Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Quite Frankly, I Like Armor Abilities

OP Kalyx triaD

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 11
- Control would be the biggest issue since the Ability button was put to other uses in H5. This is a legit complication that I have thought about. No clear answer here other than customs specific controls which would be over doing it.
And that's probably one of the few most sensible options in order to get it to work, but not practical.

- Game development is developing things like assets and sound.
Yes, and?
There are far more projects that fail because the creators lose their focus and the projects get out of hand, than there are succesful games around.
Just because a part of game development is making these assets, doesn't mean everything gets added.

- We'd only need three dual wield weapons that are mix and match ready. That's a decent enough number to balance around, too.
- No need to nerf damage when dual wielding them, simply make them weak solo. Encourage the main point, if you're choosing to have that in a customs game. And they would be exclusive to customs, for exactly the reason seen in this thread. Misunderstandings nearly went into debate. That's why I rather these be optional.
Well, it'd be something the developers consider when implementing dual wielding.
But sure, assets related to custom mechanics are only for customs.

- I don't have much sympathy for the AAA games industry in terms of resource management. I feel this would make the game better and now I gotta hear about resource management. How about they don't waste resources on campaign and do this for me and custom creators?
And neither do I, but having no sympathy for it, doesn't mean it isn't relevant and that they aren't doing it.
Resource management is efficiently handling the time and money efficiently in order to get the best result possible.

Not wasting on campaign, but doing that for you, just means that the resources come from some other section of the game, Forge, theatre, the map team, the AI, the graphics Department, QA and so forth.

For instance, consider that there were no developer made BTB maps for Halo 5, but they did ship three Warzone Maps.

- What is the value of the several Forge items, Warzone weapon variants, campaign environments, and armor pieces that were probably seen and used a few times ever?
Forge items and armor pieces I'd argue don't need much work to to implement. I'd be surprised if they haven't made it so that the process isn't too unsimilar to copy pasting and changing a few values, with a new mesh and collision box, with a quick test to make sure it works as intended.

Weapon variants I'd assume work in a similar fashion, with stats that they change and alter, and can easily be implemented.

Now I'm not certain which environments you're refering to.
However if I'm to take some a guess, an environment rarely seen or barely used, could easily be assets made earlier with another use in mind, which got changed and they never discarded those environments, putting them to use elsewhere.
Alternatively it could be part of the narrative, to convey a sensation or two.
Or as simple as them not getting a lot of value out of it.

The work required to implement 20 Forge Pieces and 20 armor pieces I'd argue is far less than making Five armor Abilities.

Not to mention, the game is an experience they want to convey, they want you to use these abilities. If we could clear most jumps in Halo 5 without clamber, it'd see far less use.

I don't even think I have played a single game which have had extensive mechanics disabled in the Main "ruleset", only available in user game modes. Perhaps there is such a game out there, I don't recall and I don't know what to look for.
Sunsdune wrote:
Naqser wrote:
I know they have next to no chance of returning outside of custom games options, but while awkward in Reach, I found them very fun and tactically rich in H4. And for that matter I loved Loadouts as well, though I often disagreed with the official set-ups. I also miss the more flexible scoring options.

Ya know what? I like Halo 4. Despite how the mechanics were recieved, they made custom game creation/adjusting the best in the series. While I totally understand Infinite doing its own thing, I'd really like those options back. Except for Ordinance. Actually so long as its optional add that too. Add everything that ever happened in this series. Dual Wielding, whatever.

Have your official playlist rulesets, but give me the power to flex in custom game creation. The power to make Halo 4 with dual wielding.
As fun as it'd be to have everything back as options, there are a few things to consider.

-Control scheme: Think of how many different combinations of enabled/disabled mechanics there are, and what possible new things they may have for Infinite. Halo 5's controller scheme felt crowded with what it had, now think about having Dual Wielding, equipment, AA's and Spartan Abilities enabled, and going in with whatever Infinite might have.
-Assets: Equipment and AA's require their own assets, Meshes, code, sound and animations. Dual Wielding require single wield weapons, and having a small number of single wields wouldn't exactly make dual wielding that fun, or? Then there's the question of how to handle them in terms of damage? All single wields get a damage reduction while dual wielded? Are all single wields going to be made available everywhere else in the game? Are these single wields made soley added for Dual Wielding in custom options? And as such bloating the "sandbox proper"? Not to mention that these features also need to be tested individuelly and as groups in combinations of each other.
-Resources: i343 has limited resources, additions like these would most certainly take away from other things in the game development where those resources could be used to make the "main game" better, more polished.
-"Value": Kind of difficult for me to pinpoint a specific descriptive word for this.
Now, these features would be Custom Game options only, meaning they'd be absent from any other mode than multiplayer.
If we consider that any game up untill now has tried to make each mechanic / trait / feature something the player would have access to and be made to use as much as possible, then the value of the work put into these would be very low, as the mechanics / traits / features wouldn't be used as much.

It's not impossible, but I find it highly improbable they'd do it. Even more unlikely that they'll pull it of well if they actually decide to go through with it.
- Control would be the biggest issue since the Ability button was put to other uses in H5. This is a legit complication that I have thought about. No clear answer here other than customs specific controls which would be over doing it.

- Game development is developing things like assets and sound.

- We'd only need three dual wield weapons that are mix and match ready. That's a decent enough number to balance around, too.

- No need to nerf damage when dual wielding them, simply make them weak solo. Encourage the main point, if you're choosing to have that in a customs game. And they would be exclusive to customs, for exactly the reason seen in this thread. Misunderstandings nearly went into debate. That's why I rather these be optional.

- I don't have much sympathy for the AAA games industry in terms of resource management. I feel this would make the game better and now I gotta hear about resource management. How about they don't waste resources on campaign and do this for me and custom creators?- What is the value of the several Forge items, Warzone weapon variants, campaign environments, and armor pieces that were probably seen and used a few times ever?
So you want to take away from the experience that more than half the community plays the game for (literal whole communities have arisen around campaign play , which is what got most of us into this series to begin with ; no matter what game you started playing Halo , the campaign was likely the first experience) , to enrich parts of the game aimed at a niche audience. Even if it is or was only played once fully thru , most Halo fans have finished the Halo campaigns just to stay up on the story (Compared to most games where 10% of players on average see the end). What is bolded is highly doubtful.

I'm not trying to belittle the customs crowd or map creators , a lot of them do great work. However , to expect the main draw of the game to be reduced so they can expand the offerings wanted by a smaller group , just isn't good business. If the Halo community at large was made of mostly customs players , or had an abundance of highly skilled forge creators , this might make sense. Unfortunately , customs have been losing popularity since the end of Halo 2 , it was a regular ocurence to have multiple friends in different custom lobbies during it's heyday , or even have open invites on Bungie forums to join customs , or get an invite from a previous MM opponent (before the proliferation of "1v1 me bro"). Since then not so much.

And I am not trying to say that expanded custom tools and options would not be well received , on the contrary , I think most Halo players feel the more custom options you have the longer the game can last , but not at the expense of the main single player story (which is becoming more and more rare in today's gaming landscape).
How many times do you think a campaign is played thru vs multiplayer playlists and customs?
Naqser wrote:
- Control would be the biggest issue since the Ability button was put to other uses in H5. This is a legit complication that I have thought about. No clear answer here other than customs specific controls which would be over doing it.
And that's probably one of the few most sensible options in order to get it to work, but not practical.

- Game development is developing things like assets and sound.
Yes, and?
There are far more projects that fail because the creators lose their focus and the projects get out of hand, than there are succesful games around.
Just because a part of game development is making these assets, doesn't mean everything gets added.

- We'd only need three dual wield weapons that are mix and match ready. That's a decent enough number to balance around, too.
- No need to nerf damage when dual wielding them, simply make them weak solo. Encourage the main point, if you're choosing to have that in a customs game. And they would be exclusive to customs, for exactly the reason seen in this thread. Misunderstandings nearly went into debate. That's why I rather these be optional.
Well, it'd be something the developers consider when implementing dual wielding.
But sure, assets related to custom mechanics are only for customs.

- I don't have much sympathy for the AAA games industry in terms of resource management. I feel this would make the game better and now I gotta hear about resource management. How about they don't waste resources on campaign and do this for me and custom creators?
And neither do I, but having no sympathy for it, doesn't mean it isn't relevant and that they aren't doing it.
Resource management is efficiently handling the time and money efficiently in order to get the best result possible.

Not wasting on campaign, but doing that for you, just means that the resources come from some other section of the game, Forge, theatre, the map team, the AI, the graphics Department, QA and so forth.

For instance, consider that there were no developer made BTB maps for Halo 5, but they did ship three Warzone Maps.

- What is the value of the several Forge items, Warzone weapon variants, campaign environments, and armor pieces that were probably seen and used a few times ever?
Forge items and armor pieces I'd argue don't need much work to to implement. I'd be surprised if they haven't made it so that the process isn't too unsimilar to copy pasting and changing a few values, with a new mesh and collision box, with a quick test to make sure it works as intended.

Weapon variants I'd assume work in a similar fashion, with stats that they change and alter, and can easily be implemented.

Now I'm not certain which environments you're refering to.
However if I'm to take some a guess, an environment rarely seen or barely used, could easily be assets made earlier with another use in mind, which got changed and they never discarded those environments, putting them to use elsewhere.
Alternatively it could be part of the narrative, to convey a sensation or two.
Or as simple as them not getting a lot of value out of it.

The work required to implement 20 Forge Pieces and 20 armor pieces I'd argue is far less than making Five armor Abilities.

Not to mention, the game is an experience they want to convey, they want you to use these abilities. If we could clear most jumps in Halo 5 without clamber, it'd see far less use.

I don't even think I have played a single game which have had extensive mechanics disabled in the Main "ruleset", only available in user game modes. Perhaps there is such a game out there, I don't recall and I don't know what to look for.
Smash Brothers.
Sunsdune wrote:
Naqser wrote:
I know they have next to no chance of returning outside of custom games options, but while awkward in Reach, I found them very fun and tactically rich in H4. And for that matter I loved Loadouts as well, though I often disagreed with the official set-ups. I also miss the more flexible scoring options.

Ya know what? I like Halo 4. Despite how the mechanics were recieved, they made custom game creation/adjusting the best in the series. While I totally understand Infinite doing its own thing, I'd really like those options back. Except for Ordinance. Actually so long as its optional add that too. Add everything that ever happened in this series. Dual Wielding, whatever.

Have your official playlist rulesets, but give me the power to flex in custom game creation. The power to make Halo 4 with dual wielding.
As fun as it'd be to have everything back as options, there are a few things to consider.

-Control scheme: Think of how many different combinations of enabled/disabled mechanics there are, and what possible new things they may have for Infinite. Halo 5's controller scheme felt crowded with what it had, now think about having Dual Wielding, equipment, AA's and Spartan Abilities enabled, and going in with whatever Infinite might have.
-Assets: Equipment and AA's require their own assets, Meshes, code, sound and animations. Dual Wielding require single wield weapons, and having a small number of single wields wouldn't exactly make dual wielding that fun, or? Then there's the question of how to handle them in terms of damage? All single wields get a damage reduction while dual wielded? Are all single wields going to be made available everywhere else in the game? Are these single wields made soley added for Dual Wielding in custom options? And as such bloating the "sandbox proper"? Not to mention that these features also need to be tested individuelly and as groups in combinations of each other.
-Resources: i343 has limited resources, additions like these would most certainly take away from other things in the game development where those resources could be used to make the "main game" better, more polished.
-"Value": Kind of difficult for me to pinpoint a specific descriptive word for this.
Now, these features would be Custom Game options only, meaning they'd be absent from any other mode than multiplayer.
If we consider that any game up untill now has tried to make each mechanic / trait / feature something the player would have access to and be made to use as much as possible, then the value of the work put into these would be very low, as the mechanics / traits / features wouldn't be used as much.

It's not impossible, but I find it highly improbable they'd do it. Even more unlikely that they'll pull it of well if they actually decide to go through with it.
How many times do you think a campaign is played thru vs multiplayer playlists and customs?
Believe it or not there are players who play the game specifically for the campaign. I have a buddy who plays thru them at least once every year and sometimes more than once.
Again , whole communities have arisen around campaign play and physics sandboxes , they spend a majority of their time with Halo playing campaign (there was actually a thread just a day or two ago asking 343 to bring back the out of bounds exploration of early Halo games). I don't have hard numbers to compare how many play thrus the campaign gets vs multiplayer matches. Nor vs custom games , but I'd be willing to bet the number of campaign only players vs customs only players are closer than you'd think.
- I don't have much sympathy for the AAA games industry in terms of resource management. I feel this would make the game better and now I gotta hear about resource management. How about they don't waste resources on campaign and do this for me and custom creators?
Wait, I think I misunderstood the first time.
You mean that they should skip the Campaign for custom game makers?
I guess if they did that then there's be resources enough available to make what you want.
Go for it.

Smash Brothers.
Interesting, as I haven't played it at all I'm unfamiliar with what kind of big mechanics they have disabled in the Main ruleset, akin to mechanics like equipment and Spartan Abilities.

Got more examples?
And anything regarding the rest of the post?
Sunsdune wrote:
Sunsdune wrote:
Naqser wrote:
I know they have next to no chance of returning outside of custom games options, but while awkward in Reach, I found them very fun and tactically rich in H4. And for that matter I loved Loadouts as well, though I often disagreed with the official set-ups. I also miss the more flexible scoring options.

Ya know what? I like Halo 4. Despite how the mechanics were recieved, they made custom game creation/adjusting the best in the series. While I totally understand Infinite doing its own thing, I'd really like those options back. Except for Ordinance. Actually so long as its optional add that too. Add everything that ever happened in this series. Dual Wielding, whatever.

Have your official playlist rulesets, but give me the power to flex in custom game creation. The power to make Halo 4 with dual wielding.
As fun as it'd be to have everything back as options, there are a few things to consider.

-Control scheme: Think of how many different combinations of enabled/disabled mechanics there are, and what possible new things they may have for Infinite. Halo 5's controller scheme felt crowded with what it had, now think about having Dual Wielding, equipment, AA's and Spartan Abilities enabled, and going in with whatever Infinite might have.
-Assets: Equipment and AA's require their own assets, Meshes, code, sound and animations. Dual Wielding require single wield weapons, and having a small number of single wields wouldn't exactly make dual wielding that fun, or? Then there's the question of how to handle them in terms of damage? All single wields get a damage reduction while dual wielded? Are all single wields going to be made available everywhere else in the game? Are these single wields made soley added for Dual Wielding in custom options? And as such bloating the "sandbox proper"? Not to mention that these features also need to be tested individuelly and as groups in combinations of each other.
-Resources: i343 has limited resources, additions like these would most certainly take away from other things in the game development where those resources could be used to make the "main game" better, more polished.
-"Value": Kind of difficult for me to pinpoint a specific descriptive word for this.
Now, these features would be Custom Game options only, meaning they'd be absent from any other mode than multiplayer.
If we consider that any game up untill now has tried to make each mechanic / trait / feature something the player would have access to and be made to use as much as possible, then the value of the work put into these would be very low, as the mechanics / traits / features wouldn't be used as much.

It's not impossible, but I find it highly improbable they'd do it. Even more unlikely that they'll pull it of well if they actually decide to go through with it.
How many times do you think a campaign is played thru vs multiplayer playlists and customs?
Believe it or not there are players who play the game specifically for the campaign. I have a buddy who plays thru them at least once every year and sometimes more than once.
Again , whole communities have arisen around campaign play and physics sandboxes , they spend a majority of their time with Halo playing campaign (there was actually a thread just a day or two ago asking 343 to bring back the out of bounds exploration of early Halo games). I don't have hard numbers to compare how many play thrus the campaign gets vs multiplayer matches. Nor vs custom games , but I'd be willing to bet the number of campaign only players vs customs only players are closer than you'd think.
I'd bet that it's a landslide victory for MP and customs playthru.
Naqser wrote:
- I don't have much sympathy for the AAA games industry in terms of resource management. I feel this would make the game better and now I gotta hear about resource management. How about they don't waste resources on campaign and do this for me and custom creators?
Wait, I think I misunderstood the first time.
You mean that they should skip the Campaign for custom game makers?
I guess if they did that then there's be resources enough available to make what you want.
Go for it.

Smash Brothers.
Interesting, as I haven't played it at all I'm unfamiliar with what kind of big mechanics they have disabled in the Main ruleset, akin to mechanics like equipment and Spartan Abilities.
I wouldn't demand campaign gets cut from a Halo game for anything. But scale it back, tell a tighter story, and add more to MP/Customs/Forge development.

Competitive Smash Bros often omits random item spawns and pretty much 99% of the maps to the make the game as consistent as possible.
I wouldn't demand campaign gets cut from a Halo game for anything. But scale it back, tell a tighter story, and add more to MP/Customs/Forge development.
Well it's possible the resources would be there.
I however doubt they'd still use part of those to implement past mechanics and assets for those mechanics, for the reasons I earlier mentioned.

Competitive Smash Bros often omits random item spawns and pretty much 99% of the maps to the make the game as consistent as possible.
Is this "competitive Smash Bros" how the game is by default?
Sunsdune wrote:
Sunsdune wrote:
Naqser wrote:
I know they have next to no chance of returning outside of custom games options, but while awkward in Reach, I found them very fun and tactically rich in H4. And for that matter I loved Loadouts as well, though I often disagreed with the official set-ups. I also miss the more flexible scoring options.

Ya know what? I like Halo 4. Despite how the mechanics were recieved, they made custom game creation/adjusting the best in the series. While I totally understand Infinite doing its own thing, I'd really like those options back. Except for Ordinance. Actually so long as its optional add that too. Add everything that ever happened in this series. Dual Wielding, whatever.

Have your official playlist rulesets, but give me the power to flex in custom game creation. The power to make Halo 4 with dual wielding.
As fun as it'd be to have everything back as options, there are a few things to consider.

-Control scheme: Think of how many different combinations of enabled/disabled mechanics there are, and what possible new things they may have for Infinite. Halo 5's controller scheme felt crowded with what it had, now think about having Dual Wielding, equipment, AA's and Spartan Abilities enabled, and going in with whatever Infinite might have.
-Assets: Equipment and AA's require their own assets, Meshes, code, sound and animations. Dual Wielding require single wield weapons, and having a small number of single wields wouldn't exactly make dual wielding that fun, or? Then there's the question of how to handle them in terms of damage? All single wields get a damage reduction while dual wielded? Are all single wields going to be made available everywhere else in the game? Are these single wields made soley added for Dual Wielding in custom options? And as such bloating the "sandbox proper"? Not to mention that these features also need to be tested individuelly and as groups in combinations of each other.
-Resources: i343 has limited resources, additions like these would most certainly take away from other things in the game development where those resources could be used to make the "main game" better, more polished.
-"Value": Kind of difficult for me to pinpoint a specific descriptive word for this.
Now, these features would be Custom Game options only, meaning they'd be absent from any other mode than multiplayer.
If we consider that any game up untill now has tried to make each mechanic / trait / feature something the player would have access to and be made to use as much as possible, then the value of the work put into these would be very low, as the mechanics / traits / features wouldn't be used as much.

It's not impossible, but I find it highly improbable they'd do it. Even more unlikely that they'll pull it of well if they actually decide to go through with it.
How many times do you think a campaign is played thru vs multiplayer playlists and customs?
Believe it or not there are players who play the game specifically for the campaign. I have a buddy who plays thru them at least once every year and sometimes more than once.
Again , whole communities have arisen around campaign play and physics sandboxes , they spend a majority of their time with Halo playing campaign (there was actually a thread just a day or two ago asking 343 to bring back the out of bounds exploration of early Halo games). I don't have hard numbers to compare how many play thrus the campaign gets vs multiplayer matches. Nor vs custom games , but I'd be willing to bet the number of campaign only players vs customs only players are closer than you'd think.
I'd bet that it's a landslide victory for MP and customs playthru.
But you keep throwing in MP players into your customs wish-list. If most of these options you are wanting are for customs or forge options only , then you don't get to include MP players only , because they aren't necessarily customs players.The original Statement I am arguing against is 343 should limit campaign to push more resources to customs options as you asked for here:
How about they don't waste resources on campaign and do this for me and custom creators? Sorry , that's not likely to happen. More people play the campaign then ever even see a custom lobby.
Naqser wrote:
Is this "competitive Smash Bros" how the game is by default?
Nope items are enabled, it's a lot like Mario Kart when it comes to this.
Naqser wrote:
I wouldn't demand campaign gets cut from a Halo game for anything. But scale it back, tell a tighter story, and add more to MP/Customs/Forge development.
Well it's possible the resources would be there.
I however doubt they'd still use part of those to implement past mechanics and assets for those mechanics, for the reasons I earlier mentioned.

Competitive Smash Bros often omits random item spawns and pretty much 99% of the maps to the make the game as consistent as possible.
Is this "competitive Smash Bros" how the game is by default?
lol Oh no. Very no.
Sunsdune wrote:
Sunsdune wrote:
Sunsdune wrote:
Naqser wrote:
I know they have next to no chance of returning outside of custom games options, but while awkward in Reach, I found them very fun and tactically rich in H4. And for that matter I loved Loadouts as well, though I often disagreed with the official set-ups. I also miss the more flexible scoring options.

Ya know what? I like Halo 4. Despite how the mechanics were recieved, they made custom game creation/adjusting the best in the series. While I totally understand Infinite doing its own thing, I'd really like those options back. Except for Ordinance. Actually so long as its optional add that too. Add everything that ever happened in this series. Dual Wielding, whatever.

Have your official playlist rulesets, but give me the power to flex in custom game creation. The power to make Halo 4 with dual wielding.
As fun as it'd be to have everything back as options, there are a few things to consider.

-Control scheme: Think of how many different combinations of enabled/disabled mechanics there are, and what possible new things they may have for Infinite. Halo 5's controller scheme felt crowded with what it had, now think about having Dual Wielding, equipment, AA's and Spartan Abilities enabled, and going in with whatever Infinite might have.
-Assets: Equipment and AA's require their own assets, Meshes, code, sound and animations. Dual Wielding require single wield weapons, and having a small number of single wields wouldn't exactly make dual wielding that fun, or? Then there's the question of how to handle them in terms of damage? All single wields get a damage reduction while dual wielded? Are all single wields going to be made available everywhere else in the game? Are these single wields made soley added for Dual Wielding in custom options? And as such bloating the "sandbox proper"? Not to mention that these features also need to be tested individuelly and as groups in combinations of each other.
-Resources: i343 has limited resources, additions like these would most certainly take away from other things in the game development where those resources could be used to make the "main game" better, more polished.
-"Value": Kind of difficult for me to pinpoint a specific descriptive word for this.
Now, these features would be Custom Game options only, meaning they'd be absent from any other mode than multiplayer.
If we consider that any game up untill now has tried to make each mechanic / trait / feature something the player would have access to and be made to use as much as possible, then the value of the work put into these would be very low, as the mechanics / traits / features wouldn't be used as much.

It's not impossible, but I find it highly improbable they'd do it. Even more unlikely that they'll pull it of well if they actually decide to go through with it.
How many times do you think a campaign is played thru vs multiplayer playlists and customs?
Believe it or not there are players who play the game specifically for the campaign. I have a buddy who plays thru them at least once every year and sometimes more than once.
Again , whole communities have arisen around campaign play and physics sandboxes , they spend a majority of their time with Halo playing campaign (there was actually a thread just a day or two ago asking 343 to bring back the out of bounds exploration of early Halo games). I don't have hard numbers to compare how many play thrus the campaign gets vs multiplayer matches. Nor vs custom games , but I'd be willing to bet the number of campaign only players vs customs only players are closer than you'd think.
I'd bet that it's a landslide victory for MP and customs playthru.
But you keep throwing in MP players into your customs wish-list. If most of these options you are wanting are for customs or forge options only , then you don't get to include MP players only , because they aren't necessarily customs players.The original Statement I am arguing against is 343 should limit campaign to push more resources to customs options as you asked for here:
How about they don't waste resources on campaign and do this for me and custom creators? Sorry , that's not likely to happen. More people play the campaign then ever even see a custom lobby.
That's a mighty bold claim, Sun.
Naqser wrote:
Is this "competitive Smash Bros" how the game is by default?
Nope items are enabled, it's a lot like Mario Kart when it comes to this.
Not played Mario Kart either, but thanks.

Naqser wrote:
I wouldn't demand campaign gets cut from a Halo game for anything. But scale it back, tell a tighter story, and add more to MP/Customs/Forge development.
Well it's possible the resources would be there.
I however doubt they'd still use part of those to implement past mechanics and assets for those mechanics, for the reasons I earlier mentioned.

Competitive Smash Bros often omits random item spawns and pretty much 99% of the maps to the make the game as consistent as possible.
Is this "competitive Smash Bros" how the game is by default?
lol Oh no. Very no.
So in other words, competitive Smash Bros rules are a custom mode which disables mechanics / features, rather than there being mechanics / features disabled by default which are then enabled by users for custom modes, correct?
Naqser wrote:
Naqser wrote:
Is this "competitive Smash Bros" how the game is by default?
Nope items are enabled, it's a lot like Mario Kart when it comes to this.
Not played Mario Kart either, but thanks.

Naqser wrote:
I wouldn't demand campaign gets cut from a Halo game for anything. But scale it back, tell a tighter story, and add more to MP/Customs/Forge development.
Well it's possible the resources would be there.
I however doubt they'd still use part of those to implement past mechanics and assets for those mechanics, for the reasons I earlier mentioned.

Competitive Smash Bros often omits random item spawns and pretty much 99% of the maps to the make the game as consistent as possible.
Is this "competitive Smash Bros" how the game is by default?
lol Oh no. Very no.
So in other words, competitive Smash Bros rules are a custom mode which disables mechanics / features, rather than there being mechanics / features disabled by default which are then enabled by users for custom modes, correct?
Pretty much yeah. In fact serious players would typically turn off items and regulate map rotation before they do anything else. The default settings are seen as casual and laid back.
Not very different from MLG which disables the motion tracker I believe.
Loadouts kill EVEN spawns and vehicle combat, they don't belong to Halo, they were straight copied from CoD.
Armor Abilities were surely better than Spartan Abilities in terms of map design but they have their issues too.
Agreed on Ordinance being not present.

They can't realistically add everything before Halo Infinite, but if I could choose I would add everything pre-Halo 4.

After many years I can appreciate some things that Halo 4 has as its own game, but still to me it is not Halo.
Choosing sticky grenades killed vehicle combat.

But I didn't ask for mandatory inclusions of these systems so I'm not sure why some of you responded the way you did lol.
To be fair, you can't pose a question that has been a hotly debated topic in the community and expect people to not respond as such. This is an issue that has divided the community in more ways than one.

As for sticky grenades, they actually provide an organic balance to vehicle combat. Without them, anyone who doesn't have a vehicle might as well just quit because they have no way of fighting back until they find a vehicle of their own. This is especially true for aerial vehicles because you can't board them as easily. Being able to lob a grenade to defend yourself makes it possible for someone not in a vehicle to be able to take part in vehicle combat.
Yes to everything Happy Place8166 said, it was choosing the plasma pistol that broke vehicle combat, not plasma granades.

(Please, don't call them sticky, sounds too generic for a Halo item ;) )
For the most part I liked AA's with the exceptions of Armor Lock, Promethean Vision and Sentry Turret. I really enjoyed Decoy, Reach's Evade, Jet Pack, Drop Shield, Invis, Regen Field and Hardlight Shield. I would like H5's Thrusters as an AA among choices, but I don't like that I have to master the use of just Thusters because. Thats the only AA the game. My main issue with games with AA was with the way the AA's were linked with different weapon loadouts. In Reach you had to spawn with different guns with each AA. In H4 everything was custom. I didn't mind that because I could choose to spawn with all the same guns. In H4's loadout that made it bad, in my opinion was the Tactical Package and Support Upgrades which change each player in ways makes your spartan imbalanced. AA's and Weapons can be balanced fairly that don't change your spartans base traits.

I'd like 343 to bring back AA's but really look at their implimention along with their balancing. Armor Lock, P-Vision and Auto Sentry could be good also but they would need changes to how they work beyond nerf/balancing them as they are. An example is Armor Lock what if instead of being rooted to the ground players and vehicles could push you around or off a cliff? You may be invincible but I could wack you with a gravity hammer into a ravine.

Theres lots of possibilities. In what other ways could AA's changed to be fun and useful?
Battle wrote:
For the most part I liked AA's with the exceptions of Armor Lock, Promethean Vision and Sentry Turret. I really enjoyed Decoy, Reach's Evade, Jet Pack, Drop Shield, Invis, Regen Field and Hardlight Shield. I would like H5's Thrusters as an AA among choices, but I don't like that I have to master the use of just Thusters because. Thats the only AA the game. My main issue with games with AA was with the way the AA's were linked with different weapon loadouts. In Reach you had to spawn with different guns with each AA. In H4 everything was custom. I didn't mind that because I could choose to spawn with all the same guns. In H4's loadout that made it bad, in my opinion was the Tactical Package and Support Upgrades which change each player in ways makes your spartan imbalanced. AA's and Weapons can be balanced fairly that don't change your spartans base traits.

I'd like 343 to bring back AA's but really look at their implimention along with their balancing. Armor Lock, P-Vision and Auto Sentry could be good also but they would need changes to how they work beyond nerf/balancing them as they are. An example is Armor Lock what if instead of being rooted to the ground players and vehicles could push you around or off a cliff? You may be invincible but I could wack you with a gravity hammer into a ravine.

Theres lots of possibilities. In what other ways could AA's changed to be fun and useful?
Just create AA's that coincide with an element of the base gameplay. That would be my choice IF I'm designing the game around them. But really I just want H4 ones back for customs.
IMO if blue team appears in the game and you will be able to control them in co-op it would make sense for Kelly to have sprint, spartan charge, thrusters and all the other stuff from halo 5. If you haven't read the books, Kelly is the sanic of blue team. (Fast boi)
I liked armor abilities, with the exception of sprinting. I wouldn't mind them coming back in some form as long as sprint wasn't one. Sprinting should be very normal for any Spartan to do.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 11