maybe you can somehow explain how it either enhances the level of competitive play, or leaves it untouched.

 

I honestly don't see the point in nitpicking and calling things subjective vs objective, while giving 343 a pass when SUBJECTIVELY, Halo has been failing and has been progressing in a direction that most long time Halo fans dislike.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

People use the word "objective" as a way of saying "this has been proven" - be it a discussion about sprint or evolution.  Pointing out that it has not actually been proven for sprint or thrusters is hardly just a semantic argument.

 

With bloom, you are correct.  Bloom automatically reduces the skill gap by introducing a random element that does not depend on player skill.  Because the element is random, player performances will be closer to the median than were it not included.  Bloom can be mathematically proven to reduce the skill gap (you don't even need empirical data for that one), so it does not help you make your point.

 

With sprint, your "prefer it" argument cuts both ways.

 

Shadowrun would be a more skillful game without bloom?

Share this post


Link to post

To be honest, I thought that the BR killed in 3 shots in breakout... but even if that wasn't the case, wouldn't it be more probable that there are some damage multipliers in place, no headshot allowed and no shields? Unlike "something wierd with the UI" you can set all that up in custom game options just fine.

Nope because a no headshot setting would mean BR killed in the same head shots as body shots. BR was a 3sk w/ Headshot

Share this post


Link to post

You can easily make an argument that bloom creates a deeper teamwork and shooting meta by continuing where the Halo 2 BR left off in terms of robbing the player of power.

Sometimes bloom robs the player of power other times it gives it to them. Sprint on the other hand works in the exact same way for every player in every instance it's used. 

 

I dislike sprint and wish it wasn't in Halo 5. But saying it makes the game less competitive isn't particularly true. If you say "sprint makes staying alive easier" that in turn means "sprint makes getting kills harder". You and I both think this is a bad thing but that doesn't objectively mean it is. 

Share this post


Link to post

Nope because a no headshot setting would mean BR killed in the same head shots as body shots. BR was a 3sk w/ Headshot

 

Well, as I said, I thought the BR killed in 3 shots with or without the headshot, but if you are telling me that that's not the case than there's probably some kind of shield... OR the headshot multiplier is small enough to not make the BR a 1sk but big enough to make the BR go from 4sk to the body to 3sk with an headshot :D (it's actually possible)

 

I'm sorry, but "wierd thing to the UI" doesn't appeal to me :P

Share this post


Link to post

Well, as I said, I thought the BR killed in 3 shots with or without the headshot, but if you are telling me that that's not the case than there's probably some kind of shield... OR the headshot multiplier is small enough to not make the BR a 1sk but big enough to make the BR go from 4sk to the body to 3sk with an headshot :D (it's actually possible)

 

I'm sorry, but "wierd thing to the UI" doesn't appeal to me :P

Totally agree, the UI is confusing and misleading. All I know is that there are shields. No fancy modifiers or anything.

Share this post


Link to post

Good, because that was the point.  The purpose of the example was to demonstrate that features can be added (or removed) that fundamentally change the way the game is played without making it uncompetitive.

 You are misunderstanding me if you think that I'm arguing otherwise. When I say that a certain addition objectively reduces the skill gap, I do not mean anything other than that. A skill gap can still exist, but can be objectively inferior to another model. I will be more clear about that moving further...

 

 

Increasing the defensive options available does not necessarily mean the skill gap has been decreased....To say that thruster, etc., has reduced the skill gap you must show that including those features results in more players performing at the median.  In other words, you must show that there is less differentiation between the top players and bottom players. 

 

Speaking particularly on thurster, it does allow players to escape punishment where if it were not available they may have died. This allows players with less skill related to map awareness and positioning to be forgiven and be closer to a player with better map awareness and positioning skill. There is still a gap between the two, but it is shortened with this defensive crutch. 

 

 

My personal [unproven] opinion is that the inclusion of those abilities actually increases the differentiation between the top and bottom players, because there is a lot of creativity that can be applied to movement mechanics.

 

Outside of using thruster to escape taking damage, what other ways can it be used? 

 

 

 

If Josh's goal is to increase the need for teamwork among the majority of the player base, then what he proposes is, indeed, a logical approach.

 

Yes, but his stated goal is simply to make the game more team oriented. Unless he didn't have time to expand on that idea, it is irrelevant to take what the average player does when looking at what the whole product offers. For example, just because most players do not use grenade tricks in CE does not mean that grenade tricks don't deepen the meta. Just because most players don't use strafing tactics in Halo 2 does not mean that strafing mechanics don't increase the individual skill gap. Josh's teamwork approach is illogical unless he meant to describe a different goal.    

 

 

 

It is not a valid argument to take just one goal, ignore other stated goals, and maintain that every mechanic must be adjusted in a manner that helps achieve that single goal you selected.

 

You're misunderstanding me here. I'm saying that Josh telling me "We included sprint for a lot of reasons, one of which being to increase the pace of the game," is illogical on the point of increasing the pace of the game. Sprint does not increase the pace of the game, it actually slows the game down. Using sprint in order to increase the pace of the game, regardless of whatever other things may be used to increase the pace of the game or whatever other purposes sprint may serve, is illogical.

 

 

I am referring solely to the argument that sprint objectively reduces the competitiveness [i.e., skill gap] of the game.  I agree entirely that it slows pacing.  However, slow-paced games can be just as competitive as fast-paced ones.

 

Slow paced games can be just as competitive/have as great of a skill gap as fast paced ones. This is true. However, slow paced games with Halo characteristics (unlimited lives per round, shields) do not have as high of a skill gap as their fast paced counterparts. A skill gap can exist in a slow paced Halo game, but it is objectively inferior to a fast paced Halo game. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Are you guys seriously arguing over bloom? I thought we were past that, you know, since 2010. You can spam bloom to get lucky. That alone breaks it regardless of other wierd ass theories people come up with.

Share this post


Link to post

A skill gap can exist in a slow paced Halo game, but it is objectively inferior to a fast paced Halo game. 

That's simply not true. Me personally, I enjoy fast paced Halo more than slow paced. But just saying something is an objective fact doesn't make it one.  A lockout 1v1 is slower paced than an octagon 1v1 but no one can objectively say which is more competitive.  

Share this post


Link to post

If that becomes default. I won't change my armor lmao.

Ditto. It reminded me of Halo 3 armor style which is a good thing. Pair it with a default bronze/gold visor and profit.

Share this post


Link to post

That's simply not true. Me personally, I enjoy fast paced Halo more than slow paced. But just saying something is an objective fact doesn't make it one.  A lockout 1v1 is slower paced than an octagon 1v1 but no one can objectively say which is more competitive.  

 

Halo 2 is objectively less competitive than Halo CE because it is slower paced. You can use quantitative variables to confirm this since players have more time to react to a situation and aren't punished as hard as they would be. Like the bald guy in Zola's documentary stated, "Getting owned in Halo CE is 50-0. Getting owned in Halo 2 is 50-35." The skill gap is larger when the game is faster because better players can dump on lower skilled players by a greater extent. 

Share this post


Link to post

Faster gameplay = Funner to play

Slower gameplay = Funner to watch

 

Just my opinion though  ;)

 

I'd say slower gameplay =  easier to understand.

But too slow gameplay can get boring fast (Lockdown Slayer)

 

Halo 2 is objectively less competitive than Halo CE because it is slower paced. 

Halo 2 is less competitive than CE for many more reasons than it's pace, I'm sure that's something even Lemon and I can agree on. 

 

EDIT: Also, why do people think CE is the only game you can 50-0 a team? 

 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=halo+50-0

Share this post


Link to post

Halo 2 is less competitive than CE for many more reasons than it's pace, I'm sure that's something even Lemon and I can agree on. 

No disagreement there, but the slow pace was indeed a factor. The pace of a Halo game, given that things like unlimited lives per round remain constant, have an impact on the game's skill gap. 

Share this post


Link to post

Sometimes bloom robs the player of power other times it gives it to them. Sprint on the other hand works in the exact same way for every player in every instance it's used.

Doesn't matter. Bloom may be bad for a specific tactile reason but both sprint and bloom have consequences for Halo's playstyle - consequences that some people can spin into positives because of their preference.

 

I dislike sprint and wish it wasn't in Halo 5. But saying it makes the game less competitive isn't particularly true. If you say "sprint makes staying alive easier" that in turn means "sprint makes getting kills harder". You and I both think this is a bad thing but that doesn't objectively mean it is.

Case in point.

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.