Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

[Locked] "Classic" gameplay is excruciatingly slow

OP Spidah Handz406

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 5
  4. 6
  5. 7
  6. ...
  7. 8
tsassi wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Problem is, we know for a fact that this "5 Million figure" was blown up, because Microsoft referred to the shipped units (sold in to stores) instead of the sold units (sold through to the end consumer).
Do we? The only source for that number I know of is Frankie on NeoGAF, and he didn't elaborate any further. Would be great if you could give a source for this.
Daniel Ahmad, Data Analyst replied "eh, same thing" when asked about if this figure referred to shipped or sold units. Which means it refers to shipped units, aka "sold in" in marketing terms.
Celestis wrote:
tsassi wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Problem is, we know for a fact that this "5 Million figure" was blown up, because Microsoft referred to the shipped units (sold in to stores) instead of the sold units (sold through to the end consumer).
Do we? The only source for that number I know of is Frankie on NeoGAF, and he didn't elaborate any further. Would be great if you could give a source for this.
Daniel Ahmad, Data Analyst replied "eh, same thing" when asked about if this figure referred to shipped or sold units. Which means it refers to shipped units, aka "sold in" in marketing terms.
I mean, if we go by what analysts say, there was the other guy who said Halo 5 sold "on par" with prior games:
https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-says-halo-5-sold-par-previous-entries-like-halo-1-4/.

So, who knows what the real sales are.
I'm so glad Infinite will incorporate some degree of advanced movement (sprint, grapple, etc.)

I booted up MCC and played some big team battle and oh my god it was painful. I can't stand moving around so slow. Maybe it was fun back then (and it was for me), but gameplay has evolved. It reminded me of vanilla Destiny 2 before the go-fast update, but way worse.

I get it, everyone is clamoring for a back-to-basics approach with classic halo gameplay. Well it's just my opinion that Halo Infinite is 100% going in the right direction. And now you all hate me :(
Halo Infinite is definitely moving forward, into the ground. You weren't around for games that lacked advanced movement, people loved them because it encouraged you to engage the enemy, fight, and PLAY THE GAME as opposed to new games that just let you sprint away from any damage you take, it boggled my mind some people find running away more fun than shooting in FPS games.
Increase your FOV, zoomer.
Christ, someone call the based control, we got a live one
tsassi wrote:
I mean, if we go by what analysts say, there was the other guy who said Halo 5 sold "on par" with prior games:
https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-says-halo-5-sold-par-previous-entries-like-halo-1-4/.

So, who knows what the real sales are.
Thing is, Microsoft has switched presenting sales figures from sold to shipped ever since Windows Vista. Not only to hide bad consumer attachment rate but also because that number is more important to the investors, because that is where they get their money, from the stores buying the games en bulk. What happens to the stockpiles afterwards is no longer their concern.

Which is why I have always gone with the VGChartz figure, as those numbers are actually counting consumer purchases. While they aren't popular because they don't include digital sales, those can be approximated with information on digital sales by other publishers.
Celestis wrote:
Which is why I have always gone with the VGChartz figure, as those numbers are actually counting consumer purchases. While they aren't popular because they don't include digital sales, those can be approximated with information on digital sales by other publishers.
VGChartz doesn't count sales. Their model is based on extrapolating from small samples, and then correcting for the official figures, i.e., the same publicly available data we all have access to. If actual sales data is published, they will eventually get it right by adopting that data, but in the case of a game like Halo 5, there is no reason to expect their guesstimates to be accurate. Hence they are generally regarded as an unreliable source.
F16 HUNTER wrote:
Don’t listen to the naysayers. They’re too stuck in 2007 to be reasoned with. Halo has to evolve to appeal to the masses & Infinite’s gameplay is a step in the right direction. I‘m with ya.
Why did they fail to appeal to the masses with Halo 4 and 5? They followed all the correct trends at the time, but the player base just fell off, especially with Halo 4. So what would make the masses stay with Halo Infinite? What would Infinite do to keep the player base when they could get a similar experience in other games?
Halo 5 failed? lol what? It was the most successful launch on the XB1 and is still higher-ranked on both Game Pass & the Microsoft Store than MCC. Halo 4 might have been a flop, but Halo 5 is far from it.
Halo 5 held a very strong player retention and stable community that was probably comparable to how Reach did in the end. It definitely did leaps and bounds better than Halo 4. Halo 5 was defiantly not a failure in the grand scheme.
You said it was as good as Reach, and Reach has a population counter. Halo 5 never did. 400,000 players means how many played the game and got ranked. That ranges from both casuals and people that got it on Gamepass and dropped it. Not consistent players like most of us here that play ranked and stuck with it. Halo 5 never had party matching to begin with which further proves my point.
Firstly, not having party matching nor a counter still doesn't prove your point. The first is a matchmaking feature and the second is still something nearly all games then and now don't do anymore.

On the Halo tracker thing, I can only defend it based on my best guess so I can't really say your wrong. But my guess is that it resets on each season. So yes, it wouldn't give you the exact player count.
If the population was good, it would have party matching.
DOOM ETERNAL WOULD LIKE TO KNOW YOUR LOCATION

game doesn't even have sprint but yet is still face paced and has movement options. Go figure
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
F16 HUNTER wrote:
Don’t listen to the naysayers. They’re too stuck in 2007 to be reasoned with. Halo has to evolve to appeal to the masses & Infinite’s gameplay is a step in the right direction. I‘m with ya.
Why did they fail to appeal to the masses with Halo 4 and 5? They followed all the correct trends at the time, but the player base just fell off, especially with Halo 4. So what would make the masses stay with Halo Infinite? What would Infinite do to keep the player base when they could get a similar experience in other games?
Halo 5 failed? lol what? It was the most successful launch on the XB1 and is still higher-ranked on both Game Pass & the Microsoft Store than MCC. Halo 4 might have been a flop, but Halo 5 is far from it.
Halo 5 held a very strong player retention and stable community that was probably comparable to how Reach did in the end. It definitely did leaps and bounds better than Halo 4. Halo 5 was defiantly not a failure in the grand scheme.
Firstly, not having party matching nor a counter still doesn't prove your point. The first is a matchmaking feature and the second is still something nearly all games then and now don't do anymore.

On the Halo tracker thing, I can only defend it based on my best guess so I can't really say your wrong. But my guess is that it resets on each season. So yes, it wouldn't give you the exact player count.
If the population was good, it would have party matching.
Ok so I was a bit confused on what Party Matchmaking was, but do you mean how the modes have a player cap on party size? Like rumble only letting one player queue in? Just want to clarify.
F16 HUNTER wrote:
Don’t listen to the naysayers. They’re too stuck in 2007 to be reasoned with. Halo has to evolve to appeal to the masses & Infinite’s gameplay is a step in the right direction. I‘m with ya.
Why did they fail to appeal to the masses with Halo 4 and 5? They followed all the correct trends at the time, but the player base just fell off, especially with Halo 4. So what would make the masses stay with Halo Infinite? What would Infinite do to keep the player base when they could get a similar experience in other games?
Halo 5 failed? lol what? It was the most successful launch on the XB1 and is still higher-ranked on both Game Pass & the Microsoft Store than MCC. Halo 4 might have been a flop, but Halo 5 is far from it.
Halo 5 held a very strong player retention and stable community that was probably comparable to how Reach did in the end. It definitely did leaps and bounds better than Halo 4. Halo 5 was defiantly not a failure in the grand scheme.
Firstly, not having party matching nor a counter still doesn't prove your point. The first is a matchmaking feature and the second is still something nearly all games then and now don't do anymore.

On the Halo tracker thing, I can only defend it based on my best guess so I can't really say your wrong. But my guess is that it resets on each season. So yes, it wouldn't give you the exact player count.
If the population was good, it would have party matching.
Ok so I was a bit confused on what Party Matchmaking was, but do you mean how the modes have a player cap on party size? Like rumble only letting one player queue in? Just want to clarify.
If I teamed up with 3 other guys in Team Slayer and we all had mics, then we get matched up against 4 solo players without mics. That's a problem. We should be matching up with other parties of 4 to keep the matches balanced.
I'm so glad Infinite will incorporate some degree of advanced movement (sprint, grapple, etc.)

I booted up MCC and played some big team battle and oh my god it was painful. I can't stand moving around so slow. Maybe it was fun back then (and it was for me), but gameplay has evolved. It reminded me of vanilla Destiny 2 before the go-fast update, but way worse.

I get it, everyone is clamoring for a back-to-basics approach with classic halo gameplay. Well it's just my opinion that Halo Infinite is 100% going in the right direction. And now you all hate me :(
Halo 2 is the fastest Halo. Every part of it is built around speed and precision.
You can shoot, grenade, jump, crouch, and melee all at the same time, while moving at top speed in any direction.
The animations cause little to no delay in any of these actions, allowing the payer to immediately adjust to any situation.
Maps are tight and well designed to keep the player playing the game at all times.

"Enhanced" mobility is anything but. These shoddily implemented, and out of place mechanics are simply tools to help lesser skilled players try to compete. Clamber is a forgiveness button for people who can't make their jumps. Sprint and Thrusters are get out of jail free cards for players who can't out smart their opponents. Stabilizers are for people who can't land their jumpshots.

Every one of them are things that players could already do. But now the game does it for them.
They don't add anything to the gameplay, they negatively impact the sandbox Halo is built around, all in an effort to make it easier for people who don't like Halo.
F16 HUNTER wrote:
Don’t listen to the naysayers. They’re too stuck in 2007 to be reasoned with. Halo has to evolve to appeal to the masses & Infinite’s gameplay is a step in the right direction. I‘m with ya.
Why did they fail to appeal to the masses with Halo 4 and 5? They followed all the correct trends at the time, but the player base just fell off, especially with Halo 4. So what would make the masses stay with Halo Infinite? What would Infinite do to keep the player base when they could get a similar experience in other games?
Halo 5 failed? lol what? It was the most successful launch on the XB1 and is still higher-ranked on both Game Pass & the Microsoft Store than MCC. Halo 4 might have been a flop, but Halo 5 is far from it.
Halo 5 held a very strong player retention and stable community that was probably comparable to how Reach did in the end. It definitely did leaps and bounds better than Halo 4. Halo 5 was defiantly not a failure in the grand scheme.
Firstly, not having party matching nor a counter still doesn't prove your point. The first is a matchmaking feature and the second is still something nearly all games then and now don't do anymore.

On the Halo tracker thing, I can only defend it based on my best guess so I can't really say your wrong. But my guess is that it resets on each season. So yes, it wouldn't give you the exact player count.
If the population was good, it would have party matching.
Ok so I was a bit confused on what Party Matchmaking was, but do you mean how the modes have a player cap on party size? Like rumble only letting one player queue in? Just want to clarify.
If I teamed up with 3 other guys in Team Slayer and we all had mics, then we get matched up against 4 solo players without mics. That's a problem. We should be matching up with other parties of 4 to keep the matches balanced.
That seems more like a feature than an indication of population, no? Said thing existed for Warzone and was not a thing for certain modes due to having that party cap. Yet I don't see how the game not having this feature means its population is good or not, objectively speaking.
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Have you ever considered that if you find Halo's original gameplay too slow, that maybe Halo just isn't the franchise for you any more? Why should the newer games bend and twist themselves into something totally different to cater to someone who no longer enjoys what the franchise was built on?
Telling someone that they should move away from a game they like is not a good way to approach this situation
How many times have classic Halo fans been told to move on or go back to the old games?
To be honest not as often as you would think. The Halo community is way too divisive and everybody is at each other’s throats. How many of the common core mechanics from CE have been carried over throughout Halo as a whole, the answer is all of them
Not as often as I think? I'm told that constantly!
Well how often do you criticize their opinions?
I don't. I speak out in support of classic gameplay. But, I don't put down anybody for their opinions or preferences.
Well that is respectable, everyone is still entitled to their opinions whether you think they are wrong or not. Personally I like Halo 5s advanced movement mechanics and it creates a vast skill gap between players, but I also really like playing the old Halos and they worked well for the time but you can’t keep recycling the same ideas
Xomet wrote:
without innovation.
I can't deny that Halo 5 had a solid multiplayer that was still fair and competitive, while adding abilities that have a potential to create a larger skill gap. There is no denying that at all. I have to admit that I personally did not like those for the fact that they added too much unnecessary complexity to the game, and took away the feeling of what made Halo its own thing.
Then again... I do have to reflect and think.. there have been very few other FPS with such a longstanding online multiplayer than COD and Halo. Their MP community has almost spanned 2 decades of gaming while maintaining a steady population. That seriously says something - a lot of people, all around the world, are excited about and have been excited about and love the multiplayer aspect of these 2 games. Everyone from gen X'ers, to millenials to zoomers, and even boomers. And you know what these 2 franchises have done? They've changed the -Yoink- out of their games to keep them fresh and relevant. I may not agree with some of their choices in doing so, but that's what they did with these franchises to keep them alive. And now Halo and COD are returning to their more retro-style gameplay and roots, which is attracting a lot of positive attention for both franchises, because we haven't seen that in so long.
But do you think that if Halo forever played almost exactly the same that people would still be dying to get ready to play the next one? No. They'd get bored as -Yoink- and move on to something else. Evolve or die. Now that we're back to the classic style of gameplay and art style (from what we can see), there is a lot of positivity and excitement and hope for the franchise, and I for one am super pumped about it. It's almost like everything moves in cycles.
F16 HUNTER wrote:
Don’t listen to the naysayers. They’re too stuck in 2007 to be reasoned with. Halo has to evolve to appeal to the masses & Infinite’s gameplay is a step in the right direction. I‘m with ya.
Why did they fail to appeal to the masses with Halo 4 and 5? They followed all the correct trends at the time, but the player base just fell off, especially with Halo 4. So what would make the masses stay with Halo Infinite? What would Infinite do to keep the player base when they could get a similar experience in other games?
Halo 5 failed? lol what? It was the most successful launch on the XB1 and is still higher-ranked on both Game Pass & the Microsoft Store than MCC. Halo 4 might have been a flop, but Halo 5 is far from it.
Halo 5 held a very strong player retention and stable community that was probably comparable to how Reach did in the end. It definitely did leaps and bounds better than Halo 4. Halo 5 was defiantly not a failure in the grand scheme.
Firstly, not having party matching nor a counter still doesn't prove your point. The first is a matchmaking feature and the second is still something nearly all games then and now don't do anymore.

On the Halo tracker thing, I can only defend it based on my best guess so I can't really say your wrong. But my guess is that it resets on each season. So yes, it wouldn't give you the exact player count.
If the population was good, it would have party matching.
Ok so I was a bit confused on what Party Matchmaking was, but do you mean how the modes have a player cap on party size? Like rumble only letting one player queue in? Just want to clarify.
If I teamed up with 3 other guys in Team Slayer and we all had mics, then we get matched up against 4 solo players without mics. That's a problem. We should be matching up with other parties of 4 to keep the matches balanced.
That seems more like a feature than an indication of population, no? Said thing existed for Warzone and was not a thing for certain modes due to having that party cap. Yet I don't see how the game not having this feature means its population is good or not, objectively speaking.
It's a feature that was removed because the population was low in H4 and now H5. If it were a thing today, players wouldn't be able to find a match. Conclusion: make a good Halo game and you'll have a higher player count.
Halo Reach, 4 and 5 was cool and all. But I still prefer 1-3 from the tactical gameplay.

I saw some comment about strafing didn't mean anything. I disagree. I've both been feinted and feinted others in duels. Strafedancing is a pretty important skill.

Hopefully the classic playlist is gonna feel good.
Arguing sales probably isn't too fruitful if they go through the effort of obscuring details, regardless IF it sold just as well then it furthers just how shockingly bad the player retention was for Halo 5. I could be wrong but we bring up sales to argue popularity, in regards to MP player count and proportion player retention should be key, while that is also obscured somewhat we do at least have a rough idea where H5 sits and it isn't pretty.
F16 HUNTER wrote:
Don’t listen to the naysayers. They’re too stuck in 2007 to be reasoned with. Halo has to evolve to appeal to the masses & Infinite’s gameplay is a step in the right direction. I‘m with ya.
Why did they fail to appeal to the masses with Halo 4 and 5? They followed all the correct trends at the time, but the player base just fell off, especially with Halo 4. So what would make the masses stay with Halo Infinite? What would Infinite do to keep the player base when they could get a similar experience in other games?
Halo 5 failed? lol what? It was the most successful launch on the XB1 and is still higher-ranked on both Game Pass & the Microsoft Store than MCC. Halo 4 might have been a flop, but Halo 5 is far from it.
Halo 5 held a very strong player retention and stable community that was probably comparable to how Reach did in the end. It definitely did leaps and bounds better than Halo 4. Halo 5 was defiantly not a failure in the grand scheme.
Firstly, not having party matching nor a counter still doesn't prove your point. The first is a matchmaking feature and the second is still something nearly all games then and now don't do anymore.

On the Halo tracker thing, I can only defend it based on my best guess so I can't really say your wrong. But my guess is that it resets on each season. So yes, it wouldn't give you the exact player count.
If the population was good, it would have party matching.
Ok so I was a bit confused on what Party Matchmaking was, but do you mean how the modes have a player cap on party size? Like rumble only letting one player queue in? Just want to clarify.
If I teamed up with 3 other guys in Team Slayer and we all had mics, then we get matched up against 4 solo players without mics. That's a problem. We should be matching up with other parties of 4 to keep the matches balanced.
That seems more like a feature than an indication of population, no? Said thing existed for Warzone and was not a thing for certain modes due to having that party cap. Yet I don't see how the game not having this feature means its population is good or not, objectively speaking.
It's a feature that was removed because the population was low in H4 and now H5. If it were a thing today, players wouldn't be able to find a match. Conclusion: make a good Halo game and you'll have a higher player count.
I mean. Not to cherry pick, yet totally cherry pick. Bringing it back today would indeed mostly like cause issues. On a game that is 5 years old and being pushed aside for MCC as of right now. The playerbase is definitely small now, but that is to be expected.

I don't believe it was ever a thing in the arena modes of Halo 5. They put all their eggs in the rank basket (which was probably not good with how shotty H5's MMR is). They went the route of adding the party cap to stop stacking. Warzone got a new mode because of the stacking.

It never existed to be removed. That is more of a design oversite than a measure of a player population. Your entire agrument for that last few posts hinges on this feature being in the game and removed when it never was. 343 tried other ways to counter it. If thry worked is a different topic.
I'm so glad Infinite will incorporate some degree of advanced movement (sprint, grapple, etc.)

I booted up MCC and played some big team battle and oh my god it was painful. I can't stand moving around so slow. Maybe it was fun back then (and it was for me), but gameplay has evolved. It reminded me of vanilla Destiny 2 before the go-fast update, but way worse.

I get it, everyone is clamoring for a back-to-basics approach with classic halo gameplay. Well it's just my opinion that Halo Infinite is 100% going in the right direction. And now you all hate me :(
Since playing on PC and having FOV sliders the game feels fresh and fast. I currently love it and believe it holds up to today's standards.

However I totally understand why you prefer modern Halo and I respect your opinion :)
I'm so glad Infinite will incorporate some degree of advanced movement (sprint, grapple, etc.)

I booted up MCC and played some big team battle and oh my god it was painful. I can't stand moving around so slow. Maybe it was fun back then (and it was for me), but gameplay has evolved. It reminded me of vanilla Destiny 2 before the go-fast update, but way worse.

I get it, everyone is clamoring for a back-to-basics approach with classic halo gameplay. Well it's just my opinion that Halo Infinite is 100% going in the right direction. And now you all hate me :(
Since playing on PC and having FOV sliders the game feels fresh and fast. I currently love it and believe it holds up to today's standards.

However I totally understand why you prefer modern Halo and I respect your opinion :)
Halo 3 feels awesome with an fov of even 90 honestly. I've been streaming it to my friends in a discord and they've all since bought MCC because there's really no other games like the Halo series
Theres nothing wrong with sprint. All these so called halo fans just want halo 3 over and over again. Sprint doesnt slow down gameplay, it gives you tactical options for combat. In halo 3 the gun fights were decided on who had the better gun. No skill or thinking required, just shoot them till they die. Adding sprint will give you the ability to avoid attacks similar to cod mw. In any fps game, I want to be able to run across an ally without dying because I am too slow. I want to be able to surprise attack people by rushing around the corner, startling them and out maneuvering their aim, giving me an advantage in the gun fight. Halo 3s gun fights were just shoot it out. There really was no point in strafing since we move so slowly. With sprinting gun fights have more variables. Aim, maneuverability, health, and dps.

Speaking from a logical standpoint, halo without sprinting makes absolutely no sense. We are playing as a bio augmented super soldier, and youre saying they shouldnt sprint??? The whole no sprint argument baffles me.
i like how you consider classic movement having "no skill" yet you would get recked by someone who knows map design and weapon spawns instead of some 12 year old who would run up to you and gun you down your only argument is that you want halo to be a cod ripoff because you think that would be viable for halo

this argument is so stupid "well hes a super soldier so we should add mechanics that ruin map design and vechicles! that'll show those stinky cod haters!!!!!1!"

maybe you should play another game? warzone is free and i kinda like destiny too
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 5
  4. 6
  5. 7
  6. ...
  7. 8