Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Remove Hitmarkers

OP Slickini

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 5
Honestly, I enjoy the hit markers. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a quality of life improvement that doesn't actually affect gameplay. Maybe give each individual player the option to turn them off in their settings like with assassination animations, but don't take them away from everyone.
I totally agree, I feel like hit markers are lazy. If I’m hitting something I want to feel the the bullets hit the target with feedback on the controller, and to have metal bits fly of premethians and blood splatter from covenant, gameplay that feels so god damn satisfying
Hitmarkers add nothing to the gameplay and aren't necessary. It's only a casualized system to help brain-dead players know if they hit something or not since they can't aim worth -Yoink- to tell if they're hitting anything.
I like hit markers, because I think they give players important information and it allows them to take actions based on what that information showed. Halo 5 has a nice system, in my opinion, that it changes size and intensity based on the weapon you just used. So, if your target is not on your line of sight, but you feel something is there, you can try throw an explosive to see if it works, based on the hitmarker you wether push your attack further, alert your teammates or push back to a safer location, so I think it gives more tactical options to enrich the overall gameplay. Sometimes your target isn't always in front of you or too far away to see the shield glowing, so I think players deserves to know if what they just did had an effect or not, and having this information is important to give the players control.
The inclusion of hit markers won’t be a deal breaker for me, but I prefer their removal for a few reasons. For one, it probably burns for the people who complain about the “COD-ification” of Halo to see that something front COD remains in the game (even if COD isn’t the only one doing it). I for one also feel like it somehow changes the way you fight enemies. Now instead of it being a cool battle and it being fun to shoot the guns (I’m talking Bungie’s Halo) it feels more mechanical and less fun. (However I’m sure there’s more to it feeling mechanical than hit markers)

But the real reason it should be removed is because it isn’t necessary. The way you know you hit an enemy in multiplayer is that their energy shield starts depleting. If you can look to see hit markers then surely you can look to see your target’s energy shield being broken. I think a lesson that 343 needs to learn is that if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it.
WerepyreND wrote:
EchoLoco2 wrote:
this reminds me of the subject of sprinting, if you do not like to sprint just do not do it!!, however, in this topic you should add a small option to activate and deactivate the hitmarker
"if you do not like to sprint just do not do it!"
well the maps and weapons are designed around sprinting just not doing it doesn't fix the problem that it's there

ALSO, this post is not about sprinting it's about hit marks toggling them sounds good for PvE but it should be permanently off for PvP. Being able to check an entire room with a grenade in Halo is just disgusting. So far I've seen no good defense for hitmarks besides needing more info in a gunfight. It's unneeded and if you do need hitmarks i think that says more about your skill than it does about its presence in the game.

Hitmarks improve upon nothing in the game and do not innovate. 343, stop conforming to generic games. Halo was popular because it was unique not because it appealed to everyone because if you try to appeal to everyone you appeal to no one.
I mean, you don't need a shield indicator, ammo counter, we didn't need passenger health bars either. Yet we have/had all these things, your only argument is that we don't need it and that's poor at best. They improve the game significantly in my experience and opinion, oh, and you are not as skilled as I am in the game, so you do not get to lecture me about how you feel it speaks to my skill level, because it does not. It does, however, speak to your lack of integrity on the subject, you don't like it, therefore everyone who does is a skill less noob. Get out of here with that garbage logic.
Um, How can they lecture you if they were not quoting you? Putting that aside, can you elaborate on how it "improves" the game in any concrete way? Shield flares and bloodshots already tell you if you've hit your target and gives you more information than a simple hitmarker as it differentiates between shields and health. While normal hitmarkers are not the worst problem facing newer Halo games by any means, explosive hitmarkers have a clear downside as they reward mindless grenade throwing with free map information.

From where I'm sitting it absolutely does lower the skill gap overall, how much is subject to debate, but hitmarkers are far from a simple "quality of life" improvement.

I also find even normal hitmarkers to be visual noise that muddies the whole experience in Halo. As I've posted before, using two different methods to convey the exact same information can make things a mess. Like mixing italics and bold.
Well, that's certainly an opinion. I vehemently disagree with it, but you have made it clear you are not interested in other opinions, so instead of wasting time on typing a full rebutle, I'm simply going to agree to disagree.
I can agree with this
I feel it makes people spam a lot more Grenades
If anything, i rather have a realistic effect of firearms, ballistics, and physic effects. I enjoy the hell out of SIM games and i always turned away from arcade style games unless it's Halo. I feel like it's more rewarding to use a weapon that is difficult to aim and shoot but the payoff for a good shot without any hit marker or non-existent bullet drop is satisfying. I know Spartans are well..Spartans but even then the physics around them doesn't become foolproof.
If they aren't too keen on removing hitmarkers, at least remove them when applied to grenades. It's too much of a reward in information if you're just spamming grenades, and you just get a hit based on a random throw on somebody behind cover.
WerepyreND wrote:
EchoLoco2 wrote:
this reminds me of the subject of sprinting, if you do not like to sprint just do not do it!!, however, in this topic you should add a small option to activate and deactivate the hitmarker
"if you do not like to sprint just do not do it!"
well the maps and weapons are designed around sprinting just not doing it doesn't fix the problem that it's there

ALSO, this post is not about sprinting it's about hit marks toggling them sounds good for PvE but it should be permanently off for PvP. Being able to check an entire room with a grenade in Halo is just disgusting. So far I've seen no good defense for hitmarks besides needing more info in a gunfight. It's unneeded and if you do need hitmarks i think that says more about your skill than it does about its presence in the game.

Hitmarks improve upon nothing in the game and do not innovate. 343, stop conforming to generic games. Halo was popular because it was unique not because it appealed to everyone because if you try to appeal to everyone you appeal to no one.
I mean, you don't need a shield indicator, ammo counter, we didn't need passenger health bars either. Yet we have/had all these things, your only argument is that we don't need it and that's poor at best. They improve the game significantly in my experience and opinion, oh, and you are not as skilled as I am in the game, so you do not get to lecture me about how you feel it speaks to my skill level, because it does not. It does, however, speak to your lack of integrity on the subject, you don't like it, therefore everyone who does is a skill less noob. Get out of here with that garbage logic.
Um, How can they lecture you if they were not quoting you? Putting that aside, can you elaborate on how it "improves" the game in any concrete way? Shield flares and bloodshots already tell you if you've hit your target and gives you more information than a simple hitmarker as it differentiates between shields and health. While normal hitmarkers are not the worst problem facing newer Halo games by any means, explosive hitmarkers have a clear downside as they reward mindless grenade throwing with free map information.

From where I'm sitting it absolutely does lower the skill gap overall, how much is subject to debate, but hitmarkers are far from a simple "quality of life" improvement.

I also find even normal hitmarkers to be visual noise that muddies the whole experience in Halo. As I've posted before, using two different methods to convey the exact same information can make things a mess. Like mixing italics and bold.
Well, that's certainly an opinion. I vehemently disagree with it, but you have made it clear you are not interested in other opinions, so instead of wasting time on typing a full rebutle, I'm simply going to agree to disagree.
Interesting how I'm "not interested in other opinions" despite specifically asking for one in the post you quoted(See; Bold). My problem is that I keep seeing everyone dance around the issue. "its a quality of life improvement" but I for the life of me can't see the "improvement" and I keep hoping someone will actually articulate why it is a "improvement" rather than a sidegrade at best.

I'm also still waiting for someone to address the elephant in the room of explosive hitmarkers which I still find the be the more pressing issue regarding hitmarkers which is the main thing making it hard for me to swallow the whole "improvement" argument.

You can't change minds if you don't discuss the issues. Neither you or anyone else is obligated to continue any discussions of course, but don't go telling others that they are "not interested in other opinions" while offering nothing substantial on your part.
Exactly, players tend to spam nades far more in Halo 5 as a cheap way of "spotting" out other players that could have otherwise pulled off a well-thought out, (or just plain lucky) ambush instead....
Exactly, players tend to spam nades far more in Halo 5 as a cheap way of "spotting" out other players that could have otherwise pulled off a well-thought out, (or just plain lucky) ambush instead....
Agreed
WerepyreND wrote:
WerepyreND wrote:
EchoLoco2 wrote:
this reminds me of the subject of sprinting, if you do not like to sprint just do not do it!!, however, in this topic you should add a small option to activate and deactivate the hitmarker
"if you do not like to sprint just do not do it!"
well the maps and weapons are designed around sprinting just not doing it doesn't fix the problem that it's there

ALSO, this post is not about sprinting it's about hit marks toggling them sounds good for PvE but it should be permanently off for PvP. Being able to check an entire room with a grenade in Halo is just disgusting. So far I've seen no good defense for hitmarks besides needing more info in a gunfight. It's unneeded and if you do need hitmarks i think that says more about your skill than it does about its presence in the game.

Hitmarks improve upon nothing in the game and do not innovate. 343, stop conforming to generic games. Halo was popular because it was unique not because it appealed to everyone because if you try to appeal to everyone you appeal to no one.
I mean, you don't need a shield indicator, ammo counter, we didn't need passenger health bars either. Yet we have/had all these things, your only argument is that we don't need it and that's poor at best. They improve the game significantly in my experience and opinion, oh, and you are not as skilled as I am in the game, so you do not get to lecture me about how you feel it speaks to my skill level, because it does not. It does, however, speak to your lack of integrity on the subject, you don't like it, therefore everyone who does is a skill less noob. Get out of here with that garbage logic.
Um, How can they lecture you if they were not quoting you? Putting that aside, can you elaborate on how it "improves" the game in any concrete way? Shield flares and bloodshots already tell you if you've hit your target and gives you more information than a simple hitmarker as it differentiates between shields and health. While normal hitmarkers are not the worst problem facing newer Halo games by any means, explosive hitmarkers have a clear downside as they reward mindless grenade throwing with free map information.

From where I'm sitting it absolutely does lower the skill gap overall, how much is subject to debate, but hitmarkers are far from a simple "quality of life" improvement.

I also find even normal hitmarkers to be visual noise that muddies the whole experience in Halo. As I've posted before, using two different methods to convey the exact same information can make things a mess. Like mixing italics and bold.
Well, that's certainly an opinion. I vehemently disagree with it, but you have made it clear you are not interested in other opinions, so instead of wasting time on typing a full rebutle, I'm simply going to agree to disagree.
Interesting how I'm "not interested in other opinions" despite specifically asking for one in the post you quoted(See; Bold). My problem is that I keep seeing everyone dance around the issue. "its a quality of life improvement" but I for the life of me can't see the "improvement" and I keep hoping someone will actually articulate why it is a "improvement" rather than a sidegrade at best.

I'm also still waiting for someone to address the elephant in the room of explosive hitmarkers which I still find the be the more pressing issue regarding hitmarkers which is the main thing making it hard for me to swallow the whole "improvement" argument.

You can't change minds if you don't discuss the issues. Neither you or anyone else is obligated to continue any discussions of course, but don't go telling others that they are "not interested in other opinions" while offering nothing substantial on your part.
I think a better quality of life is to actually become independent from hitmarkers (going back to classics) because that way it will simply make you a better player, you just don't need it. Unless if you really have a disability, it should be an option for those people, but nade hitmarkers must be removed.
I like hit markers, because I think they give players important information and it allows them to take actions based on what that information showed. Halo 5 has a nice system, in my opinion, that it changes size and intensity based on the weapon you just used. So, if your target is not on your line of sight, but you feel something is there, you can try throw an explosive to see if it works, based on the hitmarker you wether push your attack further, alert your teammates or push back to a safer location, so I think it gives more tactical options to enrich the overall gameplay. Sometimes your target isn't always in front of you or too far away to see the shield glowing, so I think players deserves to know if what they just did had an effect or not, and having this information is important to give the players control.
You have a good point here, but I personally don't remember having trouble detecting whether or not I hit someone from a far distance. Perhaps having hitmakers when you actually hit someone only from far distances, let's say 100m away, could be a thing.
MorseyBaby wrote:
Honestly not a topic I'd even considered being so controversial.

I wouldn't say I'm too much of a fan of hitmarkers (especially with AoE weapons), but likewise can understand that they have an important place for some accessibility concerns.

Also... from a 'realism' perspective: Mjolnir costs a lot. Your HUD is probably smart enough to know if your rounds are hitting something. Again... blindfire/explosives perhaps that goes too far but the argument can be made that Mjolnir has microphones so can use audio feedback to draw the conclusion.

End of the day as long as it's a level playing field then it's up to you if you want to not use a tool you've been given
I knew someone would come up with something like this lol. It may be realist but sometimes gameplay should be top priority, and I feel hitmarkers affects the gameplay.
If anything, i rather have a realistic effect of firearms, ballistics, and physic effects. I enjoy the hell out of SIM games and i always turned away from arcade style games unless it's Halo. I feel like it's more rewarding to use a weapon that is difficult to aim and shoot but the payoff for a good shot without any hit marker or non-existent bullet drop is satisfying. I know Spartans are well..Spartans but even then the physics around them doesn't become foolproof.
thats what bloom in reach represents. Spartan 3s are normal human beings so when they shoot their is still gonna be some recoil, hence the bloom.

spartan 2s are 8 feet tall superhumans that are equipped with special suits that enhance their abilities even further. their reflexes are technologically enhanced to the point that they basically see in slow motion. They are masters of their weapons and therefore they can shoot while moving without any recoil. they are strong and skilled enough to have complete control over any weapon they fire.
and for the record I agree. hit markers are dumb. they were originally for games like cod where at long range you cant tell if you are hitting the target. shouldn't be in a halo game
Slickini wrote:
MorseyBaby wrote:
Honestly not a topic I'd even considered being so controversial.

I wouldn't say I'm too much of a fan of hitmarkers (especially with AoE weapons), but likewise can understand that they have an important place for some accessibility concerns.

Also... from a 'realism' perspective: Mjolnir costs a lot. Your HUD is probably smart enough to know if your rounds are hitting something. Again... blindfire/explosives perhaps that goes too far but the argument can be made that Mjolnir has microphones so can use audio feedback to draw the conclusion.

End of the day as long as it's a level playing field then it's up to you if you want to not use a tool you've been given
I knew someone would come up with something like this lol. It may be realist but sometimes gameplay should be top priority, and I feel hitmarkers affects the gameplay.
Entirely agree - just also pointing out that the realism perspective alone isn't a reason this can't work
BANGHART wrote:
If anything, i rather have a realistic effect of firearms, ballistics, and physic effects. I enjoy the hell out of SIM games and i always turned away from arcade style games unless it's Halo. I feel like it's more rewarding to use a weapon that is difficult to aim and shoot but the payoff for a good shot without any hit marker or non-existent bullet drop is satisfying. I know Spartans are well..Spartans but even then the physics around them doesn't become foolproof.
thats what bloom in reach represents. Spartan 3s are normal human beings so when they shoot their is still gonna be some recoil, hence the bloom.

spartan 2s are 8 feet tall superhumans that are equipped with special suits that enhance their abilities even further. their reflexes are technologically enhanced to the point that they basically see in slow motion. They are masters of their weapons and therefore they can shoot while moving without any recoil. they are strong and skilled enough to have complete control over any weapon they fire.
That's so true. So what about Spartan 4's?
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 5