Halo |OT2| Hyper-Athletic Speed And Mass And Weight and Power

There have been no forge questions in any of these interviews, I would've liked to get some little tease on the next evolution of that.
They aren't blow their load on every feature in Halo 4 in one day/event. Forge's time (whether it's in the game or not) will come.
It's not about where they're coming from. Will it matter if there's another wave of Snowbound, Isolation, and Sandtrap? I think it is going to be highly interesting how 343 develops these maps. Going back to creating MP maps that will be designed for specific gametypes, be it CTF, Assault, Plots, or whatever they have new is a definite road to follow. Felt like most maps we've seen in H3/Reach were more slayer oriented than anything else.
I totally agree, but it's more about appreciating the maps' unique personality. In Reach the maps almost felt like bits and pieces of the same map, since the locale never changed. It is not exciting to me when you go into multiplayer and don't get to experience unique locations that aren't in campaign.

PS. I enjoyed the maps you listed. :_P
New to me.

"Built on the foundations of the Halo: Reach engine, it'll be super-powered to take advantage of the next wave of hardware."​

Their headline doesn't really match that description. Halo 4 is also built on the "foundations" of the Reach engine in the sense that the Halo engine was the basis, with huge parts of it rewritten, updated, replaced, etc. Seems from that description Bungie is continuing the iteration on their technology just as they (and everyone else) already does.
If it is MMO, i doubt it runs on Reach iteration of Halo engine. Might share some tech of course... And of course i'm no expert on this stuff so don't take my word on it. Just doubting.
Maybe they're using Reach engine to prototype stuff? Halo 3 levels and stuff were prototyped with Halo 2 engine and Reach stuff was prototyped with Halo 3 engine.

EDIT as GhaleonEB said, Destiny engine might be based of Reach's engine.
Thought MS owned the Halo engine. But it may only be small bits and pieces from the engine, but I'll wait till we hear officially.
iirc they handed over the Blam! engine over to MS as it existed at the end of Reach dev.
They've been working on this engine for over a decade and have built so much into it and created so much new tech for it. Did you think they would just give it all up?
Ah, the nebulous "engine".

It's a non-story in a sense. Bungie would hardly be left sitting with 0 lines of code left when control transferred to MS.
And anyway, the crack Engineers at Bungie have a lot of that understanding in their head so there's going to be a base level of overlap.

I'm expecting that some folks, yet again, will not understand how engines are used and coded and take that Reach engine news and run stupid with it.
Welcome to Reach those click fest game sites.


Fallen Xbot (cannot continue gaining levels in this class)
more importantly, is this the first indication that it actually is for next-gen (something i've assumed)?
I don't think anybody posted it here, but someone sent me a link a few days ago.

My response:

Nothing new, sounds to me like they just read the Gamasutra interview with Hao Chen back in December. Pretty much every gaming engine is “built on the foundations of” the previous engine.

“For the first time we’re now shipping on multiple platforms, and then the new consoles are at least not far on the horizon.”

I get the impression Destiny will ship on the current consoles, but they’ll still be able to use the engine on the next-gen consoles. Thanks for the link, I’m just very skeptical of PSM3′s rumors.

Keep in mind Jaime Griesemer listed the following on his résumé, so this isn't really shocking new info:
"Unannounced Project - Designed and built multiple gameplay prototypes in a modified version of the Halo engine."


Fallen Xbot (cannot continue gaining levels in this class)
Just played a match of BTB heavies on Breakpoint. Surprisingly, I had a lot of fun. I wish that map showed up a bit more.. Its not perfect, buts its a lot better than other reach offerings.


NeoGAF's smiling token!
Not a bad idea actually. I like it.
Doesn't sound that crazy. Both systems were far from perfect.
Kind of messy thoughts but here is what I had in mind:

So I was thinking the Arena system would basically function the same, giving Bronze-Oynx as before based on Wins/Losses but your Numbered Rank could see more active gains by for example: Beating someone who is the same Rank as you but has more wins than you. Alongside that the ratings you receive at the end of every match could serve as a smaller(but still worthwhile) numbered rank boost based on whatever amount you receive.

If the players knew this I think it would cause them to be more motivated to try and get the "big win" over a tougher player(or group of players) knowing that getting a win such as that is that much more important than their average game and that they should in turn play more competitively.

I also see the numbered ranking system having more active gains and drops in this mix which would help to give a sense that ones rank is not 'stuck' permanently and is instead constantly updating based on how good you are currently.

Another thought I had regarding numbered ranks(in addition to the thing I'm talking about above, was):
Should one reach rank 50 they would be allowed to reset their rank similar to prestige(note I have no idea how prestige works, only thing that comes to mind!) but they would be instead for example be: 50, Rank 1. Thus they would still get matched up with better skilled players and they could repeat this to infinity until the competition is excruciatingly tough. Where they have earned their 50's, 50's, 50 by defeating other 50,'s, 50's. /xzibit
Apparently the Reach playlist update is now live and BTB requires DLC.

Get your DLC games while it's hot, it's probably a mistake.
Oh shit, playing some BTB in that case this afternoon.

He is already dead.

more importantly, is this the first indication that it actually is for next-gen (something i've assumed)?
My gut feeling has been that Bungie's new game will be for the next consoles. Obviously it's not coming out this year, and it seems like a new Xbox will come out next year, so I just don't see it happening on this generation of consoles.
Halo 4 Video Breakdown From TSquared

Stephen Johnson: A lot of people here who watched the video said it basically looks like the last Halo game, so I wanted to ask you if you saw any other things that stuck out as differences.

Tsquared: I think that there's a lot that stuck out, and mainly it's what 343 was saying. One thing that really stood out to me was the fact that -- I believe it was Josh Holmes who said they're going to be looking at the multiplayer aspects for the competitive community. He mentioned that they're going to be having competitive gaming in mind, which is the first time that they've necessarily even considered having the competitive aspects of Halo implemented into the game.

SJ: How would Halo have to be different in order for it to be competitive in that way?

T2: I think that it would have to have a lot more maps and an improved matchmaking ranking system. In the original launch we only saw probably two competitive maps in Countdown and Zealot. I know that from what I've been hearing, that they're not going to be using any of the past campaign maps in this upcoming multiplayer, so I'm pretty excited about that. I think that if they go back to recreating the old classic Halo maps into a map pack just like they did for Halo Reach and improve on those classic maps and lose the armor abilities while implementing a ranking system from one to fifty and maybe even a leaderboard, then we can see Halo 4 do some damage. Then maybe more than 100,00 people will be playing it after a year when it's released.

SJ: So other than that, if you were in charge of Halo's multiplayer, what improvements would you make?

T2: The first thing would be the ranking system, obviously. You want to improve that because of the fact that in Halo: Reach there was absolutely no rankings system. It was more of a credit system to unlock the armor. So they had the armory completion, and also I believe…there's two things. One's the armory completion and I forget the other thing. But there's not any kind of ranking system. So one person could go in that's played 100 rumble pit games and be matched up against someone who's only played one rumble pit game. So they did that for time constraint purposes, and they wanted the matchmaking system to be so fast, but I would much rather wait around for a quality Halo match then get matched up against someone who's never played the game before.

So, I think that's the number one problem there. Obviously you don't want to see any bloom, and you want to see the battle rifle back, which is great. I'm expecting armor loadouts obviously. The spread was in there but I don't want to see that in the actual multiplayer. I think that the armor lock was too overpowered and pretty frustrating, as well as the bloom. I think what happened was with Halo: Reach a lot of people were popping in the game for the first time and they were expecting maybe the battle rifle, but they weren't expecting the reticle to expand. So when people weren't dying and they didn't understand how to shoot, they just put the game down because it seemed like all the guns were nerfed. In Halo: Reach I really felt like I was playing paintball compared to taking over the world.

I think that if I was in charge of the multiplayer I would make sure that everything that they - you know, the default way to play Halo is what everyone plays from the first time they put in the disc, so I think the playlists have to be smart. People would get in and they'd play this game with a weak weapon that they didn't understand how to use in Halo Reach, and now if you start off everyone with a familiar weapon with the battle rifle and have a secondary like the assault rifle, I think people will immediately fall back in love with it as long as there's no bloom.

SJ: I know that 343 has said that they're going to explain exactly why it's Red vs. Blue spartans, so why do you think Red and Blue fight?

T2: You know, if it's Red vs. Blue, how come there's all these other possible team colors out there like orange and green and brown and pink?Halo 4 Vs Halo: Reach Comparison: The HUD

I'm not a big Halo book nerd. That's something that I want to do when I'm done with the completive aspects of Halo. I'd love to take my time out and read the books. But I honestly am pretty intrigued by the story. As long as they keep the hit boxes the same, and everything gravy like that, I think it's going to be pretty cool, because I really like the Gears of War style of the Cogs vs. the Locust, and I think that the whole red vs. blue story could be big because Halo has always done a pretty great job of explaining their stories in the campaign and their videos are always great.

But I don't want the game to be 49-49 and then you take me to a storyline of Red vs. Blue. Obviously it has to be done the correct way. Don't implement any of that into the multiplayer. But I'm pretty confused by the whole red vs. blue thing. I'm intrigued by it.

SJ: I guess everyone's faces are covered so it could be anything behind that armor.

T2: Yeah. Overall, this is a great teaser, just because of what they're saying, not necessarily the gameplay. It just seems like they're really stoked about the game, and they look like they've been working really hard on it.
Halo gaf, are they going to COD up my beloved halo?
Too early to tell, but it seems like it. They're changing as the industry changes. CoD happened to set a lot of industry trends.

I really want to see what they're doing with Haloz. No one with half a brain expected Halo to stay the same, not even go back to its more purer roots.

The only thing I want from Halo MP is to make sure everyone starts on even ground. That's a Halo classic staple that should never change.
You know, i was really expecting BTB heavies to suck, but it's actually fairly enjoyable. I might lower the score limit to 150 rather than 200, but other than that, the maps seem pretty well made.
In that short peice early on, Tsquared put a lot of emphasize on the 1-50 system but even as someone who loved the grind and challenge that system provided, I personally care more about the gameplay. Too many people seem to care more about the carrot on a stick. I am nitpicking a whole lot when it comes to Tsquared (because he did go on to make some good gameplay points), but some people on other forums place so much importance on carrot on stick systems and graphics, and I find that annoying. 343 seems to understand the importance of getting the gameplay right before throwing that stuff on top though.


343i Lead Esports Producer
I think people misconstrued what said Josh Holmes when he mentioned competitive. I think he just meant multiplayer. Some people have the idea that the maps in Reach were ripped stripped right from campaign and it's clear 343 wanted to clear that up about Halo 4.
New to me.

"Built on the foundations of the Halo: Reach engine, it'll be super-powered to take advantage of the next wave of hardware."​

Their headline doesn't really match that description. Halo 4 is also built on the "foundations" of the Reach engine in the sense that the Halo engine was the basis, with huge parts of it rewritten, updated, replaced, etc. Seems from that description Bungie is continuing the iteration on their technology just as they (and everyone else) already does.
BSPs were used in quake.

HALO 4 using Quake era tech!?!?!? More at eleven!