4/10: a Halo Infinite review

Games Halo Infinite
, , , ,
21

I think the only irony is the bias coming from your posts, but that’s just me :man_shrugging:

Nice non argument :+1:

Have you ever played halo 2? The hitboxes, melee system, energy sword, aim assist, bullet magnetism, out of the map glitches, button combos, and dual wielding were all broken and were even worse on the 360.

What…? Obviously the latter. All dual wielded weapons are more effective than their single held counterparts. 1 smg<2 smg, 1 magnum<2 magnums. This wasn’t the case with halo 2, hence why it was broken.

SMG’s do most of their damage to health and shred unshielded targets. Plasma rifles do most of their damage to shields, not flesh. And the spikers do equal damage to both. This key difference is why dual wielding is unique. Technically speaking, any dual wielded weapon is a “new” weapon on the sandbox with different properties.

Entirely incorrect. Whereas before you had to switch weapons to get the headshot, now you can plasma pistol shot an opponent and headshot them at the same time. A unique interaction not available without dual wielding (or something like grenades).

No offense, but your misunderstanding of dual wield mechanics are precisely the misconceptions i was talking about.

1 Like
22

Nice non argument

I never said it was an argument. I thought it was just funny.

Have you ever played halo 2? The hitboxes, melee system, energy sword, aim assist, bullet magnetism, out of the map glitches, button combos, and dual wielding were all broken and were even worse on the 360.

So dual wielding wasn’t broken per your earlier statement, but when I asked for what all was broken in Halo 2 you rattled off technical issues, BXR, the energy sword, aim assist/bullet magnetism, melee, and dual wielding.

Huh.

And for what it’s worth, I played a ton of Halo 2. I don’t remember it being as insanely broken as you claim, and I’d be willing to bet most people don’t remember it that way either.

This wasn’t the case with halo 2, hence why it was broken.

For someone that insisted dual wielding wasn’t broken, you sure do mention it being broken a lot.

SMG’s do most of their damage to health and shred unshielded targets. Plasma rifles do most of their damage to shields, not flesh. And the spikers do equal damage to both. This key difference is why dual wielding is unique. Technically speaking, any dual wielded weapon is a “new” weapon on the sandbox with different properties.

By “different properties,” you mean combos that are functionally identical in practice but with different TTKs.

Entirely incorrect.

No it’s actually correct. Plasma pistol + Pistol is the exact same experience dual wielding or single wielding. The time it takes the charged shot to travel is plenty of time to switch to the other pistol, which makes weapon switching irrelevant. The only advantage afforded to dual wielding is not taking up the second weapon slot, but otherwise the gameplay experience is identical.

No offense, but your misunderstanding of dual wield mechanics are precisely the misconceptions i was talking about.

This coming from the person that thinks SMG/SMG, SMG/Spiker, SMG/Plasma Rifle, Plasma Rifle/Plasma Rifle, Plasma Rifle/Spiker, Spiker/Spiker are all vastly unique combinations that play differently and add a unique experience to the sandbox.

23

Vehicles? overpowered? this doesn’t make sense. Those things always seem to go down pretty fast and don’t even get me started on how useless the wasp is due it being made of paper mache. If 6 people are shooting at it with AR’s it should not be going down easy also there are plenty of anti-vehicle weapons across the maps so not sure what you’re talking about…in fact there maybe too many… :thinking:

24

I’m just going to skip this segment because you must be joking.

Non argument #2

And also the decreased accuracy, reload time, and range that come with said combinations, but let’s just keep ignoring those eh? Also, I said technically, meaning not literally.

Not in the slightest. Having to switch weapons in order to get a headshot is not the same as being able to headshot instantly. The connection between the two is simply that they are both the same weapons being used. Please don’t try to strawman.

This comment alone proves your ignorance. Your argument boils down to this sequence:

“Explain to me how it’s different”
Explains
“Yeah but it leads to the same result so it’s practically identical”

I’ve already explained how different combinations can lead to different results. An example; the mauler. In halo 3 the mauler is incapable of oneshotting a player. So people typically resort to mauler+melee combo. But pick up a plasma pistol, charge it, and now the mauler one shots the player up close. Now switch the mauler with the magnum and you are now capable of doing it at range. The list goes on and on. These are all different combat scenarios that would not exist IN ONE FELL SWOOP without dual wield.

1 Like
25

And also the decreased accuracy, reload time, and range that come with said combinations, but let’s just keep ignoring those eh?

I’m ignoring them because the combos are functionally identical DUE to the decreased range. Their effective range and situational use is practically identical between combos. The only meaningful difference between combos is TTK, and if memory serves me correctly the best combo is plasma rifle/spiker.

Also, I said technically, meaning not literally.

Right, in the same way that having 6 different versions of the assault rifle that are all relatively the same in terms of situational use but with slightly different TTKs would “technically” be unique entries in the sandbox.

Not in the slightest. Having to switch weapons in order to get a headshot is not the same as being able to headshot instantly. The connection between the two is simply that they are both the same weapons being used.

The only time this would be relevant is if you the target was close enough to where switching weapons wouldn’t be possible before the projectile reaches the target. So, very close range. Otherwise the instantaneous factor of dual wielding is irrelevant.

Please don’t try to strawman.

Jesus Christ. What is it with the pants-on-head brainiacs on this forum that keep using “straw man” incorrectly? Literally twice in one day someone has been so mind-numbingly incorrect when using “straw man.” You disagreeing with my point doesn’t mean I’m misrepresenting your position/claim. What on earth?

I’ve already explained how different combinations can lead to different results.

No no no. Don’t pivot to the mauler. If you think there’s a massively meaningful difference between the six combos that I mentioned above, break it down for me.

But pick up a plasma pistol, charge it, and now the mauler one shots the player up close.

I had a good laugh. Turns out every gun is a one shot if you first deal enough damage to an enemy with a different weapon. Plasma pistol is also a 1 shot if you take away 99% of their health away with an SMG first.

The list goes on and on. These are all different combat scenarios that would not exist IN ONE FELL SWOOP without dual wield.

The list you just mentioned was: “Use the plasma pistol to remove shields so that you can kill them faster with other weapons.” Does it shock you that I can also do those two combat scenarios you mentioned in Halo Infinite at pretty much the same speed without dual wielding? Same efficacy and everything. Before the person knows what hit 'em, even.

Again though. I’m dying to know the meaningful differences between those 6 dual wield combos I mentioned above.

1 Like
26

Point neutralized

Dude, what are you even trying to say? By this logic the ar is the same as the smg, saw, plasma rifle, plasma repeater and every other automatic weapon in the franchise. You are literally saying “Show me the differences without showing me the differences”.

WHICH IS ALWAYS BECAUSE THATS THE USEFUL RANGE FOR DUAL WIELDED WEAPONS.

Every single time I mention a point of differentiation between the different dual wield mechanics, you cling on to some minor detail that has little relevance to anything. That is a strawman. If you keep encountering this often maybe you should look inward lol

Now we’re talking. The mg, plasma rifle, and spiker all have their own ttk, reload speed, shield break speed, health drain speed, projectile physics, and range (there may be more variables but this is what I know for certain). Mix and match them and you get even more variables. Smg+plasma rifle seems like the best setup to maximum killing output. But the spiker+plasma rifle has a faster ttk. Only issue is that the spiker has heavy projectiles that travel slowly and drop with distance. Each weapons unique aspects waver depending on the situation. If your target is has good strafes the spiker+plasma rifle will mean you miss more shots. But the smg+plasma rifle doesn’t kill as fast. They all compliment one another in different ways. The only ones that give your argument merit are the same weapons x2. All they offer is improved ttk at a certain range. But what is that if not a “new” weapon. The saw is functionally identical to the ar, but excels are close range. Does that make them the same weapon?

Dude some of the things you write :joy:. First of all, key words: "If you deal enough damage to an enemy with a different weapon. Turns out, you have both weapons in your hand and dont have to switch at all, almost as if it was the same weapon! Here how about this, why is it that you never see anyone tear down shields with a plasma rifle and then switch to the ar to clean up the kill? Or switch to any other weapon? It’s obviously because it takes too long to switch and is too risky. Dual wielding nullifies that in a way, while introducing other factors like decreased range and reload speed. If this doesn’t make sense to you I don’t know what will.

Right, and that’s because of the plasma pistols INCREASE in range to try and make it a viable weapon and you still have to switch weapons and make the shot. Whereas before, you could do both.

1 Like
27

Point neutralized

What? Did you actually stop reading after this? I made salient points immediately after “I’m ignoring them because…” that directly weakened your argument. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that you can’t actually follow my argument, seeing how you used “straw man” without actually knowing what it means.

Dude, what are you even trying to say? By this logic the ar is the same as the smg, saw, plasma rifle, plasma repeater and every other automatic weapon in the franchise.

Jesus Christ you’re SOOOOOOOO close to getting it.

You are literally saying “Show me the differences without showing me the differences”.

Ah but then you crapped the bed. What I’m saying is: When you’re using those 6 combos of automatic weapons, the differences in practice are so minor that there may as well just be one version of that weapon. You would know what I was getting at if you didn’t stroke out after I wrote “I’m ignoring them because…”

WHICH IS ALWAYS BECAUSE THATS THE USEFUL RANGE FOR DUAL WIELDED WEAPONS.

Except… in the case of effective headshot range of the pistol… Which is what we were talking about. Did you forget about that scenario?

Every single time I mention a point of differentiation between the different dual wield mechanics, you cling on to some minor detail that has little relevance to anything. That is a strawman.

WHAT?! Not only is that not what’s happening (I’m directly engaging with everything you say, you just disagree with me), that’s not actually a strawman. A strawman is when you make an argument and then I deliberately misrepresent your argument with my own made up argument (the strawman) and attack that. You were touting the value of dual wielding a plasma pistol instead of switching to it and I directly engaged with that point with why I didn’t think it was functionally different. Which is when you brought out the strawman. I was directly engaging with one of your core arguments about why dual wielding is good.

Only issue is that the spiker has heavy projectiles that travel slowly and drop with distance.

Remember that point I made earlier that you short circuited while trying to read? When you said “point neutralized”? The effective accuracy of all dual wield weapons is reduced, meaning the difference between the SMG and the Spiker at range is further reduced. Meaning at the effective range for dual wielding, the Spiker’s projectile speed is, in practice, irrelevant.

The saw is functionally identical to the ar, but excels are close range. Does that make them the same weapon?

I actually really like that you brought up this example because I think the saw was a “meh” addition to the sandbox because it shared so much in common with the AR.

Here how about this, why is it that you never see anyone tear down shields with a plasma rifle and then switch to the ar to clean up the kill? Or switch to any other weapon? It’s obviously because it takes too long to switch and is too risky.

Wait I literally see people do this with the new plasma rifle in infinite. This is actually a thing that happens.

Dual wielding nullifies that in a way, while introducing other factors like decreased range and reload speed. If this doesn’t make sense to you I don’t know what will.

I don’t know why you’re explaining this to me. I already said that at very close ranges it makes sense, but the moment you get slightly further out the advantage completely disappears.

Right, and that’s because of the plasma pistols INCREASE in range to try and make it a viable weapon and you still have to switch weapons and make the shot.

Oh. There it is. Thanks for conceding that with a bit of balance they don’t need to have an entire dual wielding system to capture the same weapon comboing that was previously enjoyed in Halo 2/3.

29

I’m going to restart as this whole thing is getting too toxic. Disregard anything aside from actual points in my last post.

They are different, regardless of how menial. Like I said, little things attribute to the difference in each dual wield combo. Plasma rifle/spiker has the best ttk. That does not equate to best overall. The projectiles and slow fire rate of the spiker make it harder to use than the smg/plasma rifle combo. Any meaningful strafe will have the spiker rounds lagging behind their target. Long story short; the different combinations that could be had are niche and depend on the situation. (Which I’ve already said before)

There it is! You’ve conceded the differences between them!

Effective headshot range of the pistol is at close range…

You said that dual wielding a pp+magnum=headshot to equate to pp → magnum=headshot. I’m not sure why I didn’t mention this before, but the magnums range and the plasma pistol’s more or less correlate. There is no using one outside of the others range, thus, it is ridiculous to switch weapons to get the headshot instead of just dual wield and get the headshot which was mostly what I was referring to.

I don’t understand this. We’re not comparing the smg to a dual wielded smg by themselves. And if you’re trying to argue that the spikers projectile speed is irrelevant because it remains unchanged, what difference does it make? The gun still functions differently from the smg or plasma rifle. That’s the whole point. Duel wielding takes those differences and puts them on a deadlier and closer niche than their standard counterparts.

I disagree. It was a unique weapon in look and sound. It was also fun to use. Reminds me of something else we’re discussing. :thinking:

You’re comparing apples to oranges. I was referring to Halo 3 mostly.

Well, because that wasn’t what you were saying at first. You’ve said a couple of times now that any combination of dual wielded weapons would lead to the same result. This is not true.

Oh there it is. Thanks for conceding that dual wielding was a previously enjoyed mechanic :wink: But seriously. apples to oranges. Halo 3 wasn’t unbalanced with or without dual wielding. And neither was halo 2 anniversary. Both of these games do the system right although I’d give it to halo 3 for having the more varied combos.

1 Like
30

I don’t care what anyone says, dual wielding was fun and I wish it would return!

1 Like
31

There it is! You’ve conceded the differences between them!

Hey, you did the thing again where you stopped reading my point and automatically assumed you had a gotcha. If you kept going, you’d have seen this wasn’t the slam dunk you were hoping for. Alas.

By the way in previous posts I said multiple times there were differences between the combos. But since you haven’t actually been reading/comprehending my posts, I’m not surprised that you only just now think I “conceded” anything.

They are different, regardless of how menial.

The problem that you’re refusing to acknowledge (to the point of you deliberately not engaging with the core of my argument) is that the differences are so minor in practice (this is key) that there may as well not be those six combinations. The argument is that the differences were not substantial enough to justify the existence of dual wielding. Sure on paper you can talk about the skill floor between the spiker and the SMG when dual wielding, but at the effective range of dual wielding, no one really had a problem hitting with the spiker’s projectiles.

Effective headshot range of the pistol is at close range…

Mmmm I could be misremembering, but I distinctly remember it being more aligned with close to mid.

You said that dual wielding a pp+magnum=headshot to equate to pp → magnum=headshot

Because the gameplay experience is basically the same, yes.

There is no using one outside of the others range, thus, it is ridiculous to switch weapons to get the headshot instead of just dual wield and get the headshot which was mostly what I was referring to.

Good thing the plasma pistol’s effective range can be tweaked to accomplish the same thing, then. No need for a new system.

I don’t understand this. We’re not comparing the smg to a dual wielded smg by themselves.

Regardless of what you’re dual wielding the SMG with, all of its stats are effectively lowered the moment you enter dual wielding.

And if you’re trying to argue that the spikers projectile speed is irrelevant because it remains unchanged, what difference does it make?

The SMG’s effective range is reduced when dual wielding it with anything, meaning that the range difference between the SMG and Spiker is further reduced, which makes the travel speed for the projectiles less relevant.

I disagree. It was a unique weapon in look and sound. It was also fun to use. Reminds me of something else we’re discussing.

This absolutely explains why you’re missing the point I’m trying to make.

You’re comparing apples to oranges. I was referring to Halo 3 mostly.

Why? We’re talking about whether or not you can capture the same dual wielding gameplay experiences in a game without dual wielding.

Well, because that wasn’t what you were saying at first. You’ve said a couple of times now that any combination of dual wielded weapons would lead to the same result. This is not true.

Nope. I feel like so much time has passed since the start of this discussion that you genuinely don’t remember anything that I said. I never said “any combination of dual wielded weapons would lead to the same result” or anything like that. I specifically called out the 6 combos of automatic weapons as having massive overlap. I was talking about specific combinations.

32

Sorry fam, I’ve only been stooping down to your level with these types of comments. Perhaps we should detract as they take away from the discussion?

Name to me a weapon that is capable of shooting both plasma and bullets, or spikes and plasma, or spikes and bullets, so on and so forth. (You can’t) These varying mechanics (that I keep having to bring up over and over again) are the crux of the argument. If you can concede that all of halo 3’s weapons are different for the arguments sake, then you must accept the fact, that in tandem, all of these weapons dual wielded are different from their regular counterparts. Reading ahead I was able to see that you acknowledged this, but I’m leaving it up for the topics sake.

No, that is not the problem. The problem is that your argument has gone from: “Duel wielding hurt halo’s sandbox” to “Different dual wield combos play exactly the same” to “There are differences, but they are minor and therefore irrelevant”. Regardless, the whole reason this argument has gone on for this long is because you refuse to believe that dual wielding these leads to different results. Also, I did some digging, and it turns out there are additional ttk properties I forgot to mention. Apparently, dual wielding changes the weapons properties in more ways than just range, accuracy, reload, etc. Some weapons are also given increased damage per shot while dual wielded. Example: x1 smg ttk = 1.58. x2 smg ttk =1.36. x1 plasma rifle ttk = 2.24. x2 plasma rifle ttk = 1.28. Hypothetically, the best one would be the spiker which goes: x1 spiker = 1.44. x2 spiker = 1.06. Yet we know that if you are the mix these two you get the most lethal combo that is the hardest to use because of projectile properties. But let me guess, it’s not a significant enough difference :roll_eyes:

It can reach mid range targets in but in practice (since that matters so much) its accuracy is awful and it has the worst bullet velocity in the series. It’s meant to be used as a cleanup weapon, you know a weapon meant to be swapped to in order to get a kill :wink:

Except for if we’re talking about close range. In which case, dual wielding allows you to charge up and kill pretty much instantly.

It would be, if you still didn’t have to switch to another weapon to get the headshot (something avoided entirely by dual wielding).

Fair point. But that’s all part of the balance in a dual wielding system, and hence why it was never broken to begin with (og argument). The slight differences between them and the aforementioned dual wield properties are still enough to change the outcome of a battle. Like I said, a competent player will make the spiker feel useless with their strafes, this is not the case for the smg which has much faster projectiles and a faster fire rate.

Don’t play dumb. We’re comparing games with dual wielding in mind. If you want to say that they capture the same dual wield experience, then go ahead and use halo 3 as an example. The problem is, you can’t. Halo 3 was oriented around dual wielding and introduced it successfully.

Listen, we’ve already made it passed the semantics. Please do not focus on them. Dual wielding different weapons with different properties leads varied engagements. These different properties are meant to be considered by the player when choosing what weapon to dual wield. And now we know that damage per shot changes depending on wether a weapon is dual wielded or not. I’ve played enough halo 3 to know that there are differences between each of these combinations in practice. No one thinks to dual wield because of the risks. No one thinks to use the spikers both as the most lethal identical combo. The stats also prove the differences. If you want to cling to the simple fact that the outcome is mostly just a ttk increase then that’s fine because it’s true, but it’s due ENTIRELY to the weapon properties working in tandem that make them so lethal. Fin

1 Like
33

Scroll wheels on controller I would argue are even worse…

The UI is so bad and sterile.

No effort was put into making it feel like a part of Halo in any cool way.