• 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 |OT5| Believe, Again

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fuchsdh

Member
Jan 14, 2012
19,575
0
460
USA
Only thing I enjoyed about Watchmen was the opening credits/montage. That's pretty much it. Although that part was brilliant.
True, I'd forgotten that. Really well done.

Hell, the opening credits were the most enjoyable part of X-Men Origins: Wolverine too.


Dude, even if you had a perfect 4-shot you wouldn't even kill in 4 if just 1 round dropped. And they dropped. Not to mention round 3 in each burst had the largest spread calculation (aim for the neck if you want headshots, bro).
Not much of a neck on a Spartan :)
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,718
440
790
It makes perfect sense. His point is if you make the BR the best weapon in most situations, it'll make the game stagnant. No, it won't. The amount of tools you have or don't have at your disposal to beat your opponent does not have any correlation with stagnancy.
The tools used in soccer aren't the ball, it's your ability.

And they do have a correlation with stagnancy considering that the sandbox is the largest contributor to depth in a shooter. He just happens to be wrong that the BR produces stagnancy. It truncates the sandbox, but the sandbox is still versatile.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,015
56
695
Dude, even if you had a perfect 4-shot you wouldn't even kill in 4 if just 1 round dropped. And they dropped. Not to mention round 3 in each burst had the largest spread calculation (aim for the neck if you want headshots, bro).
I must have been god like then with the BR. Because 4 to 5(mostly 4) was the amount of shots needed to kill for me.
 
Sep 24, 2011
2,533
0
490
Melbourne, Australia
twitter.com
That's because those are power weapons, which are better in some/most situations than your 'all-around' weapon (br/dmr).

Regular weapons should be on equal footing to the 'all-around' weapon in some situations.
I know very well that they are power weapons, that's why I excluded them.
In my opinion, an assault rifle should beat a BR in close range. A needler should beat the BR when the BR user does not gain cover, etc.

The tools used in soccer aren't the ball, it's your ability.

And they do have a correlation with stagnancy considering that the sandbox is the largest contributor to depth in a shooter. He just happens to be wrong that the BR produces stagnancy. It truncates the sandbox, but the sandbox is still versatile.
If a skilled BR will beat any other non-power weapon, why would someone bother to pick up something other than a BR, when it is 'the best'. As a result, yes, the sandbox is truncated, and as any player who knows a thing about Halo 3 will get their hands on a BR ASAP, the gameplay becomes stagnant, as the rest of the sandbox becomes almost redundant.
I don't think there is a right and wrong here, it's all subjective.
 

Rand0m TAG

Member
Jul 17, 2011
2,248
0
0
I know very well that they are power weapons, that's why I excluded them.
In my opinion, an assault rifle should beat a BR in close range. A needler should beat the BR when the BR user does not gain cover, etc.


If a skilled BR will beat any other non-power weapon, why would someone bother to pick up something other than a BR, when it is 'the best'. As a result, yes, the sandbox is truncated, and as any player who knows a thing about Halo 3 will get their hands on a BR ASAP, the gameplay becomes stagnant, as the rest of the sandbox becomes almost redundant.
I don't think there is a right and wrong here, it's all subjective.
so instead of fucking up the br/dmr, why not beef up the rest of the sandbox? Bring back plasma stun for instance.
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,718
440
790
If a skilled BR will beat any other non-power weapon, why would someone bother to pick up something other than a BR, when it is 'the best'. As a result, yes, the sandbox is truncated, and as any player who knows a thing about Halo 3 will get their hands on a BR ASAP, the gameplay becomes stagnant, as the rest of the sandbox becomes almost redundant.
You still have the Carbine, shotgun, sword, beam rifle/sniper rifle, rockets as viable pick ups. That's a lot to fight for and use, never mind power ups and equipment. All the elements of the Halo shooting depth are represented in those listed weapons. Power at all ranges with varying degrees of properties.

so instead of fucking up the br/dmr, why not beef up the rest of the sandbox? Bring back plasma stun for instance.
Shhhh, it lowers the skill gap!
 
Sep 24, 2011
2,533
0
490
Melbourne, Australia
twitter.com
so instead of fucking up the br/dmr, why not beef up the rest of the sandbox? Bring back plasma stun for instance.
I never said the BR should be nerfed, nor did I intentionally imply it. What I like about Halo 4 is that each primary so far (SR, AR, DMR, BR, Carbine) seem to be pretty viable utility weapons. I'm quite excited to see how they all play out. If they're all balanced, you'll still have your precious skill gap, and it seems like non-loadout (ordnance) weapons are all pretty powerful, which will attend to the issues I highlighted with Halo 3.

More than anything, I just want each weapon to have a niche, and from what I can tell, Halo 4's doing a pretty good job of it with the whole play-style approach.

It seems like this is the balance they are trying to achieve in H4.

The Assault rifle is ridiculously effective in Reach at close range as well, and you barely have to try to aim it.
You have to aim exactly the same amount as the DMR in close range, but yes, I like the sandbox direction Halo 4 is taking.
 
Oct 6, 2009
13,552
1
0
Pittsburgh
I want a more accurate Burst Fire AR styled weapon.

Jesus christ, that final shot of CE(A)'s campaign is like, fifteen seconds of matte painting stars. Horrible. :lol
CEA has some awkward off moments that look horrendous. Overall I found it really nice looking, and really fresh, but every now and then..yeah.
 
Sep 24, 2011
2,533
0
490
Melbourne, Australia
twitter.com
Spray weapons shouldn't beat a skilled user with a precision weapon in a straight up 1v1 IMO.
At mid-long (especially long) range, I couldn't agree more, but at close range, an AR should beat a precision weapon. For the following reasons:
1) Encourages weapon diversity
2) Close range precision weapons require no actual precision to make hits (same as AR).
3) AR is designed to be a close-mid range weapon.

That is to say, logically, every weapon requires the same 'accuracy' to pull the reticle over an enemy. In close range an AR should win, due to the higher rate of fire.
 

Steelyuhas

Member
Apr 22, 2010
17,217
0
0
Really? Never knew that. I only played BJ with sensitivity 10. Didn't think based on the settings you had would make a difference in your BR hitting.
I mean damage settings, not control schemes.

Except for that terribly narrow FOV, feels like looking down a cardboard tube sometimes.

Spartan animations are pretty meh as well, but that's really beside the point for a competitive game ;)
The FOV is one of the top reasons I can't go back and play H3. It's awful.

I really hope that 4's is not any narrower than Reach's.
 
Sep 24, 2011
2,533
0
490
Melbourne, Australia
twitter.com
A skilled AR users isn't really a thing because of the small skill-gap. Bursting your shots only goes so far.
I refuse to see any skill difference in close range combat with an AR vs DMR/BR. When the AR bloom is smaller than the size of the enemy on your screen, it doesn't make a difference, and the AR should win hands down.

Anyway decent discussion, probably should be getting myself some sleep.
 

Deadly Cyclone

Pride of Iowa State
Apr 24, 2008
28,783
0
0
"skilled" AR users

Good one, guys

I guess I meant more to say a skilled player using an AR should beat a skilled player with a long range weapon at close range. Not necessarily someone skilled with the AR, but skilled in general.

There's a reason long range weapons shouldn't dominate at all ranges. It would make for a pretty unfun game.
 
Oct 6, 2009
13,552
1
0
Pittsburgh
"skilled" AR users

Good one, guys
Which is why an actual cross between the AR and BR would be nice, bigger bursts, less accurate, takes more skill to use, no scope etc. would be a nice alternative.

Basically, this:



PS I really want that armor...Please give us a SPIII SPI armor set, and keep it smooth like this picture.
 

squidhands

Member
Mar 16, 2009
8,169
0
0
Austin, TX
twitter.com
I reckon in Ghaleon's absence, Squidhand should lead HaloGaf. I mean, what's the worst that could happen...



<3
I'll do it.



I was playing Halo 3 co-op with Squidhands earlier today and I had my mind blown by a path I never knew was there. In the last part of the barracks, you can open a side door that brings you behind the Chieftain. It was a holy shit moment for me.
That was a lot of fun, with the exception of me constantly pooping out equipment instead of reloading.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,015
56
695
Doesn't really matter how it ends it's invariant,
AR + Melee at close range should beat BR + melee. Same rules apply.
That normally happens though. CQC is the only way to have a chance at beating a BR. In Reach it happens a lot more because the DMR takes much longer to kill someone.
 

Recarpo

Member
Jul 12, 2010
876
0
540
I recently discovered how much more effective it is to finish someone off with bullets rather than a melee. Especially if you backpedal while they go for the melee.
Yep, backpedal or strafe and you get a pretty easy kill without a beatdown.
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,718
440
790
If the skill gap was as small as you like to purport, AR shootouts would always end in a simultaneous trade-off. They almost never do.
Luck of the draw I suppose. The "skill gap" is pretty small on the AR. Not much you can really do but point and shoot. The reticule is large. The same thing is true about the BR except its reticule is smaller and you can do headshots. Ergo, larger skill gap.
 

HiredN00bs

Member
Sep 22, 2010
6,097
0
595
Laurel, MD
www.twitter.com
That normally happens though. CQC is the only way to have a chance at beating a BR. In Reach it happens a lot more because the DMR takes much longer to kill someone.
Patently false. Kill times with the DMR at close range are as fast or faster than the BR, and the AR is substantially nerfed in Reach; its damage was reduced and having to pop shields before a melee reduced its CQC effectiveness as well.
 

HiredN00bs

Member
Sep 22, 2010
6,097
0
595
Laurel, MD
www.twitter.com
Luck of the draw I suppose. The "skill gap" is pretty small on the AR. Not much you can really do but point and shoot. The reticule is large. The same thing is true about the BR except its reticule is smaller and you can do headshots. Ergo, larger skill gap.
Random spread takes care of that bro.
Aiming, moving, pacing, and timing are still components of an AR fight. Sure, if both guys are lazily aiming and just holding down the trigger, it can be a toss up, but so can two bad DMR players spamming each other out.

Of course it's easier to use, but that doesn't mean people can't have compelling encounters with them, where player skill determines the outcome.
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,718
440
790
Aiming, moving, pacing, and timing are still components of an AR fight. Sure, if both guys are lazily aiming and just holding down the trigger, it can be a toss up, but so can two bad DMR players spamming each other out.

Of course it's easier to use, but that doesn't mean people can't have compelling encounters with them, where player skill determines the outcome.
Well yeah, of course, but then that's not even really a discussion of each weapon with respect to one another because like someone else said, that's an innate function of the game.

I was analyzing the aiming properties of both weapons in a vacuum.

I'm on your side. I don't have an issue with the AR.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.