Why do you think armor abilities will be stipped from competitive multiplayer?Stardriver907 wrote:Halo was never kept simple. Every Halo game released was the most advanced game the Xbox could handle. Bungie never tried to "keep it simple". Every release they tried to push the limits. Between CE and 3, each release was more popular than the last because each release gave us more. More equipment. Better movement. More skills. All the other developers were trying to make their games as good as Halo.Gym Meathead wrote:Going good bro. No need to make Halo try to follow other games by adding sprint, or loadouts, or any other fancy ability. Halo was the best when it was kept simple, and they should use that idea to make Halo a simple yet amazing game just like Halo 2 and 3 were.knight129830 wrote:You were on the sprint discussion thread saying the same thing how it going mate :DGym Meathead wrote:I prefer no armor abilities. I’m a huge H2 and H3 fan and thought those were the best Halo games.
Listen to the fans. Look at what the hardcore Halo fans say is the best Halo. Look at what the most popular Halo game was. And when someone mentions Halo to a Halo player what is the first Halo they think about. The answers will be Halo 1, 2, or 3. Those first 3 Halo games were the best Halo games ever. When other things were added in the game it took away from the original Halo feel. Why stray away from what made Halo so popular and amazing. Go back to the basics.
No sprint or loadouts like COD.
No open world like Destiny.
No Battle Royale like Fortnite.
This is Halo. 343 has the potential to bring back the most epic FPS if they listen to their fans and go back to the basics.
Let's face it. Some people found some unique ways to get around a map, and in the next game anyone could do the same thing with a Jet Pack or Clamor. Some people didn't like that. Still don't.
Spartans have abilities. Otherwise it would be a game about normal humans. You know, like Call of Duty. WWII stuff. Had games like that for years. Halo comes out and we all went to Halo. Was it because Halo had better guns, or because a Spartan could flip an Elephant? Spartans are enhanced humans wearing fusion-powered armor. How does eliminating all that potential movement speed and power make the game better? Why go through the trouble of placing the game in the 26th Century if we're going to play the game with 18th Century abilities? Just strip all that armor off and give everyone a revolver. Then we'll see who's the best.
I don't know why so many people want the next game on the most advanced Xbox ever to be no better than Halo CE. You folks know that whatever abilities or equipment that comes with the next game can and probably will be stripped away for "competitive" multiplayer, right? There's no way you're going to be "stuck" with dealing with abilities you don't agree with. Just make a Custom Game with nothing you don't like in it, and see if anyone else likes to play that way. Removing the abilities doesn't make the game any harder, and having the abilities doesn't make the game easier. Any difference between the two extremes is all in your head. People need to stop blaming things like armor abilities and loadouts for their inability to win. If you're good, it doesn't matter.
I'd be fine with or without armor abilities in Infinite. The main thing is whichever route they choose, they need to commit to it and do it correctly. Halo Reach is an example of armor abilities not being done correctly because some of them were too good. If they stick with the H5 model, that's fine, but they'd probably tweak it somewhat based on the feedback they've received over the past few years.
I'm against the "Armor abilities" in Halo 5 and found them to be the best in Halo: Reach. There was more variety and they were more fun to use. Tell me Armor Lock wasn't the best thing ever before getting nerfed? Not because it was OP...not entirely, but because I had the most fun using it. Guy bout to run me over; "THINK AGAIN!" Got stuck with a plasma; "BACK AT CHA!". Person with a sword comes round the corner; "BETTER LUCK NEXT TIME!".
Sprint and clamber must stay in the game for both casual and competitive play. Ground pound and spartan charge must go. Or they can leave em in social playlists so casuals and new players can enjoy. They must definitely go away for competitive play.
I think abilities should be removed for Campaign and Matchmaking, but keep as an option for Custom Games and Forge.
They usually are, to some extent. There's a belief among some veteran players that any player movement enhancements added after CE deprive new players of the chance to learn to play. The newer abilities diminish the skill acquired during the older game. They complain because a player can "escape punishment at the push of a button." With Reach, the addition of Loadouts meant that match starts were no longer "even". There were players that would quit a game if someone on the other side had a Jet Pack because it gave them an "unfair advantage."Gym Meathead wrote:Why do you think armor abilities will be stipped from competitive multiplayer?
One Reach ability that no one ever complained about was Hologram. Most people couldn't figure it out. Very few understood it enough to use it effectively. Therefore it was labeled as something that was put in just because they could, which helped make the case that everything else was also useless fluff.
It's just strange, to me, that we are still having this conversation. It's been going on since Halo 3 and equipment. Halo CE was a great game in it's day. No one today is going to get excited about playing a brand new game that doesn't offer anything more than what CE did. All the Halo games are out there, and the most popular one is Halo 5. Not Halo 3, not Halo CE. The most current game will always be the most popular. My advice to 343i is to stop trying to appease players that cut their teeth on CE and just move on. There is nothing wrong with Spartans having enhanced capabilities. That was the POINT of the Spartan program. If competitive players want to disassociate Halo's story and lore from competitive play that's fine. The rest of us want to play Halo when we're playing Halo.
You make great points and I do see both sides. New is always exciting. But bringing in new abilities could completely change the feel of the game. And Halo 3 was way more popular than Halo 5.Stardriver907 wrote:They usually are, to some extent. There's a belief among some veteran players that any player movement enhancements added after CE deprive new players of the chance to learn to play. The newer abilities diminish the skill acquired during the older game. They complain because a player can "escape punishment at the push of a button." With Reach, the addition of Loadouts meant that match starts were no longer "even". There were players that would quit a game if someone on the other side had a Jet Pack because it gave them an "unfair advantage."Gym Meathead wrote:Why do you think armor abilities will be stipped from competitive multiplayer?
One Reach ability that no one ever complained about was Hologram. Most people couldn't figure it out. Very few understood it enough to use it effectively. Therefore it was labeled as something that was put in just because they could, which helped make the case that everything else was also useless fluff.
It's just strange, to me, that we are still having this conversation. It's been going on since Halo 3 and equipment. Halo CE was a great game in it's day. No one today is going to get excited about playing a brand new game that doesn't offer anything more than what CE did. All the Halo games are out there, and the most popular one is Halo 5. Not Halo 3, not Halo CE. The most current game will always be the most popular. My advice to 343i is to stop trying to appease players that cut their teeth on CE and just move on. There is nothing wrong with Spartans having enhanced capabilities. That was the POINT of the Spartan program. If competitive players want to disassociate Halo's story and lore from competitive play that's fine. The rest of us want to play Halo when we're playing Halo.
Quote:There are two ways to address that statement. Halo 3 was very popular from its release until the release of Reach. One can argue that Halo 5 has not been as popular now than Halo 3 was then. Or, since Halo 3 is currently part of the Master Chief Collection, one could compare Halo 3's current popularity to Halo 5's current popularity. The way you worded your statement suggests you would like to compare Halo 3's former popularity to Halo 5's current popularity. Like comparing Mayweather to Ali. An unfair comparison, at best, not that it even matters.Gym Meathead wrote:And Halo 3 was way more popular than Halo 5.
Warmaster987609 wrote:i know that too but for some reason many people dislike it alot, and I cant really see a 2018 game without sprint etcSmall duck weed wrote:Sprint, clamber, and slide would work really well as the base movement mechanics.Warmaster987609 wrote:I think the pick ups from halo 3 should return, I also there should be only 3 starting spartan abilities(sprint,clamber and slide)Small duck weed wrote:I can't say I really agree but for the discussion I'll say that you should start with Sprint, clamber, and ground pound. Then put all of the other AA's as pickups.
The problem I have with this though is that you would bloat the map with pickups. Just having 2 on map was kinda over kill. I liked camo and overshield in H5 because it made one team more powerful than the other and because of the rush to control it. If you bloated the maps with these powerups you wouldn't have people trying to fight for these abilities.
Also how would you balance all of these things out? Say there is 1 jetpack in the middle of the map. A person picks it up and starts to fly around and notices he keeps getting killed with it because he keeps flying up into open air with no cover. So do you add another level to the map that is unreachable except for by jetpack or do something else? Overall just trying to balance 1 ability is hard enough, I can't imagine doing anything more than camo and overshield.
Overwatch and Doom want to have words with you two.knight129830 wrote:The sprint is part any game made in this day and age. clamber was good addition. spartan charge and ground pound need some tweaks thats all i think it needs though
As far as AAs or SA go, I agree along the lines of what WerepyreND has said. I think them as map pick ups would be fine. You just have to limit there use. Maybe that's a one time use thing like equipment was in Halo 3. In Halo reach the MLG playlist made AAs map pick up items and they worked SO much better. I still didn't like the unlimited use of them, but I got the idea. I think Halo 6 should definitely go in that direction. Keep your Spartan basic at the start (no sprint especially) and make players pick items/weapons up on the maps to improve oneself. It just suits the arena gameplay so much better.
Compare Halo 3 when it was most popular to Halo 5 when it was most popular. Who is the winner?Stardriver907 wrote:Quote:There are two ways to address that statement. Halo 3 was very popular from its release until the release of Reach. One can argue that Halo 5 has not been as popular now than Halo 3 was then. Or, since Halo 3 is currently part of the Master Chief Collection, one could compare Halo 3's current popularity to Halo 5's current popularity. The way you worded your statement suggests you would like to compare Halo 3's former popularity to Halo 5's current popularity. Like comparing Mayweather to Ali. An unfair comparison, at best, not that it even matters.Gym Meathead wrote:And Halo 3 was way more popular than Halo 5.
How do you define "popular"? Online stats for Halo 3 were heavily skewed because of account selling. Sales figures were skewed because some sellers counted the sales of used games. Also, are we to ignore the market forces in play at the time? How much competition did Halo 3 have then compared to Halo 5 now? Halo 5 stats are even more obscure and that is intentional in order to prevent people from comparing. Only Microsoft knows anything for sure.Gym Meathead wrote:Compare Halo 3 when it was most popular to Halo 5 when it was most popular. Who is the winner?Stardriver907 wrote:Quote:There are two ways to address that statement. Halo 3 was very popular from its release until the release of Reach. One can argue that Halo 5 has not been as popular now than Halo 3 was then. Or, since Halo 3 is currently part of the Master Chief Collection, one could compare Halo 3's current popularity to Halo 5's current popularity. The way you worded your statement suggests you would like to compare Halo 3's former popularity to Halo 5's current popularity. Like comparing Mayweather to Ali. An unfair comparison, at best, not that it even matters.Gym Meathead wrote:And Halo 3 was way more popular than Halo 5.
What makes you so sure?
OP
Yes..... In casual playlistsAlcatrazKills wrote:No
NoWarmaster987609 wrote:Yes..... In casual playlistsAlcatrazKills wrote:No
This reasoning is flawed. Gameplay is more important than staying true to the lore. Spartans in the lore can also somersault and flip, but that would add almost nothing of value to the gameplay. Sprint comes with a heap of downsides. Paradoxically, it actually slows the game down when you consider the fact that 343 have to stretch out maps to accomodate for sprint and other abilities. The fact that you can't always sprint or fire while sprinting is another factor that slows gameplay down. Just look at the speed it takes you to cross a map in Halo 3 compared to Halo 5!CryptumSierraXV wrote:I agree with everything except sprint. I think sprint should stay unlimited since were modified super soldiers with advance combat suits that allow us to be faster and stronger than a normal human.
I also think sprint makes you feel less powerful in some ways. Spartans in the lore could always fire their weapon while moving at top speed, just like in the classic Halo games. Conversely, you're forced to lower your weapon in Reach, Halo 4 and Halo 5. I actually felt like more of a Spartan in the original games without all the pointless fluff 343 added.
Sprint as mechanic does nothing for Halo's gameplay and it never increased my immersion. At most it created an illusion that you're going faster, but that could be accomplished through map design and increasing the player's base speed.
OP
Im done arguing.Phenotype94 wrote:This reasoning is flawed. Gameplay is more important than staying true to the lore. Spartans in the lore can also somersault and flip, but that would add almost nothing of value to the gameplay. Sprint comes with a heap of downsides. Paradoxically, it actually slows the game down when you consider the fact that 343 have to stretch out maps to accomodate for sprint and other abilities. The fact that you can't always sprint or fire while sprinting is another factor that slows gameplay down. Just look at the speed it takes you to cross a map in Halo 3 compared to Halo 5! ffdijI also think sprint makes you feel less powerful in some ways. Spartans in the lore could always fire their weapon while moving at top speed, just like in the classic Halo games. Conversely, you're forced to lower your weapon in Reach, Halo 4 and Halo 5. I actually felt like more of a Spartan in the original games without all the pointless fluff 343 added.CryptumSierraXV wrote:I agree with everything except sprint. I think sprint should stay unlimited since were modified super soldiers with advance combat suits that allow us to be faster and stronger than a normal human.
Sprint as mechanic does nothing for Halo's gameplay and it never increased my immersion. At most it created an illusion that you're going faster, but that could be accomplished through map design and increasing the player's base speed.
If it takes no armor abilities to make halo successful, im on board with you.
Yeah i was about to say the same thing! Not sure how he didnt conect the two.Fully Skully wrote:Abilities effect playstyle which effects maps, you can't make the maps without the abilities in mind. While I enjoy H5, I'd rather have very subtle abilities or none at all.
Why are people so defensive over spartan abilities, it completely ruins the pace of maps, if they are ever going to remaster a map (Because classic halos had way better map designs) It's going to be, basically no matter what a piece of crap because gunfights will be way too fast. In my opinion, remove ads, remove sprint, make spartan abilities spawnable, and make the abilities of 3 or something similar. It felt so cool being able to play around them in campaign, and that's probably most of the reason why it feels so mindless in 5.
A great example is crows nest, on the scene on the beginning of the Bravo point of the level, you can get a gravity lift, and you can use it to your advantage, and you can kill the cheiftan and get rewarded for the rest of the level. And hell, if they added those things into 5 when it came out. You could have your guys use it,
either way, better with classic 3 abilities then without because it makes the gameplay more skill based and more tactical, especially in really well designed multiplayer maps
A great example is crows nest, on the scene on the beginning of the Bravo point of the level, you can get a gravity lift, and you can use it to your advantage, and you can kill the cheiftan and get rewarded for the rest of the level. And hell, if they added those things into 5 when it came out. You could have your guys use it,
either way, better with classic 3 abilities then without because it makes the gameplay more skill based and more tactical, especially in really well designed multiplayer maps
So the argument seems to be that Armor Abilities and/or Spartan abilities cause maps to be altered in order to have the Abilities work as intended, and the alterations are so severe that the game you end up playing is no longer Halo. The most obvious impact seems to be that the game runs slower e.g. "it slows down gameplay".
Is this a proper assessment?
Is this a proper assessment?
It's more like the game, especially out of combat, flows differently rather than being slower. Armor and Spartan Abilities can work in Halo's original gameplay flow, but they need to be treated similarly to the other aspects of the game. Halo was simple at its core, back when it first released, and any changes to that simplicity completely changes the game.Stardriver907 wrote:So the argument seems to be that Armor Abilities and/or Spartan abilities cause maps to be altered in order to have the Abilities work as intended, and the alterations are so severe that the game you end up playing is no longer Halo. The most obvious impact seems to be that the game runs slower e.g. "it slows down gameplay".
Is this a proper assessment?
Halo's multiplayer was all about the tools given to the player (maps, weapons, vehicles, power ups, etc.) rather than being about the player, like Halo 4 and 5 was designed to be. Reach is arguable for this aspect of design, but with the way Bungie presented AAs to us in their ViDocs and interviews, they just wanted them to be another tool for the players rather than a necessity.