Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Halo, its Change and its Haters

OP The Kishinev

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. ...
  9. 10

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

You do realise that the Halo game most "purists" and competitive players hold on a pedestal is HCE right? Spoilers: There was no BR in HCE.

There was also no BR in Reach and that was very far down the list of complaints most people had.
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
And...?

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

You do realise that the Halo game most "purists" and competitive players hold on a pedestal is HCE right? Spoilers: There was no BR in HCE.

There was also no BR in Reach and that was very far down the list of complaints most people had.
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
That's...irrelevant to his point.

People hated Reach for a lot of reasons. The primary changing from a BR to a DMR wasn't one of them.
Generally in life you cant get anywhere without accepting change. Those who don't stagnate and are forgotten.
Yep, totally true.

This is why they change the rules of soccer every year and different, new leagues like the XFL crushed the NFL. This is also why chess and monopoly are obsolete.

Wait...
Video games aren't as timeless as sports are, so there's that.
Why? Because you say so?
No, because they just aren't. I hate sports and I can say that Video games will never be as timeless as something like Soccer or Chess because those things are grounded in reality and they are literally parts of some cultures. I'm Canadian and I see Hockey stuff everywhere because it's ingrained into Canada.

You might have more fun with Halo than you would Chess (I know I sure do) but Halo will never be as timeless as Chess.
So you are saying video games need change while sports do not because sports are ingrained in culture?

I disagree. I think sports don't change often because they play well as they are and there is no point in changing them simply for the sake of change or "modernisation".

Gaming is no different(barring jumps in technology). You don't need to look any further than PC gaming to see this. Games like CS GO and Starcraft 2 play very, very close to their original versions. They are still incredibly popular. It is only in the console gaming space that we see this "check box phobia" were every dev is seemingly terrified of having a game that plays differently from other games in it's genre.

You argue that design decisions like the ones 343 are making are preventing stagnation. I would argue that they are creating stagnation. Genre wide stagnation.
I agree that the whole genre is stagnating, but these mechanics are new to Halo and they all work differently than they do in other games.
Why do you feel the genre is stagnating? Do you not agree that every game using the same mechanics(whether they are slightly altered or not) may be playing into the stagnation?
I do agree that when games start to play the same that's playing into it. However, Halo 5 plays differently than any shooter I've played.
While a lot of other people feel it plays too similar to other games.

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

You do realise that the Halo game most "purists" and competitive players hold on a pedestal is HCE right? Spoilers: There was no BR in HCE.

There was also no BR in Reach and that was very far down the list of complaints most people had.
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
And...?
When your game has armor lock, it's hard to focus on anything except for that.

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

You do realise that the Halo game most "purists" and competitive players hold on a pedestal is HCE right? Spoilers: There was no BR in HCE.

There was also no BR in Reach and that was very far down the list of complaints most people had.
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
And...?
When your game has armor lock, it's hard to focus on anything except for that.
MLG settings didn't have armour lock. Or even sprint or bloom by the end. And people still rarely said anything about the lack of a BR.
Generally in life you cant get anywhere without accepting change. Those who don't stagnate and are forgotten.
Yep, totally true.

This is why they change the rules of soccer every year and different, new leagues like the XFL crushed the NFL. This is also why chess and monopoly are obsolete.

Wait...
Video games aren't as timeless as sports are, so there's that.
Why? Because you say so?
No, because they just aren't. I hate sports and I can say that Video games will never be as timeless as something like Soccer or Chess because those things are grounded in reality and they are literally parts of some cultures. I'm Canadian and I see Hockey stuff everywhere because it's ingrained into Canada.

You might have more fun with Halo than you would Chess (I know I sure do) but Halo will never be as timeless as Chess.
So you are saying video games need change while sports do not because sports are ingrained in culture?

I disagree. I think sports don't change often because they play well as they are and there is no point in changing them simply for the sake of change or "modernisation".

Gaming is no different(barring jumps in technology). You don't need to look any further than PC gaming to see this. Games like CS GO and Starcraft 2 play very, very close to their original versions. They are still incredibly popular. It is only in the console gaming space that we see this "check box phobia" were every dev is seemingly terrified of having a game that plays differently from other games in it's genre.

You argue that design decisions like the ones 343 are making are preventing stagnation. I would argue that they are creating stagnation. Genre wide stagnation.
I agree that the whole genre is stagnating, but these mechanics are new to Halo and they all work differently than they do in other games.
Why do you feel the genre is stagnating? Do you not agree that every game using the same mechanics(whether they are slightly altered or not) may be playing into the stagnation?
I do agree that when games start to play the same that's playing into it. However, Halo 5 plays differently than any shooter I've played.
While a lot of other people feel it plays too similar to other games.
That's just their opinion, just like me thinking it plays differently is my own.

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

You do realise that the Halo game most "purists" and competitive players hold on a pedestal is HCE right? Spoilers: There was no BR in HCE.

There was also no BR in Reach and that was very far down the list of complaints most people had.
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
And...?
When your game has armor lock, it's hard to focus on anything except for that.
MLG settings didn't have armour lock. Or even sprint or bloom by the end. And people still rarely said anything about the lack of a BR.
Well we did have the lore to explain why it wasn't there right? That must count for something, not to mention Reach was more of a spin-off than a continuation of the story. People were probably more willing to let it slide just because it was a prequel spin-off.

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

You do realise that the Halo game most "purists" and competitive players hold on a pedestal is HCE right? Spoilers: There was no BR in HCE.

There was also no BR in Reach and that was very far down the list of complaints most people had.
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
And...?
When your game has armor lock, it's hard to focus on anything except for that.
MLG settings didn't have armour lock. Or even sprint or bloom by the end. And people still rarely said anything about the lack of a BR.
Well we did have the lore to explain why it wasn't there right? That must count for something, not to mention Reach was more of a spin-off than a continuation of the story. People were probably more willing to let it slide just because it was a spin-off.
Or, the far more likely explanation: people don't really care.

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

You do realise that the Halo game most "purists" and competitive players hold on a pedestal is HCE right? Spoilers: There was no BR in HCE.

There was also no BR in Reach and that was very far down the list of complaints most people had.
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
And...?
When your game has armor lock, it's hard to focus on anything except for that.
MLG settings didn't have armour lock. Or even sprint or bloom by the end. And people still rarely said anything about the lack of a BR.
Well we did have the lore to explain why it wasn't there right? That must count for something, not to mention Reach was more of a spin-off than a continuation of the story. People were probably more willing to let it slide just because it was a spin-off.
Or, the far more likely explanation: people don't really care.
I'm sure that the forums had some posts saying they want the BR back. But you're right, the majority of Halo players don't care.
I agree. personally I been a fan of changes, keeps things fresh. and I like the br, but you can be competitive and still have fun, I paid 60 bucks, not guna just use the one same gun ya know lol
I've already said it before, increasing base movement speed is not a good enough replacement for sprint to "please both worlds" because it will either be too fast or too slow. Sprint provides a way to toggle between two speeds.

I'm curious about that. Let's say sprint, for simplicities sake, makes you move 25% faster than base speed:

Base: 100%
Sprint: 125%

So your point is that if we moved at a constant 125%, we'd move too fast and cause further enlargement of maps, or lack necessary control due to the limitations of controllers. By sprint forcing toggle between the two, we move at an average of say, 113% base speed over the course of the match (assuming equal sprinting and non-sprint times).

Is there anything stopping us then, from moving base speed up to 115%? If Halo 3/Reach show us anything (which is debatable as they are arguably the slowest of Bungie's titles), it's that they operate well at around this speed on normal maps ("Normal" referring to MLG in Reach's case, as other maps were designed for sprint). So we wouldn't even necessarily have to upscale in order to compensate.

I'm suggesting this because keeping sprint is an even worse compromise than changing movement speed, due to not really being a compromise. Sure getting the right speed is finicky, but it's a lot less detrimental to other elements of the game than sprint tends to be.

Immersion is a huge factor for a lot of people, it's not a dealbreaker for me but I can see why they like it.

Source? I've got nothing against immersion, I just personally believe quality of gameplay trumps subjective factors. Then again I suppose quality of gameplay could be considered subjective. Hmmm....

I said "some" people on here don't like change. That does not automatically mean everybody who dislikes Halo 5 hates change.

Indeed. The unfortunate problem is that it's impossible to discern to whom you address when you make posts like that. Best to assume that everyone is going to take it personally, and adjust what you say accordingly.

I do my best to not make statements about the community at large simply because there's no one group that doesn't have a million splinter groups, all of which identify under the main. Referring to one means referring to all, and there are too many differences for that to be possible.

About Smart Scope, you can't deny that most of it's hate comes from how it looks.

Absolutely. I can't necessarily blame them for that either though. There is a certain stigma involved with ADS mechanics in relation to modern gaming. Halo, as of now, is one of the last franchises going strong that hasn't totally conformed to "modern" mechanics, and I can hardly blame people for getting antsy when 343i pushes the bill further and further.

I don't have a huge problem with ADS beyond it being available on every weapon.

A 10-20% increase in speed is not going to alleviate the issues of being on foot on a large map, it's not a substitute for sprint.

What scale of map are we talking here? BTB maps? Or large 4v4 maps like Complex? The latter wouldn't exist if sprint wasn't in the game, the former has movement options such as teleporters, mongeese and mancannons for alternative and faster transportation.

On BTB maps where those things aren't options I can understand a want/need for an alternative movement mechanic. Unfortunately, Halo isn't limited to BTB, and what is considered for that gamemode must be considered in its effects for all gamemodes (within terms of base mechanics).

Just a note, I don't just love sprint, I'm just talking about the other ideas to replace it. Large maps present issues when you move really slow and sprint helps this.

This is part of why I'm in favour of thrusters. I've said for a couple of years now that it could very well replace sprint, and do so in a fashion that's less detrimental to the gameplay.

Of course changes would need to be made on cooldown times to make it viable, but it's an option.

A 1 second build up toggled by a button, as opposed to slowly building up over a few seconds of holding the stick forward.

So, sprint? ;D

No but really, that's certainly a viable option so long as weapons remain at the ready.

The BR is being held on a pedestal. If 343 removed it while keeping other weapons to replace it, people would freak out.

To be fair, people will react like that regardless of whatever weapon is taken out. Remember when we first saw the new (not SPNKR) rocket launcher? People were practically rioting. There's no doubt people will get defensive of the weapon, though. Iconic designs do harbour some sense of character that people like.

Personally, like I said, it could be a cotton candy gun for all I care, so long as it's a precision weapon with enough versatility to be an option regardless of the situation (without being dominant in any). I imagine much of the competitive community feels the same way.

What you described with even starts is exactly what the AR does in Halo 5.

Indeed, but with the addition of a scope that it doesn't need. The AR doesn't need to compete at medium range, that wasn't it's purpose. I'm all for having an Automatic weapon that does, but not all of them should be capable of doing it.

If 343i are insitent on having a scoped AR I can understand that. I was pushing for the ODST SMG myself to fill the scoped automatic niche, but I'd be fine with the AR. If that's the case, however, they ought to remove the scope from the SMG. Have the AR serve close-mid range, have the SMG fill the semi-power weapon roll for point blank engagements.

There's no reason to put a scope on everything. (Unless you're linda)

Again, this isn't propaganda, this is me telling it how it is about people who think the BR should be the only weapon in the game.

I've yet to see one person who thinks the BR should be the only weapon in the game.

Then again if I did see that, I'd probably ignore them... so that's probably why.

Also again, if you aren't opposed to the weapon balance that Halo 5 provides, then you have nothing to be mad about because you're not a blind hater.
I know you don't refer to me specifically (pretty sure we've had this conversation before) but like I said, when sweeping generalizations are made you have to assume you're referring to everyone, and then consider how the people you consider to be sensible might take it.

Anyway, have a good day :)
There was no BR in halo reach because it wasn't invented until halo 2
Yeah, about that...
As I've said before...change only works if it's 'fun'...like Halo 1/2/3/odst/reach all had changes in the fps games and yet they were all fun. Halo 4, 5 made drastic changes and there was nothing fun about either of them. What concerns me is that some people to think that graphics = game-play...which is obviously not true, which is why the H5 beta failed. 343i need to make some serious changes if they want to impress anyone since barely anyone is hyped for H5 multiplayer. I suspect H5 multiplayer will end up doing just as bad as H4 but the story will get a fair amount of attention.
SilentA98 wrote:
This is part of why I'm in favour of thrusters. I've said for a couple of years now that it could very well replace sprint, and do so in a fashion that's less detrimental to the gameplay.

Of course changes would need to be made on cooldown times to make it viable, but it's an option.
This is actually a pretty interesting idea. Thrusters would work in any direction instead of just forward. Adding a cooldown would prevent spamming it. Sound and animation would make the user light up like a candle (similarly to the current implementation of ground pound). And shooting the thrusters while active could be changed to ignite the gas, possibly dealing damage.
From now on, I and everyone else will post a link to this thread on any post that talks anti-change.
Halo 5 is fine. People in this community need to stop being a bunch of babies. If anyone wants to continue to see Halo games made in the future, everyone needs to get along like we were all taught from school and watching sesame street. If you do not like Halo5 that's fine, but don't sit their on you're little throne of mlg mtn dew quick scoping,saying that this is a bad game. The original Halo players can get with the times or stay on og Xbox or MCC as far as I'm concerned.
to say halo feels unlike other shooters in the genre with the inclusion in sprint is like saying new disney feels unlike pixar. Sure that may be the case, but what is a further departure? traditional disney or pixar-esque disney? people can argue modernity all they like but aside from graphical integrity, responsiveness and greater levels of processing many of the changes argued for a "modern" cause are simply a change in style, a departure but not changing or evolving a la augmenting what already exists.

the direction of the aesthetics and mechanics are changing, but what constitutes that these changes are the superior one? aesthetics are a harder issue, but for mechanics there is a reason why they wanted to get a pro opinion...their inability to find some form of balance or uniqueness in the halo 4 sandbox is a testament to that.
it's funny you even said press of a button versus speed building up. your issue is acceleration not speed...funny how if you go into any competitive forum they're always wanting faster player acceleration, slow acceleration makes the game feel sluggish, faster acceleration allows players like me to strafe you out.

people agreeing with the 343 changes seem to revere speed of the game as one of the key things they want...yet some have defended randomness (AA's off spawn, ordnance, perks, bloom) larger maps (usually BTB), map openness, flatter maps, sprint (a mechanic designed primarily for escaping), the sprint, clamber, thruster combo, narrower field of view and ARs off spawn...it's some sort of weird paradox where i want meaningful changes which expand and innovate gameplay as well as faster and more predictive, deep gameplay, arguing against people who want something closer to other shooters that allows for gameplay stagnation both by being non-unique as well as slow with the only change being in the form of gimmicks which don't offer for more variance in gameplay and i'm told i'm the one who doesn't want change, uniqueness or balance, what a weird turn of events these last 3 years have been
Halo can't grow as a game without change, honestly I really did enjoy Halo4 I feel 343 Industries is doing a great job with its subtle changes.
Though Halo5: Guardians seems like it will renew the Fandom of halo if done well.
Gemoshi wrote:
Halo can't grow as a game without change, honestly I really did enjoy Halo4 I feel 343 Industries is doing a great job with its subtle changes.
Though Halo5: Guardians seems like it will renew the Fandom of halo if done well.
I enjoyed my time with Halo 4 as well. I mean, it could have been MUCH better in the multiplayer department, but the single player was my favorite of the whole series. It really shows you how far gone Halo 4 was when you play Halo 5.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. ...
  9. 10