Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Aural Clutter

OP NNMS MXMS

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
For the most part, I liked what I saw from the H5 gameplay . . . I liked it a lot. But I'm not nearly as happy with what I heard. The audio design is a mess, IMO. I use sound a lot when I play, and all of the random, uninformative sounds are the aural equivalent of the massively distracting screen shake / white-out visual that so many modern FPSs use (and thankfully Halo does not). For me at least, sound design is just as important as visual design.

Some specific issues are:

1. Audible hitmarkers. No reason for these.

2. Power weapon announcements. 7 complete sentences in a 35s span. A single statement at 5 - 10s from spawn works just fine.

3. Perfect / reversal / hat trick / brawler / etc. Please cut these (and others like them) out. Keep it to streaks/multikills/scoring.

4. Automated teammate communication. Most are useless. Keep some automated ones that use the map callouts . . . I will learn much faster by hearing rather than seeing the location note above the motion tracker. Just keep them short and make sure they provide some kind of information not already contained on the HUD.

5. Not everything needs a sound. The sound when reaching full sprint speed is unnecessary, for example.
.
.
.
Miscellaneous comments:

1. Jeff. Over-the-top for some. "Double kill" in particular is just too much. Several others me cringe. I think re-recording some of Jeff's announcements would be a good idea.

2. BR burst is too compressed. I prefer the sound of a slower burst FAR more. Sounds beefier.

3. Shield status sounds I really dislike. Please revert to more CE / H4 - sounding shields. The H5 ones give me the impression of a computerized nag. Also, they sound very similar to other audio effects in certain circumstances, reducing the overall usefulness of all of the effects.
.
.
.
Sorry . . . not sure how many of you are as bothered by the sounds as I am. But to me, aural clutter is just as bad as visual clutter. Maybe even worse.
343 have definitely not mastered the art of sound design yet.

It is one of the main things that put me off Halo 4 (namely the puny sniper rifle sound). But I am glad that these issues are noticeable this far from release. A lot of these should be tweaked before release.

The priorities for me are:

1. Audible Hitmarkers. Seriously I would prefer no hitmarkers whatsoever. (Visual or Audible).

2. Over the top Announcements in the modern style. I really dislike these. "Haaaat Triiick!!!" is the one that stood out for me. These are rather inconsequential medals and they do not need such an overly excited announcement. If I get an extermination Jeff can go as crazy as he likes...

3. Unnecessary announcements. Perfect Kill, Hat Trick and other general play medals do not need announcements. As said in the OP, this is just clutter that detracts from the gameplay. (And sounds like it is designed with younger players in mind - no offence)

4. Power weapon announcements. One announcement at 30 seconds before the spawns is fine. Everyone knows how long 30 seconds lasts, we do not need to be reminded 6 more times.

It is sound design like this that will hurt the longevity of the game. I could stand it for a while, but it would soon get very annoying, and I would simply stop playing.
Power weapon announcements are mostly to help drive the gameplay and encourage new players to be conscious of map control. Hitmark sounds though are a bit excessive.
All these strange beeps and unnecessary and should be removed or at least have their pitch lowered
xAT 117x wrote:
343 have definitely not mastered the art of sound design yet.

Neither did Bungie except for CE. H2 / H3 did not have enough volume variation in weapon sounds with distance, resulting in everything sounding muffled and losing the impact of what are fundamentally good weapon sounds (for the most part). But at least Bungie's sound design was clean for the most part. They avoided the extraneous, meaningless sounds.

I really really hope 343i makes some changes before H5 releases. What I heard from the beta preview was just way too much.
in hopes that 343 is taking notes ill add my voice and say

too much extra/unnecessary audio
I agree with this generally. I think the shield should sound a little more distinct or like a classic Halo shield. It sounds too much like anything else I've heard.
Higgy Doc wrote:
I agree with this generally. I think the shield should sound a little more distinct or like a classic Halo shield. It sounds too much like anything else I've heard.
Yeah. I added the similarity to other audible cues as a criticism in the OP.
yeah this topic should be pretty one-sided, it's clear the audio design in this game needs a different approach/direction
I really hate when people support unnecessary things and say "helps newer players" we were all newer players at one point and we all learned how to play. Those hitmarker sounds, lol, what is this a mlg faze mnt dew montage.
I agree with all of these. The BR though is understandable in terms of sound. The BR has a faster fire rate between rounds fired (not a complete burst) which sounds almost like a single shot. The faster fire rate is to compensate for the quickness of the spartans. Thats the way I see it.
The repeated announcements of the Power Weapons were put in to test it for the Beta. In the final version, only 1/2 will actually be said.
The repeated announcements of the Power Weapons were put in to test it for the Beta. In the final version, only 1/2 will actually be said.
That's cute if you actually believe that. Got any source or proof?
lets play the beta first OK?
SilkScroll wrote:
lets play the beta first OK?
Sigh... These comments again. Allow me to copypaste what I typed earlier:

"We don't have just one or two videos of Halo 5's gameplay to adequately judge it objectively. The pool of footage that we can judge its gameplay - and most if not all of its elements - numbers in the hundreds.

Saying that we can't accurately judge a variation of a game that we have been playing for years based on the footage of a sequel which has the same base elements of its gameplay as its predecessors is a really passive-aggressive attempt at trying to prevent discussion and the critical analysis of a sequel and its mechanics.

It's ridiculous that users are bullying others into accepting the spurious belief that no one is allowed to think differently or consider the footage of Halo 5 as proof enough of what it's going to be like. Every time I've seen anyone bring up a good point about Halo 5 has been met with stiff opposition in the form of a fallacy that we can't judge a game's sequel based on video evidence. Enough is enough. I thought Bungie's community was toxic, but this is downright manipulative in the worst of ways. It's dismissive to the extreme."
Majatek wrote:
SilkScroll wrote:
lets play the beta first OK?


Sigh... These comments again. Allow me to copypaste what I typed earlier:

"We don't have just one or two videos of Halo 5's gameplay to adequately judge it objectively. The pool of footage that we can judge its gameplay - and most if not all of its elements - numbers in the hundreds.

Saying that we can't accurately judge a variation of a game that we have been playing for years based on the footage of a sequel which has the same base elements of its gameplay as its predecessors is a really passive-aggressive attempt at trying to prevent discussion and the critical analysis of a sequel and its mechanics.

It's ridiculous that users are bullying others into accepting the spurious belief that no one is allowed to think differently or consider the footage of Halo 5 as proof enough of what it's going to be like. Every time I've seen anyone bring up a good point about Halo 5 has been met with stiff opposition in the form of a fallacy that we can't judge a game's sequel based on video evidence. Enough is enough. I thought Bungie's community was toxic, but this is downright manipulative in the worst of ways. It's dismissive to the extreme."
Ya those comments really make me giggle. And it's same thing you heard leading up to Halo 4. "You haven't even played it yet. People who've play it say it plays like Halo. Give it a chance." A lot of people gave it a chance and we all know how that turned out. Just about everything that was criticized beforehand was as bad as it was predicted to be.
NNMS MXMS wrote:


5. Not everything needs a sound. The sound when reaching full sprint speed is unnecessary, for example..
This sound is necessary, as it tells you when you'll be able to use shoulder charge and/or slide.
.
Kreig556 wrote:
NNMS MXMS wrote:


5. Not everything needs a sound. The sound when reaching full sprint speed is unnecessary, for example..


This sound is necessary, as it tells you when you'll be able to use shoulder charge and/or slide.
No. You have the visual indicator (blue lines that look sort of like the binary rifle unscoped reticle) that pops up to tell you that already.
Power weapon announcements are mostly to help drive the gameplay and encourage new players to be conscious of map control. Hitmark sounds though are a bit excessive.
That's ridiculous. When I was a little 10 year-old first playing Halo, it was obvious to me that controlling the map and power weapons was the key to winning. If I could figure it out back then, I'm sure new players these days can figure it out too. They don't need to treat new players like helpless people who have half a brain, thus need their hand held throughout the whole match. That's the mentality that brought us Halo 4, and the mentality that brings these useless features to Halo 5. Not once have I ever heard anybody complain that Halo is "too hard", not once.

So these power weapon announcements are silly. If they really must keep them, then put them in an optional playlist dedicated to new players. After 20 games or so, or once you reach a certain rank, you shouldn't be allowed to play in that playlist anymore. There, new players can have all this silly hand holding they want while leaving the rest of the game as it should be. There just isn't any fun if there isn't a challenge, right?
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2