I’ve wanted to say this for two days now but I couldn’t really figure out how to word it. But I’ll give it a shot now.
There are many people on this forum that keep saying stuff like “343 can please everyone so easily! Just make a classic playlist similar to Halo 2/3 and a newer playlist similar to Halo 4!”.
Well I’m here to say that this simply won’t work. The split between the casual gameplay and competitive gameplay is so different that trying to please both sides would not work.
This causes a huge problem when it comes to playlists. Ok, so you have your competitive playlists and your casual playlists. Where do we put Team Objective? In the competitive subsection? Wait, the casual section likes Team Objective too. Do we put a Team Objective playlist in both subsections? No, that’d just be stupid and cause a huge split in player population.
Do we put some playlists in the competitive section and others in the casual section? No, that’d cause anger because a player’s favorite playlist might not be in their preferred section.
Just look at Halo 3 and Halo 4. Seriously, look at how radically different these two multiplayers were. Do you really think that there’s anyone 343 can please both the Halo 3 lovers and Halo 4 lovers?
In the end, what I’m trying to say here is that 343 needs to pick a side. And although we don’t have that much info on Halo 5 at the moment, it seems that 343 has chosen the competitive side. And given the player numbers between Halo 3 in it’s heyday and Halo 4 right now (since Halo 4 is still in its heyday), it should be clear to everyone that 343 has made the right choice.
I really don’t mean to sound selfish when I say that, but I probably look like it. I’m just trying to point out a fact. There is no possible way to please Halo 3 players and Halo 4 players. 343 would have to basically have two multiplayers in one. It just doesn’t seem possible.
And who knows, maybe Halo 5 will come out and 343 will have found a way to please everyone and I’ll look like an idiot. But I highly doubt this outcome given the different demands of the casual side and the competitive side.
The thing about casual players is that you cannot cater to them. Call of Duty and Battlefield completely dominate the casual market. And yes, Battlefield is a casual game. The only thing 343i can do is to cater to the competitive players and hope that some casual guys play too.
The majority of the Halo 3 population was casual. They played it because it and Gears of War were the only big mulitplayer games at the time. Now there is just too much competition. If people honestly expect to ever see Halo 3 numbers again they are in for a huge dissapointment.
To be 100% honest, bullet waster, you are wrong. Halo 3 had a peak population of about 1.1 million users and did not drop out of the top 3 games populated on xbox live until it’s predecessor, Halo Reach, came out in 2010. In that time, CoD 4, WaW, and Modern Warfare 2 came out. As well as Battlefield 2 and hype was coming for Battle Field 3. Halo 3’s population was almost all competitive. Even in social slayer, there was still a competitive edge with the EXP requiring your team to win in order to gain EXP. 343 needs to get back to halo’s competitive roots in order to see similar success in Halo 5, as Halo 3. Casuals will always be in a game, so will n00bs and try hards. But when everyone hates your game, it’s time to listen to the community and fix what you’ve done wrong. 343 has already done this though. By giving us Halo 2’s multiplayer again, we don’t have to worry if Halo 5 sucks, we know Halo 2 is impeccable. And competitive halo’s future looks very bright for the first time in many years. And I’m an H2 kid, went comp. in H3. And I actually like H4. So I see where 343 went wrong, but I believe in them. #haloSaved2014
Agreed Donut. I actually abandoned these forums in 2013 in favor of the Bungie forums right after they announced Destiny because everyone here was at each other’s throats, moderators banning left and right and hate on Halo 4. I didn’t like Halo 4, but in those days the banhammer was very active on those who opposed their new game and you pretty well couldn’t get in anything without a fight ensuing.
I’ve just come back after over a year of not being here because right after the MCC was announced, everybody (the competitive people that is) is happy and back to getting along. Peace has fallen over the community with the announcement of the first competitive game since Halo Reach. At least that’s what I’ve seen happen around here and I believe a noticable change has overcome the forums as the community’s wishes are put into action. Just my opinion.
You mind explaining how two different playlist with completely different playlists and player bases is impossible? It has been done in every game since H3(2?). It’s too easy, and it’s the easiest solution to the competitive vs. casual argument.
> Agreed Donut. I actually abandoned these forums in 2013 in favor of the Bungie forums right after they announced Destiny because everyone here was at each other’s throats, moderators banning left and right and hate on Halo 4. I didn’t like Halo 4, but in those days the banhammer was very active on those who opposed their new game and you pretty well couldn’t get in anything without a fight ensuing.
>
> I’ve just come back after over a year of not being here because right after the MCC was announced, everybody (the competitive people that is) is happy and back to getting along. Peace has fallen over the community with the announcement of the first competitive game since Halo Reach. At least that’s what I’ve seen happen around here and I believe a noticable change has overcome the forums as the community’s wishes are put into action. Just my opinion.
I agree with you with everything, I wish everything will be better from now on :).
> You mind explaining how two different playlist with completely different playlists and player bases is impossible? It has been done in every game since H3(2?). It’s too easy, and it’s the easiest solution to the competitive vs. casual argument.
You end up with two sub par versions of the multiplayer. 343 has to literally split their multiplayer staff in half. One half goes to Halo 3 side, the othewr to the Halo 4 side. That means that you have half the resources, knowledge, and manpower on your half of the game than you could have had. Imagine if their wa only half the people who had worked on Halo 3’s multiplayer, it would have sucked. And actually, Halo 3 did not do this. They had the same setting, just more casual and crazy playlists in one section. Reach again did the same thing. What people are trying to argue is that we can have both 3 and 4 in the same game. THat is just stupid. All 343 needs to do is take the good stuff from Halo 3 and the good stuff from Halo 4 and add in some new innovative stuff. That is how you please everybody.
How in gods name does making 2 playlists split the dev team?
If you can make an entire game for one thing, splitting doesnt actually mean splitting your dev team. Or atleast it doesnt seem like it should.
Just have everyone work on the competitive aspect, then get that done and switch to social or however they wpuld prefer.
I know making this stuff takes time and man/mindpower…but it shouldnt upset the dev team that badly.
Besides even if they dont do that it seems they may just be trying to make an overall hybrid to atleast try and find a middle ground.
They dont have to take a side, they can find a good balance or atleast a way that will make a majority of people happy.
Halo 3 did it incredibly well during its prime. Why? Because it had a population massive enough that it could split its population in half and still be able to populate every single playlist with a lot of players.
If 343 makes a good game that can bring back the masses, then yes, they absolutely can split the population in half without worrying about it.
Sorry, I was with you until you said the split was between “casual” and “competitive”. Gamers aren’t so easily compiled into one of those two categories and the description for “casual” gamers are usually different from what they actually are.
> I’ve wanted to say this for two days now but I couldn’t really figure out how to word it. But I’ll give it a shot now.
>
> There are many people on this forum that keep saying stuff like “343 can please everyone so easily! Just make a classic playlist similar to Halo 2/3 and a newer playlist similar to Halo 4!”.
>
> Well I’m here to say that this simply won’t work. The split between the casual gameplay and competitive gameplay is so different that trying to please both sides would not work.
>
> This causes a huge problem when it comes to playlists. Ok, so you have your competitive playlists and your casual playlists. Where do we put Team Objective? In the competitive subsection? Wait, the casual section likes Team Objective too. Do we put a Team Objective playlist in both subsections? No, that’d just be stupid and cause a huge split in player population.
>
> Do we put some playlists in the competitive section and others in the casual section? No, that’d cause anger because a player’s favorite playlist might not be in their preferred section.
>
> Just look at Halo 3 and Halo 4. Seriously, look at how radically different these two multiplayers were. Do you really think that there’s anyone 343 can please both the Halo 3 lovers and Halo 4 lovers?
>
> In the end, what I’m trying to say here is that 343 needs to pick a side. And although we don’t have that much info on Halo 5 at the moment, it seems that 343 has chosen the competitive side. And given the player numbers between Halo 3 in it’s heyday and Halo 4 right now (since Halo 4 is still in its heyday), it should be clear to everyone that 343 has made the right choice.
>
> I really don’t mean to sound selfish when I say that, but I probably look like it. I’m just trying to point out a fact. There is no possible way to please Halo 3 players and Halo 4 players. 343 would have to basically have two multiplayers in one. It just doesn’t seem possible.
>
> And who knows, maybe Halo 5 will come out and 343 will have found a way to please everyone and I’ll look like an idiot. But I highly doubt this outcome given the different demands of the casual side and the competitive side.
I won’t make a paragraph against this, mainly because it is unnecessary, but the point being is that you only need look at Halo 3 to see that you are already disproved. In Halo 3, you had both Ranked Team Slayer and Social Team Slayer, yet Halo 3 did absolutely marvelous with fan response and sales. So why is that so impossible to do now?
> I won’t make a paragraph against this, mainly because it is unnecessary, but the point being is that you only need look at Halo 3 to see that you are already disproved. In Halo 3, you had both Ranked Team Slayer and Social Team Slayer, yet Halo 3 did absolutely marvelous with fan response and sales. So why is that so impossible to do now?
Ranked default settings and social default settings were almost identical in Halo 3. Even to the point where ranked had AR starts (seriously…).
What I think he’s saying is the game should be the same between ranked and social playlists. Social slayer wasn’t a mess of sloppy social fun because we had rocket launchers falling from the sky and sticky grenade spawns; it was just a different mood.
I don’t think 343 needs to try.
If you want classic, you get to play the MC Collection: 100 maps and classic gameplay. That takes care of that, and we know it caters to both casual and competitive crowds. The multiplayer won’t be going anywhere, so if you dislike what Halo 5 brings to the table, you can rest easy.
And who knows, maybe Halo 5 won’t need to look backwards to be competitive. It’s too early to tell. But if any franchise can pull it off, I think Halo can.
> > You mind explaining how two different playlist with completely different playlists and player bases is impossible? It has been done in every game since H3(2?). It’s too easy, and it’s the easiest solution to the competitive vs. casual argument.
>
> You end up with two sub par versions of the multiplayer. 343 has to literally split their multiplayer staff in half. One half goes to Halo 3 side, the othewr to the Halo 4 side. That means that you have half the resources, knowledge, and manpower on your half of the game than you could have had. Imagine if their wa only half the people who had worked on Halo 3’s multiplayer, it would have sucked. And actually, Halo 3 did not do this. They had the same setting, just more casual and crazy playlists in one section. Reach again did the same thing. What people are trying to argue is that we can have both 3 and 4 in the same game. THat is just stupid. All 343 needs to do is take the good stuff from Halo 3 and the good stuff from Halo 4 and add in some new innovative stuff. That is how you please everybody.
There won’t be a “Halo 3 side” and a “Halo 4 side.” There will be a “Halo 5:G Competitive ranked side” and a “Halo 5:G casual side.” There is no division. It’s one game with two different sets of settings.
It’s not so much that half of multiplayer should be Halo 4. By casual I’m expecting some chillax gametypes and no ranking system. A list where stats shouldn’t have a focus as much. I don’t want Halo 4 to lead the example of what casual halo should be.
I think some people are forgetting the social playlists in Halo 3 still offered equal starts, static set power weapons just like ranked. The difference is that social slayer isn’t meant to be played seriously. Social BTB is the same as ranked with less emphasis on competition. Now it also had a great action sack that wasn’t fiesta power weapons like Halo 4, but more similar to what you’d get from easy going custom games. Add the original infection etc, and you have somewhere to go where you don’t have to worry about a true skilled rank.
For me I’d be totally happy with a ranked vs social split for Halo 5. Through in a huge cloud/server based mode where Halo vehicles, buildings and more are in the mix with big player numbers and I’m a happy man.
Got a party of buddies goofing off = social
Got a party of regular teammates = ranked competitive
Got an itch to feel like you’re living in a Halo game = new cloud mode
When you consider the variations within playlist and vote options they can cater to far more than just 2 sides. Halo is like 12-sided rolling dice.
> If you can make an entire game for one thing, splitting doesnt actually mean splitting your dev team. Or atleast it doesnt seem like it should.
>
> Just have everyone work on the competitive aspect, then get that done and switch to social or however they wpuld prefer.
So then you are splitting your time. Either time or resources will be split, which means either one or both games will take a hit on quality.
> There won’t be a “Halo 3 side” and a “Halo 4 side.” There will be a “Halo 5:G Competitive ranked side” and a “Halo 5:G casual side.” There is no division. It’s one game with two different sets of settings.
No, it would be one game with two different sets of multiplayers. “Settings” are just variations of the same mechanics, such as starting weapons, movement speed, or whether or not the flag carrier can drive vehicles. The presence or lack of mechanics like dual-wielding, sprint, or Armor Abilities is not a mere setting. If you have half the multiplayer with X mechanics and half with Y mechanics, you have two completely different games.
And depending on how different those games are, they may require different map designs, different kill times, and different complementary mechanics for optimal behavior and gameplay.
I understand what you are trying to get at. I really do. But I can’t help but feel that your doubt is misplaced. This is my opinion, mind you. It has been done time and time again and it has worked fine in each iteration. Besides, what good is a competitive game when you have no way to warm up? Are you doomed to lose rank every time you start up the game because your reflexes aren’t tuned in and you don’t have your groove? If there is going to be a skill-based ranking system, there has to be a social/casual playlist.
> If there is going to be a skill-based ranking system, there has to be a social/casual playlist.
No one is arguing that all playlists must be ranked. Everyone agrees that ranked and social playlists should coexist. The argument is whether or not two completely different sets of multiplayer games–in this case, “classic” and “Infinity”–should coexist (and they shouldn’t and couldn’t).
The difference between ranked and social playlists should be minor, not major. The only difference between MLG and Social Slayer in Halo 3 was that MLG had slightly increased movement speed, slightly increased damage, BR starts, and fewer map pickups. They were exactly the same otherwise.
The casual audience can make more out of something than the competitive audience can. Halo 1, 2, and 3 had a competitive peak, yet was able to satisfy both.
You’re implying that the casual audience needs specific features to at least have their interests met. They’re the casual audience for a reason.