I have yet to play mythic. What is the general feel and what is different?
I agree classic game play needs to return halo 4 and 5 didn't even feel like halo not to mention that the thrusters and ground pound and spartan charge made the game so unbalanced I didnt mind the sprint to it would wouldn't bother me if they kept it or got rid of it and no spartan abilities
Smart that you figured this out.TheDarkKn1ght19 wrote:The answer is simple: 343 is playtesting a new gameplay style in the Mythic Arena and Mythic Rumble playlists in Halo 5. They are able to gather info and feedback without even doing a private beta; pretty ingenious if you ask me.
Curious what others think. Is this just a Halo 5 gimmick, or a sign of things to come?
My best guess: There will be both "Mythic" and "Halo 5" game styles in Infinite, to make everyone happy. Each style will have its own set of maps as well.
Reach was the only game with balanced AAsSuperman Kenobi wrote:I don't believe there will be two subsets of Infinite multiplayer; that's asking for trouble in my opinion. Ever since enhanced mobility mechanics and armor abilities broke onto the scene in Reach this has been a popular answer to giving both classic and modern players what they want.
In Reach, Sprint was the only enhanced mobility mechanic, and it was an armor ability. It was super easy to exclude AA's from loadouts in any game type, and then you were left with a very classic feel. There were playlists that went classic (no AA's) and playlists that didn't (almost all of them). Providing the option wasn't enough then, and I believe it still wouldn't be enough today.
Your points about testing a player base response to a more classic feel via H5 playlists isn't bad at all, though. I would just expect that if it is true, it's only supporting the idea that Infinite is notching down the enhanced mobility and Spartan/Armor Abilities.
I really do believe Infinite needs to pick its poison and really go for it in terms of classic vs modern mechanics. This game needs an identity of its own. That might mean something that feels more classic or modern, but it should feel unique. People always talk about Classic Halo like Halo CE-Halo 3 played identically. Totally untrue, even though all three of them felt very concordant with each other, they all felt unique.
Ok I watched the video and just because someone is genuinely upset and talks serious doesn't mean the people watching won't look into what he is saying and Google it. I feel for the man because he loves Halo and wants the best for the franchise but don't we all. I'm sure everyone wants to see Halo on top again but the video is bias.Daek Auditore wrote:I disagree.pharoh dude wrote:You make alot of good points and I also enjoy Halo 5 multiplayer. I have always felt it is the correct evolution for the franchise.Reneggade wrote:
I feel many people blame halos downfall do to the new mechanics. The thing is, Halo 3 was not up against the same amount of competition. Like you said, there is Apex and fortnite now. Plus we still have call of duty, destiny, battlefield, doom, and overwatch. The first person shooter has such a high variety and I'm sure missed some more. I have always felt that has made the bigger impact to halos downfall. All those games are on all platforms. This and the fact that YouTube and streaming has become way more popular than it used to be. So people who play those games and stream then or make YouTube videos on them are getting those games more popular. I think that is why Microsoft brought ninja to mixer. He will most likely push Halo infinites launch by streaming it.
Well, nothing is set in stone and there will be never a 100% way to prove it, but as the developers / Persons in charge a conclusion has to be made. The downfall has started with Reach. This is not an opinion, I'm talking about numbers. It continued with 4 and even more with 5. Now, Reach was very vell recieved and it got praised for tons of things (Campaign Story & the variety of missions, Multiplayer, Forge, Custimization, Art Style) - looks like the perfect game - but one thing was very controversial - the gameplay. So, as a developer, you have to ask yourself - This game did so many things right with only one aspect beeing controversial? Should we listen to the critisizm? Should we ignore it? Do we believe in those mechanics and continue this particular style of gameplay? And they did. It was time for H4 and people now blamed the Multiplayer. Finally, with Halo 5, people blame the campaign. I guess we will blame the weather if Infinite doesn't succeed with those "advanced" movements.
- "I feel many people blame halos downfall do to the new mechanics"
We should not downplay the importance of the most important aspect of a video game - the gameplay.
Really? Let me break this down (Game / Release Date)
- "The thing is, Halo 3 was not up against the same amount of competition. Like you said, there is Apex and fortnite now. Plus we still have call of duty, destiny, battlefield, doom, and overwatch."
Halo 5 / 2015
I'd like to reply to this argument with your own words: Halo 5 was not up against the same amount of competition. Neither Overwatch (Game of the year 2016, took the whole genre by storm) nor any Battle Royale Game (that you've mentioned & Pubg) was released back then.
- Overwatch / 2016
- Doom / 2016
- Fortnite / 2017
- Apex / 2019
When it comes to COD / BF: I honestly don't get this argument? Because the original triology competed with both Franchises as well? H3 probably competed against 3 COD Titles at the same time. When it comes to the current gen, Battlefield was even having a pretty rough time (BF4's bad launch & Hardline was not recieved very well) and while COD still was doing good (The reputation was bad, yet the sales were ok), Fans of the FPS Genre were looking for new things.
Actually, H5 had pretty good conditions to be successful. Not just because of the reasons I've mentioned above (Demanding for something new), people were exciting for the first big Exclusive on the Xone. I guess I don't have to elaborate the aftermath.
And then there are tons of other Franchises Halo had to compete with. Here's a whole Video about this Topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRVz7B2mEWc
First of all, doom and overwatch came out 7 months after Halo 5, so they were direct competition. Rainbow six siege came out the same holiday season as Halo 5. Titanfall 2 came out one year after Halo 5. Black ops came 3 came out the same year as Halo 5 and it was hyped because of the success of black ops 2. Battlefield 1 which was a return to form for dice came out a year after. Not to mention destiny was already out a year before and if you played that game you know how much you need to play to progress. That's 7 AAA shooters with a focus on multiplayer.
Now when looking at the Halo 3 times. The list shown in the video by major Nelson had two demos as most played. Why in the world would so many people be playing two specific demos. Battlefield was a PC game and was just beginning to enter the console space. They didn't really become relavent on consoles until the launch of bad company 2 which to me is still my favorite battlefield game. Call of duty started it's popularity with call of duty 4 modern warfare. Call of duty peaked at modern warfare 2 and the original black ops. Tom Clancy games were not known for the multiplayer and mass affect is a single player game. If you wanted to play a AAA first person shooter that focused on multiplayer on consoles, Halo and cod were the only real options. You cannot deny that. Left 4 dead was popular as well but it is not direct competition to Halo. That means it's a different genre. Halo was an established franchise and at its peak. At a time other companies were still getting there footing and making their own games have their playstyles set in stone.
I'm not saying Halo 5 is amazing. I personally enjoy it and felt it was the right step to take. I don't like Halo 4s multiplayer because to me that was not how Halo should be played. I also want the best for the franchise. I enjoyed the old games as well but again, non of the Halo games were perfect but no game ever is. Does that mean of Halo infinite played like a classic Halo it won't be successful, I don't know. Maybe it will be incredibly succesful.
In my opinion there needs to be a compromise from both sides. Those who like the new movement need to let go of stuff and same with classic enthusiasts as well. Sitting in the middle should bring the most population back.
Again, I'm not saying Halo 3 was bad, it was actually amazing. But the competition was not the same. I just want Halo infinite to bring Halo back on top as I'm sure anyone on this forum would as well.
It actually was, pretty much. There is hardly any franchise that H5G released against that Halo 3 didn't back then: Gears, Battlefield, Battlefront, Rainbow Six, Grand Theft Auto, etc. And for every franchise that is new, there is another one that left the gaming space (or at least Xbox). Overwatch is this decade's Team Fortress (and remember that Halo 3 released within two weeks of the Orange Box). PUBG came, Unreal Tournament/Championship left. You might want to downplay L4D, but it still sold 4 Million copies (on Xbox alone, that is), yet wasn't able to dethrone Halo 3 even one year after its release. In fact, the game that finally pushed Halo 3 from Xbox's most played slot was Modern Warfare 2, two years (and two CoD games) later.pharoh dude wrote:But the competition was not the same.
And that's only counting the multiplayer titles. Nowadays, everything is online, but back then there was such a thing as "single player games", and yes, these still count, because anybody that is playing Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect or Bioshock - all of which games released in the same year as Halo 3 - will not be playing other titles, including Halo.
People conveniently seem to forget that Halo 3 came out in what is considered the biggest and best year in gaming of that decade (possibly several decades) yet came out on top.
EDIT: Just to clarify - I am only watching that video right now, after writing this post. I did not just copypaste Favyn's arguments, they just happen to be objectively verifyable correct statements.
Thank you! This is it. Summed up in a nutshell.Primus Ego Sum wrote:I don't believe for one second that it is possible to design a Halo game's multiplayer with both "classic" and "modern" rule sets and maintain a high quality overall.
Sprint and other abilities interact with and affect too many fundamental aspects of the game's design. It's why they are so divisive. It would literally be the same as designing two different games. They'll pick one and go with it.
And I don't think they'll abandon sprint and abilities. I think they're too stubborn and/or arrogant to admit that the entire gameplay design philosophy post-Halo 3 was a mistake, and I think they'll continue to iterate on what was there in Halo 5. I also think that if you get a bunch of 15 year old focus testers in a room and give them an FPS without sprint, they complain that it's slow and they prefer sprint, and 343 listens to its focus test groups far more than it does old core players. They're on record as saying they envision MCC as being the place for classic Halo, and I think MCC is the best old school Halo fans will ever get.