• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Halo 5: Guardians |OT5| Is HaloGAF irrelevant now?

O

op_ivy

Fallen Xbot (cannot continue gaining levels in this class)
The ghost in the shell playlist is filled with scrubs. Which is good since I'm playing on a broken elite where everytime I jump I randomly punch and or go full ground pound or punch and start jumping.

BizzyBum said:
ABCDE was really impressive.
Click to expand...

Eh, really looked like spylce was playing badly. Lots of REALLY iffy plays, team killing rockets, terrible self nades, etc.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
GGs Splyce. Great series today. It's a shame Pro leagues structure doesn't ensure the best teams are in.

I look forward to Dreamhacks open finals though... I hope Oxygen and ABCDE stick together and make runs
 
G

Gnome Scat

Member
I think Team Skirmish needs some skill tuning, the last three games I've been in there's been a score difference of ~40.

Edit: Fourth game also had a really imbalanced result, 50-20. Map rotation for the four games were Mercy, Plaza, Mercy, Plaza, with the worst score disparity being on Mercy both times.
 
T

TCKaos

Member
Fahzgoolin said:
Here's some constructive complaining:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6YdPRyW0DA
Click to expand...

Just gonna leave these here.

TCKaos said:
ITT: "I don't care whether or not the game actually feels good to play from a player empowerment perspective."

And that's not a good thing. Sprint, in its modern form, could use tweaking, sure, but to suggest that it should be removed or that you should just move as fast as you sprint is just absurd. Sprinting is an incredibly important facet of control granted to players to make them feel empowered - as are assassinations, or ground pounds, or Spartan charging.

Like, reading over all of this, it sounds a lot like that argument a few threads back where a bunch of objectively bad people were arguing that Spartan charges are OP and needed to be nerfed or removed. It's something so well telegraphed that you're only getting charged if the guy gets the drop on you (punishing you for a lack of situational awareness) or they were just terrible and couldn't evade the charge in time (punishing you for just being really bad).

Take it from one of the three or four people in the company that uses the Spartan charge: you're really only getting hit by it if you're shit or drop the ball.

In this iteration of the game, if you can't chase some guy that's sprinting and kill him you're either not trying hard enough or you're dropping the ball. If you shoot them they slow down, if they sprint you KNOW they don't have their shields back, and if you have situational awareness you're going to know where they ran off to. Kill times are fast enough that if you're letting somebody sprint out of your engagements and you're not in a position to pursue them and clean up your kill then you got outplayed. And if you're getting outplayed by shit players, then what does that say about you?
Click to expand...

TCKaos said:
No, because directly empowering a player doesn't necessarily satisfy them or give them the actual sensation of being empowered. Some good examples in both directions that we're all familiar with include the Concussion Rifle and the Focus Rifle: the Concussion Rifle felt like a weak piece of shit in Reach and 4 because it had terrible graphical feedback and sound design, but it killed people in two hits, so it was actually a pretty powerful weapon. The Focus Rifle was a terrible weapon that sounded horrifying, creating a massive dissonance in the damage it appeared to do and the damage it actually did.

Removing the ability to sprint would create a similar dissonance: "As a super soldier, I should be able to run really fast." It feels good to run really fast. Also your stick deflection idea doesn't follow because 99% of people that play video games are accustomed to maximizing stick deflection for standard movement speeds. That's a cross genre and nearly cross medium mechanical norm that you're not going to abate anytime soon, even with attached bells and whistles. You're going to have people fumbling around and accidentally charging and sliding when they don't mean to.

Similarly, if you're unable to check your flanks or take lateral movement options because you're sprinting then that reflects poorly on player skill rather than the sprinting mechanic. It's not like sprinting changes your FOV or motion tracker, and it's not like you can't stop sprinting.
Click to expand...

TCKaos said:
To your first point, players have a specific expectation as to the physical expression of movement in a given context. The setting and tone of Halo as being an ostensibly grounded science fiction action game, players expect to have their need for increased speed be met with a mechanic functionally identical to sprinting. In this instance the sprinting mechanic serves the same function as the coconut effect. Players expect to be able to move quickly by sprinting in FPS games set in a grounded setting. Even if we suggest that a Spartan should be able to move at the speed that they sprint at in-game with their weapons up with no detriment to their capacity to aim, it still doesn't follow that they could also sprint, which would in turn be faster still, and when combined with the player expectation as to how their agency in that decision is supposed to manifest itself, that's not exactly a reason to remove it.

It's equally important to note that from a design perspective that the illusion of empowerment is just as if not more important than empowerment itself, since the thing that players engage with the most is the sensation of their own avatar's actions and perceptions in the context of their surroundings. It doesn't matter if you're actually empowered if it doesn't actually feel empowering to be empowered. It's like the design equivalent of body dysmorphia. This is much easier to point out in table top games, such as Savage Worlds or my own DBZ RPG. In some games you can increase your die type or the number of dice you roll by leveling up, even if doing so gives you a disadvantage or no significant advantage. In Savage Worlds, the larger your skill die is (ie: eight sides versus four sides) the less likely it is that you'll get to roll that die again by landing on the largest side (eight instead of four). It doesn't matter though, since players feel better about rolling a larger die, even if it's statistically less likely that they'll get insanely high roll results. In my own game, it's possible to roll more than 10d10 at a time, even though you start getting massive diminishing returns after 7d10 or so, and this is done because players just feel better when they get to roll a bigger fistful of dice. It just feels more satisfying to do.

Sprinting in Halo is the digital equivalent of this. It's a mechanic that presents a trade-off that has various mechanical consequences (you can't shoot, you have to physically turn, your shields don't charge, getting shot will stop you, ect) but it still feels more satisfying to be granted the sensation of running at top speed, to huff and puff and have your gun sway in front of you, than to just walk really fast and have your gun bob a bit more than normal. Players have a specific reaction to sprinting because they have probably experienced it before, or know of the adrenaline that you get from having to sprint into combat or out of it or around it or even through it. Sprinting from cover to cover when you're playing paintball or airsoft feels exciting to do, and giving players the illusion of that sensation of excitement is incredibly important to making sure that they actually enjoy the experience of playing and that it satisfies them. I'm not even sure how to explain this because of how thread-bare an explanation of this has to be to get the point across.

To your second, how much of Super Mario 64 did you cautiously walk through? How much of Halo: Combat Evolved did you spend without the maximum deflection on your left stick? Or games like Fable, or Assassin's Creed, or Shadow of Mordor, or Doom, or Call of Duty, or literally any other game that features movement in 3D space as a mechanic? Do you expect players in tense situations to not max out their deflection while trying to move, or do you expect them to not accidentally ruin their strafe because they maxed out their deflection and slid or charged instead of crouched?

To the third, there's nothing intrinsically stopping players from disengaging sprint and checking their corners or their flanks. There's nothing stopping players from exercising a modicum of situation awareness and not sprinting through a corridor full of doorways, or through an open field between two pieces of cover. If you're sprinting through high danger areas with blatant disregard to your own well-being then that's a case of a player not having adequate awareness or decision making skills.

And no, I'm not equating mechanical distaste with player skill, but the objections you're raising can be mostly if not completely circumvented with better situational awareness.

EDIT: Straight up if you think spartan charge is OP then you're just a BK. Not even a hint of sarcasm. It's super not broken, easily telegraphed, and easily avoidable. Maybe if you guys actually used it more you'd know. "Oh no, he's running right at me! I better lazily limp off to the right because for whatever reason I don't maximize the deflection of my movement stick and-"

You only get hit with Spartan charges if you're not paying attention (in which case you had it coming) or you're not shooting the guy (who can't charge if he's getting shot, and if by some miracle he does you can shoot him before he can shoot you, because he has to exit the animation before he can respond, in which case you got outplayed by a guy that was literally running right at you).

PPS: These "you"s are general.
Click to expand...
 
S

Sai

Member
Missed out on those Allegiance skins during my hiatus. My collection is irritatingly incomplete. Any chance of them going back up any time soon?
 
O

op_ivy

Fallen Xbot (cannot continue gaining levels in this class)
Gave up on the elite bumper repair. The replacement piece was sliding around so I aligned it the best I could and super glued it in place. Rb worked fine, but left was off slightly leading to a continuous button press. I decided this morning, fuck it, broke the lb off and mapped a paddle to jump. Now I just need to adjust :/
 
P

Prinz Eugn

Member
I'm going to write this without re-reading Kaos's posts, so this will be fun to see how they compare!

Fahzgoolin said:
Here's some constructive complaining:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6YdPRyW0DA
Click to expand...

That video is pretty dumb. By which I mean, the premise of the video is flawed.

You are not forced to sprint at all. It's a choice. They did not remove the ability to walk. Sprint is a reasonably interesting choice since it provides a choice between offensive ability and mobility. You can move and shoot, or move faster but not be able to shoot. You can be careful or you can rush. This is a pretty intuitive tradeoff for most adult hoomans. For example, you can take the risk and sprint to get into a better position before your opponents, or you can walk up guns up ready in case they got there first. Oh man, they got first shots in and you died since you were sprinting? Or they got there first and bounced a nade into your face? Tough shit, you made a bad choice for that particular situation and got appropriately fucked.

Clamber is a little different. Sprint doesn't affect traversability (just speed of locomotion) but clamber does. Essentially, anywhere you could get with sprint you could get to by walking, but you can't crouch jump everywhere you can clamber. However, anywhere you could crouch jump in older games, you can crouch jump now. The difference with clamber is twofold: 1) you can clamber instead of more complex jumps, which is easier (the tradeoff being you remove your offensive ability), and 2) you can get to new places. You as the player now have more choices: Should I try the crouch, which I might whiff, or should I just clamber and risk not being able to fight back? Is getting up to that high point worth putting my gun down and looking at a wall first? *

Having more choices is generally considered to be a good thing in a game, to the point where the claim has been made that games can be defined as a "series of interesting decisions." This perspective is especially pertinent in the context of serious competitive games. Sprint and clamber as basic mechanics give you more choices. This should make for a more interesting game.

Why, then, doesn't it feel like a more interesting game?

I think there are two major factors, both revolving around factors influencing the choice or not to use an ability. One, the maps themselves remove far too much ambiguity on which choices are better, and two, the mechanics of the abilities themselves do not provide a distinct enough trade-off so you use them all the time instead of strategically.

So the maps. They are poo-poo garbage. I'm going to focus on clamber since sprint is a whole other thing and has been done to death. The video made the implicit assumption that because clamber exists, the maps had to have all the jumps heightened to require clamber. But, obviously they didn't have to since the player character can still jump as before. The map designers chose to stick in clamber only jumps all over the goddamn place. This is the real problem with clamber in my opinion; it's required for map movement waaay too often. It's no longer an interesting decision when 99% of the time the optimum strategy is to do it one way. The fix would be to provide alternate paths for the same destinations. Be fast but vulnerable for the clamber, or be ready to fight but slow for the crouch jump.

Now for the second factor: the mechanics of the abilities do not give players an interesting enough choice in and of themselves. While I think sprint could be made more interesting, by making sprinting have a higher penalty in some way, I think overall it's pretty reasonable. Clamber is again the real challenge. Clambering is too advantageous not to do so much of the time in the current implementation. It needs a distinct tradeoff, for example taking longer, being really loud, using thrust power, causing damage, etc. Again, the decision isn't interesting because there are marginal penalties and huge advantages.

Imagine trying to get to an OS on a clamber-able/jumpable catwalk. You can crouch-jump onto a box, and then onto the catwalk, which is slow, or you can clamber directly up, which is much faster but makes you three-shot instead of four. Add in other players and suddenly it's and interesting, ambiguous decision, rather than "yep I have to clamber to get there so I guess I'll clamber ok cool"

TL;DR: The issue is not that you can do new things (sprint and clamber). The issues are that the way the maps are designed force you to do these new things, in situations where the old things would be better (like crouch jumps), and that the way the new things are designed lead to you using them constantly instead of strategically.

EDIT: Personally, I could take or leave clamber (even fixed clamber), but I feel it's worth examining what the real issues with it are, and what the potential for it is without the knee-jerk "I hate new things" attitude too many people have. Sprint I think is okay-ish for small maps but almost necessary for Big Team and Warzone. I remember, in 2008, wishing I could sprint on Valhalla.
 
S

Samurai G0SU

Member
The only ability i see them altering is clamber and making jumps more skillful with a heaviet reliance on crouch jumping.

Nah nvm lol i should ask myself what they will add.. '_'
 
FUNKNOWN iXi

FUNKNOWN iXi

Member
Fata1moose said:
I hate half measures like this, the experience should be consistent across the board. Either have sprint or don't.
Click to expand...
I don't think enabling sprint just for BTB and Warzone is a big deal at all. It helps alleviate the issue people have with Arena maps and gameplay, allowing 343 to create smaller maps without having to accommodate sprint. And right now the experiences couldn't be more different between Arena 4v4's and BTB/Warzone considering you spawn with BR's etc. and have vehicles in play anyway.
 
J

Juan

Member
Prinz Eugn said:
TL;DR: The issue is not that you can do new things (sprint and clamber). The issues are that the way the maps are designed force you to do these new things, in situations where the old things would be better (like crouch jumps), and that the way the new things are designed lead to you using them constantly instead of strategically.

EDIT: Personally, I could take or leave clamber (even fixed clamber), but I feel it's worth examining what the real issues with it are, and what the potential for it is without the knee-jerk "I hate new things" attitude too many people have. Sprint I think is okay-ish for small maps but almost necessary for Big Team and Warzone. I remember, in 2008, wishing I could sprint on Valhalla.
Click to expand...

Good and quick video about this whole post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6YdPRyW0DA

Again, I will argue that Sprint isn't really the problem, Climber isn't really one too, it's just the impact those abilities had on the level design 343 used to accommodate them to the Halo formula.

Sprint never felt like a problem (to me btw) in Halo 4 or Reach since it didn't really impacted the level design. In Halo 5, you're severely penalized if you don't use them, which really change the way you play Halo, or at least, the way you're forced to play.
 
Y

YourExWife

Member
Juan said:
Good and quick video about this whole post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6YdPRyW0DA

Again, I will argue that Sprint isn't really the problem, Climber isn't really one too, it's just the impact those abilities had on the level design 343 used to accommodate them to the Halo formula.

Sprint never felt like a problem (to me btw) in Halo 4 or Reach since it didn't really impacted the level design. In Halo 5, you're severely penalized if you don't use them, which really change the way you play Halo, or at least, the way you're forced to play.
Click to expand...

You realize his post was in response to the video, right?
 
O

op_ivy

Fallen Xbot (cannot continue gaining levels in this class)
"Fixed"
UzdmuLc.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks ms

It's literally insane how awesome the inside of the elite is... then you see this cheap ads flimsy plastic thing for the bumpers and just scratch your head
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
Smh at these tired ass Pro-sprint arguments.

When it comes to playing on maps designed around sprint, your options are:

1: travel at the speed a path was designed for, but sacrifice your ability to engage enemies with 360 degrees of awareness

2: preserve your awareness by traveling at less than ideal speed- increasing your exposure.

I fail to understand how being forced to make this "choice" is an interesting in terms of combat or liberating in terms of player agency.

In fact, it makes conflicts less dynamic. previously, players were expected to be have good movement AND gunskill , SIMULTANEOUSLY, this game actively separates the two. How is a gunfight where a) 1 player punishes a sprinter more interesting than one where b) two players encountered each other guns ready? Option b will be a display of skill. Option a will be a display of opportunism, and likely defensive utilization of SAs. Yes they've incorporated a tradeoff with sprint- but that doesn't mean the sprint mechanic is superior to the alternative.

Sprint DOES NOT empower the player. The current implementation inarguably takes power away from the player. players were once able to move at top speed, in all directions, and shoot at the same time. Now they can only move at top speed in one direction, and they can't shoot while doing it. The result is a less empowered player who is in a constant state of compromise (either sacrificinging their ability to shoot or their ability to traverse areas at the intended speed at all times).

Also why are we regurgitating arguments like 'we should sprint because of the lore' or ' if you don't like sprint it's because you aren't good'. The lore shouldn't influence game design- game design should influence the lore. The best players in the world hate sprint and its impact on gameplay- so it's def not a lack of skill/awareness issue.
 
J

jem0208

Member
Juan said:
Good and quick video about this whole post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6YdPRyW0DA

Again, I will argue that Sprint isn't really the problem, Climber isn't really one too, it's just the impact those abilities had on the level design 343 used to accommodate them to the Halo formula.

Sprint never felt like a problem (to me btw) in Halo 4 or Reach since it didn't really impacted the level design. In Halo 5, you're severely penalized if you don't use them, which really change the way you play Halo, or at least, the way you're forced to play.
Click to expand...
Sprint had a bigger impact on map design in 4 than 5.


Also Trup1aya, you're completely misinterpreting Kaos' posts if you think it's just a lore argument.
 
J

Juan

Member
jem0208 said:
Sprint had a bigger impact on map design in 4 than 5.


Also Trup1aya, you're completely misinterpreting Kaos' posts if you think it's just a lore argument.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree.

We can have a look on this if you want using the MCC, but it's not hard to tell it wasn't the case. Halo 4 maps could be easily played without having to sprint (but it was helpful for sure, don't misunderstand me). The same can't be said with Halo 5.

Sprint had a real impact in Halo 4 in term of gameplay since you could run while having your shield recharging.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
jem0208 said:
Sprint had a bigger impact on map design in 4 than 5.


Also Trup1aya, you're completely misinterpreting Kaos' posts if you think it's just a lore argument.
Click to expand...

You glossed over my whole post if you think that's the only argument I addressed.

I addressed several of his arguments. Lore and setting Was one of his arguments. Followed by an argument that FPS player EXPECT sprint mechanics. Followed by arguments about empowering the player. Followed by arguments that opponents of sprint lack skill and/or awareness - all of which are terrible arguments- either with no empirical data to back them up or they are objectively false.
 
Ozzy Onya A2Z

Ozzy Onya A2Z

Member
FUNKNOWN iXi said:
-1 and 23. I don't think I've ever seen anyone do worse while legitimately trying lol.

EDIT:
I refuse to believe anyone in this thread would go -1 and 23 :b
Click to expand...

Not worse but I will admit having a donut for kills when actually trying in one game. If memory is still working at the ripe ol' age of 40 odd it was the only game in my entire Halo history of not having 1 kill.
Yes I was actually trying to play and no there
wasn't any quitters.
 
Deputy Moonman

Deputy Moonman

Member
Anyone else think splitting the Halo 6 campaign into 2 play-styles could work? You basically have an even number of levels where you play as the MC with no armor abilities, mixed with an equal number of levels where you play as a different character/s with armor abilities? It would be pretty ground breaking imo. Then you follow suit with matchmaking having both versions? 343 could please fans of the old as well as the new? I mean why not? Let 343 continue their vision for halo while also keeping the traditional game intact. At the very least, it's an intriguing idea. Halo is known for introducing new ideas and features. 2 games within a game might be pretty lit.

It's too late for Halo 6, but maybe a Halo 7?
FUNKNOWN iXi said:
EDIT:
I refuse to believe anyone in this thread would go -1 and 23 :b
Click to expand...
haha #believe
 
J

jizzlobber

Member
Today when driving in the work truck I noticed someone pull up next to me wearing a black corporate style shirt with a Halo logo on it... it wasn't really the halo logo we all know but it looked kind of similar, I couldn't see it well enough to notice the fine details but it looked like this (dodgy fresh paint knock up).

cHI7kI7.jpg


I know this is out there but I couldn't find a company with that name on google or anything.
and I am in a semi regional part of Australia...

but i'm putting this out there just in case, E3 is around the corner and 343 has something to show that isn't halo 6, a local Microsoft rep perhaps? new shirts issued? wearing it early?

yeah I doubt it but it's fun to speculate anyway.

this all means we are getting a new halo game simply called Halo, and it will be inspired (not a remake again) by the original to attract to those lost fans??

I think it will be a hit... can't wait to see it at E3 time.

EDIT- it might be these guys actually http://www.gohalo.com.au/
:( :( :( :(
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
Deputy Moonman said:
Anyone else think splitting the Halo 6 campaign into 2 play-styles could work? You basically have an even number of levels where you play as the MC with no armor abilities, mixed with an equal number of levels where you play as a different character/s with armor abilities? It would be pretty ground breaking imo. Then you follow suit with matchmaking having both versions? 343 could please fans of the old as well as the new? I mean why not? Let 343 continue their vision for halo while also keeping the traditional game intact. At the very least, it's an intriguing idea. Halo is known for introducing new ideas and features. 2 games within a game might be pretty lit.

It's too late for Halo 6, but maybe a Halo 7?

haha #believe
Click to expand...

I think they'd be better off just having a spinoff game. That way they could test the waters without having the population split between two different mechanical styles in a single game.

Just give me a Blue Team game that's takes places Before Reach- classic mechanics, enemies, art and sandbox.

Give me a req free Firefight, and Warzone + BTB w/ maps designed w/o sprint and clamber.

Then the next game could have all of 343s new stuff, and we could see once and for all how the market reacts.

I know how I would react if I didn't have to play a game who's mechanics had me in a constant state of compromise and I didn't have to deal with promethean enemies.

Banderas.gif
 
S

Samurai G0SU

Member
You know what they'll do at e3? They will announce a NEW
TellTale
HALO game!

They always talk about the story of the halo universe and whatnot, why not do that?
i wouldn't buy it though
 
Deputy Moonman

Deputy Moonman

Member
Trup1aya said:
I think they'd be better off just having a spinoff game. That way they could test the waters without having the population split between two different mechanical styles in a single game.

Just give me a Blue Team game that's takes places Before Reach- classic mechanics, enemies, art and sandbox.

Give me a req free Firefight, and Warzone + BTB w/ maps designed w/o sprint and clamber.

Then the next game could have all of 343s new stuff, and we could see once and for all how the market reacts.

I know how I would react if I didn't have to play a game who's mechanics had me in a constant state of compromise and I didn't have to deal with promethean enemies.

Banderas.gif
Click to expand...
I would be okay with this as well. It will always be a what if, but I'd love to know if an old style halo game could become a huge success again. So many people act like it's not possible but I disagree.
 
S

Samurai G0SU

Member
What i really want this year from 343i is the inevitable Scorpio update for Halo 5 Guardians
(nobody cares about hws2 expansion, sorry not sorry)


I need some new juice to make me play halo more ... But then again, ill be busy on the new slate of games this holiday. This is so conflicting with my depression!
 
Z

ZeezbruhTV

Member
Got tired of Halo 5's aiming in less than 2 hours into the stream, so I headed to mcc and get smg starts. Just turned my box off lol.

This HW2 reveal is going to be straight zzzzzzzz
 
B

belushy

Banned
OT but watching Destiny 2 makes me want Shadowrun again.... Bungie could probably make a good re-imagining of that game. Though I don't trust them with bloom :p
 
F

Fata1moose

Banned
jem0208 said:
I don't think a classic style Halo would be any more or any less successful than new Halo.
Click to expand...

I think you'd be wrong. People love nostalgia, just look at the excitement that BF1 and CoD WWII generated after going back to more traditional settings. I don't think a spinoff is necessary though, Halo 6 could find a happy medium, I'm guessing 343i will probably just double down on Halo 5 as it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Halo Infinite Firefight Announced - December 5th
News 2
98
7K
twilo99 replied
Halo Infinite | Live Stream Recap | Jan 2024
23
1K
RPS37 replied
Halo Infinite passes Destiny 2 on Xbox's most played games list
News 2 3
106
7K
Tomeru replied
Killer Klowns from Outer Space: The Game launches June 4
Rumor Community
1
469
kiphalfton replied
  • Locked
Sketchy twitter rumor- Halo no longer considered a top flagship at Xbox, next Halo game has half the budget of Infinite, will determine fate of series
2 3 4 5
219
16K
Angry_Megalodon replied
Top Bottom